A fundamental component of project assessment under the AIJ program has been the determination of the extent to which project interventions lead to GHG benefits that are additional to "business as usual" (UNFCCC, 1995; UNCCCS, 1997; Baumert, 1999). The concern about additionality also appears in Articles 6 and 12 of the Kyoto Protocol. Although additionality arguments have several different components and are based on multiple sources of information, most additionality problems apply equally to projects in the energy sector as to those in LULUCF (Chomitz, 2000).
The first step in determining a project's additional GHG benefits (GHG emissions additionality) is the elaboration of a without-project baseline scenario against which changes in carbon stocks occurring in the project can be compared (see Section 184.108.40.206). It is then necessary to demonstrate that the purported GHG benefits are truly additional, not simply the result of incidental or non-project factors such as new legislation, market changes, or environmental change (see Section 220.127.116.11).
Establishing the baseline scenario therefore requires knowledge of historical series of conventional practices in the affected area, the local socioeconomic situation, wider (national, regional, or even global) economic trends that may affect the conventional outputs of a project, and other relevant policy parameters. The baseline is established by projecting these past trends and current situations into the future. Consequently, baseline scenarios are necessarily based on a range of assumptions.
Currently, there is no standard method for determining baselines and additionality (Puhl, 1998; Matsuo, 1999). This section describes approaches used or proposed to date.
Other reports in this collection