Search Climate Insights Directory

Carbon Market Watch argues that previous market-based mechanisms, such as the CDM and EU ETS, failed due to oversupply and poor environmental integrity. To prevent these failures in a post-2020 regime, the organization recommends strict eligibility rules based on national ambition, the exclusion of REDD-plus and agriculture from carbon markets, and the implementation of discounting to ensure net atmospheric benefits. It further calls for a UN-led standard-setting body, a robust institutional safeguard system to protect human rights, and a share of proceeds from all traded units to be allocated to the Adaptation Fund.

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.

Carbon Market Watch opposes expanding LULUCF activities within the CDM, citing risks to climate adaptation, a lack of market demand for offsets, and the non-permanent nature of land-based carbon sequestration compared to permanent fossil fuel emissions. The organization suggests that LULUCF activities are better suited for Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs), National Adaptation Plans (NAPs), and REDD+, emphasizing a rights-based approach to food security and land rights.

Carbon Market Watch asserts that the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) cannot be accredited for Green Climate Fund (GCF) finance because it fails to meet GCF's mandates for new financial resources and lacks the necessary environmental and social risk management systems, including grievance mechanisms.

The document argues that success at COP20 in Lima depends on rich nations delivering climate finance, specifically filling the Green Climate Fund, which has only seen "USD 2.3 billion in pledges" despite a "USD 100 billion a year by 2020" goal. It emphasizes the need for an international accounting framework to prevent "double counting" and ensure that only countries with "stringent targets" can access carbon markets to avoid the "hot air" issues seen under the Kyoto Protocol. The author calls for the accounting framework to be embedded in the new climate treaty separately from the Framework for Various Approaches (FVA) and highlights the need to streamline human rights safeguards for the CDM, REDD+, and Green Climate Fund.

Carbon Market Watch criticizes EU leaders for adopting a 2030 climate deal that it argues weakens emission reductions to 31% due to excess permits and provides up to €300 billion in subsidies to industry. Separately, the organization highlights human rights abuses and lack of consultation affecting indigenous communities in Guatemala associated with the UN-registered Santa Rita hydroelectric project.

A coalition of organizations requests UN intervention regarding the Santa Rita hydroelectric project in Guatemala, alleging severe human rights abuses, including extrajudicial killings and state-sponsored violence, and criticizing the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) for registering the project despite a lack of genuine indigenous consultation.

The document is a formal request to the UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to address serious human rights abuses linked to the Santa Rita hydroelectric dam in Guatemala. The authors argue that the project, registered under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) in June 2014, has been imposed without the free, prior, and informed consent of the Q’eqchí and Poqomchí indigenous communities. They report a pattern of violence, including the deaths of seven people, including two children, and state-sponsored repression involving the deployment of 1,500 police officers in August 2014. The document calls for the Government of Guatemala to provide information on its plans and for the CDM Board to investigate and potentially withdraw the project's registration due to non-compliance with consultation standards.

The document examines the limitations of the Kyoto Protocol's Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), specifically its single-site approach, and evaluates the potential of Programmes of Activities (PoA) to better support household energy projects in low-income areas of South Africa.

The statement criticizes the Santa Rita hydroelectric project in Guatemala's Alta Verapaz region, alleging that the project ignores the legal requirement for prior indigenous community consent and has led to human rights violations, intimidation, and environmental degradation. It highlights a pattern of criminalization of local leaders and lack of benefit for native populations, arguing that such projects contradict the Clean Development Mechanism's (CDM) goal of promoting sustainable development.

The document examines the critical role of dryland forests in Southern Africa, highlighting their vulnerability to deforestation and climate change. It proposes a 'nexus approach' to overcome the marginalisation of the forestry sector by demonstrating its interdependencies with water, energy, and food security. The author argues that integrated landscape management and multi-sectoral policy coordination can identify win-win solutions for climate mitigation and adaptation, such as agroforestry and payment for watershed services.

