As we have described in the “Commentaries I”[1], the main difference of DAO IPCI from other solutions is that it requires the people to make their own choices and decisions. We do not offer a marketing solution of the type “here is what you should do”, or “here is the token you should buy” but rather a public blockchain environment, a parallel universe, where “you can create your own solutions” and “make you own choices”.
It is for the individual participant to decide whether he accepts the rules of existing program of creates and introduces his own rules.
DAO IPCI smart contracts and modules are “the bricks” to build independent mitigation programs within the common environment. It is essential for independent mitigation program to have environmental units’ registries (mitigation instruments’ registries), security reserve or security deposit contracts to issue environmental units to these registries, independent entities (IE) contracts to verify that these units comply with basic rules of the Program, to issue internal currency and to transfer or trade these units via the Market.
DAO IPCI is somewhat similar to eukaryotic cells’ system, where independent program performs as individual cell structure — with core, “nucleolus” (2) containing “nucleus” with “DNA”, rules of the Program (1), and other modules, “organelles” (3–13), which provide for creation, sorting, packaging, processing, modification, and “trading” of new mitigation instruments, “proteins”, and for “energy production”, internal currency emission — separated from the external environment and other programs, “cells”, by the “membrane”.
[1] https://medium.com/@antongalenovich/commentaries-to-dao-ipci-draft-whitepaper-5-0-wp-i-e8967179d460
Independent programs may link or merge if they share basic approach, rules or have similar elements and form a superstructure, a “web” of mitigation programs.
However, linking and merging is not easy. Even similar programs, for instance climate change mitigation programs have implicit differences in approaches that make their integration difficult. For example, DAO IPCO genesis program — Blockchain Climate Standard (BloCS)[1] — requires absolute reductions relative to actual baseline GHG emissions. Other programs offer instruments that do not actually represent reductions of GHG emissions but rather the emissions allegedly avoided according to hypothetical “baseline scenarios”.
It is also quite common make distinction between “pricing” and “regulatory” approaches though some and many of the “pricing” approaches are in fact of administrative regulations nature, like taxes. Prices essentially communicate information[2]. They bring the information necessary to make a decision to a minimum and solve the problem of integrating knowledge on complex issues. However, the more rigid is the pricing system the less efficiently it performs this function.
Other than establishing prices by decrees or regulating them by introducing “floors” and “ceilings”, one could rather “correct the names”[3], give a strict and rigid definition of what exactly is offered, and have it independently verified. For example, define and differentiate actual and absolute reductions of emissions and effluents, and “additional”, relative, hypothetically “avoided negative impacts”. Then let the market value them.
Nevertheless, those differences do not prevent different programs from using the same digital, public blockchain ecosystem, each of them sustaining independency.
[1] http://ipci.io/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blockchain-Climate-Standard.pdf
[2] https://medium.com/@antongalenovich/decentralized-solution-for-pricing-the-priceless-cd781746acdc
[3]”Rectify the names” (Chinese: 正 名) to make words correspond to reality
BlockchainEnvironmentEconomicsDecentralizationDao Ipci