CARBON CREDITS FOR SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA - lumes

More documents

Recommendations

Info

number of projects discussed in this study that were not included in the studyinventory. A database of relevant and available information obtained from thispreliminary web survey includes project type, project location, transaction size,crediting periods, and certification standard and is presented in the Annex V. Projectco-benefits were included in the database based on information retrieved from theproject documents accessible. Information on project developer, project operator isprovided for the projects it was available for.The actual projects were identified through the publicly available registrieslike the Gold Standard Registry, the CarbonNeutral Company Register, the VCSRegistry System, TÜV SÜD "Blue Registry" certification database, the web directoryof carbon offsets Carbon Catalog and project portfolios of major retailers of VERs(Annex I). 23 organizations involved in project s activities were identified (Annex II).Some data regarding existing projects were collected directly from project developersthrough the questionnaires disseminated. To avoid double counting after dataavailable for projects were analyzed some projects were excluded from the inventorybased on the conclusion that the projects activities and emission reductions by theprojects were covered within other project. This can be explained by the absence of aunified database, which results in a number of cases when the same activity might bepresented as two separated projects, based on the varying vintage period or otheraspect. For instance, in case of a reforestation project, when after the project changesthe owner, the new project maintainer might aim for altering a standard choice,reevaluating generated offsets vo<strong>lumes</strong> or performing extra-activities (enlarging treeplantation), changing thereby project characteristics, which in turn might result inuncertainty and double-counting.Sustainable development benefits and co-benefits were evaluated for theprojects based on the Project Design Documents (PDDs) available; informationpublicly provided by the project developers and offset retailers; questionnaire resultsand interviews conducted.Due to a number of factors such as the nature of Over-the-Counter (OTC)markets, ascertaining offset price, and acquiring information on credit buyers andspecific transactions data proved difficult to obtain. The proprietary nature of someproject information, such as offsets price, data on offsets buyers was not available inmost of the cases and prevented the completion of the inventory database. Moreover,documents providing comprehensive information regarding the project were availablefor a limited number of projects only. Though, the present study inventory coverssignificant amount of projects in the region, it doesn’t claim to be a complete databaseof all voluntary market-based projects in Sub-Saharan Africa.Secondly, a survey was conducted among organizations identified aspotentially involved in the development of voluntary market-based projects in theregion. The survey instrument, a questionnaire, was e-mailed to the list of selectedorganizations provided in Annex I in the first week of April 2009. In order to improveresponse rate the reminder was sent via e-mail in the third week of April 2009 andwas followed by phone reminder shortly.7
The organizations involved in the voluntary market projects were identifiedthrough the registries and based on the previous research and publications available(Bayon et al., 2008; Cruz, 2007) that were believed to have adequate knowledgeabout the issue as well as through the publicly available registries for the voluntarymarket projects (Bryman, 2004). The questionnaire was kept short as suggested bySilverman (1999), with only thirteen questions and included both open-ended andclose-ended questions in ‘order to reduce the risk of ‘respondents’ fatigue’(Silverman, 1999). Low-response rates are a disadvantage of surveys; the follow-upquestions or elaborations that cannot be asked are another weakness of this method(Trochim, 2006). Moreover, the study cannot be explained in person, and a goodcommand of English is required to complete the questionnaire (Trochim, 2006), aswell as various actors may have interpreted the questions differently from what theresearcher had intended.Thus, verification ofqualitative research isimportant as it is oftenaccused of subjectivism(Bryman, 2004). Indeed,only 12 of the 23organizations identified asproject developers orproject operators took partin the survey, which is anapproximately 52 percent response rate. However, they represent quite a good varietyof organizations, with respect to the types of organization presented in the region andorganization types (project developers, offset buyers and retailers) as one may seefrom the charts presented in the Figure 1. The outcomes of the survey were evaluatedusing descriptive analyses methods.Although, some facts and figures, as well as sustainable development practicesand implementations surrounding the use of market-based GHG reductionsapproaches could be obtained from publicly available documentation, due to limitedinformation available and in order to obtain additional input from other sources thansecondary data interviews were conducted. A semi-structured interview format withan interview guide approach was used. In order to facilitate the analysis and keep thefocus of the study, the questions were determined beforehand but kept open ended.This usually allows for a more flexible situational interview (Mikkelsen, 2005).According to the qualitative method, they should have been kept unstructured,whereby general issues were selected before the interviews, leading questions werepredetermined but other questions were not. Notes were taken during each phoneinterview and compiled into a single database (Yin, 2003), and coded accordingly(Bryman, 2004.) Kvale’s (1996) principle ‘the shorter the interview’s question are andthe longer interviews answers, the better’ served as a guiding principle for theinterviews. Personal phone interviews proved to be an advantageous method incollecting additional data when compared to an e-mail questionnaire (Silverman,1999). The list of interviewers and the examples of the questions asked is provided inthe Annex III and Annex IV accordingly.8
Page 5 and 6: LIST OF ABBREVIATIONSAFOLU Agricult
Page 7 and 8: 7. WORK CITED 428. APPENDICES 49ANN
Page 9 and 10: main driver for project development
Page 11 and 12: 1.2. ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK1.2.1 RESE
Page 13: Discourse analysis is sensitive to
Page 17 and 18: 1.3.3 LIMITATIONS AND SYSTEM BOUNDA
Page 19 and 20: Sustainability discourse is formed
Page 21 and 22: 3. UNDERSTANDING CARBON FINANCE3.1
Page 23 and 24: are permitted to release is defined
Page 25 and 26: the same time as the downward trend
Page 27 and 28: preferences. This aspect of VCM pro
Page 29 and 30: 4. EMPIRICAL FINDINGSBefore I turn
Page 31 and 32: size, was mentioned as major factor
Page 33 and 34: community-based Microsolar Lighting
Page 35 and 36: funds establishment to channel fund
Page 37 and 38: approach’ 10 (PC, 2009b). This in
Page 39 and 40: Five standards out of 11 applied we
Page 41 and 42: sustainable development nor other b
Page 43 and 44: mechanism, technological solutions
Page 45 and 46: voluntary markets enable more direc
Page 47 and 48: therefore, there I have little grou
Page 49 and 50: 7. WORK CITEDADBG (African Developm
Page 51 and 52: Ellis, J., Winklerb, H., Corfee-Mor
Page 53 and 54: Olsen, K., H. (2007). The Clean Dev
Page 55 and 56: Wodak, R. & Meyer. M. (2001). Metho
Page 57 and 58: ANNEX II. LIST OF ORGANIZATIONS IDE
Page 59 and 60: ANNEX V. PROJECTS INVENTORY DATABAS
Page 61 and 62: 333435QuirimbasCarbonLivelihoodsPro
Page 63 and 64: 60616263646566Reforestationin Kibal

CARBON CREDITS FOR SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA - lumes

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?