Cargando…

A comparison of baseline methodologies for 'Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation'

BACKGROUND: A mechanism for emission reductions from deforestation and degradation (REDD) is very likely to be included in a future climate agreement. The choice of REDD baseline methodologies will crucially influence the environmental and economic effectiveness of the climate regime. We compare thr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Huettner, Michael, Leemans, Rik, Kok, Kasper, Ebeling, Johannes
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2009
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2717061/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19594899
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1750-0680-4-4
_version_ 1782169856832962560
author Huettner, Michael
Leemans, Rik
Kok, Kasper
Ebeling, Johannes
author_facet Huettner, Michael
Leemans, Rik
Kok, Kasper
Ebeling, Johannes
author_sort Huettner, Michael
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: A mechanism for emission reductions from deforestation and degradation (REDD) is very likely to be included in a future climate agreement. The choice of REDD baseline methodologies will crucially influence the environmental and economic effectiveness of the climate regime. We compare three different historical baseline methods and one innovative dynamic model baseline approach to appraise their applicability under a future REDD policy framework using a weighted multi-criteria analysis. RESULTS: The results show that each baseline method has its specific strengths and weaknesses. Although the dynamic model allows for the best environmental and for comparatively good economic performance, its high demand for data and technical capacity limit the current applicability in many developing countries. CONCLUSION: The adoption of a multi-tier approach will allow countries to select the baseline method best suiting their specific capabilities and data availability while simultaneously ensuring scientific transparency, environmental effectiveness and broad political support.
format Text
id pubmed-2717061
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2009
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-27170612009-07-29 A comparison of baseline methodologies for 'Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation' Huettner, Michael Leemans, Rik Kok, Kasper Ebeling, Johannes Carbon Balance Manag Research BACKGROUND: A mechanism for emission reductions from deforestation and degradation (REDD) is very likely to be included in a future climate agreement. The choice of REDD baseline methodologies will crucially influence the environmental and economic effectiveness of the climate regime. We compare three different historical baseline methods and one innovative dynamic model baseline approach to appraise their applicability under a future REDD policy framework using a weighted multi-criteria analysis. RESULTS: The results show that each baseline method has its specific strengths and weaknesses. Although the dynamic model allows for the best environmental and for comparatively good economic performance, its high demand for data and technical capacity limit the current applicability in many developing countries. CONCLUSION: The adoption of a multi-tier approach will allow countries to select the baseline method best suiting their specific capabilities and data availability while simultaneously ensuring scientific transparency, environmental effectiveness and broad political support. BioMed Central 2009-07-13 /pmc/articles/PMC2717061/ /pubmed/19594899 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1750-0680-4-4 Text en Copyright © 2009 Huettner et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Huettner, Michael
Leemans, Rik
Kok, Kasper
Ebeling, Johannes
A comparison of baseline methodologies for 'Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation'
title A comparison of baseline methodologies for 'Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation'
title_full A comparison of baseline methodologies for 'Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation'
title_fullStr A comparison of baseline methodologies for 'Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation'
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of baseline methodologies for 'Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation'
title_short A comparison of baseline methodologies for 'Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation'
title_sort comparison of baseline methodologies for 'reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation'
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2717061/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19594899
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1750-0680-4-4
work_keys_str_mv AT huettnermichael acomparisonofbaselinemethodologiesforreducingemissionsfromdeforestationanddegradation
AT leemansrik acomparisonofbaselinemethodologiesforreducingemissionsfromdeforestationanddegradation
AT kokkasper acomparisonofbaselinemethodologiesforreducingemissionsfromdeforestationanddegradation
AT ebelingjohannes acomparisonofbaselinemethodologiesforreducingemissionsfromdeforestationanddegradation
AT huettnermichael comparisonofbaselinemethodologiesforreducingemissionsfromdeforestationanddegradation
AT leemansrik comparisonofbaselinemethodologiesforreducingemissionsfromdeforestationanddegradation
AT kokkasper comparisonofbaselinemethodologiesforreducingemissionsfromdeforestationanddegradation
AT ebelingjohannes comparisonofbaselinemethodologiesforreducingemissionsfromdeforestationanddegradation