2000
DOI: 10.1016/s0301-4215(99)00094-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Implementing the Kyoto protocol: why JI and CDM show more promise than international emissions trading

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
22
0
1

Year Published

2006
2006
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 62 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
22
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…• A study comparing the effectiveness of CDM projects and international emissions trading systems confirmed that CDM will be more effective than international emissions trading in implementing the Kyoto Protocol (Woerdman, 2000).…”
Section: Cdm Contribution To Sustainable Development Environmental Comentioning
confidence: 97%
“…• A study comparing the effectiveness of CDM projects and international emissions trading systems confirmed that CDM will be more effective than international emissions trading in implementing the Kyoto Protocol (Woerdman, 2000).…”
Section: Cdm Contribution To Sustainable Development Environmental Comentioning
confidence: 97%
“…They pointed out that if the firms behave under a decentralized ways, they can attain a least-cost solution under joint-cost minimization. Woerdman (2000) quoted part of the work of Rubin (1996) and argued that joint implementation and clean development mechanism projects will be more effective, efficient and politically acceptable than an international emissions trading system. He further concluded theoretically that initial distributional allowances and pricing and trading mechanism are decisive factors in the determination of market participation and trading quantities.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…NGOs were also formally allied with specific states: several environmental NGOs "helped the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) with policy advice and scientific backup in the climate negotiations" and lawyers from one NGO, FIELD, "frequently obtained accreditation as members of small islands delegations" (Gulbrandsen and Andresen 2004, 60). The pre-2000 pilot phase of the treaty included a provision for the use of third-party auditors, including environmental NGOs, in establishing the base-line emissions upon which signatories' future emissions allowances would be based (Woerdman 2000). As negotiations entered their final phase in the late 1990s, an increasingly contentious issue among states was the stringency of the treaty's emissions targets and the role of NGOs in monitoring compliance with those targets.…”
Section: The Kyoto Protocolmentioning
confidence: 99%