CDM最新發展
聯合國氣候變化綱要公約(UNFCCC)於2013年6月8日至6月9日舉辦CDM Workshop，該Workshop主要討論應如何修訂CDM的方法與程序以更符合CDM通過迄今之實際運作和國際發展趨勢，而自該Workshop的討論中，我們可以看到CDM目前關注的重點及可能的發展方向。
Summary of the Workshop on the review of the
modalities and procedures of the clean development mechanism held in Bonn, Germany from the 8-9th of June 2013.
Summary provided by RINGO member, ITRI
Advisor of ITRI, Prof. Chien-Te Fan (National Tsing Hua University)
Researcher of ITRI, Yu-Tsnag Lu
Compiled by Ms. Wei-Chen Tsai, Research Assistant of National Tsing Hua
University
1.
Background
Pursuant
to decision 3/CMP.1, the first review of the modalities and procedures for the
clean development mechanism (CDM), as set out in the annex to decision 3/CMP.1,
shall be carried out by the CMP at its ninth session.
In
this context, the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties
to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP) at its eighth session had made the following
decision related to modalities and procedure for CDM[1]：
l
Reiterated that the
first review to be done by CMP 9
l
Invited submissions
from Parties and observers
l
Requested the CDM Executive
Board to submit recommendations, based on EB, secretariat and stakeholder
experience
l
Mandated the current
workshop to facilitate progress on the review
l
Requested SBI 39 to
submit recommendations to CMP 9 on possible changes to the CDM modalities and
procedures, with a view to CMP 9 adopting a decision on this matter at that
session
The Workshop on the review of the
modalities and procedures of the clean development mechanism was held in
Wissenschaftszentrum in Bonn, Germany from 8th and 9th
June 2013. And the workshop was chaired by Mr. Giza Martins (Angola) and Ms.
Emi Hijino (Sweden).
The
workshop was attended by a total of 137 participants, including 24 participants
from intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations. Of the registered
Party representatives: 25 per cent were from Parties included in Annex I to the
Convention and 75 per cent were from Parties not included in Annex I to the
Convention; 83 per cent were men and 17 per cent were women.
The
workshop consisted of plenary panel discussions and break-out sessions covering
the inputs made by the Board in its recommendations[2],
and in the submissions from Parties and admitted observer organizations[3]. More
detailed discussion and the conclusion of the workshop will be discussed in the
next two chapters.
2.
Plenary
panel discussion and break-out session
l
Panel
discussions
Two
panel discussions were held during the workshop- “Looking to the future, building on the past” and “Innovating the CDM”. The opening panel
provided an opportunity for workshop participants to consider the achievements
of the CDM and how these achievements can be built upon in the future, together
with opportunities and challenges arising from the ongoing discussions on the
international climate regime; the second panel gave an opportunity to discuss
recent developments in the CDM and how further innovations could be introduced.
In
the panel discussion, participants emphasized CDM’s successful work in the past
ten years, including channeled investment into developing countries,
sophistication of the MRV system, and raised the awareness of business decision
makers concerning investment opportunity that reduce greenhouse gas emission etc.
However, given the need to scale up mitigation activities, the current lack of
demand for certified emission reductions (CERs) and the fact that many
alternatives to the CDM are emerging, more profound change and assurance of its
continued growth are needed, which necessitate the changes in the CDM
modalities and procedures.
l
Discussion
during break-out session
The
break-out sessions were structured according to issues relating to governance,
accreditation, the project cycle and methodologies. Please refer to the
following table 1 for main discussion points in these three topics.
Table 1: Main discussion points in
break-out session
|
Accreditation
|
|
Ø Simplifying the rules and setting out principles
-
Current
standards for accreditation of operational entities and other rules are set
in Appendix A to 3/CMP.1 and in the body of it, and there is idea raised to
delete the appendix and keep only principles.
|
|
Ø Significant deficiencies
-
Since
current M&P (paragraphs 22 to
24 of M&P) provides for cancellation of issued CERs (or other KP units)
where significant deficiencies are identified in validation, verification or
certification reports,
the Board was requested to discuss procedure or approaches to deal with this
issue.
|
|
Ø Promotion of regional distribution of DOEs
-
Since
DOEs are operating globally with local offices, there should not be
regulatory supervision used to distort what is a global market.
|
|
Ø Alignment of accreditation across CDM and JI
-
The
issue was raised since alignment would provide potential for reducing
transaction cost.
|
|
Ø Contractual relationship with DOEs
-
Discussion
about removing the requirement that DOE has to have a contractual
relationship with the project participant.
|
|
Project
cycle and methodologies
|
|
Ø Length of crediting period
-
Discussion
about how to make crediting period shorter or more flexible, and also take
into account the certainty of investment and additionality.
|
|
Ø Materiality
-
Discuss
the concept of materiality and its application.
|
|
Ø Stakeholder consultation/Communications with the Board
-
The
related concerns about stakeholder consultation and communication with the
Board. For example, the principle of it, or how to improve and validate.
|
|
Ø Sustainable development co-benefits
-
Raised
the discussion on evaluating the sustainable development co-benefits, for
example, establishing the MRV system or the international sustainable
development criteria.
|
|
Ø Forestry
-
Discussed
about the forestry under the CDM, for example, the issuance of permanent
CERs, or flexibility for timing of verification.
|
|
Ø Programme of activities
-
Raised
the question of setting principles or separate sector for PoA, where there is
no reference is this issue currently.
|
|
Ø Standardized baselines
-
The
issue was raise since there no reference to this concept now, and therefore
the discussion is mainly about incorporate section on standardizes baselines,
and also update regularly.
|
|
Ø
Additionality
-
Discussed
the means to demonstrate additionality.
|
|
Governance
|
|
Ø
Role of the Board
-
The
supervisory role of the Board should be clarified and the relationship
between it and its support structure should be better defined.
|
|
Ø
Membership of the Board
-
Discussed
the nomination procedure, members’ capacity, and other requirement for the
membership.
|
|
Ø
Host Party DNA approval and
oversight
-
The
oversight system, the withdrawal of letter of approval and the required minimum
content of letter of approval were discussed.
|
|
Ø
Appeals process
-
The
appeals process against the Board’s decision was raised, but this issue is
currently under SBI discussions.
|
3.
Conclusion
The
secretariat took notes of the Workshop
on the review of the modalities and procedures of the clean development
mechanism, and published the Report
on the workshop on the review of the modalities and procedures of the clean
development mechanism[4]
as the summary of the workshop. The main ideas raised during the workshop will
be outlined in the following table, however, it should be noted that the
inclusion of the ideas outlined here does not imply any agreement and it
required more time for discussion.
Table 2: Main ideas raised during the
workshop
|
Accreditation
|
|
Ø Simplifying the rules and setting out principles
-
Simplifying the rules for
accrediting operational entities by setting out principles in the main body
of the CDM modalities and procedures, and consequently deleting appendix A.
|
|
Ø Significant deficiencies
-
Elaborating alternative principles
of Designated Operational Entities (DOEs) liability to compensate the
issuance of CERs resulting from significant deficiencies in validation,
verification and certification reports, including by: limiting the scope of
liability for DOEs to a quantifiable level; differentiating liability
depending on the cause of the excess issuance (e.g. fraud, professional
negligence); and looking for further solutions for managing the risk of
issuance of excess CERs through reserve pools, deductions of CERs from later
issuances from the relevant project activity or levying an amount at issuance
akin to a share of proceeds.
|
|
Ø Promotion of regional distribution of DOEs
-
Removing the reference in the CDM
modalities and procedures to the regional distribution of DOEs
|
|
Ø Alignment of accreditation across CDM and JI
-
Aligning or coordinating the CDM
accreditation system with the rules on accreditation in joint implementation
(JI).
|
|
Ø Contractual relationship with DOEs
-
Removing the requirement for DOEs
to have a direct contractual relationship with the project participants
|
|
Project
cycle and methodologies
|
|
Ø Length of crediting period
-
Changing the current rules on the
length of the crediting period based on further analysis as to whether a
flexible approach to determining crediting periods could be introduced (based
on factors such as technology, project type and barriers).
|
|
Ø Materiality
-
No
related ideas were raised.
|
|
Ø Stakeholder consultation/Communications with the Board
-
Elaborating local stakeholder
consultation rules.
|
|
Ø Sustainable development co-benefits
-
Introducing requirements for
reporting and assessing sustainable development co-benefits of CDM project
activities set out in project design documents.
-
Incorporating the principle of
direct communication between stakeholders and the Board and its support
structure.
|
|
Ø Forestry
-
Address the reasons for the small
proportion of A/R project activities among all CDM project activities,
including the issue of non-permanence of A/R CERs.
-
Improve the current rules on
monitoring for A/R project activities and
introduce flexibility in the timing of verification.
|
|
Ø Programme of activities
-
To include a separate section on
PoAs in the CDM modalities and procedures, elaborating its unique features
and setting out principles, such as the role of the coordinating and managing
entities, how to treat monitoring requirements and monitoring periods, and
processes for the inclusion of component project activities (CPAs).
|
|
Ø Standardized baselines
-
Including provisions on
standardized baselines within the CDM modalities and procedures, and it
should be mandatory for potential project activities once the standardized
baseline has been developed for the country and sector to which the potential
project activity belongs.
-
Also noted issues as how to manage
updating of standardized baselines.
|
|
Ø
Additionality
-
Incorporating into the CDM
modalities and procedures the work of the Board on additionality, including
the elaboration of positive lists, tools for demonstrating additionality,
common practice, the “first of its kind” approach and technology penetration
rates.
|
|
Governance
|
|
Ø
Role of the Board
-
Further clarify the strategic and
policy-setting nature of the Board’s supervisory role, also the relationship
between the Board and its support structure.
|
|
Ø
Membership of the Board
-
Include provisions on the skills
and expertise needed in the membership of the Board, and Make the process for
the nomination of Board members more transparent.
-
Make the process for the
nomination of Board members more transparent , and no distinction between
members and alternate members
-
Any consideration of changes to
provisions regarding nomination, membership, term and the decision-making of
the Board should be considered in conjunction with their implications for
other matters, such as the quorum of the Board, voting rules and provisions
for triggering requests for review of requests for registration and issuance.
|
|
Ø
Host Party DNA approval and
oversight
-
Include a definition of host Party
approval and of the minimum content of letters of approval and guidance
regarding how the Board should process the withdrawal of a letter of
approval, taking into account the certainty that investors require.
-
Elaborate the role of DNAs prior
to project registration and during project implementation, and include
provisions requiring DNAs to provide information relevant to project
activities.
|
|
Ø
Appeals process
-
The issue of an appeals mechanism
against decisions of the Board was noted but was not considered because it is
currently being considered under another SBI agenda item.
|
Even
though there were many ideas raised and included in the summary report of the
workshop, it should be noted that there are still some ideas which has not included
in the summary report as a result of insufficient discussion time, or
uncertainty of future, including uncertainty of sustainable development and
carbon reduction.
There
are some reasons contribute to the uncertainty. Firstly, it can be inferred
that the negotiation process of other market mechanism and new global agreement
will play a significant in the discussion of CDM. As discussed in New Zealand’
submission[5],
it suggested that it will be important to consider the broader context for carbon
market (where the context includes of emerging market, framework on various
approaches, and new market mechanism along with new global agreement) when
discussing changes to modalities and procedures for the CDM. Norway also expects
the CDM to coexist with the New Market Mechanism[6].
Secondly,
economic development also increases the uncertainty about
the future, since developed countries are unwilling to make commitment to guarantee
financial support for developing countries as a result of low economic
development rate domestically.
In
conclusion, since CDM is being considered in the broader context of carbon
market where everything seems to be indefinite, there will be more time needed
for concrete agreement in changes to modalities and procedures for the CDM.
[1] Decision 5/CMP.8, available at: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2012/cmp8/eng/13a02.pdf#page=7
(Last visited: 2013/06/20)
[2] FCCC/SBI/2013/INF.1, available at
http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2013/sbi/eng/inf01.pdf (Last visited:
2013/06/20)
[3] FCCC/SBI/2013/MISC.1, and FCCC/SBI/2013/MISC.1/Add.1 available at: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2013/sbi/eng/misc01.pdf
and http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2013/sbi/eng/misc01a01.pdf
(Last visited:2013/06/20)
[4] Available at: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2013/sbi/eng/inf06.pdf
(Last visited: 2013/06/19)
[5] Available at: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2013/sbi/eng/misc01.pdf
, page 9, paragraph 2. (Last visited: 2013/06/20)
[6] Available at: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2013/sbi/eng/misc01.pdf
, page11, paragraph 3. (Last visited: 2013/06/20)
