In disordered organic semiconductors, there is no band transport, as there are no delocalised, just localised charges. Consequently, there is no simple band-band recombination of free carriers, and no Shockley-Read-Hall recombination! Of course, there is still recombination going on, a lot of it;-) 
Here I’ll just quote some definitions concerning different types of recombination, and get back with details later.
For a general classification we take a look at Kwan-Chi Kao’s book “Dielectric Phenomena in Solids“.
Looking for monomolecular recombination, we find
The recombination that involves one free carrier at a time, such as indirect revombination through a recombination center (e.g., an electron captures by a recombination center and then recombined with a hole, each process involving only one carrier), is generally referred to as monomolecular recombination.
In organic semiconductors, a recombination centre can for instance be a trapped hole, localised in a deep state; it can induce a monomolecular recombination with a mobile electron. Even knowing this, it still feels like bimolecular recombination, doesn’t it?
Posted by deibel 

made for crystalline inorganic diodes, when applied on fitting organic solar cells.




Comment on Primary Photoexcitation in Polymer:Fullerene Blends
17. March 2008It seems that one prominent discussion in organic photovoltaics has officially ended, the one about the primary photoexcitation in disordered organic solar cells being excitons (with a binding energy clearly above 100meV) or free charges (with excitons having binding energies in the range of the thermal energy, i.e. <<100meV). Hwang, Moses and Heeger, have just published a paper on polymer:fullerene blends [Hwang 2008] where they describe the charge generation as
They explicitly mention
The paper is nice but in itself not that remarkable, except that previously, Moses and Heeger always claimed the primary photoexcitation to be free charges instead of bound excitons. Their measurements yielded exciton binding energies in the range of the thermal energy, i.e., no donor acceptor interface being necessary for charge separation. To quote an older paper [Moses 2000],
Now I have to mention that in the new paper they use P3HT:PCBM, and in the old one MEH-PPV:PCBM. But as they do not mention this in the new paper, I assume that either I missed something, or they changed their point of view concerning the primary photoexcitation.
Add to Connotea