EconStor >
Hamburgisches Welt-Wirtschafts-Archiv (HWWA) >
HWWA Discussion Paper, Hamburgisches Welt-Wirtschafts-Archiv >

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10419/19235
  

Full metadata record

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorRaubenheimer, Stefanen_US
dc.contributor.authorMichaelowa, Axelen_US
dc.contributor.authorJahn, Michaelen_US
dc.contributor.authorLiptow, Holgeren_US
dc.date.accessioned2009-01-28T15:56:41Z-
dc.date.available2009-01-28T15:56:41Z-
dc.date.issued2004en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10419/19235-
dc.description.abstractThe Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) was originally seen as an instrument with a bilateral character where an entity from an industrialised country invests in a project in a developing country (DC). Also, multilateral funds were envisaged that would bundle investments to spread project risks. The sluggish implementation of incentives for industrialised country companies to embark on CDM projects and low carbon prices led to a preference of just buying Certified Emission Reductions (CERs) instead of investing in projects. Thus a third option has gained prominence – the unilateral option where the project development is planned and financed within the DC. We propose that a project should be called ?pure unilateral? if it involves no foreign direct investment (FDI), only has the approval of the Designated National Authority (DNA) of the host country and sells its CERs after certification directly to an industrialised country. Unilateral projects can become attractive if the host country risk premium for foreign investors is high despite a high human, institutional and infrastructure capacity and domestic capital availability. Moreover, transaction costs can be reduced compared to foreign investments that have to overcome bureaucratic hurdles. On the other hand, technology transfer is likely to be lower, capacity building has to be done by the host country and all risks have to be carried by host country entities. The potential to carry out unilateral CDM projects strongly varies among DCs. Whereas several countries from Asia and Latin America might well be able to design projects autonomously, most of the Sub- Saharan countries rely on foreign support. International donors of capacity building grants should increasingly address those DCs that are not in the focus of foreign investors and support them in the design of projects.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisheren_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesHWWA Discussion Paper 263en_US
dc.subject.jelQ25en_US
dc.subject.jelO13en_US
dc.subject.ddc330en_US
dc.subject.keywordClean Development Mechanismen_US
dc.subject.keywordunilateralen_US
dc.subject.keywordinstitutionsen_US
dc.subject.keywordproject participantsen_US
dc.subject.keywordfinancingen_US
dc.subject.keywordrisk premiumen_US
dc.subject.stwClean Development Mechanismen_US
dc.subject.stwEntwicklungsprojekten_US
dc.subject.stwProjektfinanzierungen_US
dc.subject.stwLänderrisikoen_US
dc.subject.stwEntwicklungsländeren_US
dc.titleMeasuring the Potential of Unilateral CDM : A Pilot Studyen_US
dc.typeWorking Paperen_US
dc.identifier.ppn379942992en_US
dc.rightshttp://www.econstor.eu/dspace/Nutzungsbedingungen-
dc.identifier.repecRePEc:zbw:hwwadp:26400-
Appears in Collections:HWWA Discussion Paper, Hamburgisches Welt-Wirtschafts-Archiv

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
263.pdf319.66 kBAdobe PDF
No. of Downloads: Counter Stats
Show simple item record
Download bibliographical data as: BibTeX

Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.