This page outlines item 1 ("Develop a taxonomy of available climate action-related standards in a way relevant to the mission of the CA2SIG") of the scope of the Hyperledger CA2SIG Standards Working Group.
...
- Understanding the physical processes
- Taking / allocating responsibility for contributions to climate change (regulation and offsetting is a are special case cases of this)
- Choose between alternative courses of action based on the foreseen outcomes
Classification according to objectives
...
A preliminary conceptual map following this approach is being developed at: https://kumu.io/cjpauw/climate-change-standards#impact-pathway-approach/transactions
Interoperability
Comparing across positions on the impact pathway is difficult (although not in principle inconceivable). It is, for example, difficult to directly compare an action related to a pressure (direct emission like driving driving a car or operating a power stationstation (a pressure in the DPSEEA framework presented above) with an action aimed at changing the actions of others (such as implementing a policy, providing an incentive or providing information). The
In the DPSEEA framework, the first type of activity resorts under Pressures while the second addresses Drivers.
- Christiaan PauwI think some more elaboration here will be beneficial.
As such it is difficult to compare these two actions directly. Standard can help making difficult comparisons sich as these easier and consistent between cases (or al least point out what can be compared and what not).
What is standardised in climate mitigation standards?
...
There is clearly a difference between accounting for the greenhouse gas emissions of a whole country or whole organisation and accounting for the emissions of a single process. Protocol, standards and methods operate at different levels of complexity and aggregatation and involves different levels of nesting. This is a potential cause of double counting because...
- Complete.
Activities and events
...