PDF File - GEC

for a stepwise approach justifying the selection and determination of the most plausible baseline
scenario alternatives. Project participants proposing new baseline methodologies may incorporate
this additionality tool, but may also propose other tools for the demonstration of additionality.
Project participants can also use the “tool for identification of baseline scenario and demonstration
of additionality” (Combined Tool) [EB28, Annex 14], which provides a procedure for baseline scenario
identification as well as additionality demonstration.
The Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol at its first
session (COP/MOP1) confirmed that the use of the additionality tool is not mandatory for project
participants, and that in all cases the project participants may propose alternative methods to
demonstrate additionality for consideration by the EB, including those cases where the additionality
tool is attached to an approved methodology [Decision 7/CMP.1 3 , para. 28].
Detailed descriptions of the additionality tool are found in Appendix 5.
1.3 CDM institutions
The institutions for CDM are depicted in Figure 1-3.
COP/MOP
CDM Executive Board (EB)
CDM Registration
and Issuance Team
(CDM-RIT)
Methodologies
Panel
(Meth Panel)
Afforestation &
Reforestation
Working Group
(AR WG)
Small Scale
Working Group
(SSC WG)
CDM
Accreditation
Panel
(CDM-AP)
Experts to
undertake a
desk review
CDM-AT (CDM
Assessment
Team)
Figure 1-3 CDM institutions
1.3.1 COP/MOP
As the CDM is a mechanism under the Kyoto Protocol, the COP/MOP shall have authority over and
provide guidance to the CDM [CDM M&P, para. 2].
1.3.2 Executive Board (EB)
For the actual operation of the CDM, the EB is the body that supervises the CDM, under the authority
and guidance of the COP/MOP [CDM M&P, para. 5]. The EB comprises of 10 members from Parties
4
3 Decision 7/CMP.1, “Further guidance relating to a clean development mechanism”, contained in the document FCCC/KP/
CMP/2005/8/Add.1, page 93-99.