Search Climate Insights Directory

The document examines the role of extension and advisory services (EAS) in scaling agroecology across Africa to combat food insecurity, climate change, and land degradation. It identifies systemic barriers to this transition, including a severe shortage of extension workers—with ratios as high as 1:10,000 in some Nigerian states—and a funding bias toward industrial agricultural models. The brief recommends that donors shift toward long-term, community-driven, and gender-sensitive funding mechanisms that prioritize local and indigenous knowledge over top-down, one-size-fits-all industrial approaches.

The document argues that while agroecology offers a sustainable alternative to industrial agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa, these transitions are not gender-neutral and often overlook the systemic barriers facing women. It highlights how women's indigenous knowledge is critical for biodiversity and resilience, yet they face significant hurdles in land tenure, financing, and market access. The brief provides recommendations for philanthropic and governmental support to ensure equity, including long-term funding and investment in women-led cooperatives and processing infrastructure.

The document examines the critical role of livestock in Africa's food security and GDP, contrasting low-input agroecological systems with industrial models. It argues that industrial livestock production is unsuitable for the African context due to its negative environmental and social impacts. The brief identifies key hurdles, such as chronic underfunding and policy marginalisation, and proposes specific funding levers for philanthropic investment in disease prevention, rangeland management, and adaptive local breeds to build climate resilience.

The document advocates for a transition from industrialised agriculture to African Indigenous Foodways (AIