Search Climate Insights Directory

The 2015 IGF Annual General Meeting in Geneva brought together over 230 participants to discuss the integration of environmental, social, and economic planning into the mine life cycle. Key discussions centered on the necessity of early mine closure planning, the alignment of mining activities with the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and the challenges of financing reclamation. The meeting also presented pilot assessments of the Mining Policy Framework (MPF) in the Dominican Republic, Uganda, and Madagascar, highlighting gaps in socioeconomic benefit optimization and post-mining transition laws.

The SEI Initiative on Climate Finance focuses on enhancing the delivery and effectiveness of climate finance for developing countries. It addresses four primary areas: defining and evaluating effectiveness to ensure long-term social and economic change; reforming the fragmented global finance architecture to reduce transaction costs; analyzing the role and viability of private finance in adaptation and energy transitions; and operationalizing the concept of 'intolerable risks' to better address loss and damage.

The report identifies significant gaps between Zambia's national agricultural policies and the proposed global SDGs, noting that while national goals focus on production and exports, the SDGs emphasize human well-being and systemic sustainability. It highlights that current Zambian interventions, such as the Farmer Input Support Programme (FISP), reinforce a reliance on maize and fail to address structural barriers like poor market access and climate vulnerability.

The SEI Strategy 2015–2019 establishes a framework to bridge science and policy through three primary delivery areas: scientific research, policy engagement, and capacity development. The institute aims to shift from traditional reporting toward a more integrated approach that includes behavioral science, geopolitics, and targeted communication. Central to this strategy is the launch of 'SEI Initiatives'—specialized research hubs focusing on critical issues like climate finance, fossil fuels, and the water-energy-food nexus. The document also details the enabling infrastructure required for these goals, including the PMEC monitoring system and a suite of analytical tools such as LEAP and WEAP, while emphasizing the need to engage 'hard-to-reach' stakeholders in the private sector.

The SEI Initiative on Transforming Development and Disaster Risk (TDDR) addresses the paradox where development often acts as a root cause of disaster risk rather than a means to reduce it. Using a social-ecological systems (SES) framework, the initiative focuses on three research areas: understanding the interaction between development and risk, exploring equitable social-ecological resilience, and investigating adaptive governance processes. The goal is to generate knowledge and a synthesis framework to transform development into a tool for risk reduction, while monitoring the implementation of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction.

The briefing evaluates the UN Secretary-General's vision for the post-2015 development agenda, endorsing the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the integration of human rights and ecosystem health. While praising the report's narrative, the author identifies critical gaps in target specificity, the definition of partnerships, and the role of the private sector in accountability frameworks. It specifically notes the need for a technical review of the 169 targets to ensure they are quantified and time-bound, and calls for more concrete proposals on development finance and the relationship between climate finance and development aid.

The report argues that the Zero Draft of the Post-2015 Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction lacks coherence in its organising logic and fails to sufficiently integrate critical drivers of risk such as climate change, conflict, and poverty. It recommends a restructured framework focused on minimising new risks, reducing existing risks, and managing residual risks, while calling for stronger financial commitments and a more inclusive approach to vulnerable groups and fragile states.

The report argues that a high ambition climate agreement, aiming to limit global warming to 2°C by 2100, is essential for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030. While physical climate impacts are projected to be similar across scenarios until 2030, a high ambition deal provides the policy framework, international cooperation, and finance necessary to drive green growth and reduce poverty. Conversely, a low ambition agreement (3-5°C warming) is linked to slower economic growth, higher inequality, and a significantly greater risk of failing to meet SDGs related to poverty, inequality, and global partnerships.

Carbon Market Watch argues that previous market-based mechanisms, such as the CDM and EU ETS, failed due to oversupply and poor environmental integrity. To prevent these failures in a post-2020 regime, the organization recommends strict eligibility rules based on national ambition, the exclusion of REDD-plus and agriculture from carbon markets, and the implementation of discounting to ensure net atmospheric benefits. It further calls for a UN-led standard-setting body, a robust institutional safeguard system to protect human rights, and a share of proceeds from all traded units to be allocated to the Adaptation Fund.

The author contends that climate change is the primary challenge to sustainable development and that the post-2015 framework must include a dedicated climate goal and integrated targets to avoid undermining poverty eradication efforts. While the current SDG report includes these elements, the author warns that some countries oppose the climate goal due to perceived overlaps with the UNFCCC. The document asserts that the post-2015 framework should complement, not replace, the UNFCCC and can provide momentum for the COP21 agreement.

