1 / 8

Project-Based Approaches vs. Comprehensive Policy Design

This article explores the benefits, challenges, and feasibility of project-based approaches and comprehensive policy design for utilizing forestry as a climate solution. It discusses various policy design options, technical considerations, and practical and political issues associated with each approach. The article concludes by raising questions about the need for comprehensive accounting and the investment in research on comprehensive policy design.

townsendb
Download Presentation

Project-Based Approaches vs. Comprehensive Policy Design

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Project-Based Approaches vs. Comprehensive Policy Design Jeff FiedlerNatural Resources Defense Council November 1, 2003 Katoomba Group, Locarno

  2. What Are We Trying To Do? • Design policy that can realize the potential: • for forestry to contribute to climate solutions • for carbon incentives to change land use • Criteria: • Scale • Accurate assessment of benefits • Administrative feasibility • Political feasibility

  3. Policy Design Options • Project-based offsets • Extension of project-boundary: • Entity-wide • Landscape • National • Opt-in vs. Mandatory • Non-trading policies: • Tax policy • Direct regulation/standards • Incentives/subsidies

  4. Can Projects Achieve Potential? • Cherry Picking: only credits, no debits • Transaction costs reduce economies of scale • Capacity limits for project participants, administrators, verifiers • Do project methodologies still apply once projects become widespread, large-scale? • Double-counting • Structural policies difficult to handle • Will we find credible rules, methodologies?

  5. Benefits of Comprehensiveness • Greater coverage • Reduce or eliminate cherry-picking • Economies of scale for monitoring • Reduce many transaction costs • Avoid difficult project methodologies • Reduce administrative costs • Account for structural policies • Capture multiple revenue streams

  6. Technical Issues • Still need policies to translate national target into incentive for landowners • Monitoring technical, cost limits • Variability in land use sector could cause problems for meeting targets • Public vs. private land treatment • Permanence/Reversibility • Timing of monitoring

  7. Practical and Political Issues • Mandatory regulation of forest/ag sector • Less suitable for some countries, regions • Acceptability of greater role for sinks • Cost for lands with no C changes • Target setting and allocation: • Potential glut of allowances • Handling both +ve, -ve C projections • Registry mechanics for debits • Can it provide community benefits

  8. Final Questions • Comprehensive accounting and project-based policies are fundamentally different • Is comprehensive accounting better? • If comprehensive policy is the end-goal, how much time and effort do we want to invest in project-based approach? • Are we doing enough research on comprehensive accounting?

More Related