Abstract
As negotiations on the post-2012 climate regime are now taking off, it is time to look back and assess the experiences of the clean development mechanism (CDM) to this date. The CDM has been subject to extensive discussion in academic literature during the last few years, and this article reviews that literature in order to sum up its main themes. A common assessment is that the current structure of the CDM leads to a focus on cheap emissions reductions at the expense of sustainable development benefits for the host countries. Recently, the questionable additionality of many CDM projects has become a central issue. The article further argues that whereas a substantial body of work exists on the CDM, this work is mainly preoccupied with a ‘fine-tuning’ of the mechanism. As the CDM now becomes increasingly institutionalized, scholars should also take a step back and study the CDM in a more theoretically oriented way.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
The articles were collected starting in a search on “clean development mechanism” in the electronic article archive ELIN (Electronic Library Information Navigator, http://elin.lub.lu.se/elin), with links to journals from all major publishers. The references of these articles were then searched using a snowballing method until no further references of relevance were identified. The articles and reports referred to in the text were found to be representative of this broader selection of publications.
However, to facilitate a prompt start of the CDM, a decision by COP 7 allowed retroactive crediting for projects registered before 31 December 2005. These projects may thus have a crediting period that starts prior to the date of registration, but not earlier than 1 January 2000 (UNFCCC 2001).
In order to prevent conflicts of interest, the same DOE is not allowed to perform both the validation and the verification of one project.
Abbreviations
- CDM:
-
Clean development mechanism
- CERs:
-
Cerified emission reductions
- COP/MOP:
-
Conference of the Parties serving as the Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol
- DNA:
-
Designated National Authority
- DOE:
-
Designated operational entity
- EB:
-
Executive Board
- GHG:
-
Greenhouse gas
- LULUCF:
-
Land use, land use change and forestry
- ODA:
-
Official Development Assistance
- REDD:
-
Reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation
- UNFCCC:
-
UN Framework Convention on Climate Change
References
Aslam, M. A. (2001). Technology transfer under the CDM—Materializing the myth in the Japanese context? Climate Policy, 1, 451–464.
Austin, D., Faeth, P., Seroa da Motta, R., Ferraz, C., Young, C. E. F., Ji, Z., Junfeng, L., Pathak, M., Srivastava, L., & Sharma, S. (1999). How much sustainable development can we expect from the clean development mechanism? Washington, DC: World Resources Institute (WRI Climate Notes).
Bachram, H. (2004). Climate fraud and carbon colonialism: The new trade in greenhouse gases. Capitalism Nature Socialism, 15, 1–16.
Banuri, T., & Gupta, S. (2000). The clean development mechanism and sustainable development: An economic analysis. In P. Ghosh (Ed.), Implementation of the Kyoto Protocol: Opportunities and pitfalls for developing countries (pp. 73–101). Manila: Asian Development Bank.
Baumert, K. A., & Petkova, E. (2000). How will the clean development mechanism ensure transparency, public engagement, and accountability? Washington, DC: World Resources Institute (WRI Climate Notes).
Betzenbichler, W. (2004). The role of the verifier: Validation and verification in “cap & trade” and “baseline & credit” systems. Intereconomics, 39, 123–127.
Bode, S., & Michaelowa, A. (2003). Avoiding perverse effects of baseline and investment additionality determination in the case of renewable energy projects. Energy Policy, 31, 505–517.
Bosi, M., & Ellis, J. (2005). Exploring options for “sectoral crediting mechanisms”. Paris: OECD Environment Directorate, International Energy Agency.
Boyd, E., Hultman, N. E., Roberts, T., Corbera, E., Ebeling, J., Liverman, D. M., Brown, K., Tippmann, R., Cole, J., Mann, P., Kaiser, M., Robbins, M., Bumpus, A., Shaw, A., Ferreira, E., Bozmoski, A., Villiers, C., & Avis, J. (2007). The clean development mechanism: An assessment of current practice and future approaches for policy. Tyndall Centre Working Paper 114. Environmental Change Institute, Oxford and Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, UK.
Brown, K., & Corbera, E. (2003). A multi-criteria assessment framework for carbon-mitigation projects: Putting “development” in the centre of decision-making. Tyndall Centre Working Paper 29. Norwich, UK: The Tyndall Centre.
Bumpus, A., & Liverman, D. M. (2008). Accumulation by decarbonization and the governance of carbon offsets. Economic Geography, 84, 127–155.
