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