東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁 到查詢結果 [ null ]

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Integrating Sustainable Development ...

Lou, Jiehong.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Integrating Sustainable Development Goals into Climate Finance Projects: Assessing the Market Impact of Co-Benefits from Carbon Offsets.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Integrating Sustainable Development Goals into Climate Finance Projects: Assessing the Market Impact of Co-Benefits from Carbon Offsets./
作者:	Lou, Jiehong.
出版者:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2020,
面頁冊數:	213 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 82-05, Section: B.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International82-05B.
標題:	Climate change. -
電子資源:	https://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=28086543
ISBN:	9798684654442

Integrating Sustainable Development Goals into Climate Finance Projects: Assessing the Market Impact of Co-Benefits from Carbon Offsets.
Lou, Jiehong.

Integrating Sustainable Development Goals into Climate Finance Projects: Assessing the Market Impact of Co-Benefits from Carbon Offsets. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2020 - 213 p.

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 82-05, Section: B.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Maryland, College Park, 2020.

This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.

By design, climate finance projects have two fundamental features: climate benefits and sustainable development benefits. Climate finance is important for cutting emissions, but it can also deliver significant additional benefits, often termed "co-benefits." The concept of co-benefits, although lacking a consist definition in the international arena, is so important, especially for the audiences from the developing world. Co-benefits are the backbone of a green and low-carbon development of these developing countries, where promoting high-quality economic development, maintaining economic, financial and energy security, protecting environment and controlling carbon emissions should achieved together. However, how the climate finance market values co-benefits remains poorly understood. By focusing on local co-benefits, this research highlights the importance of valuing co-benefits where projects are located, and how these projects deliver impacts for local communities. This dissertation looks at the question of co-benefits in three specific contexts by using both quantitative and qualitative methods as follows: First, I assess the likelihood that project co-benefits encourage buyers to pay more for Certified Emission Reductions (CERs) within the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), the major international offset mechanism within a broader world of carbon finance. Second, I look at potential mechanisms of quality branding associated with the CDM to see whether these indicators in fact attract a price premium attributable to co-benefits. Third, I study the role of offset co-benefits in corporate behavior and decision-making in voluntary carbon markets.My research shows that in the CDM context, a project with a likelihood of delivering more co-benefits receives a higher CER price from buyers. The price difference between projects with the highest co-benefits and lowest co-benefits is $4.9/tCO2e on average or a difference of 27.6 percent. The large variability in the price of CER partially comes from the locations of the buyer and the project, while CER prices do not differ based on the buyer's profit status, sector, or the number of projects they hosted. In the quality branding context, I see that quality control indicators (particularly the independently generated label of "Gold Standard") have a significant effect on CER prices with the price premium is in the range of $1.13/tCO2e (6.6% of price increase due to the Gold Standard certification of co-benefits) to $4.2/tCO2e (29%). Additionally, I see a strong commitment from public finance in delivering local co-benefits through their willingness to pay a price premium. In the voluntary carbon markets, I find that corporate motivations show a large degree of consistency and orientation, which aligns with the findings on the purchasing behavior for offset standards. Companies with a primary motivation to reduce emissions will prioritize purchasing cost-effective offset projects. Alternately, companies with primary motivations for non-emission impacts (such as company values or market competitiveness) value co-benefits more, and are willing to pay more to fulfill these goals.

ISBN: 9798684654442Subjects--Topical Terms:

2079509
Climate change.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Carbon credits

Integrating Sustainable Development Goals into Climate Finance Projects: Assessing the Market Impact of Co-Benefits from Carbon Offsets.
LDR:04478nmm a2200385 4500 001 2279436
005 20210817110137.5
008 220723s2020 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9798684654442
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI28086543
035 $a AAI28086543
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Lou, Jiehong. $0 (orcid)0000-0003-4606-7756 $3 3557884
245 1 0 $a Integrating Sustainable Development Goals into Climate Finance Projects: Assessing the Market Impact of Co-Benefits from Carbon Offsets.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2020
300 $a 213 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 82-05, Section: B.
500 $a Advisor: Hultman, Nathan;Patwardhan, Anand.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Maryland, College Park, 2020.
506 $a This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.
520 $a By design, climate finance projects have two fundamental features: climate benefits and sustainable development benefits. Climate finance is important for cutting emissions, but it can also deliver significant additional benefits, often termed "co-benefits." The concept of co-benefits, although lacking a consist definition in the international arena, is so important, especially for the audiences from the developing world. Co-benefits are the backbone of a green and low-carbon development of these developing countries, where promoting high-quality economic development, maintaining economic, financial and energy security, protecting environment and controlling carbon emissions should achieved together. However, how the climate finance market values co-benefits remains poorly understood. By focusing on local co-benefits, this research highlights the importance of valuing co-benefits where projects are located, and how these projects deliver impacts for local communities. This dissertation looks at the question of co-benefits in three specific contexts by using both quantitative and qualitative methods as follows: First, I assess the likelihood that project co-benefits encourage buyers to pay more for Certified Emission Reductions (CERs) within the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), the major international offset mechanism within a broader world of carbon finance. Second, I look at potential mechanisms of quality branding associated with the CDM to see whether these indicators in fact attract a price premium attributable to co-benefits. Third, I study the role of offset co-benefits in corporate behavior and decision-making in voluntary carbon markets.My research shows that in the CDM context, a project with a likelihood of delivering more co-benefits receives a higher CER price from buyers. The price difference between projects with the highest co-benefits and lowest co-benefits is $4.9/tCO2e on average or a difference of 27.6 percent. The large variability in the price of CER partially comes from the locations of the buyer and the project, while CER prices do not differ based on the buyer's profit status, sector, or the number of projects they hosted. In the quality branding context, I see that quality control indicators (particularly the independently generated label of "Gold Standard") have a significant effect on CER prices with the price premium is in the range of $1.13/tCO2e (6.6% of price increase due to the Gold Standard certification of co-benefits) to $4.2/tCO2e (29%). Additionally, I see a strong commitment from public finance in delivering local co-benefits through their willingness to pay a price premium. In the voluntary carbon markets, I find that corporate motivations show a large degree of consistency and orientation, which aligns with the findings on the purchasing behavior for offset standards. Companies with a primary motivation to reduce emissions will prioritize purchasing cost-effective offset projects. Alternately, companies with primary motivations for non-emission impacts (such as company values or market competitiveness) value co-benefits more, and are willing to pay more to fulfill these goals.
590 $a School code: 0117.
650 4 $a Climate change. $2 bicssc $3 2079509
650 4 $a Public policy. $3 532803
653 $a Carbon credits
653 $a Carbon finance
653 $a Climate finance
653 $a Co-benefits
653 $a Sustainable development goals
653 $a Sustainable infrastructure
690 $a 0404
690 $a 0438
690 $a 0630
710 2 $a University of Maryland, College Park. $b Public Policy. $3 1270095
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 82-05B.
790 $a 0117
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2020
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u https://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=28086543