IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wop/iasawp/ir99062.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Verification Times Underlying the Kyoto Protocol: Global Benchmark Calculations

Author

Listed:
  • M. Jonas
  • S. Nilsson
  • M. Obersteiner
  • M. Gluck
  • Y.M. Ermoliev

Abstract

IIASA's Sustainable Boreal Forest Resources (FOR) Project is in the process of deriving full carbon accounts for a number of countries (Russia, Austria, Ukraine, etc.). These carbon accounts permit the Project to make generalized findings and to identify knowledge gaps relevant to the implementation of the Kyoto Protocol. In this study we focus on two questions that are central in this process: 1. What are the verification times arising from the different methods of carbon accounting, and can they be expected to be compatible with the commitment periods foreseen by the Kyoto Protocol? 2. How do verification times change as a result of changes in our knowledge of the underlying uncertainties? To address these questions, we describe the concepts of favorable and unfavorable verification and calculate the verification times for four global-scale examples. We consider full carbon accounting (FCA) and partial carbon accounting (PCA) under both business-as-usual conditions and in combination with a global afforestation program. Although global in scale, the results of our calculations allow us to draw sub-global conclusions. These conclusions refer to: -which of the two carbon accounting approaches (PCA or FCA), either in combination with Kyoto compliant land-use, land-use change, and forestry (LUCF) activities or not, represents the most practical method for implementing the Kyoto Protocol; and, if the Kyoto Protocol is based on PCA under partial inclusion of biological sources and sinks resulting from direct human induced land-use change and forestry activities , to -whether countries can gain an advantage over other countries by positioning themselves under unfavorable verification conditions by implementing Kyoto compliant LUCF projects; and -whether the implementation of Kyoto compliant LUCF projects increases the difficulty of validating sub-global Kyoto compliant carbon reporting, thereby increasing the difficulty in conducting FCA-based carbon research at large spatial scales.

Suggested Citation

  • M. Jonas & S. Nilsson & M. Obersteiner & M. Gluck & Y.M. Ermoliev, 1999. "Verification Times Underlying the Kyoto Protocol: Global Benchmark Calculations," Working Papers ir99062, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
  • Handle: RePEc:wop:iasawp:ir99062
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Publications/Documents/IR-99-062.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Publications/Documents/IR-99-062.ps
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. M. Jonas & B. Mayr & S. Schidler & M. Sotoudeh & H.M. Knoflacher, 1998. "Land-use Change and Forestry in Austria: A Scientific Assessment of Austria's Carbon Balance in Light of Article 3 of the Kyoto Protocol," Working Papers ir98028, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    2. M. Jonas & S. Nilsson & A. Shvidenko & V. Stolbovoi & M. Gluck & M. Obersteiner & A. Oeskog, 1999. "Full Carbon Accounting and the Kyoto Protocol: A Systems- Analytical View," Working Papers ir99025, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Z. Harkin & G. Bull, 2000. "Towards Developing a Comprehensive Carbon Accounting Framework for Forests in British Columbia," Working Papers ir00046, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    2. Odd Godal & Yuri Ermoliev & Ger Klaassen & Michael Obersteiner, 2003. "Carbon Trading with Imperfectly Observable Emissions," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 25(2), pages 151-169, June.
    3. Binkley, Clark S. & Brand, David & Harkin, Zoe & Bull, Gary & Ravindranath, N. H. & Obersteiner, Michael & Nilsson, Sten & Yamagata, Yoshiki & Krott, Max, 2002. "Carbon sink by the forest sector--options and needs for implementation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 4(1), pages 65-77, May.
    4. Olgierd Hryniewicz & Zbigniew Nahorski & Jörg Verstraete & Joanna Horabik & Matthias Jonas, 2014. "Compliance for uncertain inventories via probabilistic/fuzzy comparison of alternatives," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 124(3), pages 519-534, June.

    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. M. Jonas & S. Nilsson & A. Shvidenko & V. Stolbovoi & M. Gluck & M. Obersteiner & A. Oeskog, 1999. "Full Carbon Accounting and the Kyoto Protocol: A Systems- Analytical View," Working Papers ir99025, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    2. A.E. Kleinhof & L. Carlsson & M-O. Olsson, 1999. "The Forest Sector in Moscow Oblast," Working Papers ir99069, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    3. Gavrilova, Olga & Jonas, Matthias & Erb, Karlheinz & Haberl, Helmut, 2010. "International trade and Austria's livestock system: Direct and hidden carbon emission flows associated with production and consumption of products," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(4), pages 920-929, February.
    4. W. Vrzal, 1999. "Information Requirements for Natural Resource Management with Regard to Remote Sensing," Working Papers ir99064, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    5. M. Obersteiner, 1999. "Carbon Budget of the Forest Industry of the Russian Federation: 1928-2012," Working Papers ir99033, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    6. Z. Harkin & G. Bull, 2000. "Towards Developing a Comprehensive Carbon Accounting Framework for Forests in British Columbia," Working Papers ir00046, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:wop:iasawp:ir99062. 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: Thomas Krichel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iiasaat.html .

    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.