Transparency and Accountability Mechanisms in Place Public Private Partnership

Transparency and Accountability Mechanisms in Place

On this page: Achieving transparency and accountability is crucial for the successful implementation of policies relating to ERCs. Read more below, or visit Strategic Guidance for Country System Assessments, Guidance for Countries in Assessing ERC Projects, or Mobilizing ERC Finance.

I3: Transparency and accountability mechanisms in place. Ensuring transparency and accountability is crucial for the successful implementation of policies relating to ERCs. Governments can achieve this by implementing regular public reporting of ERC activities and results as they relate to the state, conducting stakeholder engagement for key policy developments, and establishing mechanisms to provide accountability to the public and ERC market participants. This approach fosters trust and confidence in the ERC ecosystem, which is vital for its growth and development.

Guideposts for best practice
Regular publication on status of policy implementation, including investment to date, performance metrics, key risks, and mitigating steps. Regular public consultation and stakeholders' engagement to develop inclusive ERC-enabling policies incorporating inputs from stakeholders. Established independent grievance and whistleblowing mechanism to ensure accountability for both project developers and regulators. [Based on country context] Appropriate technology and mechanism to safeguard integrity of registry data.
Sequencing for roadmap
Impact	Medium–A transparent and accountable institutional setup which collaborates intimately with stakeholders will enable investors to take a longer-term view of resourcing and funding	Phase 3: Enabling long-term sustainability of the ERC ecosystem
Resources needed	High–Comprehensive T&A mechanism requires full buy -in from all stakeholders involved and can be hard to measure its success, one weak link within the institution can compromise the effort

Key activities have been observed in leading markets around the world, and taking from non-voluntary or ERC executions but also for compliance-based policies, to establish transparency and accountability mechanisms:

Mechanisms	Role of mandate	Examples
Public consultations on policies	Chance for stakeholders to review and understand the rationale behind a planned policy for a carbon crediting system to increase public confidence.	South Korea. ETS requires public consultation on proposed changes for use of offsets or distribution of allowances. Fiji. Fiji Government developed national public consultation and engagement requirement and framework for engaging the public in policy creation, which was followed by the creation of Climate Change Act 2021.
Regular reporting	Regular reporting by governments in carbon market registries involves publishing transparent and accessible carbon credit information on emission reduction projects.	Australia. CER publishes data on a monthly basis for project registration, issuance, and transaction activity in its registry, allowing for public access to track offset project activity.¹ California. CARB publishes data on participants’ compliance instruments, offset credits, and facility emissions, as well as program documents, auction results, and more on the agency's website on a quarterly basis.²
Safeguard integrity of data	Clear procedures and security measures (e.g., access control, audit trails, encryption, back-ups, etc.,) for data verification and quality control of data maintain credibility of data published in registry systems.	EU. EU ETS registry uses state-of-the-art encryption and access control technology to ensure that only authorized users can access the system. Audit trails are also used to record all transfers and usage of allowances.
Complaint mechanisms	Mechanisms in place for complaint handling for dissatisfaction with agency's services.	Australia. CER outlines complaint management system, including how to file complaints, complaint handling processes and timelines for response, and external review options if a complainant is dissatisfied with the handling of complaint.³

Footnote 1: Carbon Markets

Footnote 2: ARB Offset Credit Issuance

Footnote 3: Australia CER Complaints Handling Policy

Note(s):

This section is intended to be a living document and will be reviewed at regular intervals. The Guidelines have not been prepared with any specific transaction in mind and are meant to serve only as general guidance. It is therefore critical that the Guidelines be reviewed and adapted for specific transactions. Unless expressly stated otherwise, the findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in the Materials in this Site are those of the various authors of the Materials and are not necessarily those of The World Bank Group, its member institutions, or their respective Boards of Executive Directors or member countries. For feedback on the content of this section of the website or suggestions for links or materials that could be included, please contact the Public-Private Partnership Resource Center at ppp@worldbank.org.

Download Page as PDF

Updated: August 8, 2024