Search Climate Insights Directory

The report argues that insurance is an underutilized tool for urban climate resilience, providing not only financial recovery but also risk awareness and incentives for mitigation. It details various insurance mechanisms—micro, meso, and macro—and the roles municipal governments can play as consumers, stewards, and conveners. The document highlights a significant 'protection gap,' noting that 76% of natural catastrophe losses were uninsured in 2020. Key barriers to scaling include a lack of technical capacity in city governments, behavioral biases among urban dwellers, and the difficulty of incorporating long-term climate projections into short-term insurance products. It recommends increased investment in risk assessment, the development of integrated resilience plans with the insurance sector, and the use of concessional finance from development finance institutions to support vulnerable cities.

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 paper analyzes how COVID-19 has disrupted climate finance, noting a tension between the need for economic recovery and the fulfillment of the $100 billion annual climate finance pledge. It highlights that while the pandemic created opportunities for 'green recoveries' through stimulus packages, early funding often favored carbon-intensive sectors. The authors emphasize a growing need for adaptation finance and the mobilization of private capital to support a sustainable transition in Africa.

The report highlights a significant gap in adaptation finance, noting that while total global climate finance reached US$437 billion in 2015, only 16 percent was dedicated to adaptation. It argues that public finance is insufficient to meet the projected costs of building resilience in the developing world, which could reach US$500 billion by 2050. The text identifies critical barriers to private sector engagement, including a lack of predictable returns, deficient regulatory frameworks, and knowledge gaps regarding climate vulnerability. It further examines how climate change threatens key sectors—agriculture, energy, health, and transport—while suggesting that these vulnerabilities also present new market opportunities for climate-resilient products and infrastructure.

The briefing argues that the Leaders Summit on Climate should be used to secure a 50% emissions reduction target from the US by 2030, align the 2030 targets of major economies like China and Japan with net-zero trajectories, increase climate finance for developing nations while ending public coal funding, and ensure COVID-19 recovery packages prioritize green infrastructure over fossil fuels.

The document argues that a share of proceeds for adaptation should be levied on all Article 6.2 and 6.4 transactions as a monetary contribution with a floor value to ensure stable funding. It further asserts that all Internationally Traded Mitigation Outcomes (ITMOs) and Article 6.4 emission reductions (A6.4ERs), including those from sectors or gases outside a host Party's NDC, must be subject to corresponding adjustments to prevent double counting and maintain environmental integrity.

The report finds a nascent process of alignment in Colombia, where progress in green bond issuance and renewable energy auctions is offset by significant continued investment in fossil fuels and high deforestation rates. While the government has established frameworks like the Climate Change Law (2018) and a Carbon Tax, public spending remains heavily skewed toward the energy and mining sectors. Private financial flows are largely inconsistent with climate goals, with carbon-related assets dominating the listed equity market and insurance portfolios. The authors recommend a just transition that redirects fossil fuel subsidies toward renewables and enhances the use of green taxonomies to improve transparency.

The report finds that urban adaptation finance is significantly underfunded, representing only 3-5% of total global adaptation flows, with an estimated annual investment of up to USD 3.7 billion against a projected need of USD 11-20 billion for urban infrastructure protection. Analysis of the Global Landscape of Climate Finance, World Bank PPI, and CDP Cities data reveals a heavy concentration of funding in the water and wastewater sectors and a geographic bias toward East Asia and the Pacific, particularly China. Key barriers to scaling finance include limited DFI mandates for sub-national investment, poor municipal creditworthiness, and a lack of standardized outcome metrics for private investors. The report recommends developing practitioner case study databases, improving urban boundary tracking, and expanding DFI mandates to work directly with cities.

The guide outlines a structured process for building a national landscape of climate finance, moving from scoping and definition to data collection and final analysis. It emphasizes the importance of stakeholder engagement, the use of taxonomies to categorize climate-beneficial versus harmful flows, and the application of tools like Sankey diagrams to visualize financial flows from source to end-use. The document draws on Climate Policy Initiative's (CPI) experience in countries such as India, Indonesia, and France to provide practical examples of tracking both public and private climate finance.

Global climate finance reached USD 632 billion in 2019/2020, but growth has plateaued, with an increase of only 10% between 2017/2018 and 2019/2020. To meet 1.5 °C objectives by 2030, annual finance must increase by at least 590% to USD 4.35 trillion. Mitigation remains the primary recipient of funds, dominated by renewable energy, while adaptation finance is growing but remains almost exclusively public. Investment is heavily concentrated in East Asia and Pacific, Western Europe, and North America.

The COP26 Resilience Hub served as a convening platform for the UNFCCC’s Race to Resilience, bringing together state and non-state actors to prioritise adaptation and resilience. The report identifies five core messages: the necessity of scaling Locally Led Adaptation (LLA), the urgent need for increased and diversified adaptation finance (preferring grants over loans), the requirement to bridge knowledge and implementation gaps, the role of Nature-based Solutions (NbS) across urban, coastal, and rural contexts, and the essential inclusion of marginalised groups—including women, youth, and Indigenous peoples—in decision-making. It also highlights the emergence of 'Loss and Damage' as a critical focus and notes a significant gap between current adaptation finance flows and actual needs.

The COP26 Resilience Hub Synthesis Report outlines five core messages for advancing global climate resilience: the necessity of Locally Led Adaptation (LLA), the urgent need for diversified and increased adaptation finance (preferring grants over loans), the bridging of knowledge and implementation gaps, the role of Nature-based Solutions (NbS) across urban, coastal, and rural settings, and the requirement to center marginalized groups—including women, youth, and Indigenous peoples—in decision-making. The report details thematic insights across ten areas, including finance, water, food, energy, and health, while emphasizing the need to scale these efforts toward COP27.

The report finds that global adaptation finance is dominated by public development finance, with a heavy concentration in water and wastewater management. While finance often aligns with the most vulnerable sectors in specific countries like Pakistan, Zambia, and Niger, significant funding gaps remain relative to Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) targets. The authors highlight critical data gaps in private sector and domestic public finance and recommend the use of new datasets from the Climate Bonds Initiative and CDP to improve tracking accuracy.

The document reviews the state of adaptation finance as of early 2020, highlighting the Adaptation Committee's projections of rising costs and the Adaptation Fund's operational milestones. It addresses the difficulty of tracking adaptation flows, noting that while finance increased by 35% in 2017-2018, it represents only 5% of tracked climate finance. The brief also contrasts the massive business opportunities in adaptation solutions with the urgent needs of vulnerable populations, arguing that adaptation requires a rethinking of production and equity.

The document highlights a significant gap between global climate adaptation finance needs and actual commitments, noting that annual costs could reach $280 to $500 billion by 2050. It argues that marginalizing local communities from national planning leads to ineffective investments and proposes that CSOs are essential for building inclusive, transparent, and accountable finance systems. Using examples from Bangladesh and the Philippines, it demonstrates how multistakeholder engagement and citizen-led budget reporting can improve accountability. Finally, it outlines a four-step process for CSOs to build their capacity to track and evaluate adaptation finance flows.

The briefing identifies significant challenges in tracking adaptation finance, such as context dependency and lack of standardized reporting. It proposes a three-category framework to distinguish between asset-focused, system-focused, and sectoral benchmark investments. To capture missing data, the authors suggest four technical approaches: keyword searches, sales data analysis, policy matching, and geographic matching. Initial assessments of Climate Bonds Initiative and CDP data show potential for capturing private finance, while the document recommends integrating adaptation into national planning and collaborating with data providers to enhance transparency.

Annual tracked climate finance averaged USD 579 billion in 2017/2018, a 25% increase from 2015/2016, though it remains far below the USD 1.6 trillion to USD 3.8 trillion annually needed for energy system transitions. Renewable energy remains the largest destination for finance, while low-carbon transport is growing rapidly. Private finance accounts for 56% of total flows, with a strong domestic preference as 76% of investment stays within the sourcing country.

The 2019 Global Landscape of Climate Finance report finds that annual climate finance reached an average of USD 579 billion in 2017/2018, a 25% increase over 2015/2016. While renewable energy remains the dominant sector, there is significant growth in low-carbon transport and public adaptation finance. However, the report emphasizes that current investment levels are grossly insufficient to meet 1.5 °C goals, and that finance for fossil fuel supply infrastructure continues to far outweigh clean energy investment.

In 2018, MDBs reached a record $43 billion in climate finance commitments, with an increased share allocated to adaptation and vulnerable countries. However, some banks experienced absolute declines in funding, and private sector mobilization remains lower than public co-financing. The analysis urges MDBs to meet 2020 targets, set ambitious post-2020 goals, and align their entire portfolios with the Paris Agreement.

The report examines adaptation activities across 18 developing countries' NDC Partnership Plans, identifying critical gaps in climate risk assessments, project design, and M&E systems. It argues that these short-term plans can be leveraged to align NDC pledges with the more detailed NAP processes to improve climate resilience planning and implementation.