|
4.3. Choices Relating to Inclusion and Definition of Activities
The decision about which activities should be included and the decision as
to how broadly those activities should be defined are interdependent (see Figure
4-5).
|
|
Figure 4-5: Decision tree to assist in determining
which additional activities to include under Article 3.4 of Kyoto Protocol.
|
4.3.1. Which Additional Activities are to Be Included?
The Parties have two broad choices with respect to including activities under
Article 3.4:
- Include a limited, selected set of activities ("some" in Figure
4-5)
- Include all activities that can be shown to have consequences on the atmospheric
concentration of GHGs.
A limited set of activities will be easier to implement and verify; if activities
are narrowly defined (see Section 4.3.2), however, only
a fraction of the true atmospheric impact of LULUCF will be included within
inventories and reported amounts. A narrow definition could also result in displacement
of atmospheric impact from activities that are included into activities that
are not included. Because specific, narrowly defined activities are typically
concentrated within particular geographic areas, a short, limited list may favor
some regions over other regions. Precise definition of what is meant by each
specific activity would be more critical under this option.
Including all possible activities would encourage Parties to increase the land
area that would likely be measured and reported, leading toward full carbon
accounting. The potential for undetected leakage would be reduced-as would the
consequences of leakage if it does occur because an impact created in another
land area would be measured wherever it occurred. For this reason, precision
of definition of activities is less critical under this option.
|