IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/tcpoxx/v17y2017i2p171-188.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stakeholder participation in CDM and new climate mitigation mechanisms: China CDM case study

Author

Listed:
  • Yan Dong
  • Karen Holm Olsen

Abstract

Stakeholder participation is recognized as a key principle for effective climate governance. Climate mechanisms such as the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), REDD+, and the Green Climate Fund (GCF) provide guidelines for local stakeholder consultation (LSC). However, little empirical research exists on how LSC is practised, and synergies between climate mechanisms are largely unexplored. This study explores how international LSC rules are practised at national and local levels. It aims to better shape future LSC in climate mechanisms by learning from the case of China. First, LSC policies in CDM, REDD+, and GCF are identified. Relevant rules in China's local policies are analysed. To understand the interaction between CDM policies and China's local LSC rules, a selection of Chinese CDM Projects Design Documents (PDDs) are analysed, providing an overall impression of the stakeholder process and results. Afterwards, we focus on a single case for an in-depth understanding of LSC in practice. Results point to the weakness of current CDM LSC rules and lack of good practice guidance, e.g. regarding who to consult, what approaches to be used, and when and how consultations shall take place. It also points to the lack of a clear relationship between global CDM policies and national LSC rules. The weaknesses of existing CDM LSC practices and procedures are not unique to the China case but are relevant to other countries and climate mechanisms. REDD+ and GCF provide good examples of LSC rules, where CDM can learn, share experiences, and explore synergies for future revisions.Policy relevanceContributing to the debate on public participation and effective climate governance related to United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Article 6, this study examines stakeholder participation in the CDM and explores synergies with other mitigation mechanisms such as REDD+ and the GCF. Stakeholder participation in China is investigated to present realities on the ground. It points out the lack of detailed guidelines and provides insights into how national regulations and cultural practice take precedence over international CDM rules. The findings point to proposals for improving international regulations on stakeholder participation in the CDM and beyond for a stronger framework across climate governance mechanisms.

Suggested Citation

  • Yan Dong & Karen Holm Olsen, 2017. "Stakeholder participation in CDM and new climate mitigation mechanisms: China CDM case study," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(2), pages 171-188, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:tcpoxx:v:17:y:2017:i:2:p:171-188
    DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2015.1070257
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14693062.2015.1070257
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/14693062.2015.1070257?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ba, Feng & Liu, Jinlong & Zhu, Ting & Liu, Yonggong & Zhao, Jiacheng, 2020. "CDM forest carbon sequestration projects in western China: An analysis using actor-centered power theory," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:tcpoxx:v:17:y:2017:i:2:p:171-188. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/tcpo20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.