Search Climate Insights Directory

The document argues that hiring agencies that promote fossil fuels creates conflicts of interest and exposes brands to risks, as climate change disrupts supply chains and operations. It encourages organisations to use the F-List to verify agency partners and implement fossil-free procurement criteria in briefs, RFIs, and RFPs. The guide highlights that over 1,650 agencies in 60 countries have signed the Clean Creatives pledge and suggests that clients have leverage to decarbonise the marketing industry because fossil fuel marketing represents less than 1% of global marketing spend.

The document provides a practical resource for businesses to measure and report air pollutant emissions, arguing that emissions inventories allow companies to identify reduction opportunities and integrate air pollution data into ESG and strategic decision-making processes to mitigate health, regulatory, and financial risks.

The document outlines the role of adaptation indicators within national monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL) systems, emphasizing that their design must account for institutional landscapes and adaptation objectives rather than being a purely technical exercise. It highlights how these systems support accountability, learning, and the fulfillment of international reporting obligations under the Paris Agreement, including the second round of Biennial Transparency Reports due by the end of 2026.

The report outlines a framework for companies in the offshore wind, coastal tourism, shipping, and seafood sectors to track their contributions to halting and reversing biodiversity loss. It emphasizes the use of Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) to reduce business risks and ensure credible ecological outcomes. The guidance distinguishes between pressure indicators (direct company impacts) and state-of-nature indicators (overall ecosystem health), while advocating for a 'seascape approach' to collective monitoring. It also integrates social dimensions, such as human rights and Indigenous Peoples' rights, as essential components of transformative nature-positive actions.

The document provides a framework for education ministries to integrate their sector into the national adaptation plan (NAP) process. It argues that because the education sector is both highly vulnerable to climate change and essential for community resilience, it must coordinate with climate actors to align sector plans with national commitments and secure adaptation financing.

The document outlines how education ministries can engage across the four phases of the National Adaptation Plan (NAP) process: impact, vulnerability, and risk assessment (IVRA); planning; implementation; and monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL). It emphasizes the heightened vulnerability of children to climate-related learning disruptions and argues that the NAP process is a critical mechanism to elevate education priorities, secure climate finance, and align sectoral plans with national commitments. The guide provides specific strategies for data collection via Education Management Information Systems (EMIS), the use of innovative financial instruments, and the mainstreaming of gender equality and social inclusion (GESI). A case study of Saint Lucia illustrates the successful development of a Sector Adaptation Strategy and Action Plan (SASAP) through participatory, multi-stakeholder engagement.

The document outlines the Responsible Policy Engagement (RPE) Framework to help EU businesses align their direct and indirect advocacy with climate goals. It warns that legacy fossil fuel interests often dominate trade associations, creating a false impression of business consensus against climate policy. The guide provides a five-step process for companies—commit, engage, align trade orgs, allocate spending, and disclose—and offers specific recommendations for trade associations to be more representative and for EU policymakers to close transparency gaps, particularly within the European Council.

The document argues that traditional carbon offsetting is inherently deceptive because carbon credits cannot reliably counterbalance emissions on climate-relevant timescales. It advocates for the 'beyond value chain mitigation' (BVCM) approach, where credits are treated as contributions to global climate action rather than offsets. The guide outlines principles for credible communication, including the prioritisation of internal decarbonisation and the use of transparent, non-ambiguous language. It also provides case studies of misleading claims from entities like Climate Impact Partners, Audi, and Apple, and offers recommendations for policymakers to ban offsetting claims and for consumers to identify 'red flags' in corporate communications.

The document outlines the role of Indian banks in the climate transition and proposes the Corporate Transition Assessment (CTA) framework to move beyond historical data in credit appraisals. CTAs assess companies across strategy and ambition, feasibility, and accountability to provide decision-focused insights for risk management and green investment.

The document defines a climate change adaptation investment plan (CCAIP) as a set of investment-ready priority activities linked to specific financial sources. It outlines a structured approach to bridging the adaptation financing gap by diversifying funding across domestic, international, public, and private sources using instruments such as grants, bonds, and blended finance. The text emphasizes the necessity of political leadership, particularly from ministries of finance, and the integration of gender-responsive and socially inclusive (GESI) considerations to ensure equitable outcomes. It further distinguishes CCAIPs from broader NAP financing strategies, noting that while the latter identifies overall needs and gaps, the CCAIP focuses on narrow, time-bound, and actionable investment packages ready for immediate implementation.

The Climate Bonds’ Resilience Taxonomy (CBRT) is a classification system designed to help infrastructure issuers identify and certify investments that enhance climate resilience. It covers over 1,400 investments across seven themes, including health, agri-food, and energy systems. The taxonomy employs a tiered eligibility framework requiring a 'substantial contribution to resilience', 'no maladaptation risk', and 'Do No Significant Harm (DNSH)' to other sustainability goals. Investments are categorized as whitelisted (automatically aligned), subject to technical specifications (binary pass/fail checks), or requiring a process-based approach for flexible placeholders. The guide outlines two primary use cases: developing a project pipeline by filtering for material climate hazards and mapping existing projects to verify eligibility for thematic bonds. Currently in an interim phase, the CBRT is designed for interoperability with the EU Taxonomy, the MDB joint methodology, and the LAC Common Framework.

The document presents 'Making Local Climate Action Possible', a toolkit co-designed by Climate Outreach, The Connectives, and UK local government officers. It aims to overcome barriers to business engagement—such as cost pressures and limited capacity—by providing guidance and messaging strategies based on three core principles: demonstrating purpose, empathy, and integrity.

The report synthesizes key messages from the first global stocktake (GST) to support developing countries in enhancing their national adaptation plan (NAP) processes. It emphasizes the iterative adaptation cycle—comprising impact, vulnerability, and risk assessment (IVRA), planning, implementation, and monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL)—as the guiding framework. Key findings highlight the need for gender-responsive and inclusive planning, the mainstreaming of adaptation across governance levels, and the critical role of nature-based solutions. The document also addresses the widening adaptation finance gap and provides a practical roadmap for countries to implement GST outcomes based on their current NAP status, while outlining reporting mechanisms through NDCs, AdComs, and BTRs to prepare for the second global stocktake.

The Oxford Principles for Responsible Engagement with Article 6 establish a framework for host countries, buyer countries, and private entities to ensure that carbon trading under the Paris Agreement supports global climate goals. The guidance focuses on three core principles: aligning the use of mitigation outcomes with the Paris Agreement, ensuring the climate and social integrity of those outcomes, and maintaining robust accounting and transparency. Key recommendations include requiring buyer countries to take robust domestic action before using credits, cancelling at least 2% of internationally transferred mitigation outcomes (ITMOs), and directing at least 5% of proceeds toward adaptation.

The Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor (v5.0) establishes a framework to distinguish genuine corporate climate leadership from greenwashing. It assesses companies across four pillars: comprehensive GHG emissions disclosure (Scopes 1, 2, and 3), the alignment of emission reduction targets with 1.5°C pathways, the implementation of sector-specific transitions, and the scaling of durable carbon dioxide removals (CDR). The guidance emphasizes that net-zero claims are misleading without deep absolute reductions and argues against the use of standalone Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) and traditional offsetting in favor of 'climate contributions' and millennial-scale durable CDR.

The Bioplastic Feedstock Alliance (BFA) outlines a framework for companies to transition from virgin fossil-based plastics to responsibly sourced biobased alternatives. The guidance emphasizes that biobased content targets should be measurable, time-bound, and integrated into existing corporate sustainability goals, such as those related to climate, nature, and social performance. It provides a five-step recommended approach: understanding materiality, identifying desired outcomes, aligning with existing goals, developing targets based on portfolio analysis, and evaluating progress. The document also highlights the importance of responsible sourcing, the role of external certifications, and the impact of emerging regulatory frameworks like the Global Treaty on Plastic Pollution and the Greenhouse Gas Protocol's Land Sector and Removals Guidance.

The report argues that the global ocean economy must transition from business-as-usual to a nature-positive model to avoid an estimated US$8.4 trillion in economic value loss by 2036. It introduces the AR3T (Avoid, Reduce, Restore & Regenerate, Transform) action framework to help companies in four key sectors—offshore wind, coastal and marine tourism, shipping, and seafood—halt and reverse biodiversity loss. The document emphasizes that nature positive is a collective societal goal, requiring absolute gains in nature rather than relative net gains or offsets. It provides specific technical recommendations for each sector, such as using nature-inclusive design in offshore wind, implementing sustainable siting in tourism, reducing vessel noise in shipping, and eliminating destructive fishing practices in the seafood sector. The report also highlights the necessity of integrating social equity and Indigenous knowledge into conservation efforts, asserting that a nature-positive future must also be 'people positive'.

The document argues that health organizations should lead the effort to revoke the 'social license' of the fossil fuel industry by refusing to work with PR agencies linked to it. It draws a parallel between the current fossil fuel industry and the historical tobacco industry, citing CVS Health's 2014 decision to stop selling tobacco as a model for corporate responsibility. The guide outlines a 'Fossil Fuel Free Health Communications Pledge' and a three-step screening process for agencies: requesting full client disclosure, seeking a commitment to avoid future fossil fuel clients, and demanding public accountability. It also provides a list of specific questions for organizations to ask potential agencies to ensure alignment with public health and climate goals.

The document argues that fossil fuel companies use disinformation campaigns, similar to the tobacco industry's historical tactics, to obstruct climate action and harm public health. It urges health organizations to leverage their credibility and market influence—noting a healthcare advertising market valued at USD 42.28 billion in 2024—to revoke the industry's 'social license' by refusing to hire agencies with fossil fuel ties. The guide outlines a 'Commitment for Fossil-Free Health Communications' and a three-step screening process: requesting full client disclosure (specifically for the past 3 years), seeking a fossil-free commitment (such as the Clean Creatives pledge), and verifying public accountability. It cites the 2014 decision by CVS Health to stop selling tobacco products as a precedent for how health-focused entities can catalyze broader industry change by aligning business practices with health missions.

The guide outlines six essential steps for advertising agencies and brands to integrate sustainability into their business models: organization, briefing, production, content, information integrity, and climate literacy. It emphasizes the need to combat climate disinformation, reduce Scope 3 emissions, and avoid greenwashing to meet consumer demand for responsible brand behavior.