Benito Müller

Contact

WP_Query Object
(
    [query] => Array
        (
            [post_type] => publications
            [posts_per_page] => -1
            [meta_query] => Array
                (
                    [0] => Array
                        (
                            [key] => author
                            [value] => 14616
                            [compare] => LIKE
                        )

                )

        )

    [query_vars] => Array
        (
            [post_type] => publications
            [posts_per_page] => -1
            [meta_query] => Array
                (
                    [0] => Array
                        (
                            [key] => author
                            [value] => 14616
                            [compare] => LIKE
                        )

                )

            [error] => 
            [m] => 
            [p] => 0
            [post_parent] => 
            [subpost] => 
            [subpost_id] => 
            [attachment] => 
            [attachment_id] => 0
            [name] => 
            [static] => 
            [pagename] => 
            [page_id] => 0
            [second] => 
            [minute] => 
            [hour] => 
            [day] => 0
            [monthnum] => 0
            [year] => 0
            [w] => 0
            [category_name] => 
            [tag] => 
            [cat] => 
            [tag_id] => 
            [author] => 
            [author_name] => 
            [feed] => 
            [tb] => 
            [paged] => 0
            [meta_key] => 
            [meta_value] => 
            [preview] => 
            [s] => 
            [sentence] => 
            [title] => 
            [fields] => 
            [menu_order] => 
            [embed] => 
            [category__in] => Array
                (
                )

            [category__not_in] => Array
                (
                )

            [category__and] => Array
                (
                )

            [post__in] => Array
                (
                )

            [post__not_in] => Array
                (
                )

            [post_name__in] => Array
                (
                )

            [tag__in] => Array
                (
                )

            [tag__not_in] => Array
                (
                )

            [tag__and] => Array
                (
                )

            [tag_slug__in] => Array
                (
                )

            [tag_slug__and] => Array
                (
                )

            [post_parent__in] => Array
                (
                )

            [post_parent__not_in] => Array
                (
                )

            [author__in] => Array
                (
                )

            [author__not_in] => Array
                (
                )

            [ignore_sticky_posts] => 
            [suppress_filters] => 
            [cache_results] => 1
            [update_post_term_cache] => 1
            [lazy_load_term_meta] => 1
            [update_post_meta_cache] => 1
            [nopaging] => 1
            [comments_per_page] => 50
            [no_found_rows] => 
            [order] => DESC
        )

    [tax_query] => WP_Tax_Query Object
        (
            [queries] => Array
                (
                )

            [relation] => AND
            [table_aliases:protected] => Array
                (
                )

            [queried_terms] => Array
                (
                )

            [primary_table] => wp_posts
            [primary_id_column] => ID
        )

    [meta_query] => WP_Meta_Query Object
        (
            [queries] => Array
                (
                    [0] => Array
                        (
                            [key] => author
                            [value] => 14616
                            [compare] => LIKE
                        )

                    [relation] => OR
                )

            [relation] => AND
            [meta_table] => wp_postmeta
            [meta_id_column] => post_id
            [primary_table] => wp_posts
            [primary_id_column] => ID
            [table_aliases:protected] => Array
                (
                    [0] => wp_postmeta
                )

            [clauses:protected] => Array
                (
                    [wp_postmeta] => Array
                        (
                            [key] => author
                            [value] => 14616
                            [compare] => LIKE
                            [alias] => wp_postmeta
                            [cast] => CHAR
                        )

                )

            [has_or_relation:protected] => 
        )

    [date_query] => 
    [request] => SELECT   wp_posts.* FROM wp_posts  INNER JOIN wp_postmeta ON ( wp_posts.ID = wp_postmeta.post_id ) WHERE 1=1  AND ( 
  ( wp_postmeta.meta_key = 'author' AND wp_postmeta.meta_value LIKE '%14616%' )
) AND wp_posts.post_type = 'publications' AND (wp_posts.post_status = 'publish' OR wp_posts.post_status = 'acf-disabled') GROUP BY wp_posts.ID ORDER BY wp_posts.post_date DESC 
    [posts] => Array
        (
            [0] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27429
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2014-02-28 12:37:17
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2014-02-28 12:37:17
                    [post_content] => This Review Note for the Sixth Meeting of the Green Climate Fund Board analyses the GCF Paper ?Policies and Procedures for the Initial Allocation of Fund Resources? (GCF/B.06/05) against the background of some of the main lessons drawn in a recently completed research project on resource allocation methodologies, as summarized in How will the Green Climate Fund allocate its money? 
                    [post_title] => Comments regarding 'Policies and Procedures for the Initial Allocation of Fund Resources'
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => comments-regarding-policies-and-procedures-for-the-initial-allocation-of-fund-resources
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 15:48:48
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 15:48:48
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/comments-regarding-policies-and-procedures-for-the-initial-allocation-of-fund-resources/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [1] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27443
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2014-01-17 10:55:33
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2014-01-17 10:55:33
                    [post_content] => The Green Climate Fund is at a crossroads where it must choose between the traditional centralized or a novel devolved decision making model. The next meeting of the GCF in February will be key as it will for the first time be explicitly discussing enhanced direct access through (national) funding entities which has devolution of decision making as its corner stone. This Discussion Note by Benito Müller takes stock of the deliberations on direct access and the correlated issue of country ownership, and considers how these issues should be taken forward at the February meeting.
                    [post_title] => Enhancing Direct Access and Country Ownership - Status Quo and the Way Forward
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => enhancing-direct-access-and-country-ownership-status-quo-and-the-way-forward
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 15:45:24
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 15:45:24
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/enhancing-direct-access-and-country-ownership-status-quo-and-the-way-forward/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [2] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27448
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2014-01-10 12:49:33
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2014-01-10 12:49:33
                    [post_content] => This OIES Energy and Environment Working Paper is the third and final study on resource allocation which Dr Benito Müller has been engaged in over the past year - the previous papers being on the Allocation of (Adaptation) Resources: (September 2013) and on Quantity Performance Payment by Results: (July 2013).

This Working Paper looks at the lessons to be learned, in particular for the Green Climate Fund, from the Performance-Based Allocation (PBA) system of the
World Bank's International Development Association (IDA), and the Resource Allocation Framework (RAF) as well as the System for Transparent Allocation of Resources (STAR) of the Global environment Facility (GEF).
                    [post_title] => Performance-based formulaic resource allocation - a cautionary tale
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => performance-based-formulaic-resource-allocation-a-cautionary-tale
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 15:45:04
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 15:45:04
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/performance-based-formulaic-resource-allocation-a-cautionary-tale/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [3] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27465
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2013-09-16 14:17:03
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2013-09-16 13:17:03
                    [post_content] => In this OIES Energy and Environment Brief, Benito Müller looks at lessons from fiscal transfer mechanisms, i.e. instruments used to allocate central tax revenue to sub-national governments, for the allocation of (adaptation) resources by the Green Climate Fund.
                    [post_title] => The Allocation of (Adaptation) Resources
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => the-allocation-of-adaptation-resources
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 15:42:06
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 15:42:06
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/the-allocation-of-adaptation-resources/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [4] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27467
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2013-08-23 09:59:26
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2013-08-23 08:59:26
                    [post_content] => Most of the fourth meeting of the Standing Committee on Finance (SCF) held in Bonn was taken up by deliberations on the Arrangements between the Conference of Parties (COP) of the UN
Framework Convention on Climate Change (Convention) and the Green Climate Fund (GCF). The deliberations were intense and in the end got bogged down over the issue of how to deal with the task of developing modalities by which a particular funding decision may be reconsidered in light of [the] policies, programme priorities and eligibility criteria established by the COP, as required by Article 11.3.b of the Convention. This submission considers the debate on these Modalities and the underlying issues and puts forward a pragmatic proposal for compromise.
                    [post_title] => Submission to the Standing Committee on Finance - fifth Meeting
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => submission-to-the-standing-committee-on-finance-fifth-meeting
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 15:41:49
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 15:41:49
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/submission-to-the-standing-committee-on-finance-fifth-meeting/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [5] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27472
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2013-07-09 14:22:28
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2013-07-09 13:22:28
                    [post_content] => This OIES Research Paper by Benito Müller, Samuel Fankhauser, and Maya Forstater looks at the possibility of using Quantity Performance (QP) instruments for 'wholesale' mitigation funding through enhanced direct access to the Green Climate Fund (GCF)

The Paper carries out an evaluation of such instruments in this context with respect to three key objectives of the GCF, namely, to promote a paradigm shift towards low-emission and climate-resilient development pathways, to achieve economic efficiency in directly securing emission reductions at cost, and to support equity in the distribution of resources. Based on this evaluation, the paper concludes that QP instruments can be used in conformity with these objectives, provided they are used as a complement to other funding instruments.

It ends by putting forward two examples of how QP instruments could be used in such a 'wholesale' fashion.
                    [post_title] => Quantity Performance Payment by Results - Operationalizing enhanced direct access for mitigation at the Green Climate Fund
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => quantity-performance-payment-by-results-operationalizing-enhanced-direct-access-for-mitigation-at-the-green-climate-fund
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-03-01 14:41:00
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-03-01 14:41:00
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/quantity-performance-payment-by-results-operationalizing-enhanced-direct-access-for-mitigation-at-the-green-climate-fund/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [6] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27477
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2013-06-24 10:04:07
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2013-06-24 09:04:07
                    [post_content] => This OIES submission to the UNFCCC Standing Committee on Finance on the occasion of its fourth meeting (15-17 June, Bonn, Germany) addresses one of the central questions of the main task of that meeting, namely to draft the text for the arrangements between the UNFCCC Conference of Parties and the Green Climate Fund: What does it mean for an Operating Entity of the UNFCCC Financial Mechanism to be accountable to the COP, and how does this relate to operationalizing Art. 11.3 (b)?"
                    [post_title] => ON ‘BEING ACCOUNTABLE’ - What does it mean for an Operating Entity of the UNFCCC Financial Mechanism to be accountable to the COP, and how does this relate to operationalizing Art. 11.3 (b)?
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => on-being-accountable-what-does-it-mean-for-an-operating-entity-of-the-unfccc-financial-mechanism-to-be-accountable-to-the-cop-and-how-does-this-relate-to-operationalizing-art-11
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 15:40:08
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 15:40:08
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/on-being-accountable-what-does-it-mean-for-an-operating-entity-of-the-unfccc-financial-mechanism-to-be-accountable-to-the-cop-and-how-does-this-relate-to-operationalizing-art-11/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [7] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27484
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2013-05-07 13:26:19
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2013-05-07 12:26:19
                    [post_content] => The Governing Instrument of the Green Climate Fund stipulates: The Board will consider
additional modalities that further enhance direct access, including through funding entities
with a view to enhancing country ownership of projects and programmes.

Unfortunately, it does not elaborate further either on the concept of ‘enhanced direct
access’ nor on the notion of a ‘funding entity’. The aim of this note is to fill this semantic
lacuna, and give a brief overview of a concrete example of the latter.
                    [post_title] => Information Note on the Green Climate Fund Business Model Framework
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => information-note-on-the-green-climate-fund-business-model-framework
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 15:39:06
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 15:39:06
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/information-note-on-the-green-climate-fund-business-model-framework/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [8] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27493
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2013-02-25 15:32:26
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2013-02-25 15:32:26
                    [post_content] => The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change implies that countries should shoulder costs and burdens of climate change in accordance with differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, but it does not indicate how these fairness parameters are to be quantified. In this OIES Paper, Benito Müller and Lavan Mahadeva provide a novel and distinctive methodology (‘Oxford Approach’) regarding quantifying the (economic) capability of countries as a contribution to assessments of fair cost/burden distributions, an issue of central importance in the upcoming international climate change debate.
                    [post_title] => The Oxford Approach - Operationalizing the UNFCCC Principle of 'Respective Capabilities'
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => the-oxford-approach-operationalizing-the-unfccc-principle-of-respective-capabilities
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-03-01 14:44:01
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-03-01 14:44:01
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/the-oxford-approach-operationalizing-the-unfccc-principle-of-respective-capabilities/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [9] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27494
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2013-02-20 20:31:27
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2013-02-20 20:31:27
                    [post_content] => At the second meeting of the Green Climate Fund (GCF) Board in October 2012, India announced they would prepare a submission with regards to the Board deliberations on a business model for the GCF. A consultation meeting was held in New Delhi on 15-16 February 2013 for which Benito Müller (Director Energy and Environment, OIES) was asked to contribute one of three background papers, focussing on access modalities and disbursement instruments. This Oxford Energy and Environment Brief is based on this background paper.
                    [post_title] => A Delhi Vision for the Green Climate Fund Business Model Framework - Some Thoughts on Access and Disbursement
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => a-delhi-vision-for-the-green-climate-fund-business-model-framework-some-thoughts-on-access-and-disbursement
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 15:36:48
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 15:36:48
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/a-delhi-vision-for-the-green-climate-fund-business-model-framework-some-thoughts-on-access-and-disbursement/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [10] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 28132
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2012-08-10 15:26:12
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2012-08-10 14:26:12
                    [post_content] => In recent years, public sector funding, in general, and for the support of activities in developing countries, in particular, has become more and more ‘results’ and ‘performance’ oriented. In this Oxford Energy and Environment Brief, Arunabha Ghosh (Council on Energy, Environment and Water, New Delhi), Benito Müller (OIES), William Pizer (Duke University), and Gernot Wagner (EDF, Columbia University) look at activities that are associated with quantitative performance indicators, i.e. performance assessed in terms of measured quantities − such as tonnes (of carbon), kWh, or hectares − as carried out by the private sector. The aim of the brief is to review options for the use of such Quantity-Performance (QP) instruments as a way of channelling public funds to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions in a cost-effective way.
                    [post_title] => Mobilizing the Private Sector: Quantity-Performance Instruments for Public Climate Funds
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => mobilizing-the-private-sector-quantity-performance-instruments-for-public-climate-funds
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-03-01 14:53:22
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-03-01 14:53:22
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/mobilizing-the-private-sector-quantity-performance-instruments-for-public-climate-funds-2/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [11] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 28186
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2012-03-21 11:50:33
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2012-03-21 11:50:33
                    [post_content] => The Green Climate Fund was established at Cancun in December 2010 as part of the effort to reform the financial mechanism of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Its Instrument was adopted in Durban in December 2011. Its involves observers from academia, NGOs and the private sector and takes in to account submissions by observes. To view the OIES Submissions please go to:

OIES Submission - GCF Observers

Preferred Enhaced Access - OIES Submission - BMF Berlin meeting
                    [post_title] => Submissions to the Green Climate Fund Board
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => submissions-to-the-green-climate-fund-board-2
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2012-03-21 11:50:33
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2012-03-21 11:50:33
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/submissions-to-the-green-climate-fund-board-2/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [12] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27546
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2012-03-02 09:49:18
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2012-03-02 09:49:18
                    [post_content] => This Oxford Energy and Environment Brief is the first of two papers by Benito Müller on the theme of ‘Equity and the Durban Platform’ as recently presented at the Centre for Policy Research in New Delhi. The Brief focuses on the question of how to operationalize the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities as enshrined in Article 3.1 of the UNFCCC. It does so by looking at the controversy about the introduction of international aviation in the EU Emission Trading Scheme as a case study and uses the proposed operationalization to suggest options for compromise in that dispute.
                    [post_title] => From Confrontation to Collaboration? CBDR and the EU ETS aviation dispute with developing countries
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => from-confrontation-to-collaboration-cbdr-and-the-eu-ets-aviation-dispute-with-developing-countries
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 15:24:46
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 15:24:46
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/from-confrontation-to-collaboration-cbdr-and-the-eu-ets-aviation-dispute-with-developing-countries/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [13] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 28209
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2011-10-03 10:13:51
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2011-10-03 09:13:51
                    [post_content] => This Oxford Energy and Environment Brief by Dr Benito Müller (Director Energy and Climate change at OIES) discusses a way in which the Kyoto Protocol could be used to provide the framework for a legally binding outcome in the current UN climate change Negotiations.
                    [post_title] => Plan C: The role of the Kyoto Protocol in a legally binding outcome
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => plan-c-the-role-of-the-kyoto-protocol-in-a-legally-binding-outcome-2
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 15:21:48
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 15:21:48
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/plan-c-the-role-of-the-kyoto-protocol-in-a-legally-binding-outcome-2/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [14] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 28213
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2011-08-15 16:38:42
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2011-08-15 15:38:42
                    [post_content] => The Transitional Committee was established at Cancun in December 2010 to design the new Green Climate Fund, as part of the effort to reform the financial mechanism of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change as part of the Cancun commitment by developed countries to mobilize up US$100 billion annually in support of climate change activities in developing countries. The Transitional Committee involves observers from academia, NGOs and the private sector and takes in to account submissions by observes. The following submissions were made through OIES:

Some further thoughts on the draft TC work plans

Submission of views regarding the questions for the first technical workshop of the Transitional Committee suggested by the co-facilitators of work stream I

Some lessons learned from the Adaptation Fund for the design of the Green Climate Fund - July 2011

The Role of Non-Governmental Actors

Dissecting the Green Climate Fund

Enhanced Direct Access
                    [post_title] => Transitional Committee Submissions
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => transitional-committee-submissions-2
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 15:21:17
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 15:21:17
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/transitional-committee-submissions-2/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [15] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 28239
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2011-01-01 00:00:52
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2011-01-01 00:00:52
                    [post_content] => This Oxford Energy and Environment Brief by Sven Harmeling and Benito Müller based on lessons learned particularly from the process of establishing the Global Fund puts forward five organizational elements for the work of the Transitional Committee: (i) Mutually respected leadership (ii) Specific drafting groups and clusters of work (iii) Broad expertise and skills to support the TC (iv) Active observer input to harness additional expertise (v) Broad regional and stakeholder consultations to increase support.
                    [post_title] => What to do now?: Elements for organizing the Transitional Committee to establish the Green Climate Fund based on lessons learned from the Global Fund experience
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => what-to-do-now-elements-for-organizing-the-transitional-committee-to-establish-the-green-climate-fund-based-on-lessons-learned-from-the-global-fund-experience-2
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 15:15:35
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 15:15:35
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/what-to-do-now-elements-for-organizing-the-transitional-committee-to-establish-the-green-climate-fund-based-on-lessons-learned-from-the-global-fund-experience-2/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [16] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 28240
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2011-01-01 00:00:17
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2011-01-01 00:00:17
                    [post_content] => In this Oxford Energy and Environment Brief Benito Müller identifies some of the main elements of the climate finance debate in the run up to the next UN climate conference to be held in Durban South Africa in December 2011. As concerns the establishment of the new Green Climate Fund the Brief argues for the inclusion and active participation of all relevant sectors of society in the design process. With regards to the issue of sources the Brief argues that the new fund will only be viable in the context of significant start-up funding and it identifies an existing innovative source of international funding to do this. Finally the Brief considers the issue of operationalising the new Standing Committee to support the governance of the UNFCCC financial mechanism.
                    [post_title] => Time to Roll Up the Sleeves – Even Higher!: Longer-term climate finance after Cancun
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => time-to-roll-up-the-sleeves-even-higher-longer-term-climate-finance-after-cancun-2
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 15:15:22
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 15:15:22
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/time-to-roll-up-the-sleeves-even-higher-longer-term-climate-finance-after-cancun-2/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [17] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 28244
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2010-11-01 00:00:30
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2010-11-01 00:00:30
                    [post_content] => While consensus on establishing a new multilateral climate fund is emerging, there are a number of as yet unresolved issues concerning how this should be done. One of themis the question: who exactly should be drafting the documents required for establishing such a fund? Benito Müller and Achala Chandani are proposing a Transitional Expert Panel as a compromise between the different positions currently put forward in the UNFCCC finance negotiations.
                    [post_title] => What Expertise? On who should be drafting the framework documents for a new Global Climate Fund
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => what-expertise-on-who-should-be-drafting-the-framework-documents-for-a-new-global-climate-fund-2
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 15:14:51
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 15:14:51
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/what-expertise-on-who-should-be-drafting-the-framework-documents-for-a-new-global-climate-fund-2/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [18] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27611
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2010-03-31 13:26:05
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2010-03-31 12:26:05
                    [post_content] => The objective of this Report is to explore the potential for addressing developing country greenhouse gas emissions at scale through bilateral ‘Joint Commitment Framework Agreements’ (JCFA). It focuses on the potential to reduce the growth of coal-based emissions in the Chinese power sector through large-scale collaboration between European and Chinese enterprises in the production of electricity from wind. The Report examines the proposition that under a Sino-European JCFA European companies will be more likely to collaborate with Chinese enterprises to transfer and develop low carbon technologies and know-how that will help to achieve jointly agreed carbon emission reductions in the Chinese power sector.
                    [post_title] => Addressing Large Developing Country Emissions: The case for strategic Sino-European collaboration under joint commitments
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => addressing-large-developing-country-emissions-the-case-for-strategic-sino-european-collaboration-under-joint-commitments
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-03-01 15:17:40
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-03-01 15:17:40
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/addressing-large-developing-country-emissions-the-case-for-strategic-sino-european-collaboration-under-joint-commitments/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [19] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 28255
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2010-03-02 17:39:20
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2010-03-02 17:39:20
                    [post_content] => This Energy and Environment Paper follows the original publication on the Refomred Financial Mechanism proposal (OIES EV 45). It analyses four areas of oversight:How to design decision making (processes and remits) for the UNFCCC COP and RFM executive body so as to ensure sufficient political oversight and buy-in without the danger of over-politicized micro-management of the RFM management of its financial flows. How to ensure proper stakeholder representation in particular how to design the selection of stakeholder representatives and how to design their role in the decision-making process.How to design independent oversight (audit monitoring and evaluation) procedures within the framework of existing legal arrangements which will provide sufficient safeguards against malpractice both at the international and the national level. How to oversee financial flows to ensure compliance with financial commitments.
                    [post_title] => The Reformed Financial Mechanism of the UNFCCC Part II: The Question of Oversight Post Copenhagen Synthesis Report
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => the-reformed-financial-mechanism-of-the-unfccc-part-ii-the-question-of-oversight-post-copenhagen-synthesis-report-2
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-03-01 15:22:33
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-03-01 15:22:33
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/the-reformed-financial-mechanism-of-the-unfccc-part-ii-the-question-of-oversight-post-copenhagen-synthesis-report-2/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [20] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27615
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2010-03-02 17:26:16
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2010-03-02 17:26:16
                    [post_content] => The OIES Energy and Environment paper by Dr Benito Müller looks at the recent UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen and evaluates what happened and suggests what lessons ought to be learned. Review - Teaching Climate Law
                    [post_title] => Copenhagen 2009: Failure or final wake-up call for our leaders?
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => copenhagen-2009-failure-or-final-wake-up-call-for-our-leaders
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 15:05:01
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 15:05:01
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/copenhagen-2009-failure-or-final-wake-up-call-for-our-leaders/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [21] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27618
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2010-03-01 00:00:04
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2010-03-01 00:00:04
                    [post_content] => In this Oxford Energy and Environment comment Dr Benito Müller (Director Energy and Environment at OIES) discusses some of the key options regarding how the (adaptation) quick start funding pledged under the Copenhagen Accord should be managed if we are to avoid a further deterioration of trust between the developed and the developing world.
                    [post_title] => No Trust Without Respect: Adaptation Quick Start Funding at the Cross Roads
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => no-trust-without-respect-adaptation-quick-start-funding-at-the-cross-roads
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 15:04:38
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 15:04:38
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/no-trust-without-respect-adaptation-quick-start-funding-at-the-cross-roads/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [22] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27627
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2009-12-01 00:00:51
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2009-12-01 00:00:51
                    [post_content] => The history of financial support for developing countries is seen by many as littered with disappointments and broken promises that have eroded trust to an unprecedented level. The aim of this Comment by Dr. Benito Müller. is to highlight this problem and to propose a solution through a system of certification and registration to be applied to payments towards such commitments.
                    [post_title] => On the Need to Certify: Oversight of compliance with financial commitments under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => on-the-need-to-certify-oversight-of-compliance-with-financial-commitments-under-the-un-framework-convention-on-climate-change
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 15:03:43
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 15:03:43
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/on-the-need-to-certify-oversight-of-compliance-with-financial-commitments-under-the-un-framework-convention-on-climate-change/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [23] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27630
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2009-11-01 00:00:47
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2009-11-01 00:00:47
                    [post_content] => In the debate on institutional arrangements for international climate finance a powerful mostly Northern school of thought contends that one should not create new institutions but only make use of existing ones. This Oxford Energy and Environment Comment by Dr Benito Müller analyzes the the basis of this contention and draws some implications for the current negotiations.
                    [post_title] => Procrustes’ Bed & Ockham’s Razor: The debate on existing institutions in climate finance
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => procrustes-bed-ockhams-razor-the-debate-on-existing-institutions-in-climate-finance
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 15:03:28
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 15:03:28
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/procrustes-bed-ockhams-razor-the-debate-on-existing-institutions-in-climate-finance/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [24] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 28274
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2009-11-01 00:00:41
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2009-11-01 00:00:41
                    [post_content] => In the current negotiations on the future institutional arrangements for international public climate change finance one of the most controversial issues that divides developed and developing countries is the concept of being 'under the authority of the COP'. In this OIES Energy and Environment Comment Dr. Benito Müller. looks into how this controversy could be resolved.
                    [post_title] => Under the Authority of the COP?
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => under-the-authority-of-the-cop-2
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 15:03:22
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 15:03:22
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/under-the-authority-of-the-cop-2/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [25] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27633
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2009-11-01 00:00:30
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2009-11-01 00:00:30
                    [post_content] => At the heart of any financial architecture debate is the question: who decides who gets how much and for what purpose? In this Comment Dr. Benito Müller. discusses the need to devolve funding decisions to the recipients as well as the need for joined-up decision-making through designated national funding entities.
                    [post_title] => The Time is Right! Devolution of funding decisions to designated national/regional climate change funding entities
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => the-time-is-right-devolution-of-funding-decisions-to-designated-nationalregional-climate-change-funding-entities
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 15:03:09
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 15:03:09
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/the-time-is-right-devolution-of-funding-decisions-to-designated-nationalregional-climate-change-funding-entities/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [26] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27635
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2009-10-01 00:00:09
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2009-09-30 23:00:09
                    [post_content] => The debate on institutional arrangements for climate finance. In this Oxford Energy and Environment Comment Dr Benito Müller Director Energy & Environment at OIES looks into the possibility of a compromise between the factions of the current debate on the institutional arrangements and governance of climate finance.
                    [post_title] => Is There Room for Compromise? The debate on institutional arrangements for climate finance
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => is-there-room-for-compromise-the-debate-on-institutional-arrangements-for-climate-finance
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 14:55:09
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 14:55:09
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/is-there-room-for-compromise-the-debate-on-institutional-arrangements-for-climate-finance/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [27] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27645
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2009-06-01 00:00:36
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2009-05-31 23:00:36
                    [post_content] => Dr Benito Müller (OIES Director Energy & Environment) argues that the intransigence of developed country finance ministries is threatening the current international climate change negotiations and the deal in Copenhagen. Dr. Benito Müller.
                    [post_title] => Are Treasuries killing the climate deal?
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => are-treasuries-killing-the-climate-deal
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 14:52:52
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 14:52:52
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/are-treasuries-killing-the-climate-deal/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [28] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27647
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2009-04-11 13:22:54
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2009-04-11 12:22:54
                    [post_content] => This OIES Energy and Environment Paper by Benito Müller and Luis Gomez-Echeverri is the first background paper on the topic of how to reform the Financial Mechanism of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change to make it fit for purpose to deal with the need to provide financing for climate change in developing countries without which there will be no deal in the forthcoming UN climate change conference in Copenhagen.
                    [post_title] => The Reformed Financial Mechanism of the UNFCCC Part I: Architecture and Governance
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => the-reformed-financial-mechanism-of-the-unfccc-part-i-architecture-and-governance
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 14:52:45
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 14:52:45
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/the-reformed-financial-mechanism-of-the-unfccc-part-i-architecture-and-governance/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [29] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27650
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2009-03-02 16:56:55
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2009-03-02 16:56:55
                    [post_content] => In this OIES Energy and Environment Paper, Dr Benito Müller (Director Energy and Environment at the OIES) looks at the controversial additionality criterion of the Clean Development Mechanism, and discusses some of the arguments for and against it. The paper concludes with an alternative interpretation of additionality which may overcome some of the key concerns that have been raised about the current interpretation.
                    [post_title] => Additionality in the Clean Development Mechanism: Why and What?
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => additionality-in-the-clean-development-mechanism-why-and-what
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 14:52:10
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 14:52:10
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/additionality-in-the-clean-development-mechanism-why-and-what/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [30] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 28311
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2008-10-01 00:00:57
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2008-09-30 23:00:57
                    [post_content] => Dr Benito Müller (Director Energy and Environment at the OIES) and Dr Prodipto Ghosh (Distinguished Fellow TERI, New Delhi, and former Secretary, Ministry of Environment and Forests, India) propose a way in which the Clean Development Mechanism can be used to implement the provisions of the UNFCCC Bali Action Plan on reducing developing country emissions.
                    [post_title] => Implementing the Bali Action Plan: What Role for the CDM?
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => implementing-the-bali-action-plan-what-role-for-the-cdm-2
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 14:45:37
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 14:45:37
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/implementing-the-bali-action-plan-what-role-for-the-cdm-2/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [31] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27678
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2008-03-02 16:54:49
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2008-03-02 16:54:49
                    [post_content] => 
                    [post_title] => To Earmark or Not to Earmark? A far-reaching debate on the use of auction revenue from (EU) Emissions Trading
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => to-earmark-or-not-to-earmark-a-far-reaching-debate-on-the-use-of-auction-revenue-from-eu-emissions-trading
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 14:44:40
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 14:44:40
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/to-earmark-or-not-to-earmark-a-far-reaching-debate-on-the-use-of-auction-revenue-from-eu-emissions-trading/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [32] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 28322
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2008-03-02 16:46:54
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2008-03-02 16:46:54
                    [post_content] => 
                    [post_title] => International Adaptation Funding: The Need for an Innovative and Strategic Approach
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => international-adaptation-funding-the-need-for-an-innovative-and-strategic-approach-2
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 14:44:33
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 14:44:33
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/international-adaptation-funding-the-need-for-an-innovative-and-strategic-approach-2/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [33] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27687
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2008-03-01 00:00:22
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2008-03-01 00:00:22
                    [post_content] => Benito Müller analyses the recent UN climate change conference, with a particular focus on what happened on the last day, and what implications that will have for the upcoming negotiations.
                    [post_title] => Bali 2007: On the road again!
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => bali-2007-on-the-road-again
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 14:43:32
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 14:43:32
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/bali-2007-on-the-road-again/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [34] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 28333
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2008-02-01 00:00:25
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2008-02-01 00:00:25
                    [post_content] => Benito Müller and Harald Winkler are looking at the latest World Bank initiative to set up three 'Climate Investment Funds' -- a Clean Technology Fund (Target size US$5-10bn); a $1bn Forest Investment Fund, and a $1bn Adaptation Pilot Fund, and find that the proposed governance of these funds is completely out of step with recent thinking in development circles, indeed with recent events in the field of international funding on climate change
                    [post_title] => One Step Forward, Two Steps Back? The Governance of the World Bank Climate Investment Funds
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => one-step-forward-two-steps-back-the-governance-of-the-world-bank-climate-investment-funds-2
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 14:43:11
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 14:43:11
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/one-step-forward-two-steps-back-the-governance-of-the-world-bank-climate-investment-funds-2/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [35] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27698
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2007-10-01 00:00:27
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2007-09-30 23:00:27
                    [post_content] => In his latest Energy and Environment Comment, Dr Benito Müller looks at the recent controversy about discouraging consumers particularly in the UK from buying produce of least developed countries because of their 'food miles', i.e. the transport carbon emissions (especially from air freight), and the effect that such an environmental consumer boycott has on the efforts to eradicate poverty in these countries. 
                    [post_title] => Food Miles or Poverty Eradication: The moral duty to eat African strawberries at Christmas
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => food-miles-or-poverty-eradication-the-moral-duty-to-eat-african-strawberries-at-christmas
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 14:13:49
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 14:13:49
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/food-miles-or-poverty-eradication-the-moral-duty-to-eat-african-strawberries-at-christmas/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [36] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27706
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2007-07-01 00:00:07
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2007-06-30 23:00:07
                    [post_content] => This opinion piece by Dr Benito Müller argues that probably the only way of reprieving the Russian Convention track proposal is by way of a generalised version of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), allowing for sectoral, programmatic, or generally policy based emission reduction activities in developing countries (‘policy CDM’), together with ‘CER Put Options’ issued by Annex II Parties in order to limit the carbon investment risk of such policy CDM activities for the developing country host Parties (in accordance with UNFCCC Article 4.1)
                    [post_title] => Bonn 2007: Russian Proposals, Policy CDM, and ‘CER Put Options’ (CERPOs)
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => bonn-2007-russian-proposals-policy-cdm-and-cer-put-options-cerpos
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 14:13:03
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 14:13:03
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/bonn-2007-russian-proposals-policy-cdm-and-cer-put-options-cerpos/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [37] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27745
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2007-03-02 14:20:45
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2007-03-02 14:20:45
                    [post_content] => 
                    [post_title] => Nairobi 2006: Trust and the Future of Adaptation Funding
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => nairobi-2006-trust-and-the-future-of-adaptation-funding
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 14:12:20
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 14:12:20
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/nairobi-2006-trust-and-the-future-of-adaptation-funding/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [38] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27769
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2007-01-01 00:00:16
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2007-01-01 00:00:16
                    [post_content] => Has the recent climate change conference in Nairobi really been the failure that some would have us believe? In this comment, Dr Benito Müller argues that, on the contrary, there has been some considerable success – at least in the context of adaptation to adverse impact in general, and adaptation funding in particular; issues which are at the heart of the climate change agenda for many developing countries, particularly the host continent.
                    [post_title] => The Nairobi Climate Change Conference: A breakthrough for adaptation funding
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => the-nairobi-climate-change-conference-a-breakthrough-for-adaptation-funding
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 14:10:43
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 14:10:43
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/the-nairobi-climate-change-conference-a-breakthrough-for-adaptation-funding/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [39] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27772
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2006-12-01 00:00:35
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2006-12-01 00:00:35
                    [post_content] => Dr Benito Müller and Dr Saleemul Huq argue that the time has come for people who have the means to face the responsibility for their emissions, regardless of whether they live in the developed or the developing world.
                    [post_title] => The Rich Must Face Their Personal Carbon Responsibility
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => the-rich-must-face-their-personal-carbon-responsibility
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 14:10:26
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 14:10:26
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/the-rich-must-face-their-personal-carbon-responsibility/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [40] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27802
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2006-06-01 00:00:43
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2006-05-31 23:00:43
                    [post_content] => Mutual distrust can seriously endanger international relations. In the first of the re-launched OIES website comments, Dr Benito Müller exposes the unfortunate deep divisions between Europe and many lesser developed countries in some key negotiations of the UN climate change convention's Subsidiary Bodies which were held in Bonn, Germany 17-26 May
                    [post_title] => Climate of Distrust
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => climate-of-distrust
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 14:08:14
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 14:08:14
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/climate-of-distrust/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [41] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27806
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2006-06-01 00:00:03
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2006-05-31 23:00:03
                    [post_content] => A recent World Bank Report estimates that 'climate-proofing' investments in developing countries - excluding additional investment needed to reduce the exposure to current climate risks and climate related damage that will have already occurred - will cost between $9 and $41 billion annually. In this background paper prepared for the Gleneagles Dialogue, Dr Benito Müller looks at how these rather large funding needs could be dealt with.
                    [post_title] => Adaptation Funding and the World Bank Investment Framework Initiative
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => adaptation-funding-and-the-world-bank-investment-framework-initiative
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 14:07:58
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 14:07:58
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/adaptation-funding-and-the-world-bank-investment-framework-initiative/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [42] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27817
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2006-03-02 14:09:21
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2006-03-02 14:09:21
                    [post_content] => 
                    [post_title] => IATAL – an outline proposal for an International Air Travel Adaption Levy
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => iatal-an-outline-proposal-for-an-international-air-travel-adaption-levy
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-03-01 15:36:49
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-03-01 15:36:50
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/iatal-an-outline-proposal-for-an-international-air-travel-adaption-levy/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [43] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27819
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2006-03-02 14:07:50
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2006-03-02 14:07:50
                    [post_content] => 
                    [post_title] => Montreal 2005: What Happened and What it Means
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => montreal-2005-what-happened-and-what-it-means
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 14:06:45
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 14:06:45
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/montreal-2005-what-happened-and-what-it-means/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [44] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27879
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2004-09-01 00:00:57
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2004-08-31 23:00:57
                    [post_content] => Benito Mueller, Michael Grubb and Lucy Butler examine the past relationships between national carbon dioxide emissions and GDP in order to help inform the current debate regarding emission projections.
                    [post_title] => The Relationship Between Carbon Dioxide Emissions and Economic Growth
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => the-relationship-between-carbon-dioxide-emissions-and-economic-growth
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 14:03:14
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 14:03:14
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/the-relationship-between-carbon-dioxide-emissions-and-economic-growth/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [45] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27886
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2004-08-01 00:00:19
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2004-07-31 23:00:19
                    [post_content] => The ratification of the Kyoto Protocol in Russia ultimately lies in the hands of President Putin. Will he go down in history as the man who saved the Kyoto Protocol? Benito Muller and Alexander Golub comment on why he should.

 Click here to read the full article.
                    [post_title] => Kyoto's Future Lies in Putin's Hands
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => kyotos-future-lies-in-putins-hands
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 14:02:35
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 14:02:35
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/kyotos-future-lies-in-putins-hands/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [46] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27903
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2004-05-01 00:00:41
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2004-04-30 23:00:41
                    [post_content] => Andrei Illarionov, President Putin's economic advisor, has been vocally advocating the view that ratification of the Kyoto Protocol by Russia would be inconsistent with the President's plan to double GDP over the next ten years. This presentation shows that Mr Illarionov's claims are based on a fundamentally flawed methodology.
                    [post_title] => Problems with Mr Illarionov's Methodology
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => problems-with-mr-illarionovs-methodology
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 14:01:01
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 14:01:01
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/problems-with-mr-illarionovs-methodology/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [47] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27907
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2004-03-02 14:03:18
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2004-03-02 14:03:18
                    [post_content] => 
                    [post_title] => Exploring the Carbon Kuznets Hypothesis
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => exploring-the-carbon-kuznets-hypothesis
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-03-01 15:47:08
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-03-01 15:47:08
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/exploring-the-carbon-kuznets-hypothesis/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [48] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27909
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2004-03-02 13:56:32
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2004-03-02 13:56:32
                    [post_content] => 
                    [post_title] => The Kyoto Protocol: Russian Opportunities
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => the-kyoto-protocol-russian-opportunities
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 14:00:39
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 14:00:39
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/the-kyoto-protocol-russian-opportunities/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [49] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27944
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2003-03-02 13:52:25
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2003-03-02 13:52:25
                    [post_content] => 
                    [post_title] => Framing Future Commitments: A Pilot Study on the Evolution of the UNFCCC Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Regime
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => framing-future-commitments-a-pilot-study-on-the-evolution-of-the-unfccc-greenhouse-gas-mitigation-regime
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-05-19 12:11:06
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-05-19 11:11:06
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/framing-future-commitments-a-pilot-study-on-the-evolution-of-the-unfccc-greenhouse-gas-mitigation-regime/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [50] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27972
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2002-03-02 13:49:05
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2002-03-02 13:49:05
                    [post_content] => 
                    [post_title] => Equity in Global Climate Change: The Great Divide
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => equity-in-global-climate-change-the-great-divide
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 13:56:37
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 13:56:37
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/equity-in-global-climate-change-the-great-divide/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [51] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27983
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2001-03-02 13:32:21
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2001-03-02 13:32:21
                    [post_content] => 
                    [post_title] => Fair Compromise in a Morally Complex World: The Allocation of Greenhouse Gas Emission Permits Between Industrialized and Developing Countries
                    [post_excerpt] => 
                    [post_status] => publish
                    [comment_status] => closed
                    [ping_status] => closed
                    [post_password] => 
                    [post_name] => fair-compromise-in-a-morally-complex-world-the-allocation-of-greenhouse-gas-emission-permits-between-industrialized-and-developing-countries
                    [to_ping] => 
                    [pinged] => 
                    [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 13:56:05
                    [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 13:56:05
                    [post_content_filtered] => 
                    [post_parent] => 0
                    [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/fair-compromise-in-a-morally-complex-world-the-allocation-of-greenhouse-gas-emission-permits-between-industrialized-and-developing-countries/
                    [menu_order] => 0
                    [post_type] => publications
                    [post_mime_type] => 
                    [comment_count] => 0
                    [filter] => raw
                )

            [52] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 27990
                    [post_author] => 1
                    [post_date] => 2000-12-01 00:00:11
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2000-12-01 00:00:11
                    [post_content] => On Saturday 25 November Dutch Environment Minister Jan Pronk, President of the UN climate change conference at The Hague, suspended proceedings after a days extension until May of next year. What did happen in these final days of this conference for which expectations were so high? According to the following-day editions of America's most influential dailies:
'The crunch came Saturday because of the varying interpretations by the Americans and some Western Europeans of the Kyoto Protocol. The United States insists that it and other nations should be able to earn credits toward emission-reduction targets because of existing or future forests and farmland, which soak up carbon dioxide and offset some emissions from factory smokestacks, cars and other sources. Many Europeans see that as rewarding a country for doing nothing and insist on deep reductions in the burning of fossil fuels. U.S. representatives originally wanted to credit America's woodlands with sponging up 310 million tons of carbon yearly. Faced with international and environmental opposition, they slashed that figure to 125 million tons.' Los Angeles Times 'With the conference lurching toward disaster, Britain's deputy prime minister, John Prescott, stepped forward late Friday with a compromise plan that called on the United States to restrict its use of the emissions-trading scheme and carbon sinks formula. U.S. and British sources said the proposal had been hatched in a lengthy telephone discussion between President Clinton and British Prime Minister Tony Blair. After huddling all night, a small group of U.S. and European delegates reached a tentative deal. The United States agreed to make a bigger effort in domestic reductions and to reduce carbon credits from its forests and farmlands that could be subtracted from its emissions quota to no more than 75 million tons, about one-fourth the level it was originally seeking. … But when the compromise was presented to the 15 EU countries for final approval, Germany and Denmark said the agreement was intolerable.' Washington Post
The blame for the suspension of The Hague, according to this narrative, falls squarely on Green intransigence within the European camp. But are things really as simple as that? Maybe not. Consider the statement by the head of the US delegation, Frank Loy, reported in the same edition of the Washington Post: 'Nations can only negotiate abroad what they believe they can ratify at home, …The United States is not in the business of signing up to agreements it knows it cannot fulfil. We don't make promises we can't keep.' In his inimitable way, Loy has summed up two of the key questions bedevilling the current international climate change regime: As so often, the answer to the first of these questions has to be both 'yes' and 'no,' depending on the chosen interpretation of the relevant targets listed in Annex B of the Protocol. The reason for this is creative ambiguity in the wording of the relevant Articles of the Protocol. Article 3.1, for one, requires that Parties to 'ensure that their aggregate anthropogenic carbon dioxide equivalent emissions of the greenhouse gases … do not exceed their … their quantified emission limitation and reduction commitments inscribed in Annex B'[emphasis added] which, not unreasonably, might be read as referring to nothing more than greenhouse gases emitted into the atmosphere. Yet Article 3.3 demands that the measure for compliance are 'the net changes in greenhouse gas emissions by sources and removals by sinks resulting from direct human-induced land-use change and forestry activities.' Moreover, while the same Article limits sinks to 'afforestation, reforestation and deforestation since 1990,' Article 3.4 explicitly envisages the inclusion of 'additional human-induced activities related to … removals by sinks in the agricultural soils and the land-use change and forestry categories' - albeit, strictly speaking, only after the Protocol has come into force! This apparent leeway between narrower and very wide conceptions of a 'sink' can make a significant difference as to whether the Kyoto targets can and will be met. Depending on what is to be counted as a greenhouse gas absorbing sink, some countries might well be able to meet their Kyoto commitments without any action whatsoever. Indeed, the interpretation proposed by the US at The Hague - which went far beyond the limited Article 3.3 conception - was seen by many as an attempt of trying to win the game by simply shifting the goal posts. 'So what?' one might ask. Nature does not care how net emission levels are kept below the required cap, as long as they are. Again, things unfortunately are not quite as simple as that. Net emissions, as compliance measure, are dependent of the type of sources and sinks taken into consideration, and widening the concept of a sink is likely to increase the greenhouse gas concentration under compliance relative to what would be the case under a narrower conception. More importantly, the use of the relatively short-term storage mechanisms available in land-use and forestry management to 'sponge up' fossil carbon which was out of circulation for million of years does nothing to prevent an addition of the total carbon present in the climate relevant cycles of emission and absorption. As a means to stabilising atmospheric carbon concentrations it is about as effective as bottling the water from a leak in the captain's cabin for storage in the ship's hull: the cabin will remain dry, but only in the short run. In other words, there are valid reasons why one might wish to resist introducing a wide conception of sinks into the climate regime. But why did the US delegation feel the need to propose precisely this sort of wide interpretation in the first place? While there may have been a realisation that, given current emission levels, the US will need some additional 'flexibility' in order to be able to comply with its target, I do not believe that this was main the motive, in particular in view of the very large concession offers made during the final stages of the conference. After all, as Frank Loy himself pointed out, no one would offer a concession which would leave them unable to comply. The key reason, I submit, was one of domestic US policy, namely to return with a text which might mollify a Senate which has hitherto proven to be an implacable foe of the Kyoto Protocol - which brings us to question number two: what are the chances of Senate ratification? While it is certainly true that a text which would mean inevitable non-compliance would not be ratified, the converse is not necessarily the case. There is no guarantee whatsoever that the Senate would ratify a treaty even if it were convinced that the US could comply. Obviously, chances for ratification might improve if the text would de facto release the US from any obligation to take action, but even then there is no guarantee. The fact is that, left to its own devices and the influence of certain lobbying groups, the Senate is very unlikely to change its stance towards anything labelled 'Kyoto.' This is why future US delegations to climate change negotiations will need domestic help vis-à-vis Congress (through grassroots pressures or any other means) to be able to constructively participate in the negotiations - in particular since the Kyoto Protocol is, and always was meant to be, only the first step on the long road to stabilising the global climate at an acceptable level. This, of course, will take some time. The near-term aim must be for the key players to co-operate by leaving aside for later consideration issues - such as the EU proposal on capping emission trade - which are primarily contentious because of implications for the potential on US ratification, in order to put together a text for the May meeting which can be ratified by sufficiently many parties for the Protocol to come into force by 2002. Such a text must satisfy three necessary conditions: (i) it must be sufficiently specified for the CDM to begin generating early credits; (ii) it must neither nullify the already limited environmental effectiveness of the Protocol, nor jeopardises the environmental integrity of the entire regime (by building in unsustainable 'loopholes' which will have to be carried over into post-Kyoto agreements under the Convention), and last but by no means least; (iii) it has to resolve the issues of funding and adverse effects, technology transfer and adaptation under the convention. This Comment is based on 'The Hague Climate Conference: Impressions of the North American Press Coverage' by Benito Müller (available on request form the author at mueller@ermine.ox.ac.uk). [post_title] => Climate at The Hague: What Happened, Why, and What Now? [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => closed [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => climate-at-the-hague-what-happened-why-and-what-now [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2000-12-01 00:00:11 [post_modified_gmt] => 2000-12-01 00:00:11 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/climate-at-the-hague-what-happened-why-and-what-now/ [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => publications [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw ) [53] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 28006 [post_author] => 1 [post_date] => 2000-02-01 00:00:08 [post_date_gmt] => 2000-02-01 00:00:08 [post_content] => A growing number of mainly US analysts and academics have voiced their opinion that the UN Protocol concerning the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions adopted in Kyoto on 11 December 1997 is doomed to failure because of US Congress hostility. Indeed, it does not seem very likely that Congress will ratify the Kyoto Protocol at all, let alone that it will opt for 'early ratification' as desired by the EU and Japan. But does this really imply 'the failure' of the Protocol? Of course, to those of the rather ethno-myopic view that non-acceptance by, or in, the USA is in itself tantamount to a failure, the answer must logically be affirmative. Anyone else, however, will only be able to provide an answer after a somewhat more critical analysis of aims and purposes. After all, 'failure' here can only mean the failure to achieve a purpose. And it does not take a great deal of reflection to realise that the performance of the Kyoto Protocol can be judged relative to a variety of such aims and purposes For one, there is if we wish the 'legal' (or 'procedural') aim of coming into force. Like any other international treaty, the Kyoto Protocol contains specifications concerning the conditions for becoming legally binding under international law. Article 25 of the Protocol specifies, in particular, that it 'shall enter into force on the ninetieth day after the date on which not less than 55 Parties ..., incorporating Parties included in Annex I which accounted in total for at least 55 per cent of the total carbon dioxide emissions for 1990 of the Parties included in Annex I, have deposited their instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession.' Although the USA - with around 35 per cent of 1990 Annex I emissions - does command considerable leverage in this context, it is not in a position to block a coming into force outright. As far as substance is concerned, the Kyoto Protocol can be judged by reference to its overall environmental aim, namely to reduce average yearly Annex I emissions between 2008 and 2012 to around 5 per cent below their 1990 levels. Would US non-ratification inevitably lead to a failure in achieving this aim? Strictly speaking, the answer again has to be negative, for the crucial parameter in this case is not ratification but implementation. The question thus has to be: would US non-ratification mean that the Protocol would not be implemented in the USA? The fact is that there are quite a few international treaties which are signed by the USA and which they keep without ratifying them. However, given the strictures put into law by the Congress against any US attempts to implement the Protocol before it is ratified, it would seem unlikely that the Kyoto Protocol could become one of them. In other words, even though not inevitable, it is most likely that a non-ratification of the Protocol by the USA would imply no significant US mitigation measures, and this would wreck the Protocol's overall environmental aim. There is, however, another substantive aim of the Protocol which should not be overlooked, namely to provide the means for industrialised countries to demonstrate their 'leadership' required to convince the developing world to join in abatement efforts. This 'political' aim differs from the ones discussed so-far in that the conditions under which it would be achieved cannot easily be quantified, as they are largely a matter of (political) perception. While it seems plausible to say that a failure of the Protocol to come into force would be sufficient to wreck this political aim, and a failure to ratify by Liechtenstein alone would not, it is not at all clear what effect a failure to ratify by the USA (perceived by many developing countries as the main 'culprit') would have. However, if the USA were the only (major) Annex I country not to ratify the Protocol, then the developing world just might decide that they would join a successor agreement (if only to brand the USA as the 'environmental pariah'). In other words, the answer to our question about the power of the US Congress to wreck the Kyoto Protocol is 'yes and no': By not ratifying, Congress practically ensures that the environmental aim of the Protocol is not achieved. However, provided that rest of Annex I does ratify, Congress' refusal will not be able to wreck the procedural aim of the Protocol, and chances are that the same is true of its political aim. In light of this, should Annex I countries strive to ratify even if US ratification is not forthcoming? It might be argued that since the Kyoto Protocol is an environmental treaty, its environmental aim must have precedence, and since this aim will not be achievable without the USA, the whole affair should not be pursued. Yet such an argument rests on a profound misunderstanding of the nature of this Protocol. The Protocol must be understood as a first step in achieving the environmental aim of its 'parent agreement', the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (which, incidentally, is in force). In light of this aim, namely to stabilise atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations at an acceptable level, the Kyoto target is mainly symbolic. The main aim of the Kyoto Protocol is therefore not its environmental target but its political purpose, which, as I argued, just could be achieved, provided the Protocol comes into force. In short, Annex I policy makers should not get mesmerised by Congress' misconception of being able to bring the Kyoto Protocol to its knees. If they wish the Protocol to succeed in its main aim, they should quietly go ahead with ratification and ignore Congressional posturing. [post_title] => The Kyoto Protocol: Does US Ratification Really Matter? [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => closed [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => the-kyoto-protocol-does-us-ratification-really-matter [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2000-02-01 00:00:08 [post_modified_gmt] => 2000-02-01 00:00:08 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/the-kyoto-protocol-does-us-ratification-really-matter/ [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => publications [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw ) [54] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 28032 [post_author] => 1 [post_date] => 1999-03-02 13:27:24 [post_date_gmt] => 1999-03-02 13:27:24 [post_content] => [post_title] => The Modelling of Anthropogenic Methane Emissions: Methodology and Estimates [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => closed [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => the-modelling-of-anthropogenic-methane-emissions-methodology-and-estimates [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2016-03-01 16:00:53 [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-03-01 16:00:53 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/the-modelling-of-anthropogenic-methane-emissions-methodology-and-estimates/ [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => publications [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw ) [55] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 28047 [post_author] => 1 [post_date] => 1998-03-02 13:02:49 [post_date_gmt] => 1998-03-02 13:02:49 [post_content] => [post_title] => Justice in Global Warming Negotiations: How to Obtain a Procedurally Fair Compromise [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => closed [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => justice-in-global-warming-negotiations-how-to-obtain-a-procedurally-fair-compromise [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 13:54:00 [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 13:54:00 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/justice-in-global-warming-negotiations-how-to-obtain-a-procedurally-fair-compromise/ [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => publications [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw ) [56] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 28059 [post_author] => 1 [post_date] => 1997-03-02 12:56:11 [post_date_gmt] => 1997-03-02 12:56:11 [post_content] => [post_title] => Is More Information always Better? The Effect of Information on the Validity of Contingent Valuations [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => closed [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => is-more-information-always-better-the-effect-of-information-on-the-validity-of-contingent-valuations [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 13:52:46 [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 13:52:46 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/is-more-information-always-better-the-effect-of-information-on-the-validity-of-contingent-valuations/ [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => publications [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw ) ) [post_count] => 57 [current_post] => -1 [in_the_loop] => [post] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 27429 [post_author] => 1 [post_date] => 2014-02-28 12:37:17 [post_date_gmt] => 2014-02-28 12:37:17 [post_content] => This Review Note for the Sixth Meeting of the Green Climate Fund Board analyses the GCF Paper ?Policies and Procedures for the Initial Allocation of Fund Resources? (GCF/B.06/05) against the background of some of the main lessons drawn in a recently completed research project on resource allocation methodologies, as summarized in How will the Green Climate Fund allocate its money? [post_title] => Comments regarding 'Policies and Procedures for the Initial Allocation of Fund Resources' [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => closed [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => comments-regarding-policies-and-procedures-for-the-initial-allocation-of-fund-resources [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2016-02-29 15:48:48 [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-02-29 15:48:48 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/publications/comments-regarding-policies-and-procedures-for-the-initial-allocation-of-fund-resources/ [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => publications [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw ) [comment_count] => 0 [current_comment] => -1 [found_posts] => 57 [max_num_pages] => 0 [max_num_comment_pages] => 0 [is_single] => [is_preview] => [is_page] => [is_archive] => 1 [is_date] => [is_year] => [is_month] => [is_day] => [is_time] => [is_author] => [is_category] => [is_tag] => [is_tax] => [is_search] => [is_feed] => [is_comment_feed] => [is_trackback] => [is_home] => [is_404] => [is_embed] => [is_paged] => [is_admin] => [is_attachment] => [is_singular] => [is_robots] => [is_posts_page] => [is_post_type_archive] => 1 [query_vars_hash:WP_Query:private] => 9ec6d587e9087006378dcdcfe8453de2 [query_vars_changed:WP_Query:private] => [thumbnails_cached] => [stopwords:WP_Query:private] => [compat_fields:WP_Query:private] => Array ( [0] => query_vars_hash [1] => query_vars_changed ) [compat_methods:WP_Query:private] => Array ( [0] => init_query_flags [1] => parse_tax_query ) )

Latest Publications by Benito Müller

Books by Benito Müller

Latest Tweets from @OxfordEnergy

  • OIES' @thierry_bros quoted on Sonatrach changes https://t.co/C2f3RROp1q via @LesEchos

    March 27th

  • New OIES study on Russian LNG: A 12-year tax holiday + no export tax on LNG improved project economics for Yamal LN… https://t.co/HZej1LYRny

    March 24th

  • Novatek will be Russia's LNG leader while Gazprom will focus on pipeline projects, OIES via @AAEnergyNews https://t.co/JOB85QXAyc

    March 23rd

Sign up for our Newsletter

Register your email address here and we will send you notification of new publications, comment, articles etc. automatically.