The document examines South Africa's struggle to transition from a high-carbon, coal-based energy economy to a green economy. It analyzes the role of the state-owned utility Eskom, the impact of the Renewable Energy Independent Power Producer Procurement Programme (REIPPP), and various financial and regulatory incentives designed to attract private investment in renewables. The author argues that while policy signals are positive, a lack of inter-departmental coordination and the entrenched nature of the minerals-energy complex hinder the transition.

The research evaluates four options for carbon market mechanisms to ensure they produce net emission reductions in host countries rather than merely offsetting emissions. The study identifies the application of discounts on avoided emissions and standardisation below business as usual as the most promising approaches, suggesting these be applied differentially based on project internal rates of return to balance cost-efficiency and attractiveness.

The document evaluates the net climate mitigation impact of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), arguing that its success in reducing global greenhouse gas emissions depends heavily on the additionality of large-scale power projects. It notes that while the CDM was originally designed to shift the location of emission reductions, subsequent international agreements like the Cancun Agreements aim for a net global decrease in emissions. The authors suggest that if large-scale power projects are non-additional, the CDM could potentially increase global greenhouse gas emissions.

The document details the Effort Sharing Decision (ESD), which manages greenhouse gas reduction targets for EU Member States in sectors not covered by the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS). It explains how targets are set based on GDP per capita, the role of Annual Emission Allocation units (AEAus), and the specific reporting and compliance cycles managed by the European Commission. The report also outlines seven flexibility options—including banking, borrowing, and the use of Kyoto units—and discusses how the ESD interacts with other EU directives on renewable energy and energy efficiency, as well as the Kyoto Protocol.

The statement argues that the CDM currently functions as a zero-sum offsetting mechanism that may increase global emissions due to non-additional credits. It recommends a shift toward achieving 'net atmospheric benefits' and proposes rigorous reforms to additionality assessments, the exclusion of high-emission technologies like coal, and the establishment of formal grievance mechanisms and enhanced civil society participation. The author also calls for greater transparency from Designated National Authorities (DNAs) and a restructured CDM Executive Board to prevent conflicts of interest.

The document outlines the financial requirements for Kenya's transition to a low-carbon economy, estimating that Ksh 1,085 billion is needed for the 2013-2017 National Climate Change Action Plan. It identifies key barriers to private investment, such as arduous project development processes, and suggests improvements including the implementation of the draft Climate Change Bill 2014. While Kenya has a strong track record in renewable energy investment and voluntary carbon markets, the briefing warns that compliance carbon markets are currently limited by oversupply and lack of access to the EU-ETS. It lists several domestic and international funding mechanisms available to Kenyan businesses for clean technology and energy efficiency.

The document proposes a carbon offset mechanism to allow South African firms to reduce their carbon tax liability by up to 10% of actual emissions. It establishes that only South African-based credits from projects outside the carbon tax net are eligible to avoid double counting. The paper identifies a potential national demand for offsets of up to 30 million tonnes of CO2e per annum, with a projected supply exceeding 50 million tonnes, largely driven by land-use, forestry, and renewable energy projects. It suggests an initial reliance on international standards (CDM, VCS, GS, CCBS) while proposing the medium-term development of a domestic standard managed by the Designated National Authority (DNA), supported by an independent expert committee, a national registry, and accredited third-party verifiers.

The paper identifies four types of double counting—double issuance, double claiming, double use, and double purpose—and argues that preventing these is essential for the integrity of international carbon markets. It recommends a 'net flows' accounting approach to ensure full fungibility of units and the international linking of emissions trading schemes. To prevent double issuance, the authors suggest a combination of entity attestations, host country approval, and a centralized UNFCCC information platform. The document emphasizes that globally unique serial numbers containing detailed metadata on mechanism, country, vintage, and scope are critical for effective international oversight.

Carbon Market Watch recommends that the European Council increase the EU's 2030 greenhouse gas reduction target to at least 55% and permanently remove the surplus of over 2.5 billion emissions allowances in the EU ETS. The organization warns that carrying over this surplus could weaken the 40% target to a de facto 33% reduction. It further argues against the use of international offsets due to poor environmental quality and cautions that including land-use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) sectors as net sinks would undermine the effectiveness of the GHG target.