Search Climate Insights Directory

The report finds that while significant financial flows enter the Cerrado, the current financial architecture fails to align agricultural funding with sustainability and zero-deforestation goals. Subsidized sustainable credit represents only 5.7% of total rural credit in the biome between 2020/21 and 2023/24, and is highly concentrated among large producers and a few financial institutions. The Matopiba region is particularly vulnerable, concentrating over 55% of the biome's deforestation (2013–2022) while relying heavily on Constitutional Financing Funds (FCFs), which often lack transparent sustainability criteria. Blended finance instruments show potential through risk mitigation and flexible terms but remain limited in scale compared to the economic incentives driving land conversion. The authors recommend improving transparency via the Brazilian Sustainable Taxonomy (TSB), expanding the role of sustainable credit, and fostering financial innovation to mobilize private capital.

In 2024, IDFC members committed $173 billion in green finance, a 13% decrease from 2023, primarily driven by shifts in investment priorities among a few large institutions. Despite the overall decline, 14 of 23 responding members increased their commitments. Climate finance dominated at $167 billion, with mitigation ($140 billion) remaining the primary focus, while adaptation finance saw a 54% increase to $17 billion. Biodiversity finance totaled $8 billion. The report highlights the pivotal role of non-OECD institutions, which provided 72% of climate finance, and emphasizes the need to target underfunded sectors such as AFOLU, fisheries, and industry.

The report identifies 30 international financial mechanisms totaling US$ 25.9 billion intended for tropical forests. It highlights a significant funding gap compared to the US$ 66.8 billion annual requirement estimated by UNEP, noting that 31% of identified funds remain unissued or undisbursed. The analysis reveals that while conservation is the most common focus, restoration offers high potential for private and blended finance, and REDD+ jurisdictional mechanisms account for over half of the total identified financing.

The report maps 30 international financial mechanisms totaling US$ 25.9 billion aimed at tropical forests, highlighting a significant funding gap compared to the US$ 66.8 billion annual need identified by UNEP. It analyzes the roles of various actors, the prevalence of result-based payments like REDD+, and the geographic concentration of funds in Latin America, specifically Brazil and Guyana.

In 2024, IDFC members committed $173 billion in total green finance, a 13% decrease from 2023, though 14 of 23 responding members increased their individual commitments. Climate finance dominated at $167 billion, with mitigation finance ($140 billion) remaining the primary focus, while adaptation finance grew by 64% to $17 billion. Biodiversity finance reached $8 billion, with the largest shares directed toward water preservation. Non-OECD institutions provided 72% of climate finance and 78% of biodiversity finance, with East Asia and the Pacific emerging as the largest recipient region for both categories.

The document catalogues Union and State-level financial supports in Chhattisgarh across electricity transmission and distribution (T&D), coal, oil and gas (O&G), renewable energy, electric vehicles (EVs), and bioenergy. Key state-level expenditures include significant subsidies for agricultural electricity, such as the Krishak Jeewan Jyoti Yojana, and the Saur Sujala Yojana for solar pumps. Union-level support is prominent in coal pricing for utilities and the FAME scheme for electric mobility. The appendix also lists the data sources used to track government receipts from these energy sectors.

The report evaluates renewable energy options for a municipal water station in Ukraine serving 400,000 residents. It compares 100% decentralised systems (PV+Battery vs. Wind+Battery) and feasible grid-connected hybrid systems, finding that while wind is more cost-effective, solar PV is the only viable on-site installation due to space constraints. For heating, water-to-water heat pumps are identified as the optimal solution. The report also maps international financing opportunities from institutions like the EBRD, EIB, and World Bank to support implementation.

The report argues that Indonesia's promotion of natural gas as a 'transitional fuel' and the continued financing of gas projects by Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) lock the country into fossil fuel dependence and hinder its climate commitments. It highlights significant environmental, social, and governance risks associated with gas infrastructure, including methane emissions, corruption, and human rights violations, while calling for an immediate shift toward renewable energy.

Climate finance for land use in Brazil averaged R$ 88.1 billion annually from 2021 to 2023, a 145% increase over the 2015-2020 period. Domestic sources provided 97% of these funds, with rural credit serving as the primary instrument (58% of total flows). While mitigation remains the dominant climate use (57%), there was a significant surge in 'loss and damage' payments, which grew 357% between 2021 and 2023 due to government indemnities for extreme weather events. The report highlights a heavy reliance on self-declared sustainable practices in rural credit and a decline in thematic bonds, while noting the critical role of the federal budget in supporting native forests.

In 2023, IDFC members committed $199 billion in green finance, a 31% decrease from 2022, largely due to currency depreciation in East Asia and the Pacific and the adoption of more conservative tracking methodologies. Climate finance dominated at 98% of total green finance, with mitigation accounting for 89% of that amount. Adaptation finance fell significantly to $10.5 billion, while biodiversity finance reached its lowest level since 2020 at $8.2 billion. The report emphasizes the role of public development banks (PDBs) in providing transformative finance and calls for the New Collective Quantified Goal on Climate Finance (NCQG) to integrate 'transformational criteria' to better catalyze private investment.

In 2022, IDFC members committed a record USD 288 billion in green finance, a 29% increase from 2021. Climate finance dominated these commitments, accounting for 98% of the total, with mitigation finance reaching USD 244.7 billion and adaptation finance increasing by 52% to USD 31.6 billion.

The report provides a comprehensive mapping of climate finance for land use in Brazil from 2015 to 2020, identifying an average annual flow of R$ 25.1 billion. It details the roles of domestic and international sources, the prevalence of rural credit as a primary instrument, and the distribution of funds across sectors such as agriculture and forestry. The analysis highlights a significant growth in thematic bonds and a heavy reliance on domestic private resources mobilized by public policies, while noting gaps in international funding and transparency regarding final beneficiaries.

The South African Climate Finance Landscape 2023 report finds that while annual tracked climate finance reached an all-time high of R131 billion between 2019 and 2021, this remains significantly below the estimated annual needs of R334 billion to R535 billion. The landscape is heavily dominated by domestic private sector debt, with clean energy receiving the vast majority of funding, while adaptation and low-carbon transport remain severely underfunded.

In 2021, IDFC members committed a record USD 224 billion in green finance, a 21% increase from 2020. Climate finance dominated the total at 95% (USD 212.7 billion), with mitigation finance reaching a peak of USD 186.6 billion. Conversely, adaptation finance fell by 24% to USD 20.9 billion, largely due to a 50% drop in disaster risk reduction commitments. Biodiversity projects saw growth, reaching USD 18.4 billion.

IDFC members reported a record $224 billion in green finance commitments in 2021, with climate finance accounting for 95% of the total. Mitigation finance reached $186.6 billion, while adaptation finance decreased by 24% to $20.9 billion. Biodiversity finance grew by 31% to $18.4 billion. The majority of climate finance was provided by non-OECD institutions and directed toward the East Asia and Pacific region.

This report examines the landscape of urban green finance in Hyderabad and Kolkata, India, mapping the flow of public and private funds toward climate change mitigation and adaptation across six key sectors, including clean energy, sustainable transportation, and waste and water management.

In 2020, IDFC members committed $185 billion in green finance, representing 20% of their total new commitments. While total green finance declined by 6% due to the COVID-19 pandemic, cumulative commitments since 2015 surpassed $1 trillion. Climate finance dominated at $178.5 billion, with adaptation finance growing by 42% to $27.5 billion. For the first time, the report separately tracked biodiversity finance, which totaled $14 billion. The majority of climate and biodiversity finance was provided by non-OECD institutions and directed toward the East Asia and Pacific region.

The report analyzes climate finance in South Africa for 2017-2018, tracking an annual average of R62.2 billion. It identifies a significant gap between current funding and the R8.9 trillion estimated by the IFC as necessary to achieve South Africa's Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) by 2030. Public finance averaged R22 billion annually, with a strong domestic preference, while private finance averaged R35.3 billion, focused exclusively on mitigation. The document recommends developing standardized climate finance definitions, improving public-private coordination, and scaling blended finance to leverage private capital.

In 2019, IDFC members committed $197 billion in green finance, a 47% increase from 2018. Climate finance dominated this total at 95% ($187 billion), with mitigation projects receiving the largest share ($163.5 billion), primarily in transport and renewable energy. Adaptation finance grew for the third consecutive year to $19 billion. The majority of finance (74%) originated from non-OECD institutions and was largely deployed domestically, with the East Asia and Pacific region receiving the largest geographic share (69%). Loans remained the primary instrument, accounting for 95% of commitments.

In 2019, IDFC members committed $197 billion in green finance, a 47% increase from 2018. The vast majority of this funding (95%) was dedicated to climate finance, with green energy and GHG mitigation receiving 87% of those funds. While 87% of commitments remained in the home countries of member institutions, the East Asia and Pacific region received the largest share of total commitments at 69%.