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...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
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 |