Search Climate Insights Directory

The document examines the systemic under-supply of funding for global public goods (GPGs), such as climate mitigation and pandemic preparedness, relative to the trillions of dollars required. It analyzes current G20 initiatives and the roles of the IMF and World Bank, while discussing a proposal from the Indian Council for Research in International Economic Relations (ICRIER) to create a consolidated GPG bank. The author provides recommendations for the South African G20 presidency to lead on consolidating funding windows, establishing equitable governance, and exploring global taxes to bridge the financing gap.

The report highlights that China's steel industry requires at least 1.6 trillion yuan (approximately 220 billion USD) in fixed asset investment to achieve decarbonisation by 2050. While technical feasibility for zero-carbon steel exists, high costs remain a barrier. The document argues that transition finance, carbon pricing mechanisms like the EU's CBAM, and green public procurement are essential to drive investment toward deep decarbonisation technologies, such as low-carbon hydrogen, and to avoid 'carbon lock-in' as 78% of existing coal-based blast furnace capacity requires reinvestment by 2030.

The report highlights that China's steel sector requires at least CNY1.6tn (USD220bn) in fixed-asset investment for decarbonisation by 2050. While the labelled bond and loan markets have the capacity to provide this capital, current issuance from the steel sector is minimal, representing only 0.1% of the Chinese labelled bond market. The document recommends aligning provincial transition finance guidelines with national and international standards, encouraging the use of greenhouse gas (GHG) emission-reduction targets in sustainability-linked bonds (SLBs), and implementing green public procurement to stimulate demand for low-carbon steel.

The document analyzes the global bioeconomy, estimating its current value at US$ 4-5 trillion with potential growth to US$ 30 trillion by 2050. It proposes a tripartite spectrum—Nature-Intensive, Advanced, and High-Tech bioeconomies—to better apply distinct financing and policy strategies. The report identifies significant funding gaps, particularly for first-of-a-kind (FOAK) projects and in the Global South, and advocates for an 'integrated approach' combining national strategies, international cooperation (via the G20), and innovative financial tools like biodiversity credits and blended finance to ensure a just transition.

The report finds that while urban climate finance more than doubled to USD 831 billion in 2021/2022, it must increase more than fivefold to align with a 1.5°C pathway. Mitigation needs are dominated by transport, energy, and buildings, with a significant financing gap particularly in emerging markets and developing economies (EMDEs). The document identifies systemic challenges including weak enabling environments and city-level capacity gaps, and proposes the '4C Urban Climate Finance Agenda' (Commitment, Collaboration, Capacity, and Capital Mobilization) to scale investment.

The report argues that India requires cumulative investments of US$10.1 trillion by 2070 to reach net-zero, yet current tracked mitigation finance is only about 25 percent of the required amount. It distinguishes between 'green finance' for near-zero emission technologies and 'transition finance' for hard-to-abate sectors that lack immediate green alternatives. The document identifies critical gaps in the supply of finance, noting a lack of standardised taxonomy and an underdeveloped corporate bond market. On the demand side, it analyses the decarbonisation needs of the steel, cement, transport, power, and agriculture sectors, highlighting the high capital costs and technical risks of transformative technologies like Carbon Capture, Utilisation, and Storage (CCUS). The report proposes a five-pillar roadmap covering scope and definition, transparency, cooperation, supply chain support, and financial innovation, while recommending the establishment of a Prime Ministers Net Zero Council (PMNZC) to coordinate inter-ministerial efforts.

The policy brief examines the systemic failure of global financial systems to value nature, noting that nature-related risks worth $5 trillion are not priced into investment decisions. It advocates for a multi-pronged approach to bridge the nature finance gap, including meeting the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF) targets of $20 billion annually by 2025 and $200 billion by 2030. The author argues that while carbon markets are a necessary short-term tool, they are flawed for long-term nature finance due to issues with permanence and additionality. Instead, the brief promotes the scaling of the $4 trillion global bioeconomy, the use of debt-for-nature swaps, and the implementation of payments for ecosystem services (PES), such as levies on digital sequence information and Brazil's Tropical Forests Forever Facility. It emphasizes that these transitions must be led by global south governments and indigenous peoples to ensure equitable governance and avoid 'sub-prime' transactions.

The document examines debt-for-nature swaps, where foreign currency debt is cancelled in exchange for local currency investment in environmental projects. While popular in Latin America and the Caribbean, the tool is described as having a very small market impact, offsetting only 0.11% of debt payments for low- and middle-income countries between 1987 and 2023. The IMF suggests that conditional grants or comprehensive debt restructuring are often more effective depending on debt sustainability. Case studies from Bolivia, Costa Rica, and Ecuador highlight risks including loss of national sovereignty, negative real interest rates, and the exclusion of Indigenous communities.

The report analyzes methane emissions in Nigeria's oil and gas sector, noting that 73% of the estimated 439.8 kilotons of methane emissions come from gas production, processing, and distribution. While existing policies like the NUPRC Guide 0024 - 2022 align with the Global Methane Pledge, the report identifies gaps in regulatory enforcement, stakeholder coordination, and academic research. It estimates a funding requirement of US$1.5 billion between 2023 and 2030 to reduce emissions, with oil and gas majors expected to contribute US$300 million. The document advocates for a data-driven approach using satellite technology, such as the Satellite-based Methane Emission Tracking (SMET) platform, and calls for innovative financing through green bonds and public-private partnerships.

The briefing establishes that fossil fuels are responsible for approximately 70% of carbon dioxide emissions since the industrial revolution, with a small number of companies contributing a disproportionate share. It highlights the role of attribution science in linking specific extreme weather events to climate change and details the growing trend of using the 'polluter pays' principle in litigation and legislation to hold these companies financially accountable. The document further argues that to meet the 1.5C target, global fossil fuel production must decrease significantly by 2030, supported by a transition to renewable energy and electric vehicles.

The EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) requires companies in power, heavy industry, aviation, and shipping to purchase emission allowances via auctions, with revenues distributed to 30 covered countries. While the 2023 reform mandates that revenues be spent on climate-related activities, historical data from 2013-2021 shows €25 billion was not spent on climate action and €12 billion went to projects that were not climate-sensible or could have increased emissions. The system utilizes a mix of auctioning and free allocations to prevent carbon leakage, though free allocations for aviation will end in 2026 and for heavy industry by 2034. Key funding mechanisms supported by these revenues include the Innovation Fund, expected to raise over €57 billion by 2030, and the Modernisation Fund, expected to invest €69.5 billion in 13 lower-income member states between 2021 and 2030.

The policy brief argues that current EU biodiversity financing is insufficient and inefficient, with funding needs estimated at EUR 48.15 billion per year. It proposes the creation of a dedicated biodiversity conservation and restoration fund, the strengthening of biodiversity mainstreaming through legally binding spending targets and reduced administrative barriers for small projects, and the implementation of a mandatory methodology to identify and phase out environmentally harmful subsidies. The brief emphasizes that the EU's current 'mainstreaming' approach often deprioritizes nature in favor of short-term infrastructure projects and calls for a revised tracking methodology to prevent greenwashing.

The Social Climate Fund (SCF) is an EU initiative designed to alleviate energy and transport poverty resulting from the introduction of the ETS2 carbon pricing system for buildings and road transport. Operating from 2026 to 2032, the fund will provide approximately €86.7 billion in targeted support to EU member states, primarily for lower-income groups and micro-enterprises. Funding is allocated based on need, with Poland, France, Italy, Spain, and Romania receiving the largest shares. To access funds, member states must submit Social Climate Plans (SCPs) by June 2025, which must include impact assessments and decarbonisation strategies. While the SCF supports green investments and limited temporary income support, it is not intended to solve the root causes of existing energy and transport poverty.

The report evaluates India's readiness to scale subnational climate finance across four categories: climate policy, budget and finance, climate data, and coordination. It finds that while India has strong national commitments and policies, urban local bodies (ULBs) lack institutional mandates for climate action, suffer from limited fiscal autonomy and poor financial management, and have minimal access to climate-specific data. The analysis highlights a heavy reliance on intergovernmental transfers and a significant gap in private investment and municipal bond issuance. Key recommendations include amending state municipal acts to incorporate climate functions, expanding the scope of Central Finance Commission grants to include climate action, and strengthening the capacity of ULBs to conduct green budgeting and issue municipal bonds.

Wisconsin taxpayers will need to spend at least $16.7 billion through 2040 to protect communities from climate change, with municipal governments bearing the vast majority of these costs ($14.1 billion). The most significant expenses include improving stormwater management ($6.67 billion) and proactive road maintenance ($5.09 billion). The report highlights that these costs fall disproportionately on high racial minority areas and low-education rural communities, potentially consuming a significant portion of local public works budgets. It argues that fossil fuel companies should be held legally accountable for these damages.

The document analyzes the JET-P model as a mechanism to catalyze international and private investment for Colombia's energy transition. It highlights a significant funding gap, noting that public investment currently represents only 0.01% of required resources. By reviewing JET-P experiences in South Africa, Indonesia, Vietnam, and Senegal, the report identifies risks such as increased public debt and the need for transparent, community-led project design. It proposes prioritizing projects like energy communities and the phase-out of coal plants, while warning against financing fossil fuel infrastructure or inefficient consumption subsidies.

The briefing examines how distributed solar, particularly through schemes like PM Surya Ghar and PM-KUSUM, can mitigate the financial distress of Indian Discoms by reducing the cost of supplying subsidized consumers and lowering power procurement costs. It highlights the potential for distributed solar to contribute significantly to India's 2030 renewable energy purchase obligations (RPO) and suggests that the adoption of virtual power plants (VPPs) and battery storage could further modernize the grid and manage peak demand.

The report examines the infrastructure funding gap in Canada, specifically within the water sector of the Canadian Prairies, and proposes a shift toward natural infrastructure. It identifies several private financing instruments—including carbon and biodiversity credits, outcome-based financing, natural asset companies, and insurance mechanisms—while emphasizing the need for intermediary organizations to coordinate stakeholders and the importance of Indigenous involvement in the reconciliation process.

The proposal aims to address the lack of coordination between climate, biodiversity, and development strategies in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). It proposes a 24-month project to create a 30x30 investment strategy that integrates biodiversity conservation with climate mitigation and adaptation, specifically focusing on the rights and engagement of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPs and LCs). Key activities include spatial modelling to identify priority conservation areas, policy alignment analysis, the development of a business plan for 30x30 implementation, and the submission of a technically sound GCF project concept note.

The EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) is a cap-and-trade mechanism designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the power, heavy industry, aviation, and maritime sectors by pricing pollution. It operates by setting a decreasing cap on total emissions, divided into EU Allowances (EUAs), which companies can trade or buy at auction. While the system has raised over €152 billion since 2005, its effectiveness has been historically hampered by an oversupply of permits and the extensive use of free allocations to prevent 'carbon leakage'. A separate system, ETS2, will be introduced in 2027 to cover buildings and road transport. The document highlights concerns regarding the environmental integrity of the current cap relative to the EU's carbon budget and the lack of transparency in how member states spend auction revenues.