tom heinemann engagement process - the gold standard · 2020-04-02 · this document provides a...
TRANSCRIPT
EngagementProcess:TomHeinemannClimateDocumentaryThisdocumentprovidesasummaryoftheinteractionswehadwithTomHeinemann,whilsthewasconductingresearchforhisdocumentaryoncarbonmarketsinapost-Kyotoworld.
16October2012TomcalledTheGoldStandardofficeandhadaconversationaboutthecarbonmarketingeneralandoutlinedthe
synopsisofhisdocumentary–i.e.anoverallinvestigationintocarbontradingaftertheendoftheKyotoProtocol.
Weofferedtobeofwhateverassistancewecould.Tomsaidhewoulddosomewebresearchandgetbacktousif
herequired.
28March2013
TomemailedTheGoldStandardaskingforourresponsetoseveralquestionsfollowingavisitofhistoKenyato
VesteraardFrandsen’sCarbonforWaterproject.Heclaimedthatduringhisvisitthemajorityofpeoplehespoketo
didnotusetheLifestrawfiltertocleansetheirwater,whichseemedtocontradictthepublicityaroundtheproject
andthenumberofcarboncreditsTheGoldStandardhadissuedtoVestergaardinthefirstissuanceperiod.Heasked
forspecificinformationonthevalidation/verificationprocess,thenumberofVERsissuedtodateandourimpression
ofhisinterviewsthatpeopledonotusetheLifestraw.
2April2013
TheGoldStandardrespondedtoTomprovidinganswerstohisvalidation/verificationquestions,includingour
processofNGOandotherstakeholderfeedbackthatisapartofeveryreview.Weexplainedtohimthatno2013
verificationreportwas,asyet,availableonlineasthisprocesswasunderway.Wewereopenthatwehadreceived
questionsfromwithinourNGOsupporternetworkwithregardstotheLifestrawprojectandwewereintheprocess
ofinvestigatingthem.WealsoencouragedTomtoprovideuswithfurtherinformationandmorespecificfeedback
fromhisvisittoKenyaas,ifthereareconcernsaboutanyGoldStandardprojects,itisourdutyastheregulator,to
addressthem.
7April2013
TomrespondedtoTheGoldStandard’spreviousemailaskingforspecificinformationabouttheNGOsconcernsand
askingwhentheinvestigationwouldbemadepublic.HealsodeclinedtoprovideTheGoldStandardwithanyfurther
informationwithregardstohismediainterviewsinKenya,citingthatasajournalisthecouldnotrevealanysources
ordetailsasidefromthoseinterviewsthatwouldbepubliclyairedinhisdocumentary.
8April2013
TheGoldStandardhadalongconversationwithTom,talkinghimthroughallofhispointsandansweringallofhis
questionsaboutGoldStandardprocesses,andVestergaardinparticular,includingthereviewprocessthatwas
underwaywithbothTheGoldStandardTechnicalTeamandTACinvolved,theNGOquestionsaroundusagerates
thathadbeenraisedandtheconceptofsuppresseddemand.TheGoldStandard,onceagain,invitedTomtoprovide
hisinformationtoourTACtobetakenintoconsiderationhoweverhedeclined.Uponbeingpressed,Tomdidadmit
thathedidn’tdo‘thatmany’interviews’10,20,100?’‘oh,nowaynear100,morethan10’,alsoadmittingthathis
interviewswere‘investigativejournalism’,notempirical,randomsample,scientificallyrelevantsurveysofwhichany
resultswouldbetakenseriously.HealsooutlinedthathehadspokentoaneconomistattheUniversityof
Copenhagenwhohadtoldhimsuppresseddemandwasguessworkandlikelookingintoacrystalball.WhenThe
GoldStandardrespondedbyexplainingtheconcept,andthehigh-levelgovernmentworkthathadbeendone
aroundsuppresseddemand,heendedthecall.
16April2013
TheGoldStandardproactivelyemailedTomanupdatefollowingaTACmeetingduringwhichtheCarbonforWater
projectwasdiscussed.Reiteratingtheconversationheldthepreviousweek,TheGoldStandardoutlinedourissuance
processandtheabilityofNGOsandallstakeholderstoinputandqueryprojects.TheGoldStandardagainoutlinedin
detailthat3separatesurveysallrecordedarounda92%usageratefortheLifestrawintheprojectareaandthe
methodologiesbehindthesesurveys.Italsooutlinedtheprocessofreviewunderwayandhighlightedthatthedelay
ofthesecondissuanceofcreditsillustratedhowseriouslywetookthereviewprocess.Forathirdtime,TheGold
StandardinvitedTomtoprovidefurtherinformationofhisallegednon-usageofLifestrawfilters–outliningthat
whilsthisinterviewswereunlikelytobestatisticallyrelevanttheymayprovideimportantcomparisonswithother
surveyresultsandthereforebeusefulinareviewoftheproject.
Tomrespondedonthesamedayquestioningthatthreesurveysfoundanidentical92%usagerate,againreiterating
thathebelievedhisinterviewsshoweddifferentlyandaskingforthesurveyresults.
TheGoldStandardrespondedthatthesurveyresultswerethepropertyofVestergaardFrandsenandhewouldneed
tocontactthemtosecurethemandclarifiedthatthethreesurveysfoundsimilarusagerates,notidenticalusage
ratesandthatcreditingwasbasedupon92%asthatwasthelowestusagenumber.
9May2013
TomwrotetoTheGoldStandardthankingusforprovidingdetailsofourpipelineandaskedhowmanyGSprojects
usethesuppresseddemandmethodologytocalculateemissionreductions/creditissuance.
15May2013
TheGoldStandardrespondedhavingaskedPerspectivesforacomprehensiveexplanationofsuppresseddemand,
givenAbhishek’sfeedbackthatallprojectsthatfollowtheCDM,tosomeextent,takesuppresseddemandinto
account.TheGoldStandardprovidedTomwithAxelMichelowa’ssummaryoftheconcept.GSalsoproactively
updatedTom1.31millioncreditswouldshortlyissueforCarbonforWater.GSalsotoldTomthatthisisnotthefull
numberofcreditsbecause,whilstweandourNGOsupporterswerecomfortablethattheprojectwasdelivering
robustemissionreductionsrelatingtotheuseofLifestrawthatexceedthisvolume,wewerealsohavingsome
additionalindependentresearchundertakeninordertobecertainoftheusagerates.GSdidreiteratethathislower
thanrequestedissuancewasanormalpartofourfeedbackprocess.
18May2013
Tomsentanemailoutliningsomeofhisfinalpassagesinthefilminordertoensurethathehadnotmademistakes.
21May2013
GSrepliedtoTomtocorrect/clarifymanyofhispassages,including:
• HismisunderstandingofhowmanypeopleboiltheirwaterinKenyaandhowmanypeoplewouldboiltheir
waterunderasuppresseddemandmethodologyiftheywereableandanexplanationthatthetwofigures
areirrelevanttoeachotherandarenotcomparable.
• HismisunderstandingandmisrepresentationofsuppresseddemandandhowmanyGSprojectshave
elementsofsuppresseddemandincludedintheirmethodologies,includingthatitisusedthroughoutcarbon
marketsunderCDMmeths.
• HismisrepresentationthatGSestimateshowmanycreditsareissuedovercertainperiods,correctingthat
GSistheregulatorthereforecertifiescreditswhenanissuanceisrequestedbyprojectdevelopersand
perhapsprojectdevelopersestimatethenumberofcreditsoverthelifetimeofaproject.AllfutureGScredit
issuanceforanyprojectisdependentonwhetherourrulesaremetoverthelifetimeofaproject.
• Thatwearenotcreditinga92%usagerate–thatthisnumberispreciselythefocusofthefurtheranalysis
wearecurrentlyundertaking.
24May2013
TomwrotetosayhewouldcorrecthismistakesandrequestedaninterviewwithAdrianashesaidhefoundthe25%
currentboilingrateandthe79%boilingrateusedinsuppresseddemandcalculationshighlyrelevant.Hewantedan
interviewtoatightdeadline.SeveralemailsensuredculminatinginhisstatementthathewouldsayTheGold
Standardwasnotpreparedtobeinterviewed,whichwascorrectedbyanexplanationthatAdrianwastravelling(in
WashingtonDC)andAbhishekwasinIndia.HeagreedtosaythatitwasnotpossibletogetaninterviewwithGS.
Tomwrotetosayhedidnotthinkwehadprovidedadequateanswerstotheconceptofsuppresseddemand,nor
hadweprovidedsufficientcommentonthewomenhehadfilmedinKakamega.
25May2013
GSrespondedthatwehadansweredhisquestionsonsuppresseddemandhowevertheissueshewasraisingwere
morephilosophicalandquestioningaconceptattheheartoftheCDM–establishedandsupportedbytheUNand
nationalgovernments.Forabroadermarket/intellectualperspectiveonhisquestionswesuggestedeitherAxel
Michelowaor,e.g.BMU.InrelationtotheinterviewsheconductedwithwomenintheKakamegaareaGS
respondedagainthat,ashehadpreviouslyacknowledgedhisinterviewswerenotpartofarepresentative,random
samplesurvey.Furtherwerespondedthathehadnotprovideduswithanyfurtherdetailsasidefromageneral
statementthereforewithoutknowingmorespecificallyhowmanywomenhespoketoandwhere,itwasvery
difficultforustocommentfurther.
27May2013
Tomrespondedthathewasnotsatisfiedwithouranswersandwehadfailedtoadequatelyaddressthesuppressed
demandconceptinrelationtoLifestrawinparticularandthenumberofcreditsissued.Healsorespondedthathe
didnotunderstandwhythepercentageofpeoplewhocurrentlyboiltheirwaterisnotcomparabletothosewho
wouldunderasuppresseddemandmethodology.InrelationtohisinterviewswiththewomeninKakamega,hewas
alsonothappywithouranswers,andsharedthathehadnotreceivedanysurveydocumentationfromVestergaard.
Fromourperspectiveitfeltlikehewasunwillingtounderstandtheconceptofsuppresseddemand.Thisprojectis
notaboutwhatpeoplewouldhavedoneinthefuturetotreatwateriftheyhadtheresources.Accesstosafewater
isabasichumanright.Iftheworldwasafairerplace,peopleshouldhavebeenboilingwateralongtimeago.And
wearenotcreditingthevolumeofwaterpeoplearetreatingwithLifestraw,butwecreditthebasichumanneedas
pertheWHO,whichisamaximumof6litres/person/day.Withoutthismethodology,disadvantagedcommunities
wouldnotbeabletoaccessorbenefitfromcleantechnologies,suchasinterventionsthatprovidesafewater,
fundedbyclimatefinancemechanisms.
Formoreinformationaboutourworkonsuppresseddemand:
http://www.goldstandard.org/sites/default/files/documents/climate_policy_brief_final_lo-res.pdf