The last McGill School of the Environment Speaker Series presented an interesting seminar on carbon market. The main focus was on the effectiveness of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), which is an instrument that allows developed countries (Annex I) to receive credits toward meeting their obligatory targets under the Kyoto Protocol by investing in emission reduction projects in developing countries (non-Annex I). Prof. Purdon´s preliminary conclusions on the topic are not very encouraging. Apparently, CDM has not been an effective climate policy tool.
I was particularly intrigued and puzzled by the initial findings related to two reforestation CDM´s projects analysed by Prof. Purdon. One has been carried out in Tanzania whereas the other is located in Moldova. Although it is questionable whether the Tanzanian project is in fact contributing to reduce green house gas (GHG) emissions, local people do not want the developer to leave. Supposedly, the project has been promoting a palpable socio-economic improvement for the very poor local African community. On a different vein, the Moldavian scheme seems to be more able to mitigate GHG but with no socio-economic outcome for the local citizens. If that is the case, I wonder which project can be considered the most effective one? What does effectiveness mean in this context? Is it economic effectiveness? Pure technical environmental effectiveness? Or shall we also include the human dimension when delineating the concept of effectiveness in the aforementioned cases?
I believe it is worth it reflecting about those questions, especially because CDM is often portrayed as an instrument of equity and North-South justice. Bearing this in mind, inconsistencies arise when a CDM project is not capable of having a positive and meaningful impact on the lives of those in the developing countries.
Tags: Carbon Market, Clean Development Mechanism, Effectivennes