Table 2

The Accra Accounting Options; advantages and disadvantages.

option

Art. 3.3

Art. 3.4

advantage (+)/disadvantage (-)

0 (KP rules)

mandatory GNA

voluntary, FM: GNA with fixed cap, other 3.4: NNA

+ simple, no complicated accounting rules

+ uncertainties and disturbances can be left out (voluntary)

+ almost no incentives for increasing biospheric GHG removals

- factoring out arbitrarily dealt with by cap

- unfair treatment of windfalls/liabilities

- 'voluntary excuse' and cap reduces incentives to do more

- Complicated rules, different in the LULUCF sector to other sectors

1

mandatory GNA

1A: voluntary 1B: mandatory FM: GNA with discount factor, other 3.4: NNA

+ incentives increased by discount factor

- high opportunity costs for (100-df) stock increase

2

mandatory GNA

mandatory NNA

+ stronger incentives for mitigation action

+ pragmatic factoring out by cancelling out

+ a base period can diminish the random impact of a base year

+ HWPs fully accounted

+ same NNA accounting rules across all sectors

+ accounting for 'what the atmosphere sees'

+(FM for a stable level of optimum forest carbon stock: incentive for SFM up to a certain level)

3

mandatory GNA

FM: NNA with forward looking baseline

+ ex-post adjustment allows factoring out of natural disturbances

- complicated review of baseline setting and ex-post adjustments

- unclear methodological process for baseline setting

4

land based NNA accounting according to the convention (FL, CL, GL, WL, S, OL)

+ land-based for all managed lands

+ LULUCF as any other sector

+ simplification and broader coverage on mandatory basis

+ reduced uncertainties

+ remove any perverse incentives arising from partial or inconsistent accounting rules

- potential of compliance risks and the issue of effects due to natural disturbances, age structure and harvesting cycles

Krug et al. Carbon Balance and Management 2009 4:5   doi:10.1186/1750-0680-4-5