Search Climate Insights Directory

The Global Climate and Health Alliance (GCHA) developed the HealthyNDCs Scorecard to analyze and rank 40 NDCs from 66 countries, assessing how health is incorporated into climate commitments and the level of climate ambition. The document serves as a guide for a Twitter campaign to pressure governments to set ambitious emissions targets and embed health protections into their national climate plans. GCHA identifies specific countries as failing to consider health or lacking ambition, while others are praised for leadership in this area.

The NewClimate Institute developed a methodology to assess the design of NDCs based on four criteria: increased mitigation ambition, comprehensiveness, implementation plans, and transparency. Applying this to 20 diverse NDCs, the analysis found that while most countries meet requirements for comprehensiveness and transparency, less than half demonstrated higher mitigation ambition compared to their first NDC, and many lack clear implementation plans.

Carbon Market Watch argues that environmental integrity under Article 6 requires the mandatory application of corresponding adjustments to all mitigation activities to prevent double counting. The briefing strongly opposes the carry-over of pre-2020 Kyoto Protocol units, asserting they would flood the market with up to 4 billion "junk credits" and increase global emissions. Additionally, it advocates for a share of proceeds (SOP) for adaptation that combines monetary and in-kind contributions, recommending that this levy apply to both Article 6.2 and 6.4 mechanisms to ensure stable finance for developing countries.

The report finds that the complete removal of fossil fuel consumption subsidies across 32 modelled countries could reduce greenhouse gas emissions by an average of 6.09% by 2030. When combined with a 'subsidy swap' (reinvesting savings into energy efficiency and renewables) and a 10% energy tax, the average national emission reduction increases to 11.84%. The analysis highlights that while some countries like Venezuela see reductions over 30%, G20 nations provide the largest absolute reductions due to their economic scale. Financially, fossil fuel subsidy reform (FFSR) alone could generate USD 2.99 trillion in cumulative savings by 2030, offering a cost-effective mechanism for a 'green recovery' from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Egypt's updated NDC outlines a comprehensive strategy to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to climate change by 2030. The plan focuses on transitioning the electricity sector to 42% renewable energy, reducing associated gas flaring in the oil and gas sector by 65%, and shifting transport toward low-carbon mass transit. Adaptation priorities include rehabilitating 20,000 km of irrigation canals, protecting the Nile Delta from sea-level rise, and enhancing agricultural resilience. Implementation is heavily dependent on international financial support, with an estimated total requirement of USD 246 billion.

The proposal outlines a 36-month project to address Tanzania's vulnerability to climate risks through three main outcomes: strengthening adaptation planning governance and institutional coordination, enhancing the evidence base for adaptation solutions, and developing a validated National Adaptation Plan (NAP). The project aims to overcome barriers such as limited vertical and horizontal coordination, a lack of comprehensive vulnerability data, and the absence of a dedicated adaptation financing strategy. Key activities include conducting vulnerability assessments across eight priority sectors, establishing a climate information portal, and developing three GCF concept notes for priority adaptation measures. The total requested budget is 2,986,412 USD, with implementation led by the UNDP in coordination with the Vice President's Office.

The document argues that African nations must align their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and Long-term Low Emissions Strategies (LTSs) with a cohesive vision for carbon neutrality by 2050. It highlights the necessity of integrating COVID-19 green recovery plans with these climate goals and emphasizes that current global mitigation and adaptation pledges remain insufficient to meet IPCC recommendations. For Africa, the briefing identifies climate finance, adaptation, loss and damage, and youth inclusion as critical priorities for the COP26 agenda.

The briefing evaluates the virtual UN Climate Change subsidiary bodies sessions, noting that while substantive discussions occurred, significant divides between developed and developing nations persisted. Key areas of limited progress include the Paris Agreement Rulebook, carbon markets under Article 6, and the delivery of climate finance. The document highlights logistical hurdles of virtual negotiations and a perceived imbalance in the agenda, which sidelined critical issues like loss and damage and the global goal on adaptation, leaving substantial political and technical work for COP26 in Glasgow.

The We Mean Business Coalition, representing over 1,800 companies with a combined market cap of US$24.8 trillion, calls on G7 heads of state to adopt specific climate policies. Key recommendations include phasing out coal by 2030, ending fossil fuel subsidies by 2025, and mandating climate-related financial disclosures. The coalition argues that a green recovery will better boost GDP and employment than traditional stimulus measures and urges the G7 to lead by example ahead of G20 and COP26.

