Search Climate Insights Directory

The guidance outlines the operational requirements for Approved Verifiers to ensure the integrity of the Climate Bonds Certification mark. It details the verification processes for four certification types: Use of Proceeds (UoP), Assets, Non-Financial Entities, and Sustainability-Linked Debt (SLD). The document specifies a multi-stage methodology—comprising engagement, planning, risk assessment, testing, evidence gathering, and reporting—and mandates adherence to professional standards such as ISAE3000 or AA1000. It establishes strict independence and conflict-of-interest rules, requires professional indemnity insurance, and defines the oversight mechanisms used by the Climate Bonds Standard Secretariat to monitor verifier performance.

The SCF2 MEL Guidance Notes outline a two-tier results measurement system consisting of event-level monitoring managed by partners and programme-level evaluation managed by the Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI). Partners are required to use specific tools—including pre- and post-event surveys and field notes—to capture baseline and end-line data, while adhering to GDPR standards for informed consent and data pseudonymisation. The guidance also mandates ethics planning for human subject engagement and environmental assessments to track and reduce the carbon footprint of funded activities.

The Global Stocktake (GST) is a five-year iterative cycle under the Paris Agreement designed to assess collective global progress in mitigation, adaptation, and finance. The process consists of three phases: Information Collection and Preparation, Technical Assessment, and Consideration of Outputs. For adaptation, the GST aims to establish a collective monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL) system to define adequate responses and recognize the efforts of developing countries. The document highlights that National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) and Adaptation Communications (AdComs) are primary data sources, but encourages the use of Voluntary Submissions to ensure sub-national actions and specific priorities are not lost during the Secretariat's synthesis process.

The document explains the Global Stocktake (GST) as the Paris Agreement's "ratchet mechanism" to assess collective progress on mitigation, adaptation, and finance. It argues that for climate action to be effective, it must be guided by human rights, including the rights of Indigenous Peoples, gender equality, and intergenerational equity. The briefing details the GST's three-phase structure—information collection, technical assessment, and consideration of outputs—concluding at COP28 in November 2023. It provides a framework for stakeholders to align their submissions with the GST's guiding questions to address critical gaps such as fossil fuel phase-out, land tenure rights, and loss and damage.

The document outlines the structure and process for developing GCF Country Programmes, which serve as the foundation for prioritizing climate finance proposals. It details five mandatory components: country context, climate finance strategy, project priorities, institutional needs, and stakeholder engagement. The guide emphasizes alignment with national climate plans (such as NDCs and NAPs) and the role of Accredited Entities in implementing these priorities over four-year programming cycles.

The National Adaptation Plan (NAP) process is a strategic framework established in 2010 under the Cancun Adaptation Framework to help developing countries identify and address medium- and long-term climate adaptation priorities. It moves beyond ad hoc projects to embed adaptation into national development planning, budgeting, and decision-making. The process consists of three broad phases—planning, implementation, and monitoring and evaluation (M&E)—supported by enabling factors such as financing and capacity development. It is distinct from National Adaptation Programmes of Action (NAPAs), which focused on urgent short-term needs, and Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), though it can operationalize the adaptation commitments within NDCs. The document emphasizes that a NAP is both a process and a document, and that effective processes must be country-driven, gender-responsive, and inclusive of the private sector and sub-national actors.

The document defines the NAP process as a strategic approach for countries to identify and respond to medium- and long-term climate adaptation priorities. It outlines the transition from short-term project-based interventions to systemic integration of adaptation into national development planning and budgeting. The process consists of a continuous cycle of planning, implementation, and monitoring and evaluation (M&E), supported by technical guidelines from the Least Developed Countries Expert Group (LDCEG). The text emphasizes that a NAP is both a document and a process, highlighting the importance of vertical integration between national and subnational levels, gender responsiveness, and private sector engagement. It further clarifies the synergy between NAPs, Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), the Paris Agreement, and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction.

The document outlines the flexible nature of National Adaptation Plans (NAPs), stating that there is no single template and that countries should determine the structure and content based on their specific contexts. It references the Least Developed Country Expert Group (LEG) Technical Guidelines, which divide the process into four elements: laying groundwork, preparatory elements, implementation strategies, and reporting, monitoring, and review. The guidance stresses that the process of development is as important as the final document, which should serve as a strategic guide for adaptation investments and priorities.

The National Adaptation Plan (NAP) process is a strategic framework established in 2010 under the Cancun Adaptation Framework to help countries identify and address medium- and long-term climate adaptation priorities. Unlike the earlier National Adaptation Programmes of Action (NAPAs) which focused on immediate needs, the NAP process aims to embed adaptation into standard development planning, budgeting, and decision-making. The process consists of three broad phases: planning, implementation, and monitoring and evaluation (M&E). It is designed to be country-driven, gender-responsive, and multi-sectoral, ensuring that adaptation is not treated as a separate environmental issue but as an integral part of national development. The document highlights the NAP process's central role in meeting the goals of the Paris Agreement, specifically Article 7 paragraph 9, and its synergy with Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction.

The guidance outlines the roles, methodologies, and reporting standards for independent verifiers ensuring that bonds align with the Climate Bonds Standard. It details the two-phase certification process—pre-issuance and post-issuance—and specifies the types of verification engagements available, including Reasonable Assurance, Limited Assurance, and Agreed-Upon Procedures. The document establishes strict independence and conflict-of-interest criteria for verifiers and provides a structured methodology for engagement, planning, risk assessment, testing, and reporting to maintain the integrity of the Climate Bond Certification Mark.

The document outlines the procedural rules for the Green Climate Fund Board to adopt decisions on a non-objection basis. It defines what constitutes an 'objection', the process for Co-Chairs to resolve such objections directly with Board members, and the conditions under which a decision is deemed approved or referred to the next formal Board meeting. It also specifies transparency requirements, including notification of active observers and publication on the GCF website.