Another reason why PoAs have had limited success so far is that the framework still depends on CDM methodologies which are developed mostly with a project design in mind. Thus, in most of the cases these involve complex monitoring and a relatively fixed baseline, which is often difficult to translate into a "programmatic" approach.

Another complexity is to define a suitable entity that represents the whole program, such as a program sponsor, that connects the technology providers with the users and is able to both handle the transfer of the legal title to the emission reductions as well as the monitoring of these reductions. Often, companies or institutions will face barriers to handle efficiently all the actors involved in this process.

It is a shame that PoAs haven't really take off since they do have a big potential to reduce emissions and can have a positive impact on sustainable development.

The main issues are: - For a PoA to be viable you need a lot of projects - Monitoring certain types of PoAs is extremely challenging (e.g. biomass cooking stoves) - PoAs are marginally financially attractive which makes them additional but not always feasible.

One option currently considered is to combine the monitoring of programmatic approaches at household level with microfinance credit payback. The smaller projects have the problem that current carbon prices are kept low by unambitious cap&trade systems and extremely low-hanging but still fully monetizable fruit in the industrial gases sector of the CDM. Only mixture of a benchmark-based CDM or sectoral trading / crediting mechanism or other means to take care of the low-hanging fruit will the PoAs have an economically more attractive environment. Of course, the rules may also need a lot more streamlining yet.