REDD crediting vs. REDD funds : how avoided deforestation under the UNFCCC should be financed
(2010)
The Paris Agreement adopted in December 2015 provides the basis for future international cooperation on the field of climate change mitigation. While truly global in reach, the agreement will however result in an increasingly complex new climate regime: Instead of using a uniform formula, Parties are allowed to autonomously define their NDCs (nationally determined contributions), resulting in a large diversity of contributions. This poses significant challenges for emissions accounting and the transfer of emission units.
This Policy Paper explores how these challenges can be addressed by analysing different types of NDCs and assessing their compatibility with the export and use of emission units. On that basis, the authors develop opt-in provisions for Parties willing to participate in unit transfers under the new climate regime and illustrate how potential risks to environmental integrity can be addressed.
Although it is not part of what has been called the "ambition mechanism" or "ratchet mechanism", Article 6 of the Paris Agreement also has an explicit requirement to promote ambition. Article 6 specifically highlights that some Parties choose to pursue voluntary cooperation in the implementation of their nationally determined contributions to allow for higher ambition in their mitigation and adaptation actions. Despite the common purpose, the two elements have to date been discussed mostly in isolation, both in the negotiations as well as in the wider literature. This JIKO Policy Paper sets out to change this by exploring the relationship between Article 6 and the Global Stocktake.
This JIKO Policy Paper explores how Parties using Article 6 can increase their mitigation ambition. Building on a broad definition of ambition raising which puts the intensification of climate change mitigation targets and actions by Parties at its centre, eight different ambition raising options are identified. The analysis shows that these options are associated with different technical, institutional and political challenges, calling for a combination of different ambition raising options.
The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) is in crisis. More and more market participants are leaving the sector. In the light of this development, some argue that governments should step in as buyers of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs). Given the limited volumes of public funding, however, governments will have to prioritise some projects over others. This policy brief therefore analyses national purchase programmes and multilateral carbon funds in order to identify criteria public investors are applying in the selection of the projects they finance. The aim is to identify a vision of a high quality CDM project that be can be made use of when designing a possible support programme.
Using results-based finance for climate action : existing initiatives and the role of the CDM
(2014)
Results-based finance is receiving increasing attention, being considered as a potential key funding mode in climate finance. The Clean Development Mechanism has been cited to potentially contribute to this goal. Against this background, the policy brief outlines the rationale of the concept and analyses six climate change mitigation initiatives that build on the results-based finance approach. The analysis puts a special focus on the role of the CDM.