Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (3) (remove)
Year of Publication
- 2015 (3) (remove)
Document Type
- Peer-Reviewed Article (1)
- Report (1)
- Working Paper (1)
Language
- English (3) (remove)
Division
- Energie-, Verkehrs- und Klimapolitik (3) (remove)
The research project seeks to identify the CDM SD tool's possible shortcomings, and to make structured recommendations on how to improve the EB's SD tool. Findings from this project are meant to have a lighthouse effect on the development of provisions on Sustainable Development within other carbon mechanisms of the UNFCCC and beyond. This report represents the consolidated findings of three work packages within this research project. The first chapter provides some background on the subject at hand, and leads into the report. The following chapter covers the assessment and comparison of the SD provisions of selected flexible mechanisms and multilateral standards.
On 12 December 2015, the Parties to the UNFCCC adopted the "Paris Agreement". With this step, the world community has agreed on a collective and cooperative path to fight human-induced climate change: After 25 years of UN climate diplomacy, the world's governments have for the first time in history negotiated a treaty which envisages climate action by all nations. The Agreement sets the world on a path that might lead to a decarbonised economy in the second half of the century. Researchers from the Wuppertal Institute have observed COP 21 and elaborated a detailed analysis of the results. The assessment provides an overview of the most important negotiation outcomes, assesses their results as well as shortfalls and provides an outlook of the next steps needed to implement the Paris Agreement's goals and to set the world firmly on a non-fossil based development path.
Many have hoped that the CDM's Additionality, if applied to the wider climate finance domain, can contribute to standardizing the funding criteria. This JIKO Policy Brief therefore explore options of applying the CDM's to do just that. The authors highlight issues of environmental system integrity and efficient allocation of funding, and discuss potential limits of the CDM's Additionality concept in its current form, if applied to climate finance.
The prospects are limited, because a clear attribution of emission reductions is almost impossible in a system that does not have as well-defined borders as the zero-sum-game of tradable emission reductions under a capped environment.The authors propose some inroutes to adapting the current approach to Additionality in this context, and pose a number of questions that can help to further discuss and refine the CDM's Additionality concept to make it better applicable for a future, globally inclusive climate regime.