Chadwick, B. P. (2006). Transaction costs and the clean development mechanism. Natural Resources Forum, 30, 256–271.
Christiansen, A. C. (2004). The role of flexibility mechanisms in EU climate strategy: Lessons learned and future challenges? International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 4, 27–46.
Clémençon, R. (2008). The Bali road map: A first step on the difficult journey to a post-Kyoto protocol agreement. The Journal of Environment & Development, 17, 70–94.
Cosbey, A., Murphy, D., & Drexhage, J. (2007). Market mechanisms for sustainable development: How do they fit in the various post-2012 climate efforts?. Winnipeg: International Institute for Sustainable Development.
Cox, R. (1981). Social forces, states and world orders: Beyond international relations theory. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 10, 126–155.
Dutschke, M. (2001). Permanence of CDM forests or non-permanence of land use related carbon credits? HWWA Discussion Paper 134. Hamburg: Hamburg Institute of International Economics.
Dutschke, M., & Michaelowa, A. (2006). Development assistance and the CDM—How to interpret ‘financial additionality’. Environment and Development Economics, 11, 235–246.
Dutschke, M., Schlamadinger, B., Wong, J. L. P., & Rumberg, M. (2004). Value and risks of expiring carbon credits from CDM afforestation and reforestation. HWWA Discussion Paper 290. Hamburg: Hamburg Institute of International Economics.
Ellis, J., & Kamel, S. (2007). Overcoming barriers to clean development mechanism projects. Paris: Organisation for economic co-operation and development (OECD), International Energy Agency (IEA).
Ellis, J., Winkler, H., Corfee-Morlot, J., & Gagnon-Lebrun, F. (2007). CDM: Taking stock and looking forward. Energy Policy, 35, 15–28.
Fearnside, P. M. (2001). Saving tropical forests as a global warming countermeasure: An issue that divides the environmental movement. Ecological Economics, 39, 167–184.
Fichtner, W., Graehl, S., & Rentz, O. (2003). The impact of private investor’s transaction costs on the cost effectiveness of project-based Kyoto mechanisms. Climate Policy, 3, 249–259.
Fischer, C. (2005). Project-based mechanisms for emissions reductions: Balancing trade-offs with baselines. Energy Policy, 33, 1807–1823.
Forsyth, T. (1999). Flexible mechanisms of climate technology transfer. The Journal of Environment Development, 8, 238–257.
Forsyth, T. (2005). Enhancing climate technology transfer through greater public–private cooperation: Lessons from Thailand and the Philippines. Natural Resources Forum, 29, 165–176.
Grubb, M., Vrolijk, C., & Brack, D. (1999). The Kyoto protocol: A guide and assessment. London: The Royal Institute of International Affairs: Earthscan.
Gundimeda, H. (2004). How ‘sustainable’ is the ‘sustainable development objective’ of CDM in developing countries like India? Forest Policy and Economics, 6, 329–343.
Haites, E., Duan, M. S., & Seres, S. (2006). Technology transfer by CDM projects. Climate Policy, 6, 327–344.
Haya, B. (2007). Failed Mechanism: How the CDM is subsidizing hydro developers and harming the Kyoto Protocol. Berkeley: International Rivers.
Humphrey, J. (2004). The clean development mechanism: How to increase benefits for developing countries. IDS Bulletin, 35, 84–89.
Jahn, M., Michaelowa, A., Raubenheimer, S., & Liptow, H. (2003). Unilateral CDM—Chances and pitfalls. Eschborn: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit.
Jahn, M., Michaelowa, A., Raubenheimer, S., & Liptow, H. (2004). Measuring the potential of unilateral CDM—A pilot study. HWWA Discussion Paper 263. Hamburg: Hamburg Institute of International Economics.
Jung, M. (2006). Host country attractiveness for CDM non-sink projects. Energy Policy, 34, 2173–2184.
Kallbekken, S., Flottorp, L. S., & Rive, N. (2007). CDM baseline approaches and carbon leakage. Energy Policy, 35, 4154–4163.
Kartha, S., Lazarus, M., & Bosi, M. (2004). Baseline recommendations for greenhouse gas mitigation projects in the electric power sector. Energy Policy, 32, 545–566.
Kerr, S., & Leining, C. R. (2000). Permanence of LULUCF CERs in the Clean Development Mechanism. Washington, DC: Center for Clean Air Policy.
