The incentive gap: LULUCF and the Kyoto mechanism before and after Durban

To-date, forest resource-based carbon accounting in land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF) under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), Kyoto Protocol (KP), European Union (EU) and national level emission reduction schemes considers only a fraction of its potential and fails to adequately mobilize the LULUCF sector for the successful stabilization of atmospheric greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations. Recent modifications at the 2011 COP17 meetings in Durban have partially addressed this basic problem, but leave room for improvement. The presence of an Incentive Gap (IG) continues to justify reform of the LULUCF carbon accounting framework. Frequently neglected in the climate change mitigation and adaptation literature, carbon accounting practices ultimately define the nuts and bolts of what counts and which resources (forest, forest-based or other) are favored and utilized. For Annex I countries in the Kyoto Mechanism, the Incentive Gap under forest management (FM) is significantly large: some 75% or more of potential forestry-based carbon sequestration is not effectively incentivized or mobilized for climate change mitigation and adaptation (Ellison etal. 2011a). In this paper, we expand our analysis of the Incentive Gap to incorporate the changes agreed in Durban and encompass both a wider set of countries and a larger set of omitted carbon pools. For Annex I countries, based on the first 2years of experience in the first Commitment Period (CP1) we estimate the IG in FM at approximately 88%. Though significantly reduced in CP2, the IG remains a problem. Thus our measure of missed opportunities under the Kyoto and UNFCCC framework - despite the changes in Durban - remains important. With the exception perhaps of increased energy efficiency, few sinks or sources of reduced emissions can be mobilized as effectively and efficiently as forests. Thus, we wonder at the sheer magnitude of this underutilized resource

Civil Society in Fragile Contexts

Contains fulltext : 121599pub.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)Policies to promote peace in conflict-torn societies increasingly include “civil society (CS) building” as an aim; however, in such settings, it is often difficult – if not impossible – to distinguish between state and society, or between “civil” and “uncivil”. Local legitimacy (representativeness and a strong support base) and international legitimacy (living up to norms of inclusiveness and nonviolence) rarely overlap. This poses complex challenges for those aiming to strengthen CS in support of peace. This chapter illustrates those challenges by exploring the experiences of the staff of a Dutch peacebuilding organization with identifying local CS partners in Ituri (DRC)

Surfactants Based on Renewable Raw Materials.

Under the European Commission's European Climate Change Programme, a group of experts studied the possibilities of using more renewable raw materials as chemical feedstock and assessed the related potential for greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction. Surfactants were among the products studied. Surfactants are currently produced from both petrochemical feedstocks and renewable resources (oleochemical surfactants). Assuming, in a first step, that total surfactant production in the European Union remains constant until 2010, it was estimated that the amount of oleochemical surfactants could be increased from about 880 kilotons (kt) in 1998 to approximately 1,100 kt in 2010 (an increase of 24%). This substitution reduces the life-cycle CO2 emissions from surfactants by 8%; the theoretical maximum potential for total substitution is 37%. Because the surfactant market is expected to grow, the avoided emissions will probably exceed 8% of the current life-cycle CO2 emissions from surfactants. If compared to the CO2 emissions from the total industrial sector and, even more so, if compared to the total economy, the relative savings are much lower (0.02% to 0.09%). This leads to the conclusion that the increased production and use of biobased surfactants should be part of an overall GHG emission reduction strategy consisting of a whole range of measures addressing both energy demand and supply. This article also discusses policies and measures designed to increase the use of biobased surfactants