Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

Carbon Market Watch urges the CDM Executive Board to reform additionality requirements, shorten crediting periods, and mandate human rights compliance. The organization recommends establishing global sustainability standards, improving civil society participation through grievance mechanisms, reforming the appointment and payment of Designated Operational Entities (DOEs), and implementing a strict code of conduct for the Executive Board to prevent conflicts of interest.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • Current additionality requirements are ineffective, with research indicating that large-scale power supply and methane projects are likely non-additional, potentially increasing global GHG emissions by up to 3.6 Giga tonnes CO2e through 2020.
  • The existing crediting periods of 10 years or three 7-year periods are often inappropriate because technology lifetimes are frequently shorter and some projects only advance investments that would have occurred later.
  • The CDM Executive Board has registered projects despite evidence of human rights abuses, claiming it lacks a mandate to address human rights; however, Carbon Market Watch argues that the UN Charter and UNFCCC decisions require the Board to uphold human rights standards.
  • The CDM lacks sufficient monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) for sustainable development, leading to the registration of projects with no contribution to sustainability or even negative impacts.
  • Civil society and local communities are often inadequately informed about projects, and there is currently no mechanism for stakeholders to raise concerns after a project has been registered.
  • The current system where project developers choose and pay Designated Operational Entities (DOEs) compromises auditor independence and neutrality.
  • The CDM Executive Board suffers from a lack of transparent nomination processes, a failure to implement criteria for member nomination beyond regional balance, and the absence of an explicit code of conduct to manage conflicts of interest.

Cite the original document

APA
Kollmuss, A. (2012). CDM Watch Input to CDM EB meeting 70. Carbon Market Watch. https://carbonmarketwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/CarbonMarketWatchInput_on_Annotated_Agenda_72.pdf
Chicago
Kollmuss, Anja. CDM Watch Input to CDM EB meeting 70. Carbon Market Watch, 2012. https://carbonmarketwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/CarbonMarketWatchInput_on_Annotated_Agenda_72.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite press release |last1=Kollmuss |first1=Anja |title=CDM Watch Input to CDM EB meeting 70 |publisher=Carbon Market Watch |date=23 February 2012 |url=https://carbonmarketwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/CarbonMarketWatchInput_on_Annotated_Agenda_72.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@misc{kollmuss2012cdm, author = {Kollmuss, Anja}, title = {{CDM Watch Input to CDM EB meeting 70}}, publisher = {Carbon Market Watch}, year = {2012}, month = feb, url = {https://carbonmarketwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/CarbonMarketWatchInput_on_Annotated_Agenda_72.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated