Search Climate Insights Directory

Carbon Market Watch argues that the CDM requires fundamental reform to address failures in human rights accountability, additionality testing, and sustainable development monitoring. Key recommendations include establishing a formal grievance mechanism, restricting technology eligibility to exclude fossil fuels, and introducing liability rules for Designated Operational Entities to prevent conflicts of interest.

The document argues that sustainable public procurement is essential for deploying infrastructure that optimizes value for money (VfM) across the entire asset life cycle. It details the roles of governments, development banks, and private investors in managing environmental and social risks, and examines the legal instruments—such as UNCITRAL and EU directives—that enable the integration of sustainability into tendering. The paper also discusses the importance of Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) and the use of financial incentives like green bonds and accelerated depreciation to encourage green innovation.

The document examines why traditional multilateral development banks struggle to meet the needs of middle-income countries, citing bureaucratic loan processes, rigid procurement rules, and stringent safeguards. Using the African Development Bank (AfDB) as a case study and analyzing experiences in Nigeria and Botswana, it argues that MICs are increasingly turning to private finance, bilateral donors like China, and domestic markets. It recommends that the NDB adopt a leaner operational model, utilize 'use of country systems' (UCS) for procurement, focus on 'green' sustainable infrastructure, and improve gender representation in governance to avoid the pitfalls of established MDBs.

More than 100 civil society organizations express deep concern over the Green Climate Fund's (GCF) lack of adequate policies for financing high-risk activities. The statement argues that the GCF Board should not approve high-risk projects—including large hydropower and infrastructure—until it adopts a full Environmental and Social Management System (ESMS) and a free-standing Indigenous Peoples' Policy aligned with international standards like UNDRIP. The groups demand more rigorous scrutiny for high-risk sub-projects, country-driven proposals, and strict adherence to public disclosure timelines for impact assessments.

A coalition of organizations calls on FMO and DEG to address human rights failures and environmental damage caused by the Barro Blanco dam project in Panama, specifically regarding 'test flooding' conducted without community consultation or Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC).

The document serves as a guide for commercial banks, MSMEs, and investors in Bangladesh to engage with the Green Climate Fund. It details the roles of the National Designated Authority (NDA), the process for becoming a National Implementing Entity (NIE), and the options for acting as an executing entity. It specifically highlights the Private Sector Facility (PSF) and its MSME support programme, outlining the fiduciary, environmental, and social standards required for accreditation, as well as the criteria used to evaluate project proposals.

The GCF Board's twelfth meeting resulted in the endorsement of the initial Strategic Plan (2015-2018) and the accreditation of 13 entities, including HSBC and the African Development Bank. Key operational milestones included the adoption of a Comprehensive Information Disclosure Policy, the establishment of a Budget Committee, and the approval of a risk register. The Board also addressed resource mobilization, noting a USD 3 billion contribution arrangement from the United States and approving a budget increase for Secretariat staffing to approximately 100 members by the end of 2016. Additionally, the Board initiated the process for appointing a new Executive Director and approved a USD 1.5 million grant for project preparation in Rwanda.

Carbon Market Watch argues that the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) requires fundamental reform to address systemic failures in human rights, additionality, and sustainable development. The organization recommends establishing a formal grievance mechanism, strengthening civil society participation, and introducing a 'negative list' of ineligible technologies to prevent the issuance of non-additional credits. It further proposes shortening crediting periods, reforming the CDM Executive Board's composition to prevent conflicts of interest, and introducing liability rules for Designated Operational Entities (DOEs) to ensure auditor independence.

The paper argues that the New Development Bank (NDB) lacks a clear, shared definition of sustainable development and suggests that South Africa could lead the BRICS group in establishing a holistic framework. Drawing on stakeholder interviews and international best practices, the authors recommend that the NDB prioritize social and environmental safeguards, move away from coal and extractive industries, and establish formal dialogue mechanisms with civil society to ensure transparency and pro-poor outcomes.

