Empirical analysis of performance of CDM projects: case study China

The paper evaluates six Chinese CDM projects (four registered and two in validation) to assess how they perform against their initial designs. It finds that forecasted Certified Emission Reductions (CERs) fluctuate significantly as projects progress, often due to new standardised baseline information from China's Designated National Authority (DNA) and technological barriers. All sampled projects claim investment barriers, but only half provide a complete investment analysis. The study also notes a lack of standardised stakeholder consultation procedures in China, with written surveys being the most common method. While projects often align with stakeholder expectations regarding local employment, sustainability benefits are not described quantitatively in the Project Design Documents (PDDs).

• Forecasted Certified Emission Reductions (CERs) vary significantly as projects move from validation to issuance, with observed changes ranging from +36% to -42% of the original volume.
• Project delays in the start of the crediting period are common, particularly for hydropower plants, and are caused by institutional, methodological, and financial factors including DNA approval delays, EB registration processes, and difficulties in achieving financial closure.
• Small-scale CDM projects in China may face more severe technological and financial barriers than large projects, especially when implemented by small private companies that struggle to secure bank loans because local banks do not trust CER revenues as security.
• While all analysed projects argue that investment barriers exist, only 50% perform a complete investment analysis to substantiate this claim.
• The quality of additionality argumentation is often insufficient in projects that have not yet passed validation, specifically regarding the lack of independent information sources and detailed common practice analysis.
• China lacks a specific, standardised procedure for CDM stakeholder participation; the most frequent methods used are written surveys and public meetings, though some projects provide insufficient information on their consultation methods.
• Sustainability benefits in the sampled projects are not described quantitatively, and all listed benefits derive from project activities or national regulations rather than voluntary community support programmes.

APA

Castro, P. (2008). Empirical analysis of performance of CDM projects: case study China. Climate Strategies. https://climatestrategies.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/cdm-case-china-castro02-08.pdf

Chicago

Castro, Paula. Empirical analysis of performance of CDM projects: case study China. Climate Strategies, 2008. https://climatestrategies.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/cdm-case-china-castro02-08.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Castro |first1=Paula |title=Empirical analysis of performance of CDM projects: case study China |publisher=Climate Strategies |date=February 2008 |url=https://climatestrategies.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/cdm-case-china-castro02-08.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{castro2008empirical, author = {Castro, Paula}, title = {{Empirical analysis of performance of CDM projects: case study China}}, institution = {Climate Strategies}, year = {2008}, month = feb, url = {https://climatestrategies.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/cdm-case-china-castro02-08.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }