Analyzing Brazil’s Role in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change: International Bargaining and Domestic Considerations

The Kyoto Protocol of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) has introduced the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) as a scheme for greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction through cooperation between Annex 1 Parties (investing countries), which are committed to certain GHG emission reduction targets under the Kyoto Protocol, and non‐Annex 1 Parties (host countries), which do not have any commitments to reduce GHG emissions. The eligibility of forestry projects under the CDM is limited to afforestation/reforestation (A/R) projects. A/R CDM allows Certified Emissions Reduction Units (CERs) to be purchased through carbon sequestration by afforestation or reforestation projects in developing countries. A total of 17 methodologies have been approved by the Executive Board of the UNFCCC. Out of these, 11 approved methodologies are for large‐scale A/R CDM project activities and 6 are for small‐scale A/R CDM project activities. This study identifies some potential land use changes for the development of new and approved methodologies of A/R CDM project activities. These suggested land use changes with high potential are pasture lands, landfills, mountainous areas, and mined lands. The suggested future land uses in A/R CDM project activities are due to their good potential in sequestering carbon, success in the establishment of plantation, and unavailability of the approved methodologies of A/R CDM project activities that are applicable to these suggested land uses. A total of 8 project design documents (PDD) of A/R CDM project activities have been accepted by the Executive Board and registered under the Kyoto Protocol of the UNFCCC. Some of the problems with A/R CDM project activities include the planting of large scale monoculture plantations, the planting of exotic species, and impact on the hydrology of the project areas. Future directions of A/R CDM project activities are here suggested, which are implementing mixed species in a plantation, using native species during reforestation activities, and counting the soil organic carbon pools among the carbon pools measured for carbon sequestration.

Better information on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and mitigation potential in the agricultural sector is necessary to manage these emissions and identify responses that are consistent with the food security and economic development priorities of countries. Critical activity data (what crops or livestock are managed in what way) are poor or lacking for many agricultural systems, especially in developing countries. In addition, the currently available methods for quantifying emissions and mitigation are often too expensive or complex or not sufficiently user friendly for widespread use.The purpose of this focus issue is to capture the state of the art in quantifying greenhouse gases from agricultural systems, with the goal of better understanding our current capabilities and near-term potential for improvement, with particular attention to quantification issues relevant to smallholders in developing countries. This work is timely in light of international discussions and negotiations around how agriculture should be included in efforts to reduce and adapt to climate change impacts, and considering that significant climate financing to developing countries in post-2012 agreements may be linked to their increased ability to identify and report GHG emissions (Murphy et al 2010, CCAFS 2011, FAO 2011).

There’s a market growing in the United States, but unlike markets that trade in tangible commodities, this one trades in the absence of something no one wants: greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Hundreds of companies make it possible for individuals, organizations, businesses, and even events such as rock music festivals to proclaim themselves carbon-neutral by paying someone else to reduce their emissions. Worried about your carbon footprint? No problem. For fees of US$2–50 per ton of “avoided emissions,” an offset provider will funnel your money into an activity or technology that keeps greenhouse gases out of the atmosphere. The question is, are offset buyers really getting what they paid for?

The Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change is the first international climate treaty to set binding greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets to a group of 38 developed countries and economies in transition. To comply with their obligations, these countries can reduce part of their emissions in developing countries through a mechanism known as the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and make these emission reductions count towards the fulfillment of their individual objectives. First, results of the thesis show that policies in developing countries could influence technology transfer through CDM projects. Second, developing countries could take advantage of unilateral investment in CDM projects if they have access to financial resources. Third, the analysis of support policies for the development of renewable energy power in nine Indian States shows that the diffusion of clean technologies can be promoted through the introduction of quotas and a greater participation of the private sector.

Executive Summary: The California Climate Action Registry, which was initially established in 2000 and began operation in Fall 2002, is a voluntary registry for recording annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The purpose of the Registry is to assist California businesses and organizations in their efforts to inventory and document emissions in order to establish a baseline and to document early actions to increase energy efficiency and decrease GHG emissions. The State of California has committed to use its ''best efforts'' to ensure that entities that establish GHG emissions baselines and register their emissions will receive ''appropriate consideration under any future international, federal, or state regulatory scheme relating to greenhouse gas emissions.'' Reporting of GHG emissions involves documentation of both ''direct'' emissions from sources that are under the entity's control and indirect emissions controlled by others. Electricity generated by an off-site power source is consider ed to be an indirect GHG emission and is required to be included in the entity's report. Registry participants include businesses, non-profit organizations, municipalities, state agencies, and other entities. Participants are required to register the GHG emissions of all operations in California, and are encouraged to report nationwide. For the first three years of participation, the Registry only requires the reporting of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, although participants are encouraged to report the remaining five Kyoto Protocol GHGs (CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6). After three years, reporting of all six Kyoto GHG emissions is required. The enabling legislation for the Registry (SB 527) requires total GHG emissions to be registered and requires reporting of ''industry-specific metrics'' once such metrics have been adopted by the Registry. The Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) was asked to provide technical assistance to the California Energy Commission (Energy Commission) related to the Registry in three areas: (1) assessing the availability and usefulness of industry-specific metrics, (2) evaluating various methods for establishing baselines for calculating GHG emissions reductions related to specific actions taken by Registry participants, and (3) establishing methods for calculating electricity CO2 emission factors. The third area of research was completed in 2002 and is documented in Estimating Carbon Dioxide Emissions Factors for the California Electric Power Sector (Marnay et al., 2002). This report documents our findings related to the first areas of research. For the first area of research, the overall objective was to evaluate the metrics, such as emissions per economic unit or emissions per unit of production that can be used to report GHG emissions trends for potential Registry participants. This research began with an effort to identify methodologies, benchmarking programs, inventories, protocols, and registries that u se industry-specific metrics to track trends in energy use or GHG emissions in order to determine what types of metrics have already been developed. The next step in developing industry-specific metrics was to assess the availability of data needed to determine metric development priorities. Berkeley Lab also determined the relative importance of different potential Registry participant categories in order to asses s the availability of sectoral or industry-specific metrics and then identified industry-specific metrics in use around the world. While a plethora of metrics was identified, no one metric that adequately tracks trends in GHG emissions while maintaining confidentiality of data was identified. As a result of this review, Berkeley Lab recommends the development of a GHG intensity index as a new metric for reporting and tracking GHG emissions trends.Such an index could provide an industry-specific metric for reporting and tracking GHG emissions trends to accurately reflect year to year changes while protecting proprietary data. This GHG intensity index changes while protecting proprietary data. This GHG intensity index would provide Registry participants with a means for demonstrating improvements in their energy and GHG emissions per unit of production without divulging specific values. For the second research area, Berkeley Lab evaluated various methods used to calculate baselines for documentation of energy consumption or GHG emissions reductions, noting those that use industry-specific metrics. Accounting for actions to reduce GHGs can be done on a project-by-project basis or on an entity basis. Establishing project-related baselines for mitigation efforts has been widely discussed in the context of two of the so-called ''flexible mechanisms'' of the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (Kyoto Protocol) Joint Implementation (JI) and the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM).

Since the Kyoto Protocol came into effect on Feb 16, 2005, the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) has experienced significant global growth. This mechanism enables developing countries to actively engage in combating climate change by implementing projects aimed at reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GGEs). In 2010, Libya established the Commission of the Designated National Authority (DNA) to oversee the implementation of the CDM. This move was made as part of Libya's efforts to develop a range of projects that qualify for CDM and contribute to reducing GGEs. The main motivation for conducting this study was the absence of Libya's involvement in global-level CDM projects, as evidenced by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) annual reports. Additionally, the failure to recognize the significance of CDM in influencing decisions regarding investments in wind energy. This work aims to investigate the use of CDM in Dernah wind farm (I) project (Libya). The study used a suitable CDM methodology, AM0019 with the appropriate tool (03-V3), calculated as CO2 reductions and Certified Emission Reductions (CERs). The results of CDM analysis are as follows: CO2 reductions = 362,201.82 tCO2e/year and CERs for the first ten years of the age of the proposed wind farm (Dernah Wind Farm (ɪ)) (CERs10y) = 1,687,898,590 LD (320,838,371.8 €) for the first ten years, likewise CERs20y= 3,375,797,180 LD (641,676,743.5 €) during the entire life (20 years) of the proposed wind farm. Based on these results, it can be concluded that the project will be highly cost-effective, this will lead to lower electricity prices for consumers and higher profits for the project owners. Therefore, registering wind energy projects as CDM projects and earning CERs is the most practical way to promote wind energy. The findings of this study could be valuable for policy makers and project developers who are interested in CDM wind projects.

The land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF) sector is a greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory sector that covers the emissions of GHGs from and their removal by terrestrial carbon stocks, living biomass, dead organic matter and soil organic carbon according to six main anthropogenic land use categories: Forest land, Cropland, Grassland, Wetlands, Settlements, and Other land. According to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), all Parties shall periodically report an update inventory of anthropogenic emissions and removals of GHGs using comparable methodologies provided by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Parties are also required to report and account for such emissions under the Kyoto Protocol (KP). These emission inventories are then factored into an international reduction target commitment. In recent years, international negotiations have resulted in the adoption of new rules for the second commitment period of the KP (CP2: 2013-2020), e.g. mandatory accounting of Forest management. Furthermore, Decision 529/2013/EU goes beyond the international UNFCCC negotiations by adding the mandatory accounting of Cropland management and Grassland management. All these changes pose new challenges that Member States (MS) will need to address from 2015 (i.e. the start of the CP2 reporting period). This report describes the actions undertaken in the context of the JRC’s “LULUCF MRV” (Monitoring, Reporting, and Verification) Administrative Arrangement with DG CLIMA, through a sequence of tasks (described in detail in the Annexes). The aim of the AA is to support MS in improving the quality and comparability of their LULUCF reporting during CP2, in line with IPCC methods and the new UNFCCC and EU rules. .

At a time when the US federal government failed to act on climate change, California's success as a subnational climate policy leader has been widely celebrated. However, California's landmark climate law drove a wedge between two segments of the state's environmental community. On one side was a coalition of “market-oriented” environmental social movement organizations (SMOs), who allied with private corporations to advance market-friendly climate policy. On the other side was a coalition of “justice-oriented” environmental SMOs, who viewed capitalist markets as the problem and sought climate policy that would mitigate the uneven distribution of environmental harms within the state. The social movement literature is not well equipped to understand this case, in which coalitional politics helped one environmental social movement succeed in its policy objectives at the expense of another. In this chapter, we draw on legislative and regulatory texts, archival material, and interviews with relevant political actors to compare the policymaking influence of each of these coalitions, and we argue that the composition of the two coalitions is the key to understanding why one was more successful than the other. At the same time, we point out the justice-oriented coalition's growing power, as market-oriented SMOs seek to preserve their legitimacy.

Nowadays, climate change is an overwhelming threat to many people who live in the planet. As a result, countries signed the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and held rounds of negotiations to curb the increasing temperature. Under the principle of ‘common but differentiated responsibility’ in Kyoto Protocol, the responsibilities of developed countries were emphasized. This situation changed in 2007, when China overtook the United States to become the largest emitter of carbon dioxide in the world. China is criticized for being the culprit of the over-emitting carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and is required to shoulder the main responsibility of cutting emissions in post-Kyoto era. However, these blames and requirements are unfair to china and hamper the economic justice of china. This paper is intended to analyze the impact of climate negotiations on economic justice of china from three different aspects: The right to development of China, Emission transfer and China’s export-oriented industry and Injustice China encounters under Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). Key words : Climate negotiation; Economic justice; China; United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change; Developed countries; Greenhouse gas emission; Right to development; Export-oriented industry; Clean development mechanism

This chapter presents some features of the financial mechanisms dealing with climate change. It gives an overview of the financial obligations of developed countries under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Kyoto Protocol, focusing especially on the GEF. It then stresses the characteristics of other funding mechanisms, i.e. the Adaptation Fund, the Special Climate Change Fund and Least Developing Countries Fund. It also deals with other mechanisms such as the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) established by Kyoto Protocol and carbon funds and facilities put into place by World Bank, namely the Prototype Carbon Fund and Forest Carbon Partnership Facility. The chapter examines new financial instruments created by World Bank and other regional multilateral development banks (MDBs). The aim of all these mechanisms is to facilitate and increase the access of developing countries to financial resources in order to address the challenges posed by climate change. Keywords: Clean Development Mechanism (CDM); climate change; financial assistance; Forest Carbon Partnership Facility; Kyoto Protocol; Prototype Carbon Fund; Special Climate Change Fund; United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)

As currently designed and implemented, the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) under the Kyoto Protocol is a market mechanism that creates ‘offset’ credits, named CERs (certified emission reductions). These credits are issued to Annex I Parties that invest in projects both reducing emissions and contributing to sustainable development in developing countries. This paper explores how CER weights could be used to reform and improve this mechanism. On the one hand, weights strictly lower than 1, or discount factors, would improve the environmental effectiveness of the CDM, enhancing global greenhouse gas emission mitigation while addressing the additionality concern. On the other hand, weights higher than 1, or multiplication factors, could increase the competitiveness of project types and/or host countries currently underrepresented in the CDM pipeline. This paper concentrates on stimulating investment from developed nations to less developed countries and aims at reducing the disparity between the three main CDM host countries (Brazil, India and China) and less developed nations. Based on statistical data published by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, our analysis then considers different policies, estimates their impacts, and shows how a sensible mix of discounting and multiplication could lead to a more equitable geographical distribution of CDM projects and possibly create atmospheric benefits. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.

Rapid industrialization and urbanization in the 20th century have led to increasing volumes of carbon dioxide being released into the atmosphere[...]

The European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) is a progressive cap and trade system aimed at reducing global greenhouse gas emissions emitted from Europe. However, despite scientific evidence and acknowledgement of such in major international environmental laws such as the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Kyoto Protocol, the EU ETS does not address greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture. States participating in the EU ETS and do not implement policy to cover the gaps left in compliance, such as targeting mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture, are in violation of their legal obligations under the Kyoto Protocol and decisions promulgated affecting the aims of both the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol. Greenhouse gas emissions have a proven impact on climate change and contribute to the planet’s increasing inhospitableness towards biodiversity. Therefore, it is necessary for the EU and its most offensive agricultural states to comply with the Kyoto Protocol and similar legal instruments by implement policies that mitigate agriculture’s greenhouse gas effects and move toward sustainable agriculture.

Landfilling disposal method has led to the more concern environmental issue around the world, which are greenhouse gas emissions. According to IPCC (2006), the waste sector is a major contributor to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, which accounts for about 5% of the global greenhouse budget. This 5% is methane (CH4) emissions from the anaerobic decomposition of solid waste and carbon dioxide (CO2) from the decomposition of wastewater. Methane is one of the most important greenhouse gas (GHG) due to it has about 21–23 times global warming potential than CO2. The CH4 and N2O emissions released in leachate treatment systems are the second-largest sources of greenhouse gases. The study is aimed to estimate methane emissions in leachate treatment plant in Landfill Rimba Mas Perlis, Malaysia, and its carbon credit revenue. The CH4 emission from the leachate treatment plant was estimated by using the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) methodology AM0013 and its economic benefit was determined based on the Clean Development Mechanism. From the study, the greenhouse gas emission in a leachate treatment plant has contributes to a reduction in carbon emissions by 233.21 tonnes/yr which could attract the carbon credit of RM 8,162.35 based on RM35/tonnes of CO2. The results indicate the anthropogenic emission in the leachate treatment plant can bring direct economic benefits to the local.

In June 2015, carbon credits amounting to 446 t of CO 2 were issued for a Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) project developed and implemented in Vietnam’s Mekong Delta aimed at reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions through the introduction of biogas digesters (BDs) to farm households. Subsequently, the project was evaluated in terms of GHG emission reductions (i.e., carbon credits issued), receptiveness of farm households to the technology, and economic benefits to these families. Findings confirmed that BDs provide concrete reductions in GHG emissions and are beneficial to install in such scenarios. Currently, a new international framework for post-2020 global warming mitigation is being considered by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), in which all signatory countries would participate, including the developing countries that have not yet been mandated to make reductions. These evaluation results present a potential policy direction for developing countries to reduce their GHG emissions.