VIEWS ON THE REVIEW OF THE MODALITIES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM PREPARED FOR SUBSIDIARY BODY FOR IMPLEMENTATION, 41TH SESSION, 1-8 DECEMBER 2014

The document argues that the CDM, as a pure offsetting mechanism, often fails to deliver real emission reductions and lacks sufficient social safeguards. It proposes a fundamental overhaul of the CDM's modalities and procedures, focusing on achieving net atmospheric benefits, strengthening additionality testing, shortening crediting periods, and enhancing civil society participation and grievance mechanisms. It also calls for greater transparency from Designated National Authorities (DNAs), stricter eligibility and conduct rules for the CDM Executive Board, and the introduction of liability rules for Designated Operational Entities (DOEs) to prevent conflicts of interest.

• The CDM currently operates as a zero-sum offsetting mechanism that does not reduce emissions beyond the cap, with estimates suggesting that non-additional credits could lead to an increase in global emissions between 0.7 and over 3 Gt by 2020.
• Current additionality testing is criticized as ineffective, with large-scale power supply and methane projects identified as unlikely to be additional; if these remain eligible, they could increase global GHG emissions by up to 3.6 Gt CO2e through 2020.
• The document recommends shortening crediting periods—currently 10 years or three times 7 years—because technology lifetimes are often shorter and projects may cease to be additional due to economic or policy changes.
• There is a need to include both E- (climate-friendly) and E+ (emissions-intensive) national policies in additionality and baseline determinations to prevent over-crediting and perverse incentives.
• Civil society participation is currently insufficient due to poorly defined consultation requirements and a lack of formal channels for stakeholders to raise concerns after a project is registered.
• The document proposes establishing a CDM grievance mechanism and environmental and social safeguards similar to the REDD+ framework to address adverse impacts during project implementation.
• Sustainable development contributions are hindered by a lack of transparency from Designated National Authorities (DNAs) and the voluntary, non-verified nature of the existing SD Tool.
• The independence of Designated Operational Entities (DOEs) is compromised because they are chosen and paid by project developers, creating a conflict of interest that may lead to the approval of deficient projects.

APA

Carbon Market Watch (2014). VIEWS ON THE REVIEW OF THE MODALITIES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM PREPARED FOR SUBSIDIARY BODY FOR IMPLEMENTATION, 41TH SESSION, 1-8 DECEMBER 2014. https://carbonmarketwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/CMW_Position_CDM-review_final.pdf

Chicago

Carbon Market Watch. VIEWS ON THE REVIEW OF THE MODALITIES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM PREPARED FOR SUBSIDIARY BODY FOR IMPLEMENTATION, 41TH SESSION, 1-8 DECEMBER 2014. 2014. https://carbonmarketwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/CMW_Position_CDM-review_final.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite press release |author=Carbon Market Watch |title=VIEWS ON THE REVIEW OF THE MODALITIES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM PREPARED FOR SUBSIDIARY BODY FOR IMPLEMENTATION, 41TH SESSION, 1-8 DECEMBER 2014 |date=November 2014 |url=https://carbonmarketwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/CMW_Position_CDM-review_final.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@misc{carbonmarketwatch2014views, author = {{Carbon Market Watch}}, title = {{VIEWS ON THE REVIEW OF THE MODALITIES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM PREPARED FOR SUBSIDIARY BODY FOR IMPLEMENTATION, 41TH SESSION, 1-8 DECEMBER 2014}}, publisher = {Carbon Market Watch}, year = {2014}, month = nov, url = {https://carbonmarketwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/CMW_Position_CDM-review_final.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }