Search Climate Insights Directory

The document argues that transport is a critical driver of development but a major source of emissions, accounting for 23% of energy-related CO2. It defines sustainable transport as safe, affordable, and efficient mobility that minimizes environmental impacts. The report details the evolution of international policy from the 1972 Stockholm Conference to the Sustainable Development Goals, and provides examples of successful interventions, such as Jakarta's BRT system and various cities' shifts toward active mobility (cycling and walking). It specifically notes the COVID-19 pandemic as a catalyst for structural changes in urban transit, though it warns that 30 major economies continue to provide significant subsidies to fossil fuels over clean energy.

The document argues that Middle Income Countries (MICs) face a critical gap in debt relief mechanisms following the COVID-19 pandemic, as they are ineligible for the Debt Suspension Servicing Initiative (DSSI) despite high debt burdens that crowd out climate spending. It proposes Debt for Climate (DFC) swaps, where creditor nations forgive a portion of external debt in exchange for the debtor nation making local currency payments toward climate projects. The report outlines eligibility criteria for debtor nations—including a requirement of no imminent liquidity crisis and high bilateral external debt—and suggests three specific use cases: an Accelerated Coal Power Retirement Mechanism (ACPRM), an Accelerated Energy Efficiency Adoption Mechanism (AEEAM), and Nature-Based Solutions (NBS) for adaptation. It identifies specific priority countries for these mechanisms, such as Vietnam and the Philippines for coal retirement, and South Africa and Uzbekistan for energy efficiency, based on energy intensity and carbon dependency data.

The report analyzes three types of food system shocks—the COVID-19 pandemic, the 2015–2016 Southern African drought, and the US-China trade war—to argue that existing WTO rules are insufficient to prevent harmful trade measures during crises. It highlights how climate change will increase the frequency of extreme weather events, further destabilizing food markets. The authors propose 13 recommendations centered on four objectives: ensuring food access for the poor, safeguarding farmer livelihoods, improving market functions through sustainable resource allocation, and restoring multilateral trust. Key proposals include banning export restrictions on humanitarian aid, cutting high tariff peaks, and establishing a special safeguard mechanism for low-income countries.

The report highlights that the water and sanitation sector contributes up to 5% of global greenhouse gas emissions and is highly vulnerable to climate impacts. It advocates for a shift from single-issue, siloed approaches toward integrated, local, and cross-sectoral collaborations to achieve Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 6 and 13. Through case studies in Peru, Uganda, Germany, and Bolivia, the document demonstrates how regulatory frameworks, peer-to-peer partnerships (WOPs), and systems-thinking can reduce carbon footprints and build resilience. It concludes that while collaboration is essential, it must be implemented proportionately to avoid operational inefficiency.

The report evaluates how the Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) bridges science and policy to induce sustainable development. It defines policy engagement as interactions leading to changes in agendas, capacities, and decisions. Through 18 case studies, SEI identifies key pathways to impact—such as developing scientific evidence, using decision-support tools (e.g., LEAP and WEAP), and building networks with 'champions'. The analysis categorizes outcomes into changes in awareness/attitudes (Agendas), institutional strengthening (Capacities), and actual policy shifts (Decisions). It concludes that long-term relationships and a focus on solutions are more effective than short-term, output-driven engagement.

The document argues that gender-blind climate interventions risk deepening inequalities and undermining resilience. It proposes a project cycle that begins with representative stakeholder committees and gender-disaggregated data collection to understand differential vulnerabilities. The guide details tools like 'problem tree' analysis and the 'resilience wheel' to design transformative solutions. It emphasizes the use of SMART and SPICED indicators to track progress, illustrated through five case studies in Cambodia, Tanzania, Malawi, Nigeria, and Ecuador, which demonstrate the 'double win' of achieving both climate goals and gender empowerment.

The report documents community-led responses to the Covid-19 pandemic and climate risks across the Global South, highlighting the role of social capital, women's leadership, and local innovation in maintaining development progress. It identifies specific grassroots solutions—such as community grain banks, urban kitchen gardens, and village savings groups—and argues for a shift in external support toward flexible, locally-led financing and partnerships that recognise the expertise of community-based organisations.

The report advocates for a paradigm shift in sanitation and wastewater management, moving from a 'waste disposal' model to a 'resource recovery' model. It details how the safe recovery of water, nutrients, organic matter, and energy from human excreta and wastewater can improve public health, enhance agricultural productivity, and mitigate climate change. The text provides a comprehensive framework for sustainable systems, covering technical design, health risk management, environmental protection, institutional governance, and financial models. It emphasizes that sustainability depends on adapting technologies to local geographic, social, and economic contexts rather than applying universal solutions. The report includes diverse global case studies—ranging from potable water reuse in Namibia to biogas production in China and fuel briquettes in Kenya—to demonstrate the practical viability of these systems.

The document provides a comprehensive synthesis of the 2018 Global Sustainable Blue Economy Conference's Science and Research Symposium. It argues that a sustainable blue economy—defined as the productive and sustainable use of oceans, seas, lakes, and rivers—must be grounded in multidisciplinary science and public-private partnerships. Key focus areas include the sustainable extraction of deep-sea minerals, the mitigation of climate change through blue carbon ecosystems (mangroves, seagrasses, and seaweed), and the modernization of maritime transport through AI and robotics. The report emphasizes the need for capacity building in the Global South, particularly in Africa, and proposes the establishment of a Global Blue Economy Investment Facility to mobilize finance and technology transfer.

The report argues that a significant 'urban services divide' exists in the global South, where over 1.2 billion people lack reliable access to housing, water, sanitation, energy, and transport. This divide creates a cycle of poverty and environmental degradation. To break this cycle, the authors propose seven transformations: prioritizing the vulnerable in infrastructure design, partnering with alternative service providers, improving local data through community engagement, supporting informal workers, innovating financing and subsidies, promoting transparent land management, and creating diverse governance coalitions. The report emphasizes that these shifts can yield cascading economic and environmental benefits, including reduced GHG emissions and improved public health.

The report finds that 15.3% of global agricultural production, approximately 1.2 billion tonnes, is lost at the farm stage, with an estimated economic value of $370 billion. It challenges the assumption that losses are primarily a low-income country issue, noting that higher- and middle-income countries are responsible for 58% of global harvest losses. Environmental impacts are significant, including 2.2 gigatonnes of CO2 eq. emissions, 760 km3 of freshwater withdrawals, and 4.4 million km2 of land use, with meat and animal products having a disproportionately high impact. The report identifies a complex web of direct drivers (biological, agronomic, and technological) and indirect drivers (market structure, governance, and human factors) and argues for synchronized, holistic interventions rather than isolated technical fixes.

The report examines the global crisis of human-wildlife conflict (HWC), detailing its impacts on ecosystems, local communities, and sustainable development. It argues that traditional short-term mitigation is insufficient and proposes a shift toward 'coexistence' through integrated management involving monitoring, policy reform, and stakeholder engagement. The document provides case studies from regions such as Namibia, India, and Nepal to demonstrate how holistic approaches—including community-led monitoring, land-use planning, and innovative financing like 'Wildlife Credits'—can reduce conflict and support the UN Sustainable Development Goals.

The document outlines the role of community protocols in implementing Access and Benefit-Sharing (ABS) frameworks, emphasizing that these protocols should be community-led and tailored to specific local contexts rather than standardized. It details how protocols help communities define their rights, manage resources like Rooibos and Buchu, and negotiate with industry actors. The text highlights the necessity of government support, legal recognition, and a holistic approach that integrates customary laws with national and international rights to ensure sustainable resource management and fair benefit sharing.

The document examines the intersection of the COVID-19 pandemic, climate change, and urban inequality, proposing six priority solutions to build climate-resilient and equitable cities. It highlights how the pandemic exposed systemic vulnerabilities, particularly for the urban poor in informal settlements, and argues that adaptation investments offer high benefit-cost ratios (2:1 to 10:1) and local job creation. Proposed solutions include upgrading poor settlements, building water resilience, advancing nature-based solutions, creating knowledge networks, enhancing devolved funding, and fostering peer-to-peer city collaboration.

The document examines the role of local and community-based adaptation (CBA) in addressing climate risks, emphasizing that while local actions are often the most cost-effective and socially acceptable, they are frequently hindered by top-down planning and insufficient financing. It proposes a shift toward locally led processes that integrate indigenous knowledge, devolved financing, and multi-stakeholder governance to achieve sustainable and equitable resilience.

The document outlines a comprehensive approach to forest sector law reform, emphasizing the necessity of a clear forest policy, inclusive stakeholder participation, and a structured, iterative process. It provides technical guidance on drafting clear, coherent laws that comply with legal hierarchies and avoid contradictions with other sectoral legislation. Through case studies from Ghana, the Republic of Congo, Liberia, and Côte d’Ivoire, the guide demonstrates how civil society engagement and targeted advocacy can lead to improved forest governance, including the recognition of community land rights and the implementation of sustainable management principles.

The analysis of 52 new good practice cases for the GPD identifies consistent success factors for climate action, including stakeholder engagement, political buy-in, and alignment with national or international frameworks. It also notes emerging trends such as the role of innovation in addressing complex challenges, increased focus on transparency in line with the Paris Agreement's Enhanced Transparency Framework, and the integration of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to align climate and development agendas.

The document argues that for fragile states, climate change and conflict often share drivers and mutually reinforce each other, making the integration of adaptation planning and peacebuilding essential. It highlights how the NAP process, through its long-term, holistic, and participatory nature, can serve as a platform for conflict prevention and trust-building. The text provides examples from countries like Sudan, Burkina Faso, and Palestine where climate adaptation is used to mitigate resource-based conflicts or where active conflict severely hinders adaptation capacity. It concludes by identifying key challenges, including the need for transboundary planning and the inclusion of marginalized populations like refugees.

The brief outlines ten recommendations for co-designing climate services, categorized by process, format, and content, to bridge the gap between climate science and policy implementation. Drawing on case studies from Karlstad and Stockholm, it emphasizes the need for iterative dialogue, the use of facilitators, and the alignment of climate data with existing planning tools to ensure that scientific information is actionable for practitioners.

The report examines the role of 'social control' or public accountability in democratic policing, contrasting 'back-end' accountability (addressing misconduct after it occurs) with 'front-end' accountability (public involvement in policy and practice). It identifies challenges to public engagement in fragile democracies, such as social inequalities and the use of police as tools for ruling elites. The author proposes a four-step approach for African contexts: opening communication lines, building trust through dialogue, developing multi-tiered partnerships, and collaborating on community-level problem solving. Case studies from Jamaica, the US, Brazil, and Honduras illustrate various collaborative and confrontational mechanisms of public oversight.