Khalil, H., Cohen, C., & Szklo Alexandre, S. (2006). How to use the clean development mechanism in the residential sector? The case of Brazilian refrigerators. Energy Policy, 34, 2150–2160.
Kolk, A., & Pinkse, J. (2007, May). Private actors and the governance of global climate change. Paper presented at the Amsterdam Conference on the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change, Amsterdam.
Krey, M. (2005). Transaction costs of unilateral CDM projects in India—Results from an empirical survey. Energy Policy, 33, 2385–2397.
Laurikka, H. (2002). Absolute or relative baselines for JI/CDM projects in the energy sector? Climate Policy, 2, 19–33.
Lecocq, F., & Ambrosi, P. (2007). The clean development mechanism: History, status, and prospects. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 1, 134–151.
Locatelli, B., & Pedroni, L. (2006). Will simplified modalities and procedures make more small-scale forestry projects viable under the clean development mechanism? Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 11, 621–643.
Lohmann, L. (2006). Carbon trading—A critical conversation on climate change, privatisation and power. Uppsala: Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation.
Lövbrand, E., Nordqvist, J., & Rindefjäll, T. (2007, May). Everyone loves a winner—Expectations and realisations in the emerging CDM market. Paper presented at the Amsterdam Conference on the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change, Amsterdam.
Maréchal, K., & Hecq, W. (2006). Temporary credits: A solution to the potential non-permanence of carbon sequestration in forests? Ecological Economics, 58, 699–716.
Marland, G., Fruit, K., & Sedjo, R. (2001). Accounting for sequestered carbon: The question of permanence. Environmental Science and Policy, 4, 259–268.
Matthews, K., & Paterson, M. (2005). Boom or bust? The economic engine behind the drive for climate change policy. Global Change, Peace & Security, 17, 59–75.
Michaelowa, A. (2003). CDM host country institution building. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 8, 201–220.
Michaelowa, A. (2005). CDM: Current status and possibilities for reform. HWWI Paper No 3. Hamburg: Hamburg Institute of International Economics.
Michaelowa, A. (2007). Unilateral CDM—Can developing countries finance generation of greenhouse gas emission credits on their own? International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 7, 17–34.
Michaelowa, A., & Jotzo, F. (2005). Transaction costs, institutional rigidities and the size of the clean development mechanism. Energy Policy, 33, 511–523.
Michaelowa, A., & Purohit, P. (2007). Additionality determination of Indian CDM projects: Can Indian CDM project developers outwit the CDM Executive Board? Switzerland: University of Zurich.
Michaelowa, A., Stronzik, M., Eckermann, F., & Hunt, A. (2003). Transaction costs of the Kyoto mechanisms. Climate Policy, 3, 261–278.
Michaelowa, A., Butzengeiger, S., & Jung, M. (2005a). Graduation and deepening: An ambitious post-2012 climate policy scenario. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 5, 25–46.
Michaelowa, A., Tangen, K., & Hasselknippe, H. (2005b). Issues and options for the post-2012 climate architecture—An overview. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 5, 5–24.
Millock, K. (2002). Technology transfers in the clean development mechanism: An incentives issue. Environment and Development Economics, 7, 449–466.
Miranda, M., Dieperink, C., & Glasbergen, P. (2002). The social meaning of carbon dioxide emission trading: Institutional capacity building for a green market in Costa Rica. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 4, 69–86.
Muller, A. (2007). How to make the clean development mechanism sustainable—The potential of rent extraction. Energy Policy, 35, 3203–3212.
Olsen, K. H. (2007). The clean development mechanism’s contribution to sustainable development: A review of the literature. Climatic Change, 84, 59–73.
Olsen, K. H., & Fenhann, J. (2008). Sustainable development benefits of clean development mechanism projects: A new methodology for sustainability assessment based on text analysis of the project design documents submitted for validation. Energy Policy, 36, 2819–2830.
Painuly, J. P. (2003). Baselines for clean development mechanism projects: The Marrakesh Accords and beyond. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 3, 323–348.
Palm, M., Ostwald, M., & Reilly, J. (2008). Land use and forestry based CDM in scientific peer-reviewed literature pre- and post-COP 9 in Milan. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 8, 249–274.
Pearson, B. (2007). Market failure: Why the clean development mechanism won’t promote clean development. Journal of Cleaner Production, 15, 247–252.
Pearson, B., & Shao Loong, Y. (2003). The CDM: Reducing greenhouse gas emissions or relabeling business as usual? Third World Network, CDM Watch
Reddy, B., & Balachandra, P. (2006). Dynamics of technology shifts in the household sector—Implications for clean development mechanism. Energy Policy, 34, 2586–2599.
Schlamadinger, B., Bird, N., Johns, T., Brown, S., Canadell, J., Ciccarese, L., et al. (2007). A synopsis of land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) under the Kyoto protocol and Marrakesh Accords. Environmental Science and Policy, 10, 271–282.
Schneider, L. (2007). Is the CDM fulfilling its environmental and sustainable development objectives? An evaluation of the CDM and options for improvement. Berlin: Öko-Institut.
Schneider, L. (2008). A Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) with atmospheric benefits for a post-2012 climate regime. Berlin: Öko-Institut.
Schwarze, R., Niles, J. O., & Olander, J. (2002). Understanding and managing leakage in forest-based greenhouse-gas-mitigation projects. Philosophical Transactions: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 360, 1685–1703.
Sharma, S., & Shrestha, R. M. (2006). Baseline for electricity sector CDM projects: Simplifying estimation of operating margin emission factor. Energy Policy, 34, 4093–4102.
Shrestha, R. M., & Abeygunawardana, A. M. A. K. (2007). Small-scale CDM projects in a competitive electricity industry: How good is a simplified baseline methodology? Energy Policy, 35, 3717–3728.
Silayan, A. (2005). Equitable distribution of CDM projects among developing countries. HWWA-Report 255. Hamburg: Hamburg Institute of International Economics.
Sterk, W. (2008). From clean development mechanism to sectoral crediting approaches—Way forward or wrong turn? JIKO Policy Paper 1/2008. Wuppertal: Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy.
Sterk, W., & Wittneben, B. (2006). Enhancing the clean development mechanism through sectoral approaches: Definitions, applications and ways forward. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 6, 271–287.
Streck, C. (2004). New partnerships in global environmental policy: The clean development mechanism. The Journal of Environment Development, 13, 295–322.
Streck, C. (2007). The governance of the clean development mechanism: The case for strength and stability. Environmental Liability, 2, 91–100.
Streck, C., & Lin, J. (2008). Making markets work: A review of CDM performance and the need for reform. The European Journal of International Law, 19, 409–442.
Sutter, C., & Parreño, J. C. (2007). Does the current clean development mechanism (CDM) deliver its sustainable development claim? An analysis of officially registered CDM projects. Climatic Change, 84, 75–90.
UNEP Risoe Centre. (2008). CDM/JI Pipeline analysis and database, May 1st 2008. Retrieved May 19, 2008, from http://cdmpipeline.org/.
UNFCCC. (1997). Kyoto protocol to the United Nations framework convention on climate change. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, FCCC/CP/L.7/Add1, Kyoto.
UNFCCC. (2001). Report to the Conference of the Parties on its seventh session. Part two: Action taken by the conference of the parties. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, FCCC/CP/2001/13/Add2, Marrakesh.
Wapner, P. (2008). The importance of critical environmental studies in the new environmentalism. Global Environmental Politics, 8, 6–13.
Wara, V. (2007). Is the global carbon market working? Nature, 445, 595–596.
Winkler, H., & Thorne, S. (2002, February). Baselines for suppressed demand: CDM projects contribution to poverty alleviation. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of Forum for Economics and Environment, Cape Town.
Zhang, Z. (2006). Toward an effective implementation of clean development mechanism projects in China. Energy Policy, 34, 3691–3701.
Zhang, Z., & Maruyama, A. (2001). Towards a private–public synergy in financing climate change mitigation projects. Energy Policy, 29, 1363–1378.
Zhang, C., Shukla, P. R., Victor, D. G., Heller, T. C., Biswas, D., & Nag, T. (2006). Baselines for carbon emissions in the Indian and Chinese power sectors: Implications for international carbon trading. Energy Policy, 34, 1900–1917.
Acknowledgements
Valuable comments on previous draft versions were provided by Karin Bäckstrand and Johannes Stripple, as well as the editors and two anonymous reviewers. Funding from the Swedish Energy Agency is gratefully acknowledged.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Paulsson, E. A review of the CDM literature: from fine-tuning to critical scrutiny?. Int Environ Agreements 9, 63–80 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-008-9088-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-008-9088-0