Search Climate Insights Directory

China requires an annual investment of RMB 2-4 trillion (USD 320-640 billion) to address environmental and climate issues, with the private sector expected to provide 85% to 90% of this capital. While green bonds are a key vehicle for this, the market faces hurdles including the small scale of individual green projects and low credit ratings for non-state-owned corporate issuers. The report proposes green securitisation as a primary aggregation tool to bundle small assets into larger, investable securities and to detach project risk from the issuer's balance sheet. It further recommends the development of standardised green loan contracts and the establishment of financial warehouses to support this process. Additionally, the paper advocates for tax incentives to reduce funding costs and public credit enhancements, such as guarantees and subordinated debt, to improve the risk-return profile of green bonds for institutional investors.

The document analyzes how German energy-intensive industries generated €4.5 billion in windfall profits from the EU ETS between 2008 and 2014 due to free emission allowances intended to prevent carbon leakage. It highlights that the German government missed out on €29.7 billion in auctioning revenues during this period. The brief identifies the iron and steel, refineries, cement, and petrochemicals sectors as the primary beneficiaries, specifically naming ThyssenKrupp and ArcelorMittal as top earners. It concludes that these subsidies reduce incentives for decarbonization and recommends phasing out free allocations in favor of auctioning to fund climate innovation.

The San Giorgio Group (SGG) met in February 2016 to discuss moving climate finance from diplomacy to implementation following the Paris Agreement. Key discussions focused on the need for better tracking methodologies for the USD 100 billion goal, the role of cities in climate action, the use of climate risk insurance in vulnerable countries, and the application of innovative financial instruments like green bonds and YieldCos to scale up Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).

The document reviews Tanzania's climate risks, highlighting a high vulnerability due to reliance on climate-dependent livelihoods and poverty. It evaluates the government's progress in establishing institutional structures and strategies, such as the National Climate Change Strategy (2012), while noting gaps in sectoral policy integration and the need for more targeted funding for priority sectors like forestry and infrastructure.

Bangladesh is highly vulnerable to sea level rise, flooding, and cyclones, leading the government to establish early adaptation frameworks like the National Adaptation Programme of Action (NAPA) and the Bangladesh Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan (BCCSAP). While the country has created dedicated institutions and funds, such as the Bangladesh Climate Change Trust Fund (BCCTF), adaptation efforts have predominantly focused on large-scale infrastructure in coastal urban areas, often neglecting sectors like livestock and regions prone to drought. Despite being a major recipient of international climate finance, disbursement remains fragmented, and there is a significant gap between planned budgets and actual leveraged funds.

The report analyzes how China's coal power growth was driven by a combination of government capacity targets, stable electricity tariffs, and preferential access to low-cost debt for state-owned enterprises (SOEs). It finds that SOEs have become increasingly financially self-sustaining, using tariff revenues intended for depreciation to fund new capital expenditures, which limits the effectiveness of recent government efforts to constrain coal growth. While macroeconomic shifts and new environmental policies are slowing demand, the report argues that the financial autonomy of SOEs allows them to continue expanding coal assets independently of external policy support.

This report by the Climate Policy Initiative analyzes the scale and distribution of Chinese finance for overseas coal power projects, highlighting China's role as a major provider of finance and the potential impact of its 2015 commitment to control public investment in high-carbon overseas projects.

Global climate finance reached at least USD 391 billion in 2014, driven by a 26% increase in private investment in renewable energy and a steady rise in public finance. Private finance, totaling USD 243 billion, remains the largest source, with China emerging as a major hub for renewable energy investment. Public finance reached USD 148 billion, with Development Finance Institutions (DFIs) contributing the bulk of these funds. The report highlights a strong domestic preference, with 74% of total flows remaining within the country of origin. Mitigation projects dominated the landscape, accounting for 93% of total finance, while adaptation finance reached USD 25 billion.

The report estimates that China provided USD 21-38 billion to overseas coal power projects between 2005 and 2014, with a further USD 35-72 billion planned. This financing is primarily debt used to support Chinese equipment exports and construction contracts, driven by domestic overcapacity and strategic political goals. The report analyzes China's September 2015 commitment to control public investment in high-carbon projects, estimating that up to USD 18 billion in planned investment could be discontinued, though it warns that other international lenders or export credit agencies might fill the void.

The report evaluates the effectiveness of public and private financial incentives for reducing forest emissions between 2005 and 2015. It finds that while over US$3 billion in public funds were committed to performance-based REDD+ payments by 2014, actual disbursements lagged at just over US$1 billion. The private forest carbon market experienced rapid growth until 2011 but subsequently declined, with the market value falling to approximately US$150 million by 2013. The document highlights that the voluntary carbon market alone is insufficient to scale up demand and emphasizes the need for integration into emissions trading systems.

The report argues that the global infrastructure gap persists despite available capital due to a mismatch between investment instruments and project phases. It proposes shifting from bank loans to bond financing during operation phases, mitigating construction risk through guarantees and first-loss protection, and leveraging Islamic finance. The authors advocate for long-term master plans to resolve fiscal mismatches between federal and local governments, reforming procurement to prioritize life-cycle value over the lowest bid, and using fiscal incentives like green accelerated depreciation to encourage sustainable assets.

The report identifies barriers to climate finance for MSMEs in developing countries—including weak policies, knowledge gaps, and unsuitable financial products—and proposes solutions such as risk-sharing instruments, matchmaking platforms, and the use of financial intermediaries to deliver funds efficiently.

This report by the Climate Policy Initiative (CPI) analyzes the role of public finance in accelerating geothermal energy deployment in developing countries. Based on case studies from Turkey, Kenya, and Indonesia, the report demonstrates that public risk-mitigation measures can reduce the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) and allow governments to achieve electricity generation goals while spending only 15-35% of the resources required for sole public ownership.

The report argues that public finance for geothermal energy in developing countries must increase 7-10 fold to meet 2030 targets. Through case studies in Kenya, Indonesia, and Turkey, it demonstrates that public risk mitigation measures—such as concessional loans, guarantees, and exploration support—can reduce the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) by 35-48%, allowing governments to achieve deployment targets while spending only 15-35% of the resources required for full public ownership.

The document examines how hard currency loans create asset-liability mismatches in infrastructure projects within emerging and frontier markets. It argues that IFIs should move away from direct lending and instead use guarantees and credit enhancements to leverage private capital and stimulate local currency financing. The paper details specific financial tools, such as local currency bonds and derivatives, to mitigate currency, political, and project risks.

The paper examines how to balance the allocation of traffic and toll revenue risks between public agencies and private concessionaires in highway PPPs. It argues that full risk transfer is often suboptimal and suggests a combination of 'downside' protection (to ensure bankability and lower financing costs) and 'upside' sharing (to prevent excessive private returns). The author analyzes different metrics for calculating returns—gross revenue, net revenue, and internal rate of return (IRR)—and provides international examples from the US, Chile, and the Netherlands to illustrate the impact of these mechanisms on value for money (VFM).

This research paper by the Climate Policy Initiative describes three analytical tools designed to help low and middle-income countries and their partners redirect land-use finance toward climate mitigation and adaptation. The tools aim to address the gap between the hundreds of billions spent on business-as-usual land use and the relatively small amount of finance currently dedicated to green activities.

The report argues that while hundreds of billions are spent annually on land use, most are 'business-as-usual' (BAU) investments that may increase climate vulnerability. To shift this, the authors propose three tools: the Landscape of Land Use Finance to map current flows and gaps; the Financial Viability-Gap Analysis to identify where public incentives can make green projects financially feasible; and the Public Finance Mapping tool to ensure policy coherence and identify BAU subsidies. These tools aim to help low and middle-income countries scale up private investment in green agriculture, forestry, and land management.

The report addresses the challenge of redirecting hundreds of billions of dollars spent annually on high-emission 'business-as-usual' (BAU) land-use activities toward sustainable 'green' alternatives. It argues that limited understanding of current financial flows inhibits effective public intervention. To solve this, the authors propose three tools: Land Use Finance Mapping to visualize current spending and identify gaps; Financial Viability Gap Analysis to determine why sustainable activities are not financially attractive and how public incentives can bridge that gap; and Public Incentive Mapping to ensure coherence across government policies and align them with sustainable production goals.

The report addresses the challenge of transitioning to low-carbon, productive land use by identifying gaps in the understanding of current financial flows. It argues that while hundreds of billions are invested in agriculture and forestry, most support non-sustainable practices. To remedy this, the authors introduce three tools: a financial flow mapping tool to visualize investments and actors, a financial viability analysis tool to identify and bridge the gap between 'green' and business-as-usual costs, and a public incentive mapping tool to ensure policy coherence and maximize private investment.