and co-benefits have been achieved (though the Gold Standard does not hold a
monopoly on pro-poor projects).
There is an underlying development narrative associated with pro-poor carbon
projects, namely, that market-driven development tools can attract private
resources into public services resulting in a win-win outcome for the environment
and for the poor. The premise of the “win-win” outcome has been challenged
(Simon et al. 2012) and the need to add granularity and precision to discussions
on private-public partnerships is also well-established (Kwame Sundaram et al.
2016). This chapter builds upon these discussions to identify some of the conditions
that might make “win-win” outcomes more likely: what kinds of elements determine the likelihood of local economic benefit when aid organizations, donor
agencies, and private actors join together? Analysis reveals that the technology
dissemination strategy is a significant, yet presently invisible, driver for pro-poor
outcomes. Administratively, dissemination strategies are absent from project
design documents; as a research topic, they are under-represented in the literature.
This chapter argues that technology dissemination strategies merit more focus and
attention given its bearing on livelihood outcomes for market-driven climate projects targeting the poor.
The chapter is structured as followed. A literature review on household interventions in the carbon market establishes that critiques of win-win market
approaches and public-private partnership models are well documented and that
there is an established need for further research on the conditions and variables that
determine whether innovative financing partnerships will lead to their intended
outcomes. The literature review also reviews current tools for evaluating
low-emissions development projects and presents an adapted version of an evaluation tool forwarded by the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves. This adapted
version of the tool, named the “Livelihood Index,” provides a rough indicator on
projects’ local economic impact, specifically on a project’s ability to catalyze
skilled and long-term employment opportunities at the local level. The second
section describes the methods of analysis and the parameters for case study
selection. Next, the cases are described. The final section applies the Livelihood
Index to the cases, alongside an analytical discussion as to the implications of each
distribution strategy. Finally, the chapter concludes by arguing that the success or
failure of a green technology to benefit its target population relates as much to the
question of “how is the technology distributed?” as to “what is distributed in the
first place?” The conclusion addresses areas for further research and suggests a new
round of questions for a continued exploration of the conditions for designing
climate finance projects that benefit the poor.
12.2 Literature Review
Carbon projects are, by definition, complicated subjects for impact evaluations.
They represent dense policy experiments due to their pursuit of multiple goals,
i.e. to support local sustainable development while mitigating global climate
12 Unpacking the Black Box of Technology Distribution, Development Potential. . .
215
monopoly on pro-poor projects).
There is an underlying development narrative associated with pro-poor carbon
projects, namely, that market-driven development tools can attract private
resources into public services resulting in a win-win outcome for the environment
and for the poor. The premise of the “win-win” outcome has been challenged
(Simon et al. 2012) and the need to add granularity and precision to discussions
on private-public partnerships is also well-established (Kwame Sundaram et al.
2016). This chapter builds upon these discussions to identify some of the conditions
that might make “win-win” outcomes more likely: what kinds of elements determine the likelihood of local economic benefit when aid organizations, donor
agencies, and private actors join together? Analysis reveals that the technology
dissemination strategy is a significant, yet presently invisible, driver for pro-poor
outcomes. Administratively, dissemination strategies are absent from project
design documents; as a research topic, they are under-represented in the literature.
This chapter argues that technology dissemination strategies merit more focus and
attention given its bearing on livelihood outcomes for market-driven climate projects targeting the poor.
The chapter is structured as followed. A literature review on household interventions in the carbon market establishes that critiques of win-win market
approaches and public-private partnership models are well documented and that
there is an established need for further research on the conditions and variables that
determine whether innovative financing partnerships will lead to their intended
outcomes. The literature review also reviews current tools for evaluating
low-emissions development projects and presents an adapted version of an evaluation tool forwarded by the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves. This adapted
version of the tool, named the “Livelihood Index,” provides a rough indicator on
projects’ local economic impact, specifically on a project’s ability to catalyze
skilled and long-term employment opportunities at the local level. The second
section describes the methods of analysis and the parameters for case study
selection. Next, the cases are described. The final section applies the Livelihood
Index to the cases, alongside an analytical discussion as to the implications of each
distribution strategy. Finally, the chapter concludes by arguing that the success or
failure of a green technology to benefit its target population relates as much to the
question of “how is the technology distributed?” as to “what is distributed in the
first place?” The conclusion addresses areas for further research and suggests a new
round of questions for a continued exploration of the conditions for designing
climate finance projects that benefit the poor.
12.2 Literature Review
Carbon projects are, by definition, complicated subjects for impact evaluations.
They represent dense policy experiments due to their pursuit of multiple goals,
i.e. to support local sustainable development while mitigating global climate
12 Unpacking the Black Box of Technology Distribution, Development Potential. . .
215