{"query_echo":{"q":"","filters":{"analysis_type":["evidence summary"]},"warnings":[{"code":"facet_value_not_in_vocabulary","message":"Value 'evidence summary' for facet 'analysis_type' is not in the controlled vocabulary."}]},"total":{"value":2,"relation":"eq"},"page":1,"page_size":20,"self":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/api/v1/search?analysis_type=evidence+summary","stability":"beta","ai_marking":{"digital_source_type":{"uri":"http://cv.iptc.org/newscodes/digitalsourcetype/trainedAlgorithmicMedia","name":"Created using Generative AI"},"notice":"Summary and key insights are generated using artificial intelligence."},"results":[{"id":"sei-000369","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/sei-000369","title":"We need to talk about nitrogen","publisher":{"name":"Stockholm Environment Institute","organization":"stockholm-environment-institute"},"document_type":"report","language":"en","date_published":"2017-03-10","source_url":"https://www.sei.org/publications/we-need-to-talk-about-nitrogen/","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"The document highlights the impact of human-induced changes to the global nitrogen cycle, specifically the use of manufactured nitrogen-based fertilisers. It notes that reactive nitrogen levels have tripled in Europe and doubled globally over the last century, leading to ecosystem eutrophication, biodiversity loss, and the exacerbation of climate change.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"sei-000369#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"Human activity, particularly the reliance on manufactured nitrogen-based fertilisers for crop yields and livestock feed, has altered the global nitrogen cycle, with reactive nitrogen levels doubling globally and tripling in Europe over the last century.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"sei-000369#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The increase in reactive nitrogen is causing widespread eutrophication of ecosystems, biodiversity loss, human health impacts, and is exacerbating climate change.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"sei-000369#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["biodiversity loss","climate change"],"geography_discussed":["Europe","World"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["evidence summary"]},{"id":"cmw-000897","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/cmw-000897","title":"Response to SBTi Call for evidence on the effectiveness of Environmental Attribute Certificates in climate targets","publisher":{"name":"Carbon Market Watch","organization":"carbon-market-watch"},"document_type":"statement","language":"en","date_published":null,"source_url":"https://carbonmarketwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/SUMMARY-submission-to-the-SBTi-Call-for-evidence.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"The submission argues that environmental attribute certificates, specifically REDD+ carbon credits and energy certificates like RECs and GOs, are unsuitable for corporate decarbonisation targets. It highlights systemic issues in the voluntary carbon market, including over-crediting and flawed methodologies in REDD+ projects, and asserts that energy certificates are financial instruments that do not represent physical electricity delivery. The document advocates for a strict separation of these certificates from gross emission reduction targets, citing the EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) as a regulatory precedent.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cmw-000897#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"REDD+ carbon crediting programs in the voluntary carbon market are deemed ill-suited for generating emission reduction factors due to systemic over-crediting, flawed methodologies, and a 'race to the bottom' where buyers seek the cheapest, most over-credited credits.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cmw-000897#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The methodologies used to quantify emissions reductions in REDD+ projects often exaggerate actual climate impacts and fail to address primary deforestation drivers like large-scale agriculture, logging, and mining.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cmw-000897#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) and Guarantees of Origin (GOs) are characterized as financial instruments that do not represent the physical delivery of electrical energy and have been shown not to cause actual emission reductions.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cmw-000897#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) provides a regulatory model by requiring that GHG emission reduction targets be gross targets, explicitly prohibiting the use of carbon credits, GHG removals, or avoided emissions to achieve these targets.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cmw-000897#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Using REDD+ credits to offset fossil fuel emissions is criticized as it transfers carbon from permanent geological storage to a short-duration carbon cycle, increasing the risk of atmospheric release.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cmw-000897#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation","carbon offset","carbon credit","deforestation"],"geography_discussed":["European Union","Brazil","Colombia","Mexico","Belgium"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["policy response","evidence summary"]}]}