No abstract

The two aims of the clean development mechanism (CDM) were to reduce greenhouse gases cost effectively and contribute to sustainable development (SD) in developing countries. So far, however, SD components of the mechanism have been questionable. In this opinion article, we argue for a more theoretically informed engagement with the CDM that could be empowered through the better provision of transparent and clear information in the project implementation processes. Drawing on our work in Latin America, we concur with other authors that the CDM as it stands does not 'deliver' SD, but that improved information and a research agenda that focuses on the multi-level political economy of projectbased CDM could assist in the mechanism delivering on multiple forms of SD in local contexts. 

A body of literature is emerging applying critical consideration to the Kyoto Protocol Clean Development Mechanism's ('CDM') achievement of policy goals regarding sustainable development, geographical distribution of projects and related matters. This article places this literature in the context of the policymaking goals of the CDM's Brazilian architects. The CDM arose from the Brazilian Proposal's Clean Development Fund, and was negotiated between Brazil and the United States in the weeks preceding the Kyoto Conference of Parties. The CDM's Brazilian architects continued to pursue their underlying policy goals by taking a leadership position in the Marrakesh Accords negotiations. During this period Brazil's primary policy objectives comprised achieving meaningful mitigation of GHG emissions to avoid dangerous interference with the climate system, derailing a perceived US/IPCC initiative to allocate emissions cap obligations in the Kyoto Protocol on the basis of current emissions, and taking a leadership position both among the G-77 and China and in the multilateral climate negotiations as a whole. The CDM arose in this context from the G-77 and China's desire to coerce the North's compliance with the North's emissions cap obligations through an alternative means of compliance. As a result, there was no focus on broad conceptions of sustainable development, or on broad distribution of CDM projects throughout the South. Instead, the CDM's Brazilian architects envisioned that CDM-related sustainable development would arise exclusively from the presence of the CDM projects. Similarly, the Brazilian Proposal advocated allocation of the Clean Development Fund on a basis proportionate to each nonAnnex I countries projected 1990-2010 greenhouse gas emissions. These views persisted through the evolution of the Clean Development Fund into the CDM and through Marrakesh Accords negotiations. This article argues that the CDM has largely met the policy

Six hydroelectricity projects registered under the Kyoto Protocol Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), three each in Brazil and Peru, are reviewed to assess and contrast Peru's and Brazil's differing regulatory approaches to assessing the sustainable development (SD) benefits of CDM projects to social development. The Brazilian regulators rely exclusively on documents addressing a finite set of issues, whereas the corresponding Peruvian regulators visit the project site to engage in an ad hoc assessment of SD needs. Brazil's approach encourages foreign investment by providing some certainty of costs and prospects, yet the projects reviewed provided only limited SD benefits for social development. The Peruvian projects included significant and diverse social benefits for the local community. In order to achieve business confidence and social development benefits in the short to medium term, a hybrid of these approaches is recommended. However, successful implementation of this approach will require enhanced domestic non-governmental organization capacity, including additional funding. Ultimately, it appears that the solution lies in multi-stakeholder dialogue among mature regulators, civil society actors, local government and local community actors, and project developers.

No abstract