technology, whether or not they replace it, whether or not it is appropriate for their
local settings, and how their livelihoods are enhanced in terms of social, environmental and economic outcomes. This body of literature is crucial for the discussion
of carbon finance evaluation and effectiveness, as it addresses whether and how
climate-compatible technologies can enhance the lives of target communities while
supporting the global goal of climate change mitigation and adaptation. However,
user-focused studies cannot address a primary assumption within the environmental
markets policy narrative, namely, that market approaches support the development
of local economies and are therefore more empowering than the traditional aid
model.
The Livelihood Index is derived from the GACC’s conceptual framework on
social impacts from cookstove projects, which are often carbon finance projects as
well. It adapts GACC’s broad notion of “involvement in the value chain” on the far
left of the diagram, and converts the listed categories of project involvement into
“actors” whose jobs are assessed for evidence of an enhanced livelihood and social
impact: Investors; SME owners and executives; selection and design of clean
cooking technologies; production of clean cooking fuels/stoves; distribution of
clean fuels/stoves; after sales service of clean stoves; borrowers (supply-side).
These categories are adapted to the broader range of project types and the specific
range or actors when carbon credit creation is involved: (1) Carbon credit buyers/
investors; project developers (i.e. executives) and SMEs (when applicable); clean
technology producers; clean technology distributors; after sales service agents;
borrowers and users. In addition, we have added the third party validator and
verifier to the supply chain, an actor whose role is specifically created by the carbon
market to validate the quantifications associated with greenhouse gas emissions
Fig. 12.1 GACC social impact, conceptual framework
218
J. Hyman
local settings, and how their livelihoods are enhanced in terms of social, environmental and economic outcomes. This body of literature is crucial for the discussion
of carbon finance evaluation and effectiveness, as it addresses whether and how
climate-compatible technologies can enhance the lives of target communities while
supporting the global goal of climate change mitigation and adaptation. However,
user-focused studies cannot address a primary assumption within the environmental
markets policy narrative, namely, that market approaches support the development
of local economies and are therefore more empowering than the traditional aid
model.
The Livelihood Index is derived from the GACC’s conceptual framework on
social impacts from cookstove projects, which are often carbon finance projects as
well. It adapts GACC’s broad notion of “involvement in the value chain” on the far
left of the diagram, and converts the listed categories of project involvement into
“actors” whose jobs are assessed for evidence of an enhanced livelihood and social
impact: Investors; SME owners and executives; selection and design of clean
cooking technologies; production of clean cooking fuels/stoves; distribution of
clean fuels/stoves; after sales service of clean stoves; borrowers (supply-side).
These categories are adapted to the broader range of project types and the specific
range or actors when carbon credit creation is involved: (1) Carbon credit buyers/
investors; project developers (i.e. executives) and SMEs (when applicable); clean
technology producers; clean technology distributors; after sales service agents;
borrowers and users. In addition, we have added the third party validator and
verifier to the supply chain, an actor whose role is specifically created by the carbon
market to validate the quantifications associated with greenhouse gas emissions
Fig. 12.1 GACC social impact, conceptual framework
218
J. Hyman