Search Climate Insights Directory

The report argues that community forest management (CFM) and agroecology are complementary systems based on shared principles of territorial control, traditional knowledge, and gender autonomy. It contends that these community-led approaches are more effective at preserving biodiversity and ensuring food security than top-down 'green economy' solutions, such as REDD+ or industrial monoculture plantations. The document specifically critiques the FAO's definition of forests for excluding social and cultural dimensions, which it argues facilitates deforestation and the displacement of local populations. It advocates for the recognition of collective land rights and the promotion of local markets to support sustainable, non-anthropocentric relationships with nature.

The report finds that total 'green finance' for forest emissions reduction (roughly USD 20 billion since 2010) is insufficient and vastly outweighed by 'grey finance'—investments and subsidies that potentially drive deforestation—which totals USD 777 billion. While there is growth in impact investment and results-based REDD+ payments, the report argues that a dramatic shift away from traditional investments in deforestation drivers is required to achieve zero deforestation.

The GCF Board's seventeenth meeting focused on enhancing the fund's operational framework, specifically through the adoption of a comprehensive Risk Management Framework (RMF) and an Operational Framework for complementarity and coherence with other climate funds. The Board accredited six new entities, including CDG Capital, IDCOL, SIDBI, MCT, BTMU, and JICA, while introducing new guidelines for country ownership. Significant discussions were held on the pilot programme for REDD-plus results-based payments and the analysis of barriers to private sector engagement. The Board also approved the 2016 audited financial statements and established performance criteria for the Executive Director.

The document denounces the neoliberal capitalist system and the 'destructive practices' of transnational corporations as drivers of climate injustice and disaster severity in the Global South. It specifically highlights the impact of Hurricane Irma and earthquakes in Mexico, arguing that the most vulnerable are disproportionately affected. The statement rejects 'false solutions' such as the financialization of nature and REDD, instead advocating for 'people’s solutions' including food sovereignty, agroecology, and energy sovereignty to preserve life and manage the commons.

The statement argues that climate disasters, such as Hurricane Irma and the earthquake in Mexico, are results of the neoliberal capitalist system's production and consumption patterns. It criticizes global policies that promote the privatization and financialization of nature, such as REDD and Payments for Environmental Services, as 'false solutions' that protect corporate interests. The document advocates for popular alternatives including food sovereignty, agroecology, and energy sovereignty to preserve life and ensure environmental, social, and gender justice.

ATALC denounces the climate injustice facing Latin America and the Caribbean, linking disasters like Hurricane Irma and earthquakes in Mexico to neoliberal production systems. The statement rejects market-based 'false solutions' and advocates for food, energy, and water sovereignty as the only viable paths to preserve life.

The GCF Secretariat report for the period of 11 June to 8 September 2017 details progress across its operational divisions. Key achievements include the finalization of 33 Accreditation Master Agreements (AMAs) and 19 Funded Activity Agreements (FAAs), the approval of 123 readiness support requests for 88 countries totaling USD 39.5 million, and the launch of the 'GCF 101' online guide. The Secretariat also advanced its gender mainstreaming efforts, with 84% of approved funding proposals containing a gender assessment. Efforts to secure privileges and immunities continue, with 13 bilateral agreements signed to date. The report also outlines the development of a draft Indigenous Peoples Policy and the progress of the Private Sector Facility, which received approximately 350 concept notes for its 'Mobilizing Funds at Scale' request for proposals.

Between 2010 and 2015, US$ 1,477 million in climate finance was committed to Caribbean SIDS, representing approximately 6% of total reported aid flows. The analysis reveals a heavy reliance on bilateral sources (85%), with a significant concentration of funds in a few countries and sectors. While 48% of finance targeted mitigation and 32% adaptation, the report highlights a critical gap in funding for resilience-essential sectors like health and education. Furthermore, a low regional disbursement ratio of 39% suggests significant implementation challenges compared to non-climate aid.

The document examines 'jurisdictional approaches' to deforestation, which align governments, businesses, and NGOs around shared conservation and sustainable development goals. Based on a workshop of practitioners from five initiatives, it identifies key success factors including political leadership, participatory design, and sustainable financing. It highlights the challenge of aligning short-term corporate and government expectations with the long-term systemic change required for landscape-scale forest loss reduction.

The report examines jurisdictional approaches to deforestation, emphasizing the necessity of political leadership, participatory design, and diverse financing. Through case studies in Brazil, Liberia, Ghana, and Colombia, it argues that while these models are nascent and complex, they offer a systemic way to align market forces and government policy to achieve landscape-scale conservation.

The Green Climate Fund Proposal Toolkit 2017 serves as a comprehensive manual for creating funding proposals for the GCF. It details the roles of National Designated Authorities (NDAs), Accredited Entities (AEs), and Executing Entities (EEs), while outlining a ten-step approach to project design. Key requirements include alignment with the GCF's Results Management Framework (RMF), adherence to International Finance Corporation (IFC) Performance Standards for environmental and social safeguards, and the integration of gender-sensitive objectives through a Gender Action Plan (GAP). The document also explains the GCF's six investment criteria—impact potential, paradigm shift potential, sustainable development potential, recipient needs, country ownership, and efficiency and effectiveness—and provides guidance on selecting financial instruments such as grants, concessional loans, equity, and guarantees.

