Search Climate Insights Directory

This report by Trend Asia examines the social and environmental risks associated with geothermal energy expansion in Indonesia. While promoted by international financial institutions as a low-carbon climate solution, the document argues that current funding models prioritize corporate financial risk over the resulting water scarcity, pollution, and human rights violations affecting local and indigenous communities.

This briefing by Zero Carbon Analytics examines the systemic failures of carbon offsetting, arguing that these mechanisms often increase global emissions rather than reduce them. The document details how both compliance and voluntary carbon markets suffer from low environmental integrity, lack of additionality, and fraudulent practices, particularly in forestry projects. It concludes that carbon offsets are not a valid climate solution and that priority must be given to direct emission mitigation over offsetting or unproven large-scale carbon removal technologies.

This policy brief by the Africa Policy Research Institute examines the Global Shield (GS) initiative and the broader climate insurance landscape in Africa. The authors argue that while insurance can provide rapid disaster response, it is an insufficient tool for addressing the diverse, slow-onset impacts of climate change and often fails to provide equitable protection due to high premiums, technical complexities, and the risk of 'basis risk' where payouts are not triggered despite actual losses.

This report by Zero Carbon Analytics examines the distinctions, controversies, and global implementation of biodiversity offsetting and biodiversity credits (biocredits). It contrasts offsetting—a mandatory mitigation tool for development impacts—with biocredits, which are voluntary investments in conservation. The document highlights ecological and ethical concerns regarding the 'no net loss' principle and the potential for greenwashing, while detailing the efforts of the UK, France, Australia, and the EU to establish nature markets.

This research paper by the Africa Policy Research Institute examines the health cooperation between Germany and African states, arguing that current partnerships are rooted in colonial legacies and lack genuine reciprocity. The author contends that recent shifts toward 'securitization' of health—prioritizing global health security and economic interests—often override the needs of marginalized populations and the goal of strengthening local health systems.

This research paper examines the historical and contemporary health cooperation between Germany and African nations, arguing that these relations remain unequal and lack reciprocity. The author contends that while Germany promotes multilateralism and health security, its actions often prioritize economic interests and security over the public health needs and autonomy of African partners, calling for a decolonial shift toward health and climate justice.

This paper critiques a 2021 evidence review by Natural England titled "Carbon Storage and Sequestration by Habitat" (Gregg et al.), arguing that the review's methodology lacks transparency and misrepresents the role of prescribed fire in UK heather-dominated blanket bog peatlands.

This policy brief by the Institute for Economic Justice analyzes the USD 8.5 billion Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP) in South Africa. It argues that the deal's reliance on blended finance and Independent Power Producers (IPPs) shifts commercial risks to the state and consumers while privatizing gains. The document warns that this 'de-risking' approach may worsen South Africa's fiscal position, increase energy poverty through higher tariffs, and undermine local renewable energy manufacturing. It proposes alternative pathways, including the regulation of private finance, debt cancellation for 'odious debt', climate reparations, and the implementation of allocative green credit policies.

A statement signed by over 100 organizations criticizing the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) for failing to eliminate violence and environmental destruction over 14 years. The document argues that the RSPO serves as a 'greenwashing' tool for the industrial palm oil sector, masking human rights violations and deforestation while facilitating the industry's expansion.

This 2010 report by the Stockholm Environment Institute reviews the projected supply of international greenhouse gas (GHG) offsets, specifically evaluating how these estimates impact U.S. cap-and-trade legislative designs. The authors analyze the use of marginal abatement curves (MACs) and identify significant discrepancies between optimistic techno-economic models and more conservative market-based projections.

This briefing by Friends of the Earth International examines the theories, institutions, and impacts of the global trade system, arguing that its core principles are fundamentally flawed and prioritize economic growth and corporate interests over environmental sustainability, social equity, and human development.

This October 2016 report by Friends of the Earth International argues that the current global trade and investment regime prioritizes the economic profitability of agribusiness over food sovereignty and agroecology. It details how neoliberal investment frameworks, including 'mega-regional' agreements and Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs), undermine the ability of states to implement public policies that protect human rights and the environment, effectively blocking the transition to sustainable, small-scale food production.