Additionality of Climate Change Mitigation Activities

  • Gregory Valatin
Part of the Forestry Sciences book series (FOSC, volume 81)


Although widely considered to be a core aspect of quality assurance of climate change mitigation activities, additionality remains a source of much controversy in relation to carbon accounting and carbon markets. This chapter illuminates the multi-faceted nature of the concept and develops a taxonomy of different forms. It provides an overview of how additionality is currently applied in relation to both compliance and voluntary carbon markets, including tests used and underlying evidence base requirements. This draws upon and updates an earlier review commissioned to help inform development of a Woodland Carbon Code designed to underpin climate change mitigation activities in the UK by the forest sector. Sources of uncertainty and trade-offs in practical application of the concept are highlighted, and potential perverse incentives explored.


Clean Development Mechanism Clean Development Mechanism Project Carbon Credit Project Developer Perverse Incentive 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



 Thanks to Pat Snowdon, Chris Quine and Trevor Fenning for their comments, to Christine Cahalan and three anonymous reviewers.


  1. ARB (2011a) Compliance offset protocol U.S. forest projects. Air Resources Board, California Environmental Protection Agency, October,
  2. ARB (2011b) Compliance offset protocol urban forest projects. Air Resources Board, California Environmental Protection Agency, October,
  3. Au Yong HW (2009) Investment additionality in the CDM. Technical Paper Econometrica Press, EdinburghGoogle Scholar
  4. Bloomgarden E, Trexler M (2008) Another look at additionality. Environ Finance May 17Google Scholar
  5. Bode S, Michaelowa A (2003) Avoiding perverse effects of baseline and investment additionality determination in the case of renewable energy projects. Energ Policy 31:505–517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown J, Bird N, Schalatek L (2010) Climate finance additionality: emerging definitions and their implications. Climate Finance Policy Brief No. 2, Overseas Development InstituteGoogle Scholar
  7. Calel R (2011) Perverse incentives under the CDM: a comment. Working Paper 63 Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy, and Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, LSE. JulyGoogle Scholar
  8. Costa PM, Stuart M, Pinard M, Phillips G (2000) Elements of a certification system for forestry-based carbon offset projects. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Chang 5:39–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. DECC (2010) Valuation of energy use and greenhouse gas emissions for appraisal and evaluation: supplement to HM treasury’s green book. Department of Energy and Climate Change, LondonGoogle Scholar
  10. EIA (2010) HFC-23 offsets in the context of the EU emissions trading scheme. Policy Briefing, Environmental Investigation Agency/CDM Watch, JulyGoogle Scholar
  11. Forestry Commission (2011a) The UK forestry standard: the Government’s approach to sustainable Forestry. Forestry Commission, EdinburghGoogle Scholar
  12. Forestry Commission (2011b) The Woodland carbon code. Version 1.3. Forestry Commission, EdinburghGoogle Scholar
  13. Forster P, Ramaswamy V, Artaxo P, Berntsen T, Betts R, Fahey DW (2007) Changes in atmospheric constituents and in radiative forcing. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB (eds) Climate change 2007: the physical science basis contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  14. Hamilton K, Sjardin M, Shapiro A, Marcello T (2009) Fortifying the foundation: state of voluntary carbon markets 2009. New Carbon Finance/Ecosystem Marketplace , New York/Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  15. HM Treasury (2003) The green book: appraisal and evaluation in central government. TSO, LondonGoogle Scholar
  16. IPCC (2000) Land use, land-use change, and forestry. Intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  17. Kollmuss A (2007) Carbon offsets 101: a primer on the hottest – and trickiest – topic in climate change. World Watch Mag 20 July/AugustGoogle Scholar
  18. McCully P (2008) The great carbon offset swindle: how carbon credits are gutting the Kyoto Protocol and why they must be scrapped. In: Pottinger L (ed) Bad deal for the planet: why carbon offsets aren’t working… And how to create a fair global climate accord. Dams, Rivers and People Report 2008 International Rivers Berkeley, pp 2–14Google Scholar
  19. Merger E (2008) Forestry carbon standards 2008 and the state of climate forestation projects. Carbon Positive, AthensGoogle Scholar
  20. Mukerjee M (2009) A mechanism of Hot Air. Sci Am 4 June, pp 9–10Google Scholar
  21. Peters-Stanley M (2012) Bringing it home: taking stock of government engagement with the voluntary carbon market. Ecosystem Marketplace, Forest Trends, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  22. Price C, Willis R (2011) The multiple effects of carbon values on optimal rotation. J Forest Econ 17:298–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rajan SC (2011) Vested or public interest? the case of India. In global corruption report: climate change. Transparency International Earthscan, London, pp 57–62Google Scholar
  24. Reynolds B (2008) Do we need financial additionality? Environ Finance 36 MarchGoogle Scholar
  25. Schneider L (2007) Is the CDM fulfilling its environmental and sustainable development objectives? An evaluation of the CDM and options for improvement. Institute for Applied Ecology, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  26. Schneider RL (2011a) Perverse incentives under the CDM: an evaluation of HFC-23 destruction projects. Clim Policy 11:851–864CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Schneider L (2011b) The trade-offs of trade: realities and risks of global carbon markets. In global corruption report: climate change. Transparency International Earthscan, London, pp 131–143Google Scholar
  28. Schwank O (2004) Concerns about CDM projects based on decomposition of HFC-23 emissions from 22 HCFC production sites. INFRAS, ZurichGoogle Scholar
  29. Scolnick T (2010) Carbon market distortions and diminishing environmental returns: the clean development mechanism and China. Briefing note 2010-24, Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions/ISIS, Saunder School of Business. University of British Columbia, VancouverGoogle Scholar
  30. Shapiro M (2010) Conning the climate: inside the carbon-trading shell game. Harper’s Mag. Feb, pp 31–39Google Scholar
  31. UNFCCC (2007) Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality in A/R CDM Project Activities (Version 02), CDM Executive Board Report EB 35, Annex 17,
  32. Valatin G (2011) Forests and carbon: a review of additionality. Research Report Forestry Commission, EdinburghGoogle Scholar
  33. Valatin G (2012) Additionality and climate change mitigation by the UK forest sector. Forestry 85(4):445–462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Valatin G, Starling J (2010) Valuation of ecosystem services provided by UK woodlands, appendix to Chapter 22 of UK National Ecosystem Assessment. UNEP-WCMC/Defra, LondonGoogle Scholar
  35. Wara M, Victor DG (2008) A realistic policy on carbon offsets. Working Paper 74, Program on Energy and Sustainable Development, Freeman Spogli Institute, University of Stanford CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  36. Willis K, Ozdemiroglu E, Campbell D (2012) Environmental economics and policy. J Environ Econ Policy 1:1–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Forest ResearchNorthern Research StationMidlothianScotland, UK

Personalised recommendations