Seite - (000231) - in Evaluating Climate Change Action for Sustainable Development

and co-benefits have been achieved (though the Gold Standard does not hold a monopolyonpro-poor projects). There is an underlying development narrative associatedwith pro-poor carbon projects, namely, that market-driven development tools can attract private resources into public services resulting in awin-winoutcome 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).Thischapterbuildsuponthesediscussions to identifysomeof theconditions thatmightmake “win-win” outcomesmore likely: what kinds of elements deter- mine 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 designdocuments; as a research topic, they are under-represented in the literature. This chapter argues that technologydissemination strategiesmeritmore focus and attention given its bearing on livelihood outcomes formarket-driven climate pro- jects targeting the poor. The chapter is structured as followed. A literature review on household inter- ventions in the carbon market establishes that critiques of win-win market approaches and public-private partnership models are well documented and that there isanestablishedneedfor further researchon theconditionsandvariables 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 evalu- ation 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 thecases, alongsideananalyticaldiscussionas to the implicationsofeach distribution strategy. Finally, the chapter concludes by arguing that the success or failure of a green technology to benefit its target population relates asmuch to the question of “how is the technology distributed?” as to “what is distributed in the firstplace?”Theconclusionaddressesareas for further researchandsuggestsanew round of questions for a continued exploration of the conditions for designing climatefinance projects that benefit the poor. 12.2 LiteratureReview 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 theBlackBoxofTechnologyDistribution,Development Potential. . . 215