Time filter

Source Type

Washington, DC, United States

Sterk W.,Wuppertal Institute for Climate | Bolscher H.,Triple E Consulting | van der Laan J.,Triple E Consulting | Hoogzaad J.,Climate Focus | Sijm J.,Energy Research Center of the Netherlands
Climate Policy | Year: 2015

Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) have decided to establish a ‘new market-based mechanism’ (NMM) to promote mitigation across ‘broad segments’ of developing countries' economies but have so far defined only some broad outlines of how it is to function. This article identifies key design options of the NMM based on a survey of the literature and reviews them against a range of assessment criteria. Furthermore, potential application of the NMM is analysed for five country-sector combinations. The analysis finds that lack of data and of institutions that could manage the NMM are key bottlenecks. In addition, the analysis reveals the existence of substantial no-regret reduction potential, suggesting that sectors may not be sensitive to the market incentives from an NMM. Governmental capacity building and Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs) might be more appropriate in the short term, preparing the ground for the adoption of market-based approaches at a later stage. NMM pilots could be based on supported NAMAs but should ideally generate tradable and compliance-grade emission credits in order to fully simulate the real-life conditions of an NMM. Policy relevance The Doha conference identified ‘possible elements’ of the NMM to be addressed in the development of the NMM's modalities and procedures. This article identifies available options for these possible elements and reviews these options against a number of criteria, including environmental effectiveness, economic efficiency, political and administrative efficiency, and others. On this basis the article identifies options that are best suited to fulfil the main aims of the NMM as decided at the Durban conference, ‘to enhance the cost-effectiveness of, and to promote, mitigation actions’. In addition, the article analysis potential application of the NMM for five country-sector combinations. The analysis assesses the emission reduction potential that could be mobilized through the NMM as well as the institutional market readiness of the sectors. Finally, the article synthesizes the challenges ahead for the NMM that have emerged from the analysis and suggests possible ways forward. © 2014 Taylor & Francis. Source

Streck C.,Climate Focus
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability | Year: 2012

In the eighth year of international negotiations on REDD+, the structure and flows of REDD+ finance remain uncertain. There is no agreement on the magnitude and sources of funding; the role of the private sector and market-based mechanisms; or the modalities of disbursing international REDD+ funds. This paper summarizes the status quo of REDD+ finance, analyzes the potential sources of REDD+ finance and discusses their respective risks and strengths. Considering the evolving nature of REDD+ and relating insecurities of REDD+ finance, it argues in favor of complementary and pragmatic use of the various sources of finance to avoid further delay and frustration in REDD+ implementation. © 2012 Elsevier B.V. Source

Streck C.,Climate Focus | Keenlyside P.,Climate Focus
Journal for European Environmental and Planning Law | Year: 2016

The adoption of the Paris Agreement is a milestone in international climate politics and brings years of near deadlock negotiations to a conclusion. The Agreement creates a global process of engagement, follow-up, regular stock-take exercises and cooperative action. On the one hand, it represents a step forward, overcoming the many divisions that had marked the Kyoto area: between developed and developing countries, between industrialized nations inside the Protocol and those outside, and between those supportive of market mechanisms and those that vehemently opposed them. On the other hand, individual country contributions fall short of the overall climate goal, and the risk is that the Paris Agreement remains a shell without sufficient action and support. It thus remains to be seen whether the Paris Agreement is the right framework through which to address the collective action problem of climate change. © KONINKLIJKE BRILL NV, LEIDEN, 2016. Source

Milder J.C.,Cornell University | Scherr S.J.,EcoAgriculture Partners | Bracer C.,Climate Focus
Ecology and Society | Year: 2010

Payment for ecosystem services (PES) is a market-based approach to environmental management that compensates land stewards for ecosystem conservation and restoration. Because low-income households and communities control much of the ecologically sensitive land in developing countries, they potentially stand to gain from PES, as environmentally responsible stewardship is assigned a value by various actors in society. To date, however, instances of PES benefiting the poor have been limited mainly to specific localities, small-scale projects, and a handful of broader government programs. We analyze the size, characteristics, and trends of PES to evaluate its future potential to benefit low-income land stewards in developing countries. We estimate that by the year 2030, markets for biodiversity conservation could benefit 10-15 million low-income households in developing countries, carbon markets could benefit 25-50 million, markets for watershed protection could benefit 80-100 million, and markets for landscape beauty and recreation could benefit 5-8 million. If payments and markets reach these potentials, they could provide a non-negligible contribution to poverty alleviation at the global level. © 2010 by the author(s). Source

Coren M.J.,Climate Focus | Streck C.,Climate Focus | Madeira E.M.,The Nature Conservancy
Climate Policy | Year: 2011

Previous attempts to estimate the supply of greenhouse gas emission reductions from reduced emissions from deforestation (RED) have generally failed to incorporate policy developments, country-specific abilities and political willingness to supply offsets for developed countries' emissions. To address this, we estimate policy-appropriate projections of creditable emission reductions from RED. Two global forest carbon models are used to examine major assumptions affecting the generation of credits. The results show that the estimated feasible supply of RED credits is significantly below the biophysical mitigation potential from deforestation. A literature review identified an annual RED emission reduction potential between 1.6 and 4.3 Gt CO2e. Feasible RED supply estimates applying the OSIRIS model were 1.74 Gt CO2e annually between 2011 and 2020, with a cumulative supply of 17.4 Gt CO2e under an 'own-efforts' scenario. Estimates from the Forest Carbon Index were very low at $5/t CO2e with 8 million tonne CO2e annually, rising to 1.8 Gt CO2e at $20/t CO2e. Cumulative abatement between 2011 and 2020 was 9 billion Gt CO2e ($20/t CO2e). These volumes were lower, sometimes dramatically, at prices of $5/t CO2e suggesting a non-linear supply of credits in relation to price at a low payment level. For policy makers, the results suggest that inclusion of RED in a climate framework increases abatement potential, although significant constraints are imposed by political and technical issues. © 2011 Copyright Taylor and Francis Group, LLC. Source

Discover hidden collaborations