The World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) asserts that climate change is the most critical sustainable development challenge and that sustainable energy access is a primary lever for eradicating poverty. The authors call for the final text of the UN Sustainable Development Goals to explicitly include both climate mitigation and adaptation measures, as well as the scaling up of sustainable energy access, to ensure global action and partnership between public and private sectors.

The author asserts that climate change threatens to reverse development gains and undermine efforts to end poverty. The text emphasizes that the UN Climate Summit and the transition from Millennium Development Goals to Sustainable Development Goals are critical opportunities to integrate climate resilience with poverty eradication. It highlights specific solutions, such as renewable energy and energy-efficient technologies, as drivers of economic growth and public health.

The paper argues that for the SDGs to deliver climate compatible development, climate change must be both a stand-alone goal and mainstreamed across all other goals. It highlights a lack of quantitative targets in the Open Working Group's draft and emphasizes the need for nationally relevant indicators and local-level resilience. The document suggests that the SDGs should complement the UNFCCC process rather than duplicate it, and calls for coordinated financing to avoid gaps in climate compatible development funding.

The document analyzes the transition from the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), noting a shift toward a universal, integrated approach to food security. It highlights a consensus on increasing agricultural productivity and resource efficiency, with an expanded focus on nutritional value and the empowerment of smallholders. While the Open Working Group's 'Zero draft' includes a dedicated goal for hunger and sustainable agriculture, the author argues that the framework still lacks sufficient integration between goals and specific strategies for implementation, such as research and technology transfer.

The report details a rapid foresight exercise and backcasting analysis conducted with 18 practitioners from Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) to identify gaps in sustainable development planning. It emphasizes the need to transition from siloed, sector-based planning to integrated, multistakeholder processes that align national visions with subnational implementation. The document outlines a capacity-building agenda for 2014-2015 focusing on vertical and horizontal collaboration, cross-cutting policies for water, energy, and food security, and the shift from expenditure-based reporting to objective-based monitoring, evaluation, and reporting (MER). It also maps existing regional networks, such as REDEPLAN and CLAD, to coordinate knowledge sharing and avoid duplication of efforts.

The report identifies four core areas for improving sustainable development (SD) planning: multistakeholder participation, integrated vertical planning across government levels, cross-sectoral policy integration, and monitoring, evaluation, and reporting (MER). Across Africa, Asia-Pacific, and Latin America and the Caribbean, the report finds a prevalence of 'silo' sectoral planning and a lack of institutional frameworks for stakeholder engagement. It argues for the creation of national SD councils chaired by heads of state and the adoption of 'glocal' planning to align global goals with local implementation. Key capacity gaps include a lack of data for evidence-based policy, poor coordination between governmental and non-governmental agencies, and limited technical skills for information management at subnational levels.

The document identifies five critical areas for designing the HLPF review mechanism: the entities to be reviewed and frequency, the scope of what is reviewed, incentives for voluntary participation, the methodology for national and systemic reviews, and the integration of outputs with other global sustainable development frameworks. It argues that the mechanism should focus on positive learning and scalability rather than finger-pointing, and must assess both goals and the means of implementation together.

The document outlines a framework for transitioning African governance toward the 2030 SDGs, emphasizing the need for National Councils for Sustainable Development (NCSDs) and integrated planning. It identifies current gaps, such as poor policy implementation and a dearth of data, and proposes capacity-building strategies and the establishment of Communities of Practice (CoP) to foster knowledge sharing across the continent.

The document argues that subnational governments are essential for implementing sustainable development policies because they are closest to citizens' needs and can foster grassroots innovation. It emphasizes the need for 'vertical coordination'—the linking of local, subnational, national, and supranational levels—to ensure policy coherence. Using empirical research, the author identifies good practice examples in Europe (such as Tyrol, Austria) and other regions (such as Bhutan), while noting that many regions lack systematic links to national strategies due to political independence or administrative bottlenecks. The briefing recommends a 'metagovernance' approach that mixes hierarchical, market, and network styles to better integrate sustainable development across all levels of government.

The document argues that African countries must integrate an ecosystem-based approach into economic planning to protect natural assets from pressures like population growth and extractive industries. It advocates for the use of ecological accounting and natural asset pricing to quantify the economic value of ecosystems, which often exceeds the value of their conversion for mining or farming. The brief recommends a multi-level governance system—combining national interdisciplinary coordination with local community co-management—and the adoption of innovative financing like Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) and Blue Carbon frameworks. It emphasizes the need for rigorous environmental impact assessments (EIAs) and scientific spatial mapping to guide conservation priorities and regulate development in sensitive areas.