The document provides an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) for a project aimed at conserving freshwater, marine, and coastal resources in the Mesoamerican Reef System (MAR). It defines the institutional roles of the Central American Commission on Environment and Development (CCAD) and partner NGOs, establishes a project classification system (Categories A, B, and C) based on risk, and outlines procedures for Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIAs). The framework identifies priority river basins—including the Hondo, Motagua, Belice, Chamelecón, and Ulúa—and details the threats facing the reef, such as agricultural runoff, deforestation, and urban waste. It also sets strict safeguards for indigenous peoples, involuntary resettlement, and the use of hazardous pesticides, while proposing various 'ridge-to-reef' interventions like agroforestry and habitat restoration.

Carbon Market Watch argues that the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) must undergo reform to be eligible for results-based finance (RBF) from institutions like the Green Climate Fund (GCF). This reform should include the implementation of environmental and social safeguards, a grievance mechanism, and an exclusion list for projects with low additionality or high emissions. Additionally, the organization recommends enhancing the online platform for voluntary cancellation by making sustainable development benefits more visible and improving the Sustainable Development (SD) tool to include stakeholder input and legal compliance assessments.

CIEL is participating in a three-day consultation in Washington, DC, as part of a reform process started in 2012 to improve the World Bank's project loan policies. CIEL argues that the Bank has prioritised investment volume over safety and environmental protections, and is pushing for standards that guarantee compliance with international law.

The document describes REDD+ as a voluntary framework for developing countries to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation while enhancing forest carbon stocks. It details the five core activities, the three phases of implementation (readiness, implementation, and results-based finance), and the requirements for receiving results-based payments, including national strategies and monitoring systems. The report also outlines how the 2015 Paris Agreement integrates REDD+ into the global climate architecture, specifically regarding Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and transparency frameworks.

The policy brief highlights how climate mitigation actions under the UNFCCC can infringe on human rights, citing the Sasan coal power project as a case study of forced displacement and pollution. It calls for the Paris agreement to explicitly commit parties to human rights obligations and establish a robust institutional safeguard system, including grievance and monitoring mechanisms, to manage the risks associated with increasing climate finance flows from 2020 onwards.

Carbon Market Watch argues that the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) requires fundamental reform to remain viable after 2020, specifically to move beyond 'pure offsetting' and ensure human rights protections. The organization recommends establishing a formal grievance mechanism, strengthening civil society participation, and introducing stricter additionality testing to exclude high-emission technologies like coal. It also calls for the removal of conflicts of interest within the CDM Executive Board and the introduction of liability rules for Designated Operational Entities (DOEs) to prevent the issuance of non-additional credits.

The Green Climate Fund (GCF), an operating entity of the UNFCCC, aims to support low-emission and climate-resilient development in developing countries. It operates through a 24-member Board divided equally between developed and developing nations and distributes funds via 'Accredited Entities' rather than directly. The fund maintains a 50/50 aspirational split between adaptation and mitigation, with half of adaptation funds targeted at particularly vulnerable countries. However, the document highlights concerns regarding the lack of an explicit exclusion list for fossil fuels, the potential for funding 'false solutions', and the limited requirements for national designated authorities (NDAs) to engage with civil society and affected communities.

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) is the primary multilateral fund for climate adaptation and mitigation in developing countries. It operates through accredited entities and National Designated Authorities (NDAs), with a target of splitting funding equally between adaptation and mitigation. While it lacks a formal exclusion list for polluting technologies, it employs investment criteria to avoid high-emission infrastructure. Civil society organizations, including Friends of the Earth, act as observers and advocates to ensure transparency and community involvement.

Carbon Market Watch recommends that the Green Climate Fund (GCF) avoid the shortcomings of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) by implementing strict criteria for additionality, sustainability, and social safeguards in its funding proposals.

The Center for International Environmental Law and other organizations advocate for the AIIB to implement a transparent, independent, and accessible accountability framework. They specifically call for an Oversight Mechanism aligned with UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and caution against over-reliance on potentially weak Country and Corporate Systems for grievance redress.

A coalition of 98 global entities argues that the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) fails to comply with international human rights obligations, specifically those recognized in the 2010 Cancun Agreements. The letter calls for the establishment of an independent accountability mechanism, the adoption of international sustainable development safeguards, and the implementation of improved stakeholder consultation processes to prevent environmental and social harms.