Flexibility mechanisms and sustainable development: lessons from five AIJ projects

Abstract

CLIMATE POLICY 8 (2008) 261-276Do 'Activities Implemented Jointly' (AIJ) projects contribute to sustainable development in the host countries? Which factors have contributed to the success or failure of the projects? Five AIJ projects were examined, accounting for 90% of the total AIJ expenditure of the Dutch government. The projects are at different stages of implementation, and four are in the process of being submitted as Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) projects. Although all five projects focused on small renewables, only one was very successful in also promoting sustainable development, while one failed completely in both achieving emissions reduction and promoting sustainable development. In this small set, the project with the most cost-effective reduction of greenhouse gases was also the project that attained the most sustainable development benefits. In order to develop successful projects that also contribute to sustainable development, it is critical that projects should be demand-driven (not only by governments, but also by involved stakeholders), designed carefully, well-documented in order to ensure institutional memory, and should aim to have a demonstrative effect.Les activités exécutées conjointement (AEC) contribuent-elles au développement durable des Parties hôtes? Quels sont les facteurs ayant contribué au succès ou à l'échec de ces projets? Cinq projets d'AEC ont été examinés, représentant 90% des dépenses du gouvernement néerlandais pour les AEC. Ces projets sont à différents stades de développement, et quatre sont au stade de proposition au titre du MDP. Bien que tous les cinq projets soient des projets de faible ampleur dans le secteur de l'énergie renouvelable, un seul a très bien réussi à promouvoir aussi le développement durable, tandis qu'un projet a échoué aussi bien dans la réduction des émissions que dans la promotion du développement durable. Dans ce petit échantillon, le projet dont les réductions des gaz à effet de serre étaient les plus économiquement efficaces, est celui qui a aussi produit le plus de bénéfices en développement durable. Dans le but de développer des projets réussis qui contribuent aussi bien au développement durable, il est important que les projets répondent à une demande (non seulement de la part des gouvernements, mais aussi par les parties prenantes impliquées), soient conçus avec soin, soient bien documentés de manière à assurer une mémoire institutionnelle, et visent à produire un effet demonstratif.Mots clés: Activités exécutées conjointement; développement durable; développement et climat; énergie renouvelable; mécanisme pour un développement propre; nord-sud; pays en développement; transfert de technologies

The future of the CDM: same same, but differentiated?

“…■ The contribution of the CDM to sustainable development in the host countries is widely seen as being very limited (Olsen, 2007;Sutter and Parreño, 2007; cf. Gupta et al, 2008). ■ Asian and Latin American countries make up more than 95% of the projects and certifi ed emission reductions (CERs) in the CDM project pipeline (UNEP/Risø, 2010), raising concerns about the equitable regional and sub-regional distribution of projects (UNFCCC, 2008a; see also Cosbey et al, 2006;).…”

Climate change and development cooperation: trends and questions

“…For example, integrating the sustainable development aspects into the Clean Development Mechanism projects has been quite difficult to achieve in practice [67][68][69][70]. Research shows that although in early phases of project approval parties indicate that they would like to make a contribution to sustainable development, once the projects are approved, actual contracts are drawn up between purchasers and sellers of emission credits.…”

Sequestration through forestry and agriculture

“…Because a key argument in favor of forestry and agricultural carbon sequestration through the CDM—and of CDM offsets in general—are the perceived development benefits, the lack of development benefits to‐date suggests that mechanisms like the CDM should not be policy priorities. Investments via the CDM generally seek the lowest‐cost of CO 2 emission offsets, not necessarily prioritizing for development,93 producing limited investment in new infrastructure and resulting in little development success 138,139. Small‐holder households represent a serious challenge for documenting carbon sequestration140 because aggregation across a variety of landowners increases monitoring transaction costs, implying that the cost‐effectiveness of carbon sequestration projects conflicts with poverty alleviation goals 141,142.…”