Search Climate Insights Directory

The document provides an educational overview of REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation), detailing its three-phase implementation process and the technical challenges of establishing reference levels for carbon emissions. It contrasts market-based financing (carbon credits) with fund-based approaches, highlighting concerns that carbon offsets may allow developed nations to avoid reducing their own emissions. The guide emphasizes significant risks to indigenous communities, including forced eviction due to land tenure insecurity and the potential for corruption in fund distribution. It evaluates the safeguards of the UN-REDD and World Bank programs, noting that while UN-REDD has stronger theoretical protections, practical implementation remains a concern, as evidenced by a case study in Vietnam where free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) was found to be deficient.

The paper identifies four types of double counting—double issuance, double claiming, double use, and double purpose—and argues that preventing these is essential for the integrity of international carbon markets. It recommends a 'net flows' accounting approach to ensure full fungibility of units and the international linking of emissions trading schemes. To prevent double issuance, the authors suggest a combination of entity attestations, host country approval, and a centralized UNFCCC information platform. The document emphasizes that globally unique serial numbers containing detailed metadata on mechanism, country, vintage, and scope are critical for effective international oversight.

The paper argues that single-year targets create uncertainty regarding emissions pathways and may reduce cumulative mitigation outcomes compared to multi-year targets, especially when tradable units are used. It assesses four accounting options to address these issues and recommends that future international agreements require continuous multi-year targets to ensure comparability and alignment with carbon budgets.

The paper evaluates the Adaptation Fund's early project approvals, finding that while equity is the primary motivation, the use of uniform national caps rather than formalized vulnerability metrics may result in inequitable outcomes.

The document posits a correlation between domestic climate laws and international ambition, suggesting that national legislation provides the confidence and evidence needed for negotiators to defend ambitious global commitments. It identifies several factors influencing a country's negotiation position, including economic competitiveness, national interest, and leadership goals, while noting that the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) serves as the primary system for these negotiations.

The IAI activities plan for 2014-2015 focuses on institutional restructuring, the monitoring of CRN3 projects, and the leadership of the Latin American Future Earth Network. Key initiatives include a training event in Panama, the closure of a MacArthur Foundation project on Andean biodiversity, and participation in IPBES and UNFCCC processes, including planned events for the CoP in Lima.

The CAIT Equity Explorer is an online visualization tool developed by the World Resources Institute to support UNFCCC climate negotiations. It allows users to compare countries using a variety of metrics related to emissions, development capacity, and vulnerability through radar and column charts.

The COP19 analysis by Carbon Market Watch describes the conference as demoralizing due to the influence of corporate interests and the lowering of climate targets by countries like Japan. While the conference established a mechanism for loss and damage and made progress on REDD+ safeguards and funding, it failed to reach decisions on future carbon markets, the Framework for Various Approaches (FVA), or the New Market Mechanism (NMM). The document also notes that reforms to the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and Joint Implementation (JI) were largely postponed, though some guidance on stakeholder consultation for the CDM was improved.

A coalition of civil society organisations calls for the UNFCCC to implement formal rules to prevent the fossil fuel industry and major polluters from influencing climate policy. The letter highlights the problematic presence of corporate partners and coal industry lobbyists at COP19 in Warsaw, arguing that their commercial interests are irreconcilable with ambitious climate action. The authors suggest following the World Health Organisation's model for excluding the tobacco industry from public health policy-making.

The document examines how international offset mechanisms, which typically provide no net atmospheric benefit, could be designed to deliver a net decrease in greenhouse gas emissions. It identifies the need for certain additionality, surplus reductions, the avoidance of double counting, and the exclusion of surplus reductions from host country pledges to achieve a net atmospheric benefit.

The document outlines the state of climate finance negotiations leading up to COP19, focusing on the mobilization of US$100 billion per year by 2020 and the operationalization of the Green Climate Fund. It details the work of the Standing Committee on Finance, the challenges facing the Adaptation Fund due to falling carbon prices, and the need for 'enabling environments' in both developed and developing countries to attract and deploy investment. The guide emphasizes that providing financial assurance to developing countries is critical for securing their commitment to a new global climate agreement in 2015.

The document outlines the role of the Coalition for Rainforest Nations (CfRN) in supporting developing countries during international climate negotiations, specifically focusing on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+). It argues that the Kyoto Protocol failed to address deforestation, which accounts for approximately 20% of annual global CO2 emissions, and details CfRN's strategies for capacity building, including technical support, negotiation training, and securing leadership roles for delegates. Case studies from the Dominican Republic, Papua New Guinea, and Liberia illustrate the practical application of these supports in national policy and international diplomacy.

The document outlines a hybrid monitoring and evaluation (M&E) framework used by the Climate and Development Knowledge Network (CDKN) to track the effectiveness of its Negotiations Support programme. Because international climate negotiations are complex and non-linear, CDKN moved away from traditional linear causal chains toward 'outcome mapping,' which focuses on behavioral changes in 'boundary partners' (negotiators and delegations). The framework uses five 'Dimensions of Change' as proxies for outcome challenges, with specific 'progress markers' categorized by ambition: 'expect to see', 'like to see', and 'love to see'. Early results indicate that change was observed across all five dimensions, with the most significant progress in negotiator capacity and coordination. The paper argues that while direct attribution of negotiation successes to specific interventions is difficult and politically sensitive, this approach allows for the identification of 'plausible contributions'.

The document examines the tension between the 'green growth' agenda promoted by developed nations and Brazil's preference for 'sustainable development' and autonomous industrialisation. It argues that while Brazil possesses significant environmental assets, its domestic policies—including those of the BNDES and Petrobras—continue to prioritise short-term economic growth and fossil fuel consumption over a green transition. Internationally, Brazil aligns with BRICS and other emerging economies to resist binding emissions commitments and protectionist 'green' trade barriers, despite its own voluntary GHG reduction targets.

The document argues that a paradigm shift requires moving from small, project-by-project interventions to programmatic approaches that address entire sectors or economies. It emphasizes that strong country ownership is a prerequisite for ambition and long-term sustainability, suggesting that the GCF should provide more beneficial funding conditions to countries with higher ambition. The brief also discusses the need for clear performance indicators to measure transformative impact and the importance of substantial financial resources from developed countries to trigger larger investments.

The report argues that avoiding dangerous climate change requires a sophisticated international regime combining top-down UNFCCC direction with broad bottom-up action. It identifies climate diplomacy as the critical interface between national interest debates and international cooperation, requiring three core capabilities: 'knowing yourself' (understanding national interests), 'knowing the other' (analyzing other actors' constraints), and the 'capacity to influence' (integrating priorities into diplomatic channels). The authors highlight that most countries have not yet sufficiently embedded climate change into their 'whole of government' decision-making machinery, often leaving it siloed in environment ministries. The document outlines the evolution of the climate regime from narrow UNFCCC negotiations to a broader system including the G20, Major Economies Forum, and security councils, while emphasizing the need for strategic confidence-building and the use of 'unusual alliances' to overcome political stalemates.

The document examines the negotiations surrounding the Framework for Various Approaches (FVA) ahead of COP-19, highlighting the tension between parties seeking minimal guidance and those calling for centralized oversight. It argues that for carbon markets to support a new climate deal, they must be predicated on ambitious mitigation targets, strict environmental integrity, and the prevention of double counting. The author specifically warns that a proposed FVA pilot phase, advocated by Poland, could set a dangerous precedent by allowing early action units to be recognized in a post-2020 regime before fundamental accounting rules are established.

The Declaration on Climate Justice argues that the global response to climate change must prioritize human rights, equity, and the needs of the most vulnerable. It outlines six priority pathways: empowering affected communities, transitioning to a low-carbon economy, reforming investment models, ensuring government accountability, and strengthening the rule of law. The declaration emphasizes that developed countries must lead in reducing emissions and providing climate finance to ensure a just transition and a sustainable global society.

The document argues that leaders of Least Developed Countries (LDCs) should integrate climate messaging into foreign and diplomatic affairs to catalyse collective action. It proposes a three-point plan: raising domestic awareness of climate action as a national interest, identifying how other governments perceive climate action as their own national interest, and training diplomatic corps on climate issues while educating experts in policy-relevant communication. The authors base these recommendations on experiences from the Republic of the Marshall Islands and the LDC negotiating group within the UNFCCC.

The document outlines the mechanics of consensus-building within the UNFCCC, emphasizing the human element of negotiations. It provides guidance for negotiators on knowing their national 'red lines', mastering technical substance, and building trust through transparency. It also highlights the challenges faced by new negotiators, such as complex schedules and technical jargon, and suggests capacity-building measures like mentoring and the use of external policy briefs to facilitate smoother international cooperation.