Indicators and Scales
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Research Collection Master Thesis CDM projects under the Kyoto Protocol of the UNFCCC a methodology for sustainable development assessment and an application in South Africa Author(s): Heuberger, Renat; Sutter, Christoph Publication Date: 2003 Permanent Link: https://doi.org/10.3929/ethz-a-004498711 Rights / License: In Copyright - Non-Commercial Use Permitted This page was generated automatically upon download from the ETH Zurich Research Collection. For more information please consult the Terms of use. ETH Library CDM Projects under the Kyoto Protocol of the UNFCCC: A Methodology for Sustainable Development Assessment and an Application in South Africa Diploma Thesis of Renat Heuberger In cooperation with Christoph Sutter Received by Prof. Dieter Imboden Institute of Environmental Physics, Energy & Climate Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) Zurich, January 2003 CDM Projects under the Kyoto Protocol of the UNFCCC: A Methodology for Sustainable Development Assessment and an Application in South Africa Diploma Thesis of Renat Heuberger In cooperation with Christoph Sutter Received by Prof. Dieter Imboden Institute of Environmental Physics, Energy & Climate Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) Zurich, January 2003 2 Sustainable Development Assessment of CDM Projects - ETH Zurich, Energy & Climate Acknowledgements I would like to express special thanks to Alan Brent, University of Pretoria, for the fruitful collaboration and his valuable support. As well, I would like to thank the participants in the survey as well as the developers of the assessed CDM project proposals for their time and the interesting discussions. A list of the contacted people in South Africa is provided in appendix 3. Inger Kaergaard was a perfect travel and discussion partner during the case study. Aeneas Wanner has helped with the interviews and has conducted additional research in the field of housing projects. Finally, many thanks to Christoph Sutter, who was an excellent supervisor of this thesis. Renat Heuberger, Zurich, January 2003 contact: [email protected] Abbreviations ACP African, Caribbean and Pacific (countries) AHP Analytic Hierarchy Process CDM Clean Development Mechanism CER Certified Emission Reduction DEAT Department of Environmental Affairs & Tourism DNA Designated National Authority DOE Designated Operational Entity EDRC Energy & Development Research Center (University of Cape Town) EIA Environmental Impact Assessment GCCC Government Committee on Climate Change GGP Gross Geographical Product GHG Greenhouse Gases KP Kyoto Protocol LCA Life Cycle Assessment LNG Liquified Natural Gas LFG Landfill Gas LULUCF Land use, land use change, and forestry (type of CDM projects) MAUT Multi-Attributive Utility Theory MCDA Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis NCCC National Committee on Climate Change (forum in South Africa) NEDLAC National Economic Development and Labour Council NSS National Strategy Study (on the Clean Development Mechanism) SA South Africa SD Sustainable Development SSN Southsouthnorth UCT University of Cape Town UP University of Pretoria UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change WSSD World Summit on Sustainable Development 3 Sustainable Development Assessment of CDM Projects - ETH Zurich, Energy & Climate Table of Content ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS..............................................................................................3 ABBREVIATIONS ...........................................................................................................3 SUMMARY........................................................................................................................6 INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................7 REQUIREMENTS FOR SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENTS....................................................... 8 THREE CONCEPTS OF SUSTAINABILITY CRITERIA ............................................................. 8 EXISTING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT INDICATORS........................................................ 9 Indicators on a National Level..........................................................................................9 Indicators on a Project Level..........................................................................................10 THE GOAL OF THIS PAPER.............................................................................................. 14 PART I: THE PROPOSED METHODOLOGY – MULTI-ATTRIBUTIVE UTILITY THEORY FOR SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT OF CDM PROJECTS..........15 THE METHODOLOGY IN BRIEF.......................................................................................... 16 MULTI-ATTRIBUTIVE UTILITY THEORY............................................................................. 16 STEP 1 – THE SET OF SUSTAINABILITY CRITERIA ........................................................... 18 1.1 About criteria and indicators .....................................................................................18 1.2 Procedure to derive the pre-defined set of SD criteria ................................................18 1.3 Sustainability Criteria: The Objective Tree.................................................................19 1.4 Temporal and local system boundaries .....................................................................20 STEP 2 – INDICATORS TO MEASURE THE CRITERIA ......................................................... 20 2.1 How to define measurable indicators ........................................................................20 2.2 Quantitative and Qualitative Indicators......................................................................21 2.3 Scales for the Indicators – the Concept of Utility........................................................23 2.4 Categorization of the indicators for the Case Study in South Africa .............................25 STEP 3 – WEIGHTING THE CRITERIA .............................................................................. 26 3.1 Methods to Weight Criteria.......................................................................................26 3.2 Different Ways to Conduct the Survey ......................................................................29 3.3 Who should assess the criteria?...............................................................................30 3.4 Uncertainties / Inconsistency / Remarks ...................................................................31 3.5 Direct Weighting and AHP: Comparison of the methods in a Case Study ....................32 STEP 4 – ASSESSMENT OF CDM PROJECT PROPOSALS ................................................ 35 STEP 5 – AGGREGATION OF THE RESULTS...................................................................... 35 PART II: APPLICATION IN SOUTH AFRICA – A CASE STUDY........................38 CDM APPROVAL IN SOUTH AFRICA – BACKGROUND AND C URRENT DISCUSSION .......... 38 The CDM process: Institutions and Stakeholders ............................................................38 Host Country Approval – Perspectives and Interests.......................................................40 SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN THE SOUTH AFRICAN CONTEXT.................................... 44 STEP 1 – THE SET OF SUSTAINABILITY CRITERIA ........................................................... 45 STEP 2 – INDICATORS AND SCALES ................................................................................ 45 STEP 3 – WEIGHTING THE CRITERIA ............................................................................... 45 Weighting the Criteria – Survey .....................................................................................45 Results from the survey.................................................................................................47 4 Sustainable Development Assessment of CDM Projects - ETH Zurich, Energy & Climate STEP 4 – ASSESSMENT OF CDM PROJECT PROPOSALS ................................................ 51 Project Pipeline ............................................................................................................51 Project 1 – Energy Efficient Tunnel Kiln for a Chrome Plant .............................................52 Project 2 – Methane Capturing and Electricity Generation in Waste Water Plant ...............54 Project 3 – Methane Capturing and Electricity / Fuel Generation on Landfill Site...............56 Housing Projects ..........................................................................................................58 STEP 5 – AGGREGATION OF THE RESULTS...................................................................... 59 Finding the Overall Utility of a Project .............................................................................59 Sensitivity Analysis .......................................................................................................62 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS .........................................................................64 DISCUSSION OF THE METHODOLOGY ............................................................................... 64 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................ 66 Conclusions Regarding the Methodology........................................................................66 Lessons Learned ..........................................................................................................67 The way forward...........................................................................................................69