The document argues that current national climate pledges are inadequate to limit warming to 1.5°C and calls for a transition away from fossil fuels rather than relying on net-zero promises. It emphasizes the need for rigorous rules for Article 6 carbon trading to prevent double-counting and protect human rights, criticizes the omission of loss and damage from the SB52 agenda, and highlights how the virtual format of the negotiations impairs the participation of civil society and Indigenous Peoples.

The guide argues that public understanding of net-zero is currently limited and that governments must adopt evidence-based, tangible, and inclusive communication strategies to mobilize society. It recommends avoiding technical jargon, using positive imagery, and focusing on local realities and immediate actions to build public confidence and support for climate targets.

The report details CDKN's efforts to bridge the gap between climate knowledge and action through regional programmes in Africa, Asia, and South America. Key initiatives include improving climate information on Wikipedia, tailoring IPCC reports for regional audiences, and mainstreaming gender into climate policy in countries like Peru, Ecuador, and Ethiopia. The network also focused on urban resilience in India and Nepal, and community-led responses to the Covid-19 pandemic.

Carbon Market Watch critiques the TSVCM's objective of scaling the voluntary carbon market (VCM), arguing that growth should not be the primary goal and that financial speculation through secondary markets and futures contracts does not benefit the climate. The organization emphasizes the need for a truly independent governance body, free from industry associations and conflicts of interest, and calls for more rigorous Core Carbon Principles (CCPs). Key recommendations include excluding ex-ante and retroactive crediting, requiring a minimum permanence timeframe of at least 100 years, and ensuring that credits used for offsetting include corresponding adjustments to national reporting to avoid double claiming.

Carbon Market Watch argues against the transition of CDM credits to the Paris Agreement era, warning that up to 4 billion "hot air" credits could flood the market. The organization advocates for a clean break from the Kyoto Protocol, requiring all CDM projects to be reassessed against strict quality criteria. To enable climate ambition under Article 6, the submission proposes the use of conservative baselines, an automatic partial cancellation rate of credits to ensure overall global emission reductions, and the restriction of carbon markets to the disbursement of results-based climate finance rather than zero-sum offsetting.

The analysis finds a growing trend of countries incorporating fossil fuel production into their national climate communications, with some establishing pathways for managed decline. However, a significant number of countries still plan for continued or expanded production, and many fail to address the equity and economic diversification needs of a just transition.

The analysis of 29 long-term climate strategies reveals a general commitment to Paris Agreement goals and a growing trend toward 'net-zero' targets regardless of a country's economic development. While these strategies typically include mitigation modeling, near-term targets, and considerations for a just transition, the paper notes that many nations still need to submit strategies or require support for implementation.

Power Forward 4.0 finds that 60% of Fortune 500 companies have set at least one climate or energy target, a 12-percentage-point increase since 2017. While GHG reduction targets are most common (54%) and Science-Based Targets (SBTs) have increased sixfold, only 20% of the Fortune 500 have set or committed to an SBT. The report highlights a rise in net-zero commitments (17%) and 100% renewable energy targets (58 companies), though it notes significant gaps in the financial, fossil fuel, and retail sectors. Despite progress, the report argues that voluntary action is insufficient and calls for federal and state policies, such as carbon pricing, to align the US private sector with the Paris Agreement and the US Nationally Determined Contribution.

The report analyzes how varying rates of OMGE and SOP, alongside CDM transition rules, affect global GHG abatement and adaptation funding. It finds that higher OMGE rates increase net global abatement and credit prices, while higher SOP rates increase revenues for the Adaptation Fund without affecting net global abatement. The transition of CDM units and activities is found to potentially increase global emissions unless limited to vulnerable projects.

The 'Resilient Recovery Rapid Readiness Support in Lesotho' project seeks USD 300,000 from the Green Climate Fund (GCF) to ensure that Lesotho's recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic accelerates its climate goals. The initiative focuses on creating a National strategy for resilient recovery, including an investment plan, and developing two concept notes for climate-resilient agriculture and food security. The project is led by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) under the guidance of the Lesotho Meteorological Services, which serves as the National Designated Authority (NDA). It aims to address the socio-economic shocks of the pandemic—which increased vulnerable households by 50%—by integrating climate adaptation and mitigation into economic stimulus and recovery planning.

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) serves as the largest dedicated climate fund for developing countries, accounting for two-thirds of all multilateral climate finance last year. The GCF focuses on bridging the adaptation finance gap, where only one-fifth of global climate funds are currently allocated. To scale action, the GCF employs a strategy involving the translation of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) into investment plans, piloting innovative technologies and business models, utilizing blended finance to crowd-in private investment, and strengthening the capacity of domestic financial institutions. Key initiatives include the Global Sub-national Climate Fund and partnerships to de-risk investments in adaptation technologies and coral reef protection.