Closing the Legitimacy Gap in Global Environmental Governance? Lessons from the Emerging CDM Market
AbstractThe Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) is a prominent example of the contemporary turn towards more hybrid modes of global environmental governance. It epitomizes the trend away from hierarchical state regulation towards softer forms of steering along the public-private frontier. In this article we analyze the legitimacy of this novel governance arrangement. While we approach input legitimacy as a procedural ideal that guarantees actors affected by a CDM project voice in the project design and implementation, we relate output legitimacy to the effectiveness or problem solving capacity of the CDM institutions. In contrast to the mainstream understanding of the CDM as a policy mechanism that will secure both goals at the same time and thus reduce the legitimacy gap in global environmental governance, our study points to central trade-offs between the procedural quality and the effectiveness of the CDM project cycle. These trade-offs are illustrated by three carbon projects in Chile, China and Mexico and raise questions for the continued study of legitimacy in global environmental governance. (c) 2009 by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by MIT Press in its journal Global Environmental Politics.
Volume (Year): 9 (2009)
Issue (Month): 2 (May)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://mitpress.mit.edu/journals/
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- 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.
- Ian A. MacKenzie & Markus Ohndorf & Charles Palmer, 2010.
"Enforcement-proof contracts with moral hazard in precaution: ensuring ‘permanence’ in carbon sequestration,"
Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment Working Papers
27, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
- Ian A. MacKenzie & Markus Ohndorf & Charles Palmer, 2012. "Enforcement-proof contracts with moral hazard in precaution: ensuring 'permanence' in carbon sequestration," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 64(2), pages 350-374, April.
- Ian A. MacKenzie & Markus Ohndorf & Charles Palmer, 2010. "Enforcement-proof contracts with moral hazard in precaution: ensuring ‘permanence’ in carbon sequestration," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 30846, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
- Stua, Michele, 2013. "Evidence of the clean development mechanism impact on the Chinese electric power system's low-carbon transition," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1309-1319.
- Rosendal, G. Kristin & Andresen, Steinar, 2011. "Institutional design for improved forest governance through REDD: Lessons from the global environment facility," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1908-1915, September.
- Emily Anderson & Hisham Zerriffi, 2012. "Seeing the trees for the carbon: agroforestry for development and carbon mitigation," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 115(3), pages 741-757, December.
- Larson, Donald F. & Dinar, Ariel & Blankespoor, Brian, 2012. "Aligning climate change mitigation and agricultural policies in Eastern Europe and Central Asia," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6080, The World Bank.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Karie Kirkpatrick).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.