Search Climate Insights Directory

The document details the progress of the GCF accreditation process, reporting that 88 entities have been decided for accreditation, with 52 having fully completed the process via effective Accreditation Master Agreements (AMAs). It outlines the pipeline of 112 submitted applications and the support provided to direct access entities, including USD 11.68 million committed through 61 grants. The report specifically recommends the accreditation of seven new applicants (APL090 to APL096) with varying fiduciary and environmental and social (E&S) risk categories, most of whom are subject to specific conditions to close institutional gaps. Additionally, it tracks the status of existing accredited entities in addressing their accreditation conditions and proposes extending the prioritization of entities to the end of the twenty-fifth Board meeting.

The briefing note examines the ongoing negotiations regarding Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, highlighting the risk that poorly designed carbon market and non-market mechanisms could lead to human rights violations. It advocates for the inclusion of rights-based safeguards, meaningful stakeholder consultation (including free, prior, and informed consent for indigenous peoples), and independent grievance redress processes to avoid repeating failures seen in the Kyoto Protocol's Clean Development Mechanism.

The GCF Secretariat report for the period ending 31 August 2019 details progress toward its 2019 goals. Key achievements include the approval of 66 additional funding proposals (public and private) and the signing of 81 Funded Activity Agreements (FAAs), meeting the annual KPI for legal agreements. The Secretariat advanced the first formal replenishment process, with pledges reaching USD 5.9 billion by August 2019. Efforts to strengthen country ownership included technical support for 32 countries' programming and the approval of 61 readiness grants. The report also highlights the development of the 2020–2023 Strategic Plan and the operationalization of a complementarity and coherence framework with other climate funds like the GEF and Adaptation Fund. Challenges remain in the slow disbursement of readiness funds due to delivery partner capacity and the need for further expertise to implement the SEAH Policy.

The report form confirms that the Chile REDD-plus RBP (FP120), managed by the FAO, is classified as Environmental and Social Safeguards (ESS) Category B. It details the disclosure of the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA), Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP), and other assessments including gender and social assessments, which were made available in English and Spanish on October 6, 2019.

The report confirms that the Lao PDR Emissions Reduction Programme, managed by GIZ, is classified as an Environmental and Social Safeguards (ESS) Category B project. It documents the public disclosure of the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA), the Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP), and other critical frameworks including the Indigenous Peoples Plan (IPP), Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF), and Resettlement Action Plan (RAP). These documents were made available in English and Lao on various websites and as hard copies at the Lao Women’s Union offices in Houaphan, Luang Prabang, and Sayabouri provinces, as well as the GIZ office in Vientiane.

The GEF6-MPA project, funded by the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and implemented by the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development (MEDD) with WWF, seeks to expand Madagascar's marine protected areas by over one million hectares. The document outlines the safeguards required to manage environmental and social risks, specifically focusing on the restriction of resource access for local communities. It defines a four-component strategy: establishing a representative network of MPAs/LMMAs, creating a robust enabling environment through regulatory updates, improving site-level management efficiency to support sustainable development, and implementing a knowledge management and monitoring system. A key mechanism is the Action Plan for Resource Access Restriction (PARAR), designed to provide alternative livelihoods for affected persons (PAPs) before restrictions are imposed. The project is classified as Category B by WWF, meaning it has moderate, localized, and reversible impacts. The framework also details a four-level grievance redress mechanism ranging from amicable settlement to judicial recourse.

The GCF Board's 23rd meeting focused on operationalizing the fund's first formal replenishment (GCF-1) and improving governance. Key outcomes include the adoption of a new voting procedure to resolve deadlocks when consensus fails, the approval of a Policy on Ethics and Conflicts of Interest for Active Observers, and the adoption of a Policy on the Prevention and Protection from Sexual Exploitation, Sexual Abuse, and Sexual Harassment (SEAH). The Board also approved several funding proposals, including a high-leverage seawater pumped storage project in Chile and agricultural resilience projects in Bhutan, Pakistan, and Kenya. A Forward-Looking Performance Review (FPR) highlighted that while GCF has committed over USD 5.3 billion, it faces challenges with long disbursement times and a need for greater direct access for developing countries.

At its 23rd meeting, the GCF Board approved 10 new projects totaling USD 266.90 million in GCF funding, which, with co-financing, will support over USD 1.45 billion in climate action across 10 developing countries. The Board adopted several key governance frameworks, including a compliance risk policy, an updated policy on the prevention of sexual exploitation, abuse and harassment (SEAH), and procedures for decision-making when consensus is not reached. Additionally, the Board established that the first replenishment period will run from 1 January 2020 to 31 December 2023 and approved four new Accredited Entities.

