@article{Muller-Pelzer:26122,
      recid = {26122},
      author = {Muller-Pelzer, Felicia},
      title = {The Clean Development Mechanism},
      address = {2004},
      number = {880-2016-64494},
      series = {HWWA Report 244},
      pages = {114},
      year = {2004},
      abstract = {This paper explores chosen CDM methodologies for methane  recovery and electricity generation regarding their  additionality assessment. First, a brief outline of the  historical evolution will be given and the three  flexibility mechanisms (the Emission Trading, the Joint  Implementation and the Clean Development Mechanism) will be  defined. Against this background, the paper will illustrate  the working of the CDM, discuss the additionality concept,  show limitations of the additionality assessment and  explain the impact of the baseline setting. Second, chosen  methodologies will be compared and explored with the aim to  identify problems of implementation. In order to make the  analysis understandable, a first section explains how the  methodologies were chosen. This section is then followed by  a brief description of the underlying project activities.  Subsequently, the author will oppose and discuss the  different paths taken by the methodologies. In doing so,  contradictions will be identified. Some methodologies go  further than others. Some are very general in their  approach and others are very project specific. These  findings reveal the potential for further generalization  and simplification of the methodologies. In addition, the  comprehensive evaluation makes it possible to draw  conclusions about the outcome of the methodologies and to  identify problems with implementing the ultimate objective  of the United Nations Framework Convention [UNFCCC (1992),  Article 2]. The main problem lays in the information  asymmetry. But inaccuracies in quantitative and qualitative  assessments also affect the outcome of the methodologies.  Further, a distortion of the results can be provoked by an  inadequate setting of the boundaries, an inaccurate leakage  assessment and related uncertainties. Finally, the emission  reductions can only be estimated correctly if an  appropriate method is chosen to calculate the emission  reductions. Moreover, alternative proceedings to the  present UNFCCC methodology approach and their possible  impact on the CDM will be briefly discussed. Based on these  results, the author will make suggestions on how to proceed  in the future, especially how to coordinate and consolidate  the methodologies. A simplified approach will be  recommended to guarantee an effective additionality  assessment and an efficient structure.},
      url = {http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/26122},
      doi = {https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.26122},
}