The document critiques the 2010 MOU between California, Acre, and Chiapas, which aimed to link California's cap-and-trade system with jurisdictional REDD+ programs in Brazil and Mexico. It argues that these market-based mechanisms lead to human rights violations, territorial conflicts, and the marginalization of indigenous peoples. In Acre, the report highlights methodological flaws in emission baselines and the failure of social projects. In Chiapas, it notes the rise of land-grabbing for African palm monocultures and significant public debt to the World Bank and IDB. The report concludes that REDD+ serves as a tool for capital accumulation rather than a genuine solution to climate change, recommending a shift toward recognizing land tenure and autonomous territorial management.

The report critiques the 2010 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between California, Acre, and Chiapas, which aimed to link jurisdictional REDD+ programs to California's cap-and-trade system. It argues that these mechanisms prioritize market logic over structural climate causes, leading to land grabbing, the criminalization of traditional practices, and the marginalization of indigenous peoples. In Acre, the report identifies methodological flaws in emission accounting and failures in community-level projects. In Chiapas, it highlights the expropriation of territories for agrofuel monocultures and increasing public debt. The document concludes that REDD+ safeguards are largely rhetorical and recommends the exclusion of carbon markets and offsets from environmental policy.

The Eastern Arc Mountains in Tanzania and Kenya have lost approximately 70% of their original forest cover due to deforestation and degradation. Despite a comprehensive legislative framework and significant donor funding—including $75 million for REDD+ activities in Tanzania between 2009 and 2014—governance remains ineffective. Key drivers include high population growth and a heavy reliance on biomass for energy, with Dar es Salaam residents using over 1,900 tonnes of charcoal daily. The document argues that while participatory forest management through Local Authority and Village Land Forest Reserves shows promise, success is hindered by poor land tenure, lack of economic alternatives to charcoal, and insufficient state capacity. It recommends strengthening the science-policy interface, promoting climate-smart agriculture, and increasing resource allocation for state forestry agencies.

The document examines artisanal and small-scale mining (ASM) in Tanzania as a critical but under-governed source of employment and income. It argues that while the sector provides a vital livelihood for approximately 1.5 million people, it is plagued by severe health and safety risks, specifically mercury poisoning and pit collapses, and environmental degradation such as deforestation. The author contends that current legislation, specifically the 2010 Mining Act, prioritizes large-scale mining (LSM) and creates bureaucratic and financial barriers that marginalize artisanal miners. To harness the sector's potential, the paper recommends lowering licensing costs, improving geological information access, and implementing context-sensitive technology rollouts, such as mercury-recycling retorts, through partnerships between the government, private sector, and international organizations.

Friends of the Earth International criticizes the UN Convention on Biological Diversity's 2017 theme of tourism, asserting that mass tourism causes significant ecological devastation and human rights abuses. The statement contends that 'sustainable tourism' initiatives are often superficial and that the industry's growth—particularly in aviation—is incompatible with climate and biodiversity goals. It advocates for policies that prioritize the self-determination of local and indigenous communities over the interests of transnational corporations.

Friends of the Earth International criticizes the UN Convention on Biodiversity for promoting tourism as a tool for biodiversity conservation. The statement argues that mainstream tourism leads to the eviction of indigenous peoples, destruction of ecosystems like mangrove forests, and excessive resource consumption, including high water usage and food waste. It highlights that 5% of global emissions are linked to tourism and warns that the aviation industry's planned 700% growth by 2050, supported by REDD offsets, is unsustainable. The document calls for a fundamental change in the tourism business model and policies that prioritize the rights and self-determination of local communities over corporate profit.

Friends of the Earth International criticizes the UN Convention on Biological Diversity for promoting tourism to protect biodiversity, arguing that mass tourism leads to ecosystem destruction, water scarcity, and the displacement of indigenous peoples. The statement highlights that while community-based projects exist, the broader industry is characterized by corporate profit, high emissions, and human rights abuses.

The GCF Board approved eight funding proposals totaling USD 387.5 million and accredited seven new entities. Key administrative outcomes include the approval of a USD 43.4 million budget for 2017 and the establishment of work plans for the Independent Redress Mechanism and Independent Integrity Units. The Board also discussed the Readiness and Preparatory Support Programme, allocating up to an additional USD 50 million to it.

The document assesses public finance aligned with REDD+ goals in Côte d’Ivoire for 2015, highlighting the risk of total forest loss by 2034 due to agricultural expansion and logging. It argues that 'greening' existing agricultural finance could increase REDD+ aligned funding fivefold to FCFA 101 billion (USD 169 million) and suggests new mechanisms like a National REDD+ Fund to support sustainable land use.