Search Climate Insights Directory

The We Mean Business Coalition urges the EU to distinguish between simplifying regulatory implementation and rolling back core green legislation, arguing that deregulation would penalise sustainable companies and harm long-term economic stability.

The Council on Strategic Risks advocates for the restoration of Feed the Future and the Famine Early Warning Systems Network (FEWS NET), asserting that these programs mitigate national security risks by building food system resilience and providing critical forecasting for humanitarian responses. The text highlights that Feed the Future reduces migration intent in Honduras and that FEWS NET lowers the cost of humanitarian interventions. It references endorsements from former military commanders and bipartisan political support to emphasize that food security is an investment that prevents future conflict and reduces the need for costly US military or humanitarian spending.

The Canadian Climate Institute urges the Quebec government to implement new flood maps and construction regulations despite opposition from municipalities and developers. The author argues that the cost of inaction—estimated between $70 million and $210 million in annual losses—far outweighs the potential decrease in property values, noting that homes in very high-risk zones are likely to suffer several hundred thousand dollars in damages over the next 25 years.

The World Association for Christian Communication (WACC) asserts that the right to freedom of expression is insufficient to protect democratic debate because it does not address the power imbalances created by Big Tech. The statement claims that major tech companies—including Amazon, Meta, X, and Alphabet—have aligned themselves with the U.S. far-right, prioritizing profit over the public good and supporting agendas that deny climate change. WACC calls for a rights-based communication framework, the involvement of more movements in the fight for democratic tech, and the support of state blocs like the EU or African Union to create non-profit-driven technology and media ecosystems.

The statement asserts that oil and gas developers are locking in emissions that threaten the ability to maintain manageable global warming levels. It argues that because major oil and gas companies cannot be expected to lead a transition, financial institutions must stop supporting the development of new oil and gas fields and new liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminals.

The statement contends that integrated oil and gas majors are not transitioning to sustainable energy and should be excluded from financial support. Citing the Global Oil and Gas Exit List (GOGEL), it highlights that 95% of oil and gas companies worldwide have plans for new projects, with major European firms like BP, Shell, and TotalEnergies increasing production or expanding short-term plans. The author argues that these companies are diverting capital away from clean energy, with the three European majors projected to allocate less than a third of future investments to low-carbon activities, contradicting IEA 1.5°C scenarios.

The author contends that the green energy transition cannot rely on markets alone or the leadership of fossil fuel producers, who lack the incentive to undermine their core business. Instead, the transition must be driven by consumers reducing global demand through policies like carbon pricing. The text outlines four geoeconomic scenarios for this transition: 'survival of the fittest', 'geopolitical preferences', 'green preferences', and 'development preferences', suggesting that the latter two—which prioritize low-carbon footprints and the socio-economic needs of lower-income producers—are the most just and realistic pathways to meeting Paris Agreement goals.

The Institute for Economic Justice proposes a universal basic income guarantee (UBIG) as a foundational safety net for South Africa's transition from fossil fuels to clean energy. The document asserts that while targeted support for displaced workers is necessary, a UBIG is essential to cover those indirectly affected, such as informal workers and carers, and to prevent people from falling through gaps in social protection. It highlights international evidence from countries like Bangladesh, Brazil, and Ethiopia to demonstrate how cash transfers mitigate climate-induced crises and reduce negative coping strategies. Furthermore, the text argues that a UBIG facilitates environmental adaptation by providing the financial stability needed for reskilling and sustainable consumption, while promoting a more equitable distribution of climate risks between the Global North and Global South.

The author asserts that the 'Yes to Yasuní' victory in Ecuador demonstrates the power of civil society to pressure governments to end fossil fuel extraction. The document links this local success to the broader goals of the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty, emphasizing the need for an international legal framework that replaces the 'extractivist economic matrix' with global cooperation and financial compensation from the Global North to support a just energy transition.

The document analyzes the June 2024 sale of 1.55 billion Saudi Aramco shares, classifying it as a Secondary Share Offering (SSO) where funds benefit the Saudi government rather than the company. While distinguishing SSOs from Primary Share Offerings (PSO) that provide direct capital for expansion, the author argues that financial institutions should avoid both to prevent supporting fossil fuel developers and increasing the attractiveness of oil and gas stocks.

The lecture calls for a 'solidarity pact' akin to a Marshall Plan to support low- and middle-income countries facing a 'historic reversal in development' due to the combined impacts of climate change, the COVID-19 pandemic, and the war in Ukraine. The author argues that the current global financial system is 'not fit for purpose,' citing structural biases in ESG scores and a debt crisis where the most vulnerable nations spend more on debt servicing than they receive in climate finance. The speech advocates for replacing high-interest loans with grants and concessional finance, leveraging new technologies like blockchain for decentralized energy and insurance, and empowering women and youth to drive a just transition to low-carbon economies.

The document advocates for a transformational fisheries subsidies agreement at the WTO's MC13, emphasizing the critical role of small island developing states (SIDS) and small vulnerable economies (SVEs) in shaping the negotiations. It highlights the importance of 'special and differential treatment' to protect artisanal fisheries, food security, and livelihoods in small economies, while calling for stricter disciplines on the largest industrial fishing nations to arrest the destruction of fish stocks.

The author contends that current climate policies are failing because they lack redistributive measures and ignore carbon inequalities, which in turn fuels right-wing populism. The text proposes a 'third way' based on post-growth economics and a 'green-red alliance' that integrates social justice with environmental goals. A central practical solution highlighted is the promotion of energy communities—non-profit entities that democratize energy production and provide affordable, clean energy to vulnerable households. The document calls for a radical acceleration of emission reductions, aiming for carbon neutrality by the mid-2030s and a negative carbon balance by the 2040s, funded by taxing high polluters and redirecting fossil fuel subsidies.

The author contends that sub-Saharan African low-income economies face a severe debt and solvency crisis, with debt service consuming 31 per cent of revenues and eroding poverty gains. The text calls for a comprehensive debt relief mechanism equivalent to the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) initiative and reforms to the G20 Common Framework to facilitate quicker debt restructuring.

The author contends that the global food system requires a transformation focused on 'moving the bottom'—the least efficient 10-20% of producers who generate 60-80% of environmental impacts while producing only 5-10% of the product. The text asserts that improving these producers is the only way to achieve absolute reductions of 50% in food's overall footprint and 80% in food-related GHG emissions. This shift would require governments to mandate a 'license to operate' based on resource limits and could be supported by more responsible producers providing technical or financial assistance. The document emphasizes that incremental change is insufficient and that urgent action is needed to protect biodiversity, soil health, and the climate.

The document outlines how a Universal Basic Income Guarantee (UBIG)—defined as a government commitment to ensure all adults receive a basic income as a right—can break the cycle of poverty. It highlights evidence that cash transfers improve child nutrition and growth, reduce depression and increase life satisfaction, and increase school enrollment and adult retraining. The text specifically references the positive impacts of the Child Support Grant in South Africa and similar programs in Namibia, India, Kenya, and Tanzania.

The author discusses the immediate impacts of climate-driven wildfires in North America, specifically the health risks associated with particulate matter and the necessity of implementing binding emission reductions and adaptation strategies in Canada.

The document advocates for a diverse energy mix that includes 'clean firm power'—non-weather-dependent zero-carbon sources—to complement wind, solar, and battery storage. It argues that relying solely on variable renewables would lead to excessive costs, land use, and infrastructure requirements, while a diversified approach could significantly reduce the time and cost of the energy transition.

The authors contend that the U.S. EPA has sufficient evidence to base CO2 emissions standards on carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technology. They draw a parallel to sulfur dioxide scrubbers, which were rarely used before 1971 but became industry standard after emissions regulations were implemented. The text highlights that while only four U.S. power plants currently use carbon scrubbers, the historical example of sulfur scrubbers shows that regulation can rapidly increase vendor availability, lower costs through 'learning by doing', and significantly increase pollution removal efficiency.

The statement emphasizes the necessity of linking climate solutions with poverty eradication and human well-being to ensure climate justice. It highlights that the IPCC synthesis report calls for urgent resource mobilization to address these issues synergistically, noting that those in extreme poverty are most vulnerable to climate hazards. Project Drawdown identifies 28 mitigation solutions across five sectors—agriculture, ecosystems, clean cooking, clean electricity, and equality—that could sequester 691.4 gigatons of CO2-eq over 30 years while providing co-benefits for health, gender equality, and food security, especially in rural Africa and South Asia.