Search Climate Insights Directory

The document outlines how to apply a gender and social equality (GSE) lens to sustainable development research to uncover power relations and inequalities. It defines key concepts such as intersectionality, the distinction between sex and gender, and the role of social constructions in creating hierarchies. The guide provides a framework for analyzing norms, division of labour, resource access, and decision-making power, while offering specific methodological advice for defining research questions, collecting data from diverse social groups, and presenting results to ensure the voices of marginalized populations are represented.

The paper examines environmental integrity in international carbon markets, defining it as a state where carbon unit transfers result in the same or lower aggregated global emissions. It identifies four primary risk factors: accounting for transfers, the quality of generated units, the ambition of transferring countries' targets, and potential disincentives for future mitigation action. The author recommends that policy-makers employ a combination of approaches to mitigate these risks.

The document defines alignment as a process to identify synergies among policy processes with common objectives to increase coherence, efficiency, and effectiveness. It argues that aligning the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the Paris Agreement, and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction is essential for climate-resilient development because these agendas share goals of strengthening resilience and reducing vulnerability. The brief outlines a continuum of alignment—from informal collaboration to systematic alignment—and notes that success depends on political will, government capacity, and the influence of coordinating actors, such as ministries of planning or central leadership.

The document argues that aligning national policy processes—specifically those related to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), National Adaptation Plans (NAPs), and Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) strategies—increases coherence, efficiency, and effectiveness in achieving climate-resilient development. It defines alignment as the identification of synergies between policies with common goals, distinguishing it from 'mainstreaming' (the integration of climate considerations into a single plan). The briefing outlines a progression of alignment from informal collaboration to systematic alignment, noting that success depends on political will, institutional arrangements, and the capacity of government actors. It emphasizes that while national governments lead these processes, implementation occurs primarily at the subnational level, necessitating a coordinated approach to avoid overburdening local authorities.

The document argues that aligning national policy processes—specifically those related to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), National Adaptation Plans (NAPs), and Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) strategies—increases the coherence, efficiency, and effectiveness of climate-resilient development. It defines alignment as the identification of synergies between policies with common goals and presents a continuum of alignment ranging from informal collaboration to systematic alignment. The briefing emphasizes that while alignment is often hindered by administrative barriers between government ministries, it is essential for reducing the burden on subnational actors and improving overall development outcomes.

The paper argues that existing transition models are often either purely quantitative or purely social, lacking a holistic view. By bridging an energy systems model with socio-technical analysis and local action studies, the authors aim to create a more realistic picture of the transition to a low-carbon residential heating system by 2050. The framework integrates niche innovations as scenario options, landscape signals as external drivers, and regime studies to identify governance barriers, while local action studies provide data on community attitudes.

This research paper discusses the need to rebuild trust in Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD+) mechanisms to scale up climate mitigation. It proposes applying guiding principles from financial accounting—such as relevance, faithful representation, and comparability—to REDD+ impact reporting to attract private sector investment and ensure environmental and social robustness.

The document discusses the complexities of climate change communication, noting the blurred line between science and advocacy. It presents four potential roles for scientists—pure scientist, science arbiter, issue advocate, and honest broker—to help them determine how to communicate their research findings to the public and policymakers.

The report examines the synergies between Community Forest Management (CFM) and agroecology, positioning them as essential tools for food sovereignty and biodiversity conservation. It critiques the 'green economy' and market-based conservation models like REDD+, arguing that they erode traditional values and community autonomy. The document specifically challenges the FAO's definition of forests for including monoculture plantations, which it claims facilitates deforestation and undermines the livelihoods of the 1.6 billion people dependent on forests. It advocates for the recognition of territorial control, women's autonomy, and traditional knowledge as the primary drivers of effective forest protection.

The Green Economy Coalition defines a green economy as one providing prosperity for all within the planet's ecological limits. The document argues that a successful transition requires moving beyond narrow technocratic policies toward an inclusive social movement that values nature, tackles inequality, greens economic sectors, reforms financial systems, and implements new governance metrics.

The document argues that implementing the Paris Agreement requires a "transformative change in international capacity building," particularly in low- and middle-income countries where resources are constrained. It describes CDKN's shift toward a more intentional, context-specific approach to capability development, which began as an organisational enquiry in 2016 to identify and support specific capabilities within country systems rather than allowing capacity to develop by chance.

The paper positions gender equality as a cornerstone of the green economy, asserting that without it, sustainable development and poverty eradication cannot be achieved. It defines a green economy as one that is low carbon, resource efficient, and socially inclusive, and argues that existing gender disparities in economic, political, legal, and environmental spheres must be addressed to prevent the 'brown economy's' inequalities from persisting. The author proposes gender mainstreaming and women's empowerment as key strategies to ensure women are active agents of change rather than marginalized victims. However, the paper warns that without gender-responsive policies and budgeting, the transition to green jobs—estimated at 15–60 million globally—may fail to benefit women, particularly in developing countries where they are often trapped in informal, low-wage agricultural work.

The document argues that the environmental impact of food production is far broader than tropical deforestation, affecting a wide array of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. It introduces the concept of "arcs" of habitat loss to categorize these impacts. Key areas of concern include the degradation of soils, the unsustainable depletion of groundwater aquifers, the pollution and loss of freshwater ecosystems, the conversion of carbon-rich grasslands, the disappearance of endangered tropical dry forests, and the physical destruction of the ocean floor through bottom trawling. The authors emphasize that sustainable food production requires optimizing performance across these diverse ecological systems rather than focusing solely on productivity.

The document proposes a conceptual framework to improve sustainability in source-to-sea systems, addressing the challenges of fragmented governance and climate-driven alterations to ecosystem flows. The framework provides a taxonomy of key flows, tools for analysis and planning, and a method for developing a theory of change, emphasizing the importance of governance baselines and stakeholder engagement.

The document distinguishes between incremental and transformational adaptation, arguing that the latter is necessary when historic approaches are insufficient for climate risks. It emphasizes that systemic changes to governance—prioritizing transparency, flexibility, and learning—are key to enabling transformational adaptation. The brief is part of a series developed for Edmonton and Calgary focusing on robustness, redundancy, and resourcefulness.

The document defines Vertical Integration as the strategic linking of national and sub-national efforts in climate adaptation. It emphasizes that this process ensures adaptation considerations are integrated across all levels of government and society, leveraging local expertise to support vulnerable groups. The text identifies institutional frameworks, information sharing, and capacity development as the three key drivers of this integration. It further explains that while decentralization provides a strong foundation for Vertical Integration by shifting decision-making closer to citizens, countries with less advanced decentralization must find alternative ways to engage sub-national actors.

The document describes a process for integrating climate science, social analysis, and emergency response to improve decision-making after extreme weather events. It emphasizes the need for policy makers and officials to determine how to rebuild and prepare for future climate shifts by utilizing both historical experience and scientific data on climate change.

The document distinguishes between incremental adaptation, which improves existing practices, and transformational adaptation, which involves systemic structural changes to address the root causes of vulnerability. It argues that as climate risks in Alberta increase—including rising temperatures and more variable precipitation—cities like Calgary and Edmonton may need to adopt transformational approaches to avoid unsustainable development paths. The text outlines qualities of a resilient city, such as flexibility and integration, and uses the Netherlands' Delta Programme as a case study of a proactive, systems-based approach to flood management. It concludes with strategic, regulatory, and community recommendations to enable transformational change.

The brief explores how transitional justice frameworks for reparations—including restitution, rehabilitation, compensation, satisfaction, and guarantees of non-repetition—can be applied to the climate context. It emphasizes that addressing the needs of those most impacted is essential for building a legitimate global climate regime and suggests a combination of material and symbolic reparations to repair relationships and foster collective solidarity.

The policy brief explores how truth commissions, traditionally used for political reconciliation, could provide a pragmatic middle path between ignoring historical climate harms and pursuing legal liability. It evaluates three structural options: internal UNFCCC processes, external but linked mechanisms, and entirely external processes such as the International Court of Justice. The author concludes that a high-profile, neutral commission created by NGOs or a coalition of Parties is the most politically feasible approach for trust-building and documenting lived harms, though it must be accompanied by concrete action to avoid alienating supporters.