Future restrictions for sinks in the CDM How about a cap on supply?

Climate Policy

Volumn 2, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 353-365

  Forner, Claudio ^a   Jotzo, Frank ^a,b  

^a Climate Change Secretariat   (Germany)

^b AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

CDM; Forest; Kyoto Protocol; LULUCF; Supplementarity; Sustainable development

Indexed keywords

AFFORESTATION; CARBON SINK; EMISSION CONTROL; KYOTO PROTOCOL; QUOTA SYSTEM; REFORESTATION;

EID: 0036935180     PISSN: 14693062     EISSN: 17527457     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1469-3062(02)00063-3     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Barlett, P., 1980. Adaptive strategies in peasant agricultural production. Ann. Rev. Anthropol. 9, 545-573.
2. Bass, S., Dubois, O., Moura Costa, P.,Wilson, C., Pinard, M., Tipper, R., 2000. Rural livelihoods and carbon management. IIED Natural Resources Issues, Paper No. 1, International Institute for Environment and Development, London.
3. Brown, S., Masera, O., Sathaye, J., 2000. Project-based activities. In: Watson, R.T., Noble, I.R., Bolin, B., Ravindranath, N.H., Verardo, D.J., Dokken, D.J. (Eds.), Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry. Special report of the Intergovernmental Panel on climate change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
4. Byron, N., Arnold, M., 1999. What futures for the people of the tropical forests? World Dev. 27 (5), 789-805.
5. Cairns, R., Lasserre, P., 2001. Carbon credits for forests and forest products.Working paper No. 20-22, Economics Department, University of Q uebec, Montreal.
6. Dessus, B., 1998. Equity, sustainability and solidarity concerns. In: Goldenberg, J. (Ed.), Issues and Options: the Clean Development Mechanism. United nations Publications, New York.
7. Ellis, J., 2001. Forestry projects: permanence, crediting accounting and lifetime. Information Paper, OECD Environment Directorate and International Energy Agency, Paris. http://www.oecd.org/env/cc
8. Houghton, R., 2002. Magnitude, distribution and causes of terrestrial carbon sinks and some implications for policy. Climate Policy 2 (1), 71-88.
9. Jotzo, F., Michaelowa, A., 2002. Estimating the CDM market under the Marrakech accords. Climate Policy 2, 179-201.
10. Kanninen, M., 1998. Secuestro de carbono en bosques: el papel de los bosques en el ciclo global de carbono. Memorias, II Conferencia electrínica agroforestería para la producción animal en America Latina,FAO-CIPAV, http://lead.virtualcentre.org/es/ele/conferencia2/ articulovb.PDF.
11. Lamb, D., 1997. Biodiversity restoration by plantation. ITTO Newslett. 7 (2). http://www.itto.or.jp/newsletter/v7n2/03biodiversity.html.
12. Moe, A., Tangen, C., 2000. The Kyoto Mechanisms and Russian Climate Politics. Royal Institute of International Affairs, London.
13. Niles, J.O., Brown, S., Pretty, J., Ball, A., Fay, J., 2001. Potential carbon mitigation and income in developing countries from changes in use and management of agricultural and forest lands, Centre for Environment and Society Occasional Paper 2001-04, University of Essex.
14. Nilsson, S., Schophauser, W., 1995. The carbon-sequestration potential of a global afforestation program. Climatic Change 30 (3), 249-257.
15. Noble, I., Scholes, R., 2000. Sinks and the Kyoto Protocol. Climate Policy 1, 5-25.
16. Polidano, C., Heyhoe, E., Hester, Fisher, B.S.,Woffenden, K., Jakeman, G., 2001. The Kyoto Protocol: state of negotiations and implications for the Australian economy, In: Proceedings of the National OUTLOOK Conference, Outlook 2001, ABARE, Canberra, February 2001.
17. Sathaye, J., Makundi,W., Andrasko, R., Boer, R., Ravindranath, N., Sudha, P., Rao, S., Lasco, R., Pulhin, E., Masera, O., Ceron, A., Ordonez, J., Deying, X., Zhang, X., Zuomin, S., 2001. Carbon mitigation potential and costs of forestry options in Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Mexico, The Philippines and Tanzania. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 6, 185-211.
18. Smith, J., Scherr, S., 2001. Capturing the value of forest carbon for local livelihoods. CIFOR and Forest Trends, CIFOR, Bogor.
19. Stavins, R., 1999. The costs of carbon sequestration: a revealed-preference approach. Am. Econ. Rev. 89 (4), 994-1009.
20. The Royal Society, 2001. The Role of Land Carbon Sinks in Mitigating Global Climate Change. The Royal Society Policy Document 10/01, Holbrooks Printers Ltd., London.
21. Tipper, R., McGhee, W., Ellis, J., de Jong, H., Heiller, A., 2001. An Initial View on Methodologies for Emission Baselines: Forestry Case Study. Draft presented at March 2001 AIXG, unpublished.
22. Trexler, M., Haugen, C., 1995. Keeping it green: tropical forestry opportunities for mitigating climate change.World Resources Institute, Washington.
23. UNFCCC, 2001. New proposals by the president of COP 6. UNFCCC, Bonn, http://unfccc.int/cop6 2/infopart/unfccc np.pdf.
24. UNFCCC, 2001b The Marrakech Accords & the Marrakech declarations. UNFCCC, Bonn http://www.unfccc.int/cop7/ documents/accords draft.pdf.
25. Vrolijck, C., Grubb, M., 2000. Quantifying Kyoto: How will COP6 decisions affect the market? Report of a workshop organized by the RIIA, UK, August 2000.
26. Winjum, J.K., Dixon, R.K., Schroeder, P.E., 1993. Forest management and carbon storage: an analysis of 12 key forest nations. Water Air Soil Pollut. 70, 239-257.
27. Yamagata, Y., Alexandrov, G., 2001. Global Potential of carbon sinks under the Kyoto Protocol. In: Matsuno, T., Kida, H. (Eds.), Present and Future of Modeling Global Environmental Change: Toward Integrated Modeling, Terrapub, Japan.