Numerous GHG policy studies are reported for developing countries, Most use demand driven bottom-up models, Reported abatement costs vary significantly across countries for identical options, This can cause policy conflicts such as for GEF financing schemes. Top-down macroeconomic studies for developing countries are scant; their model structure assumes dynamics akin to developed market economies. Transitional dynamics of developing countries such as underdeveloped markets and informal activities are inadequately modelled, Policy analysis is thus restricted to market oriented alternatives, while more relevant bifurcation scenarios along alternate development patterns are ignored. Alterations in model structure and policy analysis are proposed to represent the realities of developing nations.