【文章內(nèi)容簡(jiǎn)介】 international application, the proponent needs to find buyers of carbon credit, pass the designated operational entities (DOE) validation, and clear the registration assessment by the CDM Executive Board (EB). This registration process normally takes more than one year and there is also a risk of failure of registration at some point. The second risk is the prepayment of transaction costs, which include PDD preparation costs, negotiation costs, DOE validation costs, registration costs, monitoring costs, verification costs, consultant fee, and the charge by the DNA. In addition, the unit transaction cost is larger for smaller projects. The third risk is associated with the gap between the estimated and actual amount of credits issued. This could happen for example in the case of methane recovery projects at landfill sites. Another problem specific to China is that there is a discrepancy between the CDMEB rule of additionality and the related domestic regulations. The Chinese government requires that each CDM project should have a higher IRR than the benchmark for each industry, yet the CDMEB considers that such a high IRR indicates no additionality. Therefore, Chinese project proponents need to modify the feasibility study to meet the CDMEB requirement after they obtain domestic approval. In addition, China has a regulation that limits eligibility to be a CDM project proponent to private panies and excludes local governments. This hinders some CDM projects where it is more appropriate to have a governmental organization as coordinator, for example in the case of biogas micro digester distribution projects for farmers in Chongqing. In China, local governments actively play various facilitating roles, but they do not develop and implement projects directly due to CDM regulations. The above discussion illustrates the existence of several types of barriers to the utilisation of carbon finance, in particular CDM, to fund lowcarbon munity development, as was initially expected. The first category is unfavourable conditions for investors, which make it difficult to secure the underlying finance. New technology used in lowcarbon development is seen by investors as risky and makes them reluctant to finance projects as observed in the Philippines and Indonesia. Low profitability associated with high transaction costs and small size of projects, or the low amounts of the carbon credits, also reduces the attractiveness for the investors. High transaction costs were concretely demonstrated in Indonesia and China and difficulties of investment for smallscale projects were pointed out in the Philippines, Indonesia, and China. In addition to these unfavourable conditions, local government officials and the staff of local financial institutions often have limited or no knowledge and experience regarding carbon finance. This has also made project development and finance difficult in the Philippines, Indonesia, and even China, which is the second largest host country of CDM projects in terms of registered projects. Moreover, the concepts of carbon credit or even climate change mitigation in general, are still difficult for ordinary citizens to understand. Though these barriers are not necessarily characteristic for all lowcarbon munity development projects, the lower profitability of developmentoriented projects and the novelty of carbon credits are important obstacles to consider when developing possible promotion measures. Roles of local governments： In China, local governments actively play various facilitating roles, but they do not develop and implement projects directly due to CDM regulations. For CDM projects, local governments in China have played the role of facilitator, recognizing the benefits of local development through CDM projects. Local governments sometimes provide necessary land and electricity with favourable conditions to CMD projects. Ways to promote carbon finance for lowcarbon munity development：Although CDM is a carbon finance mechanism which is relatively widely used in the Philippines, Indonesia and China pared to the other financial mechanisms, there is still considerable scope to expand i