Search Climate Insights Directory

The report argues that land use generates nearly a quarter of global greenhouse gas emissions and is highly vulnerable to climate change, yet most investment in the sector remains 'business as usual' (BAU). To address this, the authors propose three tools: a Land Use Sector Financing Landscape to map current financial flows and actors; a Financial Viability Gap analysis to identify the costs and risks preventing green investments; and a Public Financing Mapping analysis to ensure coherence among public financial instruments and incentives. These tools aim to help governments shift funding from BAU activities to green alternatives without compromising economic development.

The paper argues that energy security in the EU is often framed too narrowly, focusing primarily on import dependency and security of supply. It proposes a broader assessment framework that includes availability, affordability, security of demand, and geopolitical security, while noting that external factors like international climate treaties and relations significantly influence energy security outcomes.

The report argues that climate change acts as a "threat multiplier" in fragile states, exacerbating existing conflict drivers like poverty and weak governance. It proposes a framework for "climate-resilient peacebuilding" based on six principles, including integrated context analysis and a forward-looking approach to planning. The document identifies specific entry points for integration across five peacebuilding dimensions: basic safety and security, political processes, basic services, government functions, and economic revitalization. It also reviews existing international guidance, noting that while some tools integrate climate risks, many others lack this perspective, suggesting that practitioners should integrate climate resilience into existing resources rather than creating new toolkits.

The report introduces the electricity system value chain, a non-linear framework designed to map the flow of energy, information, and money across the grid. It breaks the system into three fundamental layers—organizational, electrical, and communications—and defines essential functions (input, process, output) within each. By applying this framework, stakeholders can identify the specific technical and regulatory connections required to realize and monetize system values, such as frequency regulation or renewable energy integration. The document provides step-by-step examples of applying the framework to solar PV and battery systems in both behind-the-meter and distribution-scale environments.

The report examines the water-energy-food (WEF) nexus in Latin America and the Caribbean, highlighting how the region's reliance on natural resources creates critical trade-offs. It argues that while LAC is resource-abundant, fragmented governance and climate change threaten security. The document proposes a framework for action based on infrastructure, information, institutions, and investment to transition toward climate-compatible development.

The SEI Initiative on Transforming Development and Disaster Risk (TDDR) addresses the paradox where development often acts as a root cause of disaster risk rather than a means to reduce it. Using a social-ecological systems (SES) framework, the initiative focuses on three research areas: understanding the interaction between development and risk, exploring equitable social-ecological resilience, and investigating adaptive governance processes. The goal is to generate knowledge and a synthesis framework to transform development into a tool for risk reduction, while monitoring the implementation of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction.

The report establishes a framework for assessing the positive societal impacts of crisis management (CM) tools, specifically for the DRIVER project. It defines societal resilience as a multi-dimensional concept encompassing technical, political, psychological, and value-based dimensions. By reviewing 23 policy documents from the UN, EU, and IFRC, the report identifies core societal values—such as trust, solidarity, and participation—that should guide CM interventions. It proposes a consolidated list of assessment criteria (e.g., accountability, diversity, and transparency) to ensure CM tools foster rather than infringe upon societal values. The document concludes with general recommendations for positive intervention, emphasizing people-centered, bottom-up approaches and the importance of international cooperation and legal frameworks in building resilience.

The document argues that traditional food security monitoring focuses too heavily on outputs and outcomes, which are often difficult to attribute to specific actions. It proposes 'process-based indicators' as proxies to measure the quality of decision-making, institutional capacity, and inclusivity. Using the FIPAT tool in Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua, the authors identify key indicators across six areas: policy vulnerability, system resilience, decision-making transparency, multistakeholder participation, lessons learned, and decentralization. The briefing emphasizes that effective food security policies require inclusive participation of vulnerable groups, empowered local decision-makers, and a shift in institutional culture to view policy review as a dynamic, non-punitive process.

The report introduces 'governAbilities' as the nexus of sustainability, accountability, and adaptability, arguing that these three operational areas are essential for governments to maintain a 'social licence to operate' in a complex, uncertain century. It identifies four common principles—outcome-based, multistakeholder, forward-looking, and multi-dimensional—that link these abilities. To operationalize these, the authors propose a toolkit including Budgeting for Outcomes, Indicator Information Systems, Multistakeholder Councils, Scenario Planning, and Integrated Strategies. The report provides global case studies, such as Germany's sustainability reporting and Washington State's budgeting process, to demonstrate how these tools can be implemented to improve public management and policy resilience.

The document argues that scaling out community-based adaptation (CBA) requires moving beyond isolated pilots to a systemic approach that integrates adaptive capacity, strategic partnerships, and documented evidence. It identifies four key enabling factors: building comprehensive adaptive capacity (assets, institutions, knowledge, innovation, and decision-making), leveraging diverse networks including the private sector, producing rigorous cost-benefit evidence, and utilizing flexible institutional and finance mechanisms. Case studies from Niger, Colombia, Zambia, and Bangladesh illustrate different pathways to scale, ranging from informal farmer networks and municipal government planning to commercial contract farming and international research platforms.

The document argues that a gap exists between climate adaptation research and action because traditional framing ignores agency and separates adaptation from mitigation. It proposes an actor-oriented approach to overcome five identified bottlenecks, applying modelling, visualization, and policy analysis to land-use change, energy transitions, and insurance and finance.

The guidebook introduces a systems-based approach to the Water-Energy-Food (WEF) nexus, arguing that agricultural investments are most sustainable when they protect underlying environmental determinants and social capital. It proposes a four-stage operational process: assessing the current WEF security system, envisioning future landscape scenarios, developing a specific investment strategy, and transforming the system through implementation and adaptive management. The framework emphasizes the use of watershed-scale analysis, stakeholder engagement, and quantitative modeling to identify synergies and trade-offs, ensuring that investments do not harm tenure rights or ecosystem services.

The executive summary introduces a guide for owner-occupants to capture the full value of deep energy retrofits, which are defined as those reducing energy consumption by 50 percent or more. It argues that these investments generate significant, quantifiable business value through non-energy benefits, such as improved employee health, productivity, and risk management. The document presents the RMI Retrofit Value Model, which links design and execution practices to direct and indirect outcomes, ultimately impacting property and enterprise performance. It details nine specific value elements—ranging from reduced health and employee costs to enhanced property-derived revenues—that professionals can use to build a comprehensive business case for deep retrofits.

The CLEANED framework provides a participatory, rapid assessment tool for evaluating the environmental footprints of livestock and aquaculture interventions across the entire value chain. It focuses on four main impact categories: water availability and quality, soil and land health, biodiversity, and greenhouse gas emissions. Designed for use in developing countries, the tool combines public global datasets with local participatory GIS data to provide scores (adverse, positive, or static) for specific spatial units. A pilot application in Tanzania's dairy sector demonstrated the tool's ability to visualize how increased milk demand could expand fodder production areas.

The research investigates the risk of 'vulnerability redistribution,' where adaptation measures in one location inadvertently increase vulnerability elsewhere. The authors develop a framework based on the 'sustainable livelihoods' approach, focusing on five asset types (natural, physical, social, financial, and human) to identify 'risk transfer pathways.' Applying this to Colombia's coffee sector, the study identifies three primary pathways for indirect effects: global economic competition affecting price premiums, donor-funded projects diverting national institutional resources, and infrastructure improvements reducing demand for manual labour.

The document introduces the Adaptive and Integrated Disaster Resilience (AIDR) framework, designed to address the increasing complexity and uncertainty of disasters caused by environmental and socio-economic changes. AIDR focuses on building system adaptiveness through institutional processes that operate across sectors and scales. The authors identify seven conceptual pathways to achieve this integration: integrating DRR with adaptation and development, strengthening polycentric governance, fostering collaborations, improving knowledge and information, enabling institutional learning, self-organization and networking, and providing disaster risk finance and insurance. When applying these pathways to Indonesia, the authors emphasize the need for increased resources for local multi-stakeholder collaboration and the necessity of placing communities at the center of DRR and adaptation efforts.

The paper introduces the Climate Resilience Mainstreaming Building Block (CRMBB) framework, which guides government planners in integrating climate resilience into policy objectives, spatial scales, and temporal planning cycles. It identifies three primary policy responses: climate-proofing, climate-first, and development-first. The CRMBB framework consists of three building blocks: an enabling environment (political will and information services), policy and planning (policy frameworks, institutional arrangements, and financial frameworks), and projects and programmes. Case studies from Bangladesh, Cambodia, Laos, Kenya, The Gambia, and Rwanda demonstrate a trend toward country-led, programmatic approaches over externally driven, project-based initiatives.

The Climate Risk Assessment Guide – Central Asia establishes a framework to downscale climate impact understanding to support sub-national risk management. It integrates climate change assessment with disaster risk assessment, focusing on six types of capital: human, natural, social, financial, physical, and political. The methodology combines an impact-based assessment (using monetary damage and Delphi-based livelihood scoring) with a perception-based assessment to identify gaps between expert data and local views. The guide emphasizes the use of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) for data management and provides a structured process for creating climate risk profiles to prioritize management actions.

The report identifies seven primary and secondary barriers to institutional impact investing, including a shortage of attractive deals, lack of track records, and limited exit options. It suggests that governments can mitigate these by strengthening the investment pipeline through technical assistance and seed funding, and by promoting blended capital arrangements. The authors propose the National Impact Investment Readiness Assessment (NIIRA) tool to help investors and policy-makers evaluate the quality and scalability of a country's impact investment pipeline. A case study of India illustrates the role of pioneering firms like Aavishkaar and IntelleGrow in building a supportive entrepreneurial ecosystem.

The report argues that traditional conservation policies relying on regulation and financial incentives are often insufficient because they ignore the psychological and social drivers of human behavior. It proposes a 'soft policy' approach using 'nudges'—small changes in the decision-making context—to encourage voluntary pro-environmental actions. The authors identify five primary 'areas of influence' for behavior change: attitudes, personal agency, emotions, social norms, and the environmental/decision context. To improve conservation outcomes, the report recommends that practitioners explicitly use social science evidence, track social indicators alongside ecological ones, and employ experimental or quasi-experimental designs to identify causal relationships between interventions and behavioral changes.