Search Climate Insights Directory

This report by the Climate Policy Initiative (CPI/PUC-RIO) introduces a new economic-based methodology to assess the additionality of REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) carbon projects in the Brazilian Amazon. The study finds that 77% of the carbon traded in these projects is additional, meaning the forests would have been cleared without the projects' incentives. The report highlights regional variations in additionality and discusses the impact of land tenure issues and low agricultural productivity on project integrity, specifically citing the case of Portel, Pará.

This report by the Climate Policy Initiative/PUC-Rio proposes a new economic-based methodology to evaluate the additionality of REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) carbon projects in the Brazilian Amazon. The study finds that while 77% of carbon traded in these projects is additional, significant regional variations exist, and some projects in isolated areas with low agricultural productivity lack additionality.

The NewClimate Institute report defines 'high-hanging fruit' as decarbonisation technologies and measures that are currently inaccessible to host governments due to extraordinary costs or insurmountable barriers. The report argues that targeting these projects is essential to ensure climate mitigation ambition is enhanced rather than compromised, and proposes several interventions to develop a project pipeline and redirect voluntary climate finance toward these high-cost or first-of-a-kind technologies.

This research paper by the Climate Policy Initiative (CPI) outlines methodological approaches for assessing the additionality of climate investments, specifically drawing from the evaluation of the Climate Public Private Partnership (CP3) program. The paper proposes both a qualitative multi-criteria assessment (MCA) framework and a quantitative composite index to determine if investments represent a deviation from business-as-usual scenarios.

This policy brief by the Stockholm Environment Institute evaluates the environmental integrity of Joint Implementation (JI) during the Kyoto Protocol's first commitment period (2008–2012). The analysis finds that JI likely increased global greenhouse gas emissions by approximately 600 million tCO2e due to widespread issues with additionality, overcrediting, and a lack of international oversight under 'Track 1' procedures.

This research paper examines the net emissions impact of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), focusing on whether it achieves a net decrease in global greenhouse gas emissions or merely shifts the location of reductions.

This policy brief examines how international greenhouse gas (GHG) emission offsets can be designed to provide a 'net decrease' in emissions, moving beyond the standard one-to-one credit ratio. It analyzes the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) to identify project types and accounting methods—such as stringent baselines and discounting—that could generate surplus reductions and a net atmospheric benefit.

This policy paper by the Stockholm Environment Institute and other experts evaluates the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) framework for standardized baselines. The authors argue that the current approach is too rigid, potentially leading to both under-crediting and over-crediting of emission reductions, and recommend a more flexible, data-driven, and sector-specific methodology to ensure environmental integrity and practical applicability.

This policy note by the Stockholm Environment Institute evaluates whether revisions to the ACM0013 methodology can resolve systematic flaws in awarding Certified Emission Reductions (CERs) to coal power projects under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). The authors argue that while some technical fixes are possible, fundamental challenges regarding data noise, additionality, and long-term climate goals make it unlikely that revised methodologies can ensure coal power CERs are real, measurable, and additional.

This report by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) examines the role of international carbon market mechanisms within the context of negotiations for a post-2012 climate change agreement. It reviews the existing Kyoto Protocol instruments—International Emissions Trading (IET), Joint Implementation (JI), and the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM)—and explores potential expansions or new mechanisms, such as sectoral crediting and REDD, to enhance cost-effectiveness and engage developing countries in mitigation efforts.

This research paper by the Stockholm Environment Institute evaluates the environmental integrity of Joint Implementation (JI) during the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol. The authors conclude that approximately three-quarters of JI offsets likely did not represent additional emissions reductions, potentially increasing global greenhouse gas emissions by 600 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent.

This working paper by the World Resources Institute outlines the critical issues surrounding the negotiation of Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, which governs international cooperation through carbon markets. It emphasizes that the operationalization of accounting rules, additionality, and financial mechanisms will determine whether Article 6 enhances global climate ambition or weakens the environmental integrity of nationally determined contributions (NDCs).