The document outlines a risk-based approach to environmental and social due diligence for GCF-funded projects. It details the screening process used to identify potential impacts early in project design and defines three risk categories (A, B, and C) that determine the depth of required assessments, mitigation measures, and stakeholder engagement. It also provides specific guidance for activities involving indigenous peoples and financial intermediation.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) describes the progress at the SB50 talks in Bonn as "glacial," noting that while a non-consensus text for Article 6 was established for COP25, critical language on human rights remains in brackets. CIEL emphasizes that Article 6 mechanisms—which include carbon credit markets and sustainable development mechanisms—must incorporate independent grievance bodies and social safeguards to avoid the failures of the Clean Development Mechanism. The statement also highlights the importance of the Escazú Agreement for environmental democracy in Latin America and condemns countries that questioned the IPCC's Special Report on 1.5°C during the negotiations.

The SB-50 negotiations in Bonn were characterized by persistent political deadlocks, particularly regarding the IPCC 1.5ºC report and Article 6 mechanisms. While there was an increase in countries advocating for human rights-based social safeguards in market mechanisms, deep divisions remain. The session also advanced reviews of the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage and the Gender Action Plan, while highlighting the importance of procedural rights and the Escazú Agreement for civil society participation.

The report 'Uncalculated Risks' examines how development finance institutions (DFIs) often fail to account for human rights risks, leading to the stigmatization, criminalization, and physical attack of human rights defenders. Through 25 case studies across various countries and sectors, it argues that DFIs frequently rely on inadequate client reporting and overlook the enabling environment for public participation. The document provides a 'Leverage Toolbox' and a 'Reprisal Prevention and Response Process' to help DFIs move toward a human rights-based approach to development.

The IEU report covers its operational progress between November 2019 and February 2020, highlighting the completion of evaluations on country ownership and environmental and social safeguards. It details the progress of the Learning-Oriented Real-Time Impact Assessment (LORTA) programme, the publication of evidence gap maps on forestry and adaptation, and the unit's 95% budget expenditure rate for 2019.

The document serves as a formal disclosure of environmental and social safeguard reports for the RE-GAIN project, managed by AGRA. It identifies the programme as Category B for environmental and social safeguards and lists the target countries as Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Kenya, Malawi, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zambia. The report confirms the availability of an Environmental and Social Baseline and Risk Assessment, which includes a risk analysis, an Indigenous Peoples Planning Framework, and an Environmental and Social Action Plan, all disclosed in English, French, Amharic, and Swahili.

The Union of Concerned Scientists reports a pattern of hostility toward science during the first two years of the Trump administration, citing instances of political interference, funding restrictions, and the silencing of scientists. The document recommends that Congress reestablish the Office of Technology Assessment, pass the Scientific Integrity Act, and use confirmation hearings to ensure transparency and adherence to scientific standards.

The document emphasizes that adopting a human rights approach to climate action is essential for protecting those on the frontlines of climate impacts, including indigenous peoples and local communities. It traces the progressive recognition of human rights within the UNFCCC, from the 2010 Cancun Agreements to the 2015 Paris Agreement, and highlights the role of updated Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) in promoting public participation. For the SB50 negotiations, it specifically identifies the need for social and environmental safeguards in Article 6 mechanisms to avoid the rights infringements seen under the Clean Development Mechanism, and notes the importance of reviewing the Warsaw International Mechanism on Loss and Damage and the Gender Action Plan.

Carbon Market Watch calls for the inclusion of independent grievance mechanisms and rights-based safeguards in the Article 6 implementation guidelines to prevent the human rights and environmental violations seen under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM).

The document details a GEF-funded project to increase Madagascar's MPA coverage from 1.1 million hectares to over 2.1 million hectares. It focuses on three main components: establishing a representative network of protected areas, improving the regulatory environment for MPAs and LMMAs, and enhancing site-level management effectiveness through community-led revenue generation and standardized toolkits. The project emphasizes a co-management approach involving the Ministry of the Environment, Ecology and Forests (MEEF), various NGOs, and local communities to balance biodiversity conservation with sustainable economic development.

The report details the GCF's accreditation pipeline, the status of existing accredited entities, and specific assessments for 17 applicants seeking accreditation or upgrades. It highlights the implementation of a prioritization approach to increase the diversity and coverage of direct access entities.

The document examines the environmental integrity risks—specifically baseline determination, additionality, permanence, and leakage—and social safeguards associated with using forest-related mitigation credits in international carbon markets like Article 6 and CORSIA. It notes that while transfer-based finance could increase funding for forest protection, it introduces risks such as credit oversupply and volatility in market prices.