Search Climate Insights Directory

The report finds that public financial flows have not aligned with Paris Agreement goals, with fossil fuel subsidies increasing significantly since 2015, reaching over USD 1 trillion in 2022. It argues that these subsidies incentivize emissions and hinder clean energy deployment, while recommending improved transparency, accountability, and national planning to transition these flows.

Carbon Market Watch (CMW) argues that the Article 6.4 Supervisory Body must establish a robust, independent grievance mechanism before registering any carbon crediting projects to protect indigenous peoples and local communities. Drawing on a review by Perspectives Climate Research, CMW finds that most voluntary carbon market (VCM) standards—including Verra, American Carbon Registry, and Climate Action Reserve—have inadequate mechanisms, while the Global Carbon Council lacks one entirely. Only the Gold Standard and the Green Climate Fund's Independent Redress Mechanism are identified as high-quality models. CMW recommends that the Article 6.4 mechanism be fully independent, transparent, and accessible, featuring a public grievance repository and the power to overturn Supervisory Body decisions.

The report evaluates grievance mechanisms across various carbon market standards and funds, using UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights as a benchmark. It finds that most voluntary carbon market (VCM) standards have opaque or insufficient mechanisms, while the Green Climate Fund (GCF) and Gold Standard provide more robust models. The authors recommend that the Article 6.4 mechanism prioritize accessibility, transparency through public repositories, independence, and the ability to provide binding remedies, including the power to overturn Supervisory Body decisions.

Costa Rica is implementing a decentralized approach to climate adaptation through 'Project – Plan A: Climate-Resilient Territories', which empowers local municipalities to develop their own climate actions based on territorial analysis and inclusive governance.

Costa Rica is implementing a strategy of local-scale climate adaptation, exemplified by the "Proyecto Plan A: Territorios resilientes ante el cambio climático," which empowers local governments to develop their own adaptation actions. Approximately 25% of the country's cantons, covering 46% of the territory, have generated specific climate adaptation actions by analyzing local threats and integrating climate variables into territorial planning. The approach emphasizes the inclusion of historically excluded groups, such as indigenous peoples, Afro-descendants, women, and youth, in the governance and implementation of these measures.

The document outlines eight reasons why the UK should not increase its military spending, asserting that the UK and NATO already possess significant force advantages over Russia and China. It highlights recent budget increases, such as a £24bn boost in 2020, and criticizes the arbitrary nature of NATO's 2% GDP spending target. The author argues that funds would be better allocated to the National Health Service, overseas aid, and carbon emission reductions, noting that military spending is more than seven times the budget for reducing national carbon emissions.

Recourse argues that the World Bank Group's Evolution Roadmap lacks essential commitments to the 1.5C goal and fails to rule out direct or indirect funding for fossil fuels, including through financial intermediaries and technical assistance.

The analysis examines sectoral GHG emissions per capita from 2000 to 2019 across 180 countries. It finds that while energy supply, buildings, and agriculture emissions per capita have decreased in over half of the countries, transport and industry emissions per capita have increased in more than half. Road transport is identified as a particular laggard, with per capita emissions increasing in nearly two-thirds of the countries.

The document demands that Japan phase out coal by 2030, end international public finance for fossil fuels, and stop promoting technologies like ammonia co-firing and carbon capture and storage, which the authors claim are ineffective and costly.

The report argues that the World Bank Group must shift from project-by-project 'greening' to a systemic transformation of its portfolio to support 1.5°C alignment. It proposes a strict taxonomy that excludes fossil gas and 'false solutions' like CCUS and nuclear power, while emphasizing a rights-based approach to ensure the energy transition does not burden marginalized communities or increase debt in low-income countries.

ClientEarth argues that EIOPA's reliance on historical data to assess transition risks is flawed because future decarbonization will be non-linear and more rapid than past trends. The organization advocates for a precautionary approach, specifically proposing a 100% capital requirement for companies engaged in 'New Fossil Fuel Activities' (exploration, expansion, or development). ClientEarth also warns that sustainability market indices and corporate emissions targets are often unreliable due to greenwashing and inadequate methodologies, urging EIOPA to include absolute emissions and scope 3 emissions in its risk assessments to avoid underrepresenting systemic financial risks.

