Search Climate Insights Directory

The report examines rural credit in the Cerrado, noting that while the biome accounts for about one-third of Brazil's rural credit and agricultural production, financing is highly concentrated. Average contract values in the Cerrado are 181% higher than in other biomes, primarily benefiting large-scale soy and cattle producers. While there is a growing trend toward private funding sources like Agribusiness Credit Notes (LCA), public banks—specifically Banco do Brasil—continue to dominate distribution. The study highlights a significant gap in credit access for small and medium producers (Pronaf and Pronamp), arguing that improving this access is essential for increasing productivity and reducing deforestation pressures.

The Cerrado biome accounts for approximately one third of Brazil's rural credit and agricultural production, with a high concentration of financial flows toward large-scale crop production, particularly soy. While the region has attracted more private funding sources like Agricultural Credit Notes (LCA) than other Brazilian biomes, the credit market remains dominated by public banks, specifically Banco do Brasil. There is a significant scarcity of credit for small and medium producers, as programs like PRONAF represent only 4% of the rural credit volume in the biome. The report argues that improving credit access for smaller producers is essential for increasing productivity and reducing deforestation pressures.

The document highlights the financial backing of Pemex by global banks and investors following a pipeline leak and fire in the Gulf of Mexico. It criticizes Pemex's plans to expand production by 2050 and calls for the financial sector to end support for oil and gas expansion, particularly high-risk offshore drilling, ahead of COP 26.

Canadian governments provided over CAD 23 billion in support to oil and gas pipelines between 2018 and 2021, with CAD 10 billion allocated after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. This support, which includes loans and loan guarantees, is argued to undermine Canada's net-zero goals and international commitments to phase out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies.

The briefing argues that meeting the US NDC target of 50–52 percent emissions reduction by 2030 requires the rapid retirement of fossil fuel assets, which risks placing high costs on ratepayers and frontline communities. It proposes amending Title XVII of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to establish a Clean Transition Financing Program. This program would use tools like low-cost direct loans, outcome-based impact bonds, and environmental risk insurance to reduce transition costs. Specifically, RMI estimates that a federal credit subsidy of $3 billion to $4 billion could save electricity ratepayers over $10 billion annually by refinancing fossil generation assets.

The report finds that fossil fuel subsidies in India increased relative to clean energy in FY 2020, with electricity transmission and distribution (T&D) remaining the largest subsidy category. While electric vehicle (EV) subsidies grew, renewable energy support stagnated. The authors argue that India's energy PSUs remain heavily skewed toward fossil fuel investments and lack clear decarbonization roadmaps. The report recommends a 'second generation' of clean energy support focusing on storage, green hydrogen, and offshore wind, alongside reforms to DISCOM finances and a strategic shift in PSU capital expenditure.

The report finds that Canadian governments provided over CAD 23 billion in support for oil and gas pipelines between 2018 and 2020, with over CAD 10 billion provided after the onset of COVID-19. This support, which includes loans, loan guarantees, and equity investments, is argued to undermine Canada's climate commitments and expose taxpayers to significant financial risk due to cost overruns, legal challenges, and declining private sector interest in fossil fuel infrastructure.

The assessment finds that the Kakono Hydropower Plant (HPP) is the most sustainable and cost-effective energy option for northwestern Tanzania, demonstrating high climate resilience and the highest net societal benefits. Compared to a utility-scale diesel plant and a gas-solar PV portfolio, the HPP offers the lowest levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) and the most attractive net present value (NPV), particularly when environmental and social externalities are internalized. While the HPP causes some habitat loss and carbon emissions during construction and reservoir operation, these are offset by significant employment generation and the avoidance of high fossil fuel emissions. The report concludes that the HPP is a viable investment for multilateral banks like the African Development Bank, provided that mitigation strategies for GHG emissions and habitat loss are implemented.

The report details a pattern of acquisitions by OpenGate Capital that resulted in the closure of at least five companies and the loss of over 1,300 U.S. jobs. It examines specific cases including HUFCOR, Golden Guernsey Dairy, Fusion Paperboard, Hamilton Scientific, PennySaver, and Pacific Crest Transformers, alleging that the firm extracted fees and dividends while eroding the value of these businesses. The document highlights legal disputes over unpaid wages, lack of worker notice, and allegations of 'cash stripping' and 'looting' by bankruptcy trustees.

The 2021 State of Cities Climate Finance report finds that annual urban climate finance averaged USD 384 billion in 2017/2018, which is significantly lower than the estimated annual need of USD 4.5 to 5.4 trillion. Investment is heavily concentrated in OECD countries and China, with critically low levels in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. The report emphasizes that while cities act as providers of infrastructure and stewards of regulation, their ability to mobilize finance depends on national-level governance, city-level capacity, and the alignment of climate-specific financial instruments. It recommends strengthening municipal finance fundamentals, integrating carbon pricing into capital planning, and utilizing catalytic funding to de-risk private investment in developing economies.

Reclaim Finance argues that Japan's three megabanks (Mizuho, MUFG, and SMBC) maintain policies that allow continued support for the coal industry. While the banks have updated policies to restrict direct project financing for new coal plants 'in principle', these policies contain exceptions and do not apply to general corporate financing. Between October 2018 and October 2020, these banks provided $39bn, $36bn, and $32bn respectively to companies on the Global Coal Exit List. The document contrasts this with European peers like Crédit Agricole and notes increasing shareholder and activist pressure on the Japanese institutions to align with the Paris Agreement.

The report identifies tax regulations as a primary barrier preventing US utilities from adopting low-cost renewable energy. It highlights how 'tax normalization' and the lack of tax liability for non-profit or loss-carrying utilities create 'perverse incentives' that favor fossil fuels. To meet President Biden's goal of 100 percent clean electricity by 2035, the author proposes eliminating tax normalization for the Investment Tax Credit (ITC) and introducing 'direct pay' mechanisms to ensure all utility types can access clean energy incentives.

The report examines the green infrastructure landscape of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area (GBA), highlighting significant investment needs across sectors such as low-carbon transport, renewable energy, and green buildings. It details the role of green finance, specifically green bonds and asset-backed securities, in bridging the funding gap between public budgets and the capital required for climate-resilient infrastructure. The document provides a sample pipeline of 70 green and potentially green projects and offers six strategic recommendations to unlock private capital, including the harmonisation of green definitions and the promotion of local government green bonds.

The 2021 State of Cities Climate Finance report finds that annual urban climate finance averaged USD 384 billion in 2017/2018, which is significantly lower than the estimated annual need of USD 4.5 to 5.4 trillion. Investment is heavily concentrated in OECD countries and China, leaving developing regions like Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia severely underfunded. The report emphasizes a critical gap in adaptation and resilience finance, which accounts for less than 10% of urban climate finance. To bridge this gap, the report recommends strengthening municipal finance capacities, aligning city and national climate policies, and utilizing innovative financial instruments like blended finance and green procurement.

The 2021 report on the state of urban climate finance reveals a significant gap between current investments and the trillions of dollars needed for urban climate action. While global urban climate funding averaged 384 billion USD per year in 2017/2018, these flows are heavily concentrated in OECD countries and China, leaving rapidly urbanizing areas in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia severely underfunded. The report emphasizes that mitigation efforts, particularly in transport and buildings, dominate current spending, while adaptation and resilience receive less than 10% of funding. To bridge this gap, the document outlines 'enabling conditions' across national, city, and climate-specific levels, urging a systemic approach to align planning, budgeting, and policy to attract both public and private investment.

The report finds that while urban climate finance averaged 384 billion USD annually in 2017/18, this is far below the estimated annual need of 4.5 to 5.4 trillion USD. Funding is heavily concentrated in OECD countries and China, with severe deficits in developing regions like Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, and a critical lack of investment in adaptation and resilience, which accounts for less than 10% of tracked project data. The document argues that cities must act as both 'providers' of green infrastructure and 'guardians' of regulatory standards to attract private and public capital, requiring stronger alignment between municipal and national climate policies.

The 2021 report on the state of cities climate finance reveals a significant gap between current investment levels and the trillions of dollars needed for urban climate action. While global urban climate finance averaged 384 billion USD annually in 2017/2018, funding is heavily concentrated in OECD countries and China, leaving developing regions like Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia severely underfunded. The report emphasizes a critical shortage in adaptation and resilience funding, which accounts for less than 10% of urban climate finance. It argues that mobilizing further investment requires 'enabling conditions' across national, city, and climate-specific levels, urging governments and international financial institutions to provide predictable funding and technical support to help cities transition to sustainable development paths.

The report finds that international public finance for gas in low- and middle-income countries is four times higher than for wind or solar, risking a 'dash for gas' that locks economies into high-carbon pathways. It argues that gas is no longer a necessary 'bridge fuel' because renewables are often cheaper and more effective for power, cooking, and industry. The document recommends that international financial institutions end support for gas and instead scale up clean energy finance, focusing on grid integration, technology transfer, and a just transition for workers.

The report finds that international public financing for gas projects in low- and middle-income countries is four times higher than for wind or solar, creating a 'lock-in effect' that threatens climate goals. It argues that gas is no longer a necessary 'bridge technology' because renewables are often cheaper and more effective for energy access. The document recommends that international financial institutions cease all support for gas infrastructure and instead fund grid integration, technology transfer, and a just transition for affected workers.

The report finds that international public finance for gas projects in low- and middle-income countries averaged nearly USD 16 billion per year from 2017 to 2019, which is four times the amount provided for wind or solar. It argues that the 'bridge fuel' concept is obsolete due to the urgency of the climate crisis, methane leakage, and the falling costs of renewables. The document recommends that international public finance institutions end all support for gas exploration, production, and long-lived infrastructure, instead scaling up finance for grid integration, technology transfer, and universal clean energy access. Case studies of Argentina, Egypt, and India illustrate risks such as high subsidies, dependence on volatile export markets, and the creation of redundant parallel infrastructures for gas and electric vehicles.