IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/tcpoxx/v15y2015i2p183-222.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Time to market in the CDM: variation over project characteristics and time

Author

Listed:
  • Roland Magnusson

Abstract

Not only is the carbon market inundated with Certified Emissions Reductions (CERs) issued by successful projects, it is also littered with failed projects, that is, projects that either fail to be registered under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) or projects that have been successfully registered but fail to issue CERs. By relying on a novel application of survival analysis in the context of the CDM, this article shows that half of all projects that start the Global Stakeholder Process fail to issue CERs, while the other half have a median time to market of four years. Furthermore, it is shown that some of the best projects, in terms of being additional, are those that are least likely to make it to market, whereas some of the worst projects, in terms of not being additional, are the ones that are most likely to make it to market. This presents a fundamental challenge for the CDM and future offset schemes that rely on the same design as the CDM. In contrast with previous studies, it is shown that, when project characteristics are controlled for, not all durations measured along the CDM project cycle have increased over time. Policy relevance This article develops a novel method for analysing durations measured along the CDM project cycle that avoids the biases of previous studies, and corrects for some misconceptions of what the delays faced by CDM projects are and how these delays have changed over time. Developing an understanding of the delays is important in order not to draw the wrong lessons from the CDM experience. As the leading example of an offset scheme, both in terms of geographical scope and sectoral coverage, and some would say institutional complexity, the CDM serves as a benchmark and reference for all future offset schemes, among others, for the New Market Mechanisms (NMMs) and the Chinese domestic offset programme. While the NMMs are still very much in development, China has announced that it will rely on the methodologies and procedures developed under the CDM for generating offsets for their regional carbon trading schemes.

Suggested Citation

  • Roland Magnusson, 2015. "Time to market in the CDM: variation over project characteristics and time," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 183-222, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:tcpoxx:v:15:y:2015:i:2:p:183-222
    DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2014.905443
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14693062.2014.905443
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/14693062.2014.905443?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alexandre Kossoy & Philippe Ambrosi, "undated". "State and Trends of the Carbon Market 2010," World Bank Publications - Reports 13401, The World Bank Group.
    2. World Bank, 2010. "10 Years of Experience in Carbon Finance : Insights from Working with the Kyoto Mechanisms," World Bank Publications - Reports 2873, The World Bank Group.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kim, Jung Eun & Popp, David & Prag, Andrew, 2013. "The Clean Development Mechanism and neglected environmental technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 165-179.
    2. Claudia Kettner & Daniela Kletzan-Slamanig & Angela Köppl, 2012. "The EU Emission Trading Scheme. National Allocation Patterns and Trading Flows," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 44139, April.
    3. Gbenga Ibikunle & Andros Gregoriou & Naresh R. Pandit, 2013. "Price Discovery and Trading after Hours: New Evidence from the World's Largest Carbon Exchange," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(3), pages 421-445, November.
    4. Katja S. Halbritter & Markus Ohndorf, 2012. "Optimal liability apportionment in programmatic credit-based emissions trading," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(4), pages 440-452, July.
    5. Frank Hartmann & Paolo Perego & Anna Young, 2013. "Carbon Accounting: Challenges for Research in Management Control and Performance Measurement," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 49(4), pages 539-563, December.
    6. Sheng, Jichuan & Qiu, Hong, 2018. "Governmentality within REDD+: Optimizing incentives and efforts to reduce emissions from deforestation and degradation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 611-622.
    7. Jinshan Zhu & Hui Yao & Yingkai Tang & Liyong Wang, 2015. "An econometric analysis of sub-national Clean Development Mechanism performance in China," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 20(7), pages 1137-1153, October.
    8. Prabhat Upadhyaya, 2010. "Is emission trading a possible policy option for India?," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(5), pages 560-574, September.
    9. Robert MacNeil, 2013. "Alternative climate policy pathways in the US," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2), pages 259-276, March.
    10. Bhim B Ghaley & Harpinder S Sandhu & John R Porter, 2015. "Relationship between C:N/C:O Stoichiometry and Ecosystem Services in Managed Production Systems," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(4), pages 1-14, April.
    11. Phan, Thu-Ha Dang & Brouwer, Roy & Davidson, Marc David, 2017. "A Global Survey and Review of the Determinants of Transaction Costs of Forestry Carbon Projects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 1-10.
    12. Lederer, Markus, 2011. "From CDM to REDD+ -- What do we know for setting up effective and legitimate carbon governance?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1900-1907, September.
    13. Nicolas Koch, 2014. "Dynamic linkages among carbon, energy and financial markets: a smooth transition approach," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(7), pages 715-729, March.
    14. Eric Helleiner & Jason Thistlethwaite, 2013. "Subprime catalyst: Financial regulatory reform and the strengthening of US carbon market governance," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(4), pages 496-511, December.
    15. Strand, Jon & Rosendahl, Knut Einar, 2012. "Global emissions effects of CDM projects with relative baselines," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 533-548.
    16. Jingjing Jiang & Bin Ye & Xiaoming Ma & Lixin Miao, 2016. "Controlling GHG emissions from the transportation sector through an ETS: institutional arrangements in Shenzhen, China," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(3), pages 353-371, April.
    17. Perdan, Slobodan & Azapagic, Adisa, 2011. "Carbon trading: Current schemes and future developments," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 6040-6054, October.
    18. Gary Koop & Lise Tole, 2013. "Forecasting the European carbon market," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 176(3), pages 723-741, June.
    19. J. Hourcade & B. Perrissin Fabert & J. Rozenberg, 2012. "Venturing into uncharted financial waters: an essay on climate-friendly finance," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 165-186, May.
    20. Claudia Kettner, 2012. "Der EU-Emissionshandel – Allokationsmuster und Handelsflüsse," WIFO Monatsberichte (monthly reports), WIFO, vol. 85(9), pages 737-750, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:tcpoxx:v:15:y:2015:i:2:p:183-222. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/tcpo20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.