A review of voluntary carbon market standards found that most have inadequate or non-existent grievance mechanisms, leaving local and indigenous communities vulnerable. Only Gold Standard and the Green Climate Fund's Independent Redress Mechanism were rated as having good mechanisms. The report details failures in accessibility, transparency, and independence for standards like Verra, CAR, and ACR, and notes that the Global Carbon Council lacks a mechanism entirely. It provides a framework of good practices and specific recommendations for these standards and the Paris Agreement's Article 6.4 Supervisory Body.

Earthjustice argues that limiting climate mitigation to the property level is insufficient to protect world heritage. The statement recommends that the World Heritage Committee recognize state parties' national-level obligations to limit warming to 1.5°C, acknowledge extraterritorial obligations under Article 6(3) to prevent transboundary harm, and utilize the List of World Heritage in Danger to hold states accountable for climate-related threats.

The Stakeholder Toolkit lists a variety of frameworks and organizations designed to align industrial activities with forest conservation and climate goals. It categorizes resources for agricultural supply chains (focusing on commodities like palm oil, soy, beef, and paper), mining (including large-scale and artisanal standards), and infrastructure development. Key resources include the Accountability Framework Initiative, World Bank's Forest-Smart Mining guides, and the ICMM Mining Principles, which align mining operations with the Paris Agreement and UN Sustainable Development Goals.

The report argues that governments have failed to fulfill commitments to shift public financial flows away from fossil fuels, with subsidies increasing since the Paris Agreement. It identifies significant data gaps regarding state-owned enterprise investments and provides a framework for fossil fuel subsidy reform based on pricing, impact management, and stakeholder support.

The report finds that five major Swiss financial institutions—UBS, Credit Suisse, Swiss Life AM, Zurich, and Pictet—continue to provide billions in financing and investments to companies expanding coal, oil, and gas production. Despite public net-zero pledges, the authors argue these institutions maintain weak policies with significant loopholes, engage in 'net-zero greenwashing,' and send mixed signals through inconsistent voting practices at shareholder meetings.

The Strategic Plan for Advancing Energy Efficiency Across Demand Sectors by 2030 outlines a framework for G20 countries to double the global annual rate of energy intensity improvement. It focuses on five pillars: buildings, industry, transport, financing, and behavioral change. The plan argues that energy efficiency is the 'first fuel' for the energy transition and proposes specific high-impact opportunities, such as rethinking building codes (RENEW), scaling motor efficiency for SMEs (SME²), and aggregating energy services (FAST). It emphasizes the need to triple annual energy efficiency investments to approximately USD 840 billion by 2030 and highlights the potential of the Indian 'Lifestyle for Environment' (LiFE) initiative to reduce global CO2 emissions by 2 billion tonnes by 2030.

ClientEarth argues that the TPT framework must move from permissive language to mandatory, science-aligned standards to correct a market failure where corporate net zero commitments lack credible transition plans. Key recommendations include requiring alignment with 1.5°C pathways, mandatory disclosure of all Scope 1-3 emissions, and a prohibition on counting carbon credits toward reduction targets. The document also advocates for stronger links between transition plans and financial statements, more rigorous reporting on corporate lobbying, and the integration of 'just transition' and nature-positive objectives.

The document asserts that maintaining the 1.5°C target is essential because the costs and human suffering associated with climate change increase exponentially with every incremental rise in temperature. It argues that this ambitious goal is required to trigger the massive scaling of investments and policy changes needed to mitigate climate change, warning that abandoning the target would create a 'slippery slope'.

The analysis finds that interactions between key SDG targets are generally synergetic at a global level when aligned with a 1.5°C climate target. Specifically, mobilizing climate finance and Official Development Assistance (ODA) and mainstreaming climate change into national policy are identified as the most beneficial objectives for advancing all other targets. The authors conclude that achieving these goals in tandem with the 1.5°C limit would strongly improve global resilience, adaptive capacity, and the reduction of poverty, vulnerability, and inequality.