Internationalization of the Response: The Example of the REDD Credits

  • Benoit Morel
Part of the Springer Climate book series (SPCL)


One can read in Chap.  11 of the WGIII AR5 IPCC report that REDD credits (REDD is for Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) “can represent a cost-effective option for mitigation with economic, social, and other environmental co-benefits, e.g., conservation of biodiversity and water resources” with the caveat that there is limited evidence for that and only medium agreement. In this chapter, using the ROA looking glass, we investigate some aspect of how to make REDD credits cost-effective and compare with what actually happens. Despite the apparent difference, there is more similarity between what the ROA approach would recommend and what takes place.


  1. Arrow, K.J.: The limits of organization. Norton, New York (1974)Google Scholar
  2. Fisher, A.: Introduction to special issue on irreversibility. Resour. Energy Econ. 22(3), 189–196 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Hanemann, W.M.: Information and the concept of option value. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 16(1), 23–27 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Helm, D., Hepburn, C.: The economic analysis of biodiversity. In: Helm, D., Hepburn, C. (eds.) Nature in the Balance. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. (2005)
  6. Parry, I., Veung, C., Heine, D.: How much carbon pricing is in countries’ interests? The critical role of co-benefits. IMF working Paper (2014)Google Scholar
  7. Pindyck, R.: Irreversibilities and the timing of environmental policy. Resour. Energy Econ. 22(3), 233–259 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Sachs, J.D.: The age of sustainable development. Columbia University Press, New York (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Schmalensee, R.: Option demand and consumer’s surplus: valuing price changes under uncertainty. Am. Econ. Rev. 62(5), 813–824 (1972)Google Scholar
  10. Weisbrod, B.A.: Collective-consumption services of individual-consumption goods. Q. J. Econ. 78(3), 471–477 (1964)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Benoit Morel
    • 1
  1. 1.Carnegie Mellon UniversityPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations