Has Joint Implementation reduced GHG emissions?

The evaluation finds that Joint Implementation (JI) likely increased global GHG emissions by approximately 600 million tCO2e because many projects lacked additionality and were hosted by countries with significant allowance surpluses. The report highlights systemic failures in auditing, particularly under Track 1, and notes that 80% of issued ERUs came from project types with low or questionable environmental integrity. It recommends international oversight, standardized methodologies, and the prohibition of retroactive crediting for future mechanisms.

• As of March 2015, nearly 872 million Emission Reduction Units (ERUs) were issued under Joint Implementation, with over 95% originating from countries that possessed significant surpluses of emission allowances during the Kyoto Protocol's first commitment period.
• An analysis of 60 representative projects revealed that additionality claims were implausible for 43% of projects and 73% of the ERUs issued, suggesting these projects likely would have proceeded without carbon revenues.
• The use of JI may have resulted in global GHG emissions being approximately 600 million tCO2e higher than they would have been without the mechanism, potentially undermining the EU ETS emission reduction target by about 400 million tCO2.
• Environmental integrity varied significantly by project type; only N2O abatement from nitric acid production showed high integrity, while 80% of all ERUs came from project types with low or questionable integrity.
• There is a stark difference in integrity between the two implementation tracks: 97% of ERUs were issued under Track 1, which lacks international oversight and allows host countries to set their own rules, whereas Track 2 projects showed a considerably larger share of plausible environmental integrity.
• Auditing performance was inadequate, particularly by Bureau Veritas Certification Holding SAS, which audited 56% of all projects and 78% of total ERUs; in the sample, 77% of projects determined by this entity had implausible additionality claims.
• Geographic analysis shows that while Russia and Ukraine had significant integrity concerns for over 80% of their ERUs, Poland and Germany had high integrity ratings for 70% and 97% of their ERUs, respectively.

APA

Kollmuss, A., Schneider, L., & Zhezherin, V. (2015). Has Joint Implementation reduced GHG emissions? Stockholm Environment Institute. https://www.sei.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/Climate/SEI-PB-2015-JI-environmental-integrity.pdf

Chicago

Kollmuss, Anja, Lambert Schneider, and Vladyslav Zhezherin. Has Joint Implementation reduced GHG emissions? Stockholm Environment Institute, 2015. https://www.sei.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/Climate/SEI-PB-2015-JI-environmental-integrity.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Kollmuss |first1=Anja |last2=Schneider |first2=Lambert |last3=Zhezherin |first3=Vladyslav |title=Has Joint Implementation reduced GHG emissions? |publisher=Stockholm Environment Institute |date=2015 |url=https://www.sei.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/Climate/SEI-PB-2015-JI-environmental-integrity.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{kollmuss2015has, author = {Kollmuss, Anja and Schneider, Lambert and Zhezherin, Vladyslav}, title = {{Has Joint Implementation reduced GHG emissions?}}, institution = {Stockholm Environment Institute}, year = {2015}, url = {https://www.sei.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/Climate/SEI-PB-2015-JI-environmental-integrity.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }