Valentin Bellassen, Nicolas Stephan, Marion Afriat, Emilie Alberola, Alexandra Barker, Jean Pierre Chang, Caspar Chiquet, Ian Cochran, Mariana Deheza, Chris Dimopoulos, Claudine Foucherot, Guillaume Jacquier, Romain Morel, Roderick Robinson, Igor Shishlov

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract / Description of output

This chapter brings together all the previous ones. Based on the detailed presentation and analysis of the MRV requirements of so many different carbon pricing and management mechanisms – hereafter “carbon pricing mechanisms,” it synthesizes and compares how they answered to the five cross-cutting questions identified in the general introduction to the book:• What are the MRV requirements? • What are the costs for entities to meet these requirements? • Is a flexible trade-off between requirements and costs allowed? • Is requirements stringency adapted to the amount of emissions at stake (materiality)? • What is the balance between comparability and information relevance? MRV requirements across schemes The first cross-cutting question – what are the MRV requirements? – is too large to be answered in a synthetic way. This section thus focuses on two components of this question that have a major impact on MRV costs: requirements pertaining to third-party verification and those pertaining to monitoring uncertainty. Verification requirements are broadly similar across the board Most carbon pricing mechanisms impose a verification of the reports by an independent third party. Verification requirements are broadly similar across carbon pricing mechanisms:• the third party must be accredited by a regulator for GHG emissions audits and this accreditation tends to be sector-specific; • the third party must assess whether the methods used and the reporting format comply with the relevant guidelines; • the third party must assess the accuracy, i.e., the absence of bias, of the reported figures; • the regulator is allowed to question the opinion of the auditor, but seldom does so;• the third party tends to be paid directly by the verified entity. Although this creates a potential conflict of interest, the risk of losing the accreditation is a much stronger incentive and keeps auditors from being complacent with their client (Cormier and Bellassen, 2013).

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationAccounting for Carbon
Subtitle of host publicationMonitoring, Reporting and Verifying Emissions in the Climate Economy
PublisherCambridge University Press
Number of pages28
ISBN (Electronic)9781316162262
ISBN (Print)9781107098480
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2015


Dive into the research topics of 'Synthesis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this