|
back to mind map
CDM Methodologies and Their Managerial and Technological Basis
International relations prime over emissions, technical change and economics. These dimensions can be aligned to a degree when they are build into the accounting framework underlying CDM, the CDM methodologies. Based on my engineering and my ethnography experience, I seek opportunities to demonstrate this aligning. In particular by focussing on the factors that shape technical changes and by defining baselines and emission scenarios so that technical changes get most emission reduction credits. The table below shows CDM parameter and institutional aspects for four “technological trajectories“ (the columns), prominent subjects of science studies and in the innovation literature1, that shape the environmental modernization of industrial economies. I use it to check any CDM activity in order to complete its parameters and to achieve more impact on global emissions trading.
|
Science - based trajectories
|
Scale intensive trajectories
|
Information intensive trajectories
|
Specialized supplier trajectories
|
typical technologies
|
nuclear energy
|
automotive
|
electricity distribution
|
power plants, recycling
|
technical change modus operanti
|
patent royalties, get access to research
|
consumer services
|
perception of system characteristics
|
business alliances
|
| | emission dimension:
|
dominant CDM barriers
|
additionality
|
monitoring
|
baselines are mostly current policy
|
conservativeness in linked systems
|
alternatives to current CDM
|
sector baselines
|
efficiency standards
|
network access regulation
|
?
|
methodology parts and crucial professions required for novel approaches
|
R&D management
|
marketing, retailers
|
regulators, industry associations
|
manufacturers' customer relations
|
| | institutional dimension:
|
examples and their paradigms
|
Bakelite2 Kuhnian authority
|
refrigerators, consumption style3
|
Aramis4, QWERTY5 politics
|
Deltaplan6 professional habitus
|
major actors
|
scientists, patent lawyers
|
marketing, advertisers
|
monopolists, government
|
engineers, designers
|
determined by
|
logic of discoveries, adherence to scientific values
|
firm's mastery of market demand
|
infrastructure, company law
|
pick buyers' needs, matching user
|
players
|
few producers few buyers
|
many producers mass buyers
|
few producers mass buyers
|
some producers some buyers
|
seamless web7 of change history
|
discovery versus networks
|
performance versus meaning
|
system versus power
|
performance versus institutions
|
| | political dimension:
|
effective tools for sustainability
|
science policy assessment
|
Blue Angel, popularising metrics
|
new legitimacy, politics
|
voluntary codes
|
democracy
|
science shops, concensus fora8, US: courts
|
market power
|
cases of public deliberation9
|
expert consultation procedures and accessibility
|
Tasks in methodology making that I find to be effective:
compare monitoring uncertainties and regulatory risks
align eligibility criteria, barriers and monitoring
provide engineering and thermodynamics to elaborate emission calculations
survey commercial players in a technological field
elaborate marketing roles of CDM project formats
find economic niches for new methodologies and gaps in existing methodologies
adapt methodologies to carbon traders' interests and carbon market segments
compare organisational solutions of firms for CDM project implementation
outline plans and teams for methodology and PDD production
steer the assembling of business, technical and regulatory components of PDDs and methodologies
design stakeholder consultation and auxiliary documents
1Dosi G, 1982, "Technological Paradigms and Technological Trajectories: A Suggested Interpretation of the Dynamics and Directions of Technical Change", Research Policy, 11: 147-162.
2Bijker W, 1995, Of Bicycles, Bakelite and Bulbs. Towards a Theory of Sociotechnical Change, Cambridge: MIT Press.
3Campbell C, 2002, "The craft consumer: Culture, craft and consumption in a postmodern society", Journal of consumer culture, 5:23-42.
4Latour B, 1996, Aramis, or, The Love of Technology, Cambridge: Harvard UP.
5David P, 1997, Path dependence and the quest for historical economics: one more chorus of the ballad of QWERTY, Discussion papers in economic and social history no.20, Oxford UP.
6Bijker W, 2002, "The Oosterschelde storm surge barrier: a test case for Dutch water technology, management and politics", Technology and Culture, 43/3: 569-584.
7Hughes T. "The evolution of large technological systems", In: Bijker W, Hughes T, Pinch T, editors, 1987, The social construction of technological systems: new directions in the sociology and history of technology, Cambridge: MIT Press. Smith M, Marx L, editors, 1994, Does technology drive history?: the dilemma of technological determinism, Cambridge: MIT Press.
8Joss S, 1998, "Danish consensus conferences as a model of participatory technology assessment", Science and public policy, 25/1: 2-22.
9Jasanoff S, 2005, Designs on nature: science and democracy in Europe and in the United States, Princeton UP.
|