Search Climate Insights Directory

The report explores how municipalities can move beyond traditional governance to reduce consumption-based emissions through collaborative, place-based citizen engagement. It introduces a conceptual framework for strategic participation and details a three-stage workshop methodology—exploring sufficiency, visioning sustainable futures, and backcasting—implemented in Malmö. The authors argue that focusing on everyday wellbeing and sufficiency, rather than abstract targets, fosters more inclusive and transformative climate action.

The guidance document details how the Net Zero Finance Tracker (NZFT) monitors financial institutions' (FIs) transition to net zero. It maps NZFT indicators against nine global and regional frameworks—including GFANZ, UN HLEG, and the TPT—to ensure a robust tracking approach. The NZFT aims to exceed standard recommendations by applying more stringent criteria for target coverage, accountability, and evidence of positive climate engagement. While it covers most key transition elements, the document notes current data gaps regarding Just Transition and specific 2030 emission reduction thresholds.

The document outlines the challenges of researching climate obstruction in restrictive political environments, focusing on participant safety, data security, and the navigation of political 'red lines'. It recommends flexible research designs, such as using snowball sampling and reframing sensitive topics, to mitigate risks associated with government surveillance and data manipulation in non-democratic states.

The RMI Aluminum GHG Emissions Reporting Guidance establishes a framework for product-level emissions reporting in the aluminum sector. It defines fixed system boundaries—benchmarking and full—to ensure comparability regardless of a producer's vertical integration. The guidance emphasizes the use of primary data, provides specific calculation procedures for primary and recycled aluminum, and outlines a hierarchy for sourcing renewable energy to drive sectoral decarbonization.

The Steel GHG Emissions Reporting Guidance establishes a framework for product-level emissions accounting in the steel sector. It mandates reporting based on a fixed system boundary and the use of primary data to ensure comparability and transparency. A key feature is the 'sliding-scale' approach, which benchmarks emissions intensity against 1.5°C trajectories while accounting for the different carbon intensities of ore-based versus scrap-based production. The guidance also defines criteria for labeling abatement technologies and provides detailed procedures for calculating emissions from exported products, by-products, and fugitive methane.

The document establishes a standardized framework for reporting aluminum emissions at the product level, utilizing fixed system boundaries to ensure comparability regardless of a company's vertical integration. It defines two primary reporting boundaries: a 'benchmarking boundary' (mining to final cast-house) and a 'full boundary' (mining to semi-fabrication). Key requirements include the use of primary data, the disclosure of scrap-based content (distinguishing between pre- and post-consumer scrap), and the reporting of mine-to-smelter cast-house emissions intensity for primary aluminum. The guidance also details specific calculation methods for energy impacts, including a hierarchy for sourcing renewable energy and a dual-reporting approach for pre-consumer scrap using both cut-off and co-product allocation methods.

The document argues that effective climate services require an intentional MEL design based on outcome mapping to foster collaboration and adaptive management. It details the use of boundary partners, outcome challenges, and progress markers to track behavioral changes rather than just direct development impacts. The briefing recommends specific tools like the 'most significant change' technique and outcome harvesting to capture complex, non-linear results. An illustrative example from the FRACTAL project in Windhoek, Namibia, demonstrates how these elements are applied to different stakeholder groups, including city officials and climate service providers.

The document outlines a methodology for calculating the amount of fossil fuel subsidies per unit of GDP, as required by SDG indicator 12.c.1, for both national and global estimates.

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 document introduces a financial model developed by the Intergovernmental Forum on Mining, Minerals, Metals and Metals (IGF) to help governments quantify the impact of tax incentives on public revenues. It emphasizes that conventional cost estimates often overlook 'behavioral responses'—actions taken by investors to maximize financial gains from incentives—which can significantly increase revenue losses. The guide outlines a four-step framework: estimating reference revenues, calculating direct costs, estimating behavioral costs, and determining the total revenue loss. It provides specific examples of behavioral risks, such as 'high-grading' (écrémage) in response to tax holidays, excessive interest deductions following withholding tax exemptions, and under-invoicing of ore sales under progressive royalty schemes. The document also advocates for the use of scenario modeling and sensitivity analysis to test the robustness of these estimates and determine if incentives are effectively targeted to support marginal investments.

The document outlines 'Stage 3' of the Impact-Oriented Measurement (IOM) system, focusing on 'Step 7: Developing a credible narrative'. It advocates for the use of contribution analysis—rather than strict attribution—to demonstrate how FSD interventions lead to systemic changes in financial markets. The process involves triangulating bottom-up monitoring (e.g., project results chains) with top-down evidence (e.g., national household surveys and landscape studies) to convince a 'sceptical observer' of the programme's impact. It also provides methodologies for aggregating quantifiable results and conducting Value for Money (VfM) assessments by monetizing sectoral benefits, such as reduced depositor losses in the SACCO sector in Kenya.

The document provides a framework for FSD programmes to set up an Impact-Oriented Measurement (IOM) system. It details a two-step process for 'Stage 1: Clarity of Purpose', which involves ensuring the programme's Theory of Change (ToC) is evaluable and developing specific impact measurement questions. The guide emphasizes the importance of 'nesting' project-level results chains within thematic and overall programme ToCs to capture systemic change and avoid overstating causal contributions. It also introduces 'top-down' and 'bottom-up' approaches to measuring impact, ranging from high-level economic growth to direct intervention effects.

The document outlines a methodology for FSD programmes to move beyond traditional project-level monitoring toward an Impact-Oriented Measurement (IOM) system. It emphasizes the need to bridge the evidence gap between direct project outputs and long-term market changes by tracking intermediate progress indicators, systemic changes (such as adoption, scaling, and replication), and top-down sector trends. The guide advocates for a mixed-methods approach, combining quantitative data from sources like FinScope with qualitative narrative reporting to capture complex market dynamics and resilience.

The document outlines a two-step process for measuring change in financial sector development: assessing causality and contribution (Step 5) and developing a research agenda (Step 6). It emphasizes a pragmatic, evidence-based approach to attribution, acknowledging that FSDs act as market facilitators and cannot claim full credit for changes. The guide details 'bottom-up' (intervention-focused) and 'top-down' (sector-level) analysis, offering a menu of methodologies ranging from light-touch monitoring and theory-based approaches (e.g., contribution analysis, outcome harvesting) to rigorous quantitative statistical methods (e.g., experimental and quasi-experimental designs). It also defines the role of research in filling knowledge gaps, informing strategy, and contributing to global learning on the links between financial inclusion, economic growth, and poverty reduction.

The UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative provides global guidance on harmonizing LCIA indicators to improve the comparability and accuracy of environmental assessments. The document recommends specific metrics for climate change (GWP100 and GTP100), human health impacts from PM2.5, water scarcity (AWARE approach), and biodiversity loss from land use, while proposing an updated LCIA framework that distinguishes between intrinsic, instrumental, and cultural values.

The document serves as a mapping tool between the NAP Technical Guidelines (NAP-TG) and the PROVIA Guidance, providing policy-makers in Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and other developing nations with specific methods and tools for climate adaptation planning. It aligns the NAP-TG's four elements—laying groundwork, preparatory elements, implementation strategies, and monitoring/evaluation—with the PROVIA adaptation learning cycle. Key guidance includes using stakeholder and network analysis for gap assessments, employing scenario analysis for future risk characterization, and applying multi-criteria analysis for appraising adaptation options. The document emphasizes that neither the NAP-TG nor the PROVIA Guidance is prescriptive, allowing countries to define activities based on their unique circumstances.

The document argues that collaboration and knowledge sharing are essential for sustainable development and proposes a shift from focusing on institutional partnerships to fostering networks of individual experts. It defines three types of collaboration: networked governance, inter-organizational relationships (IORs), and inter-individual collaborative relationships (ICRs). For ICRs, the authors suggest assessing performance through four key lenses: focus and extensiveness, structural evolution, social capital, and value creation (divided into applied and realized value). The report also suggests various diagnostic tools for these assessments, including Social Network Analysis and the Cynefin Framework.

The document examines the methodological requirements for conducting representative public opinion surveys to support the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM). It argues that while participatory consultations are useful for public ownership, they often produce biased results. Instead, the author advocates for random probability sampling, noting that relatively small samples (e.g., 1,200 respondents) can provide accurate national estimates. The paper outlines essential prerequisites—such as recent census data and freedom of travel—and warns against the common error of polling only heads of households, which biases results toward older, employed males. It also provides a practical timeline and cost estimate for implementing such surveys in Africa.

The paper examines the methodological requirements for conducting credible representative public opinion surveys within the framework of the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM). It contrasts the limitations of 'participatory' consultations—which often suffer from self-selection bias—with the precision of random probability sampling. The author provides technical guidance on sample sizes, the necessity of accurate census data, and the importance of sampling individual citizens rather than household heads. It also outlines the practical costs and timelines for implementing such surveys in Africa, suggesting that national surveys of 1,200 respondents typically cost between $85,000 and $125,000.

The guide outlines a five-step methodology to integrate nature-based solutions into project lifecycles, moving from qualitative systems thinking to quantitative economic valuation. It emphasizes the use of systems mapping, climate data analysis, and scenario modeling to compare NbS against traditional 'grey' infrastructure and 'business as usual' scenarios. The framework concludes with strategies for identifying financing structures and communicating findings to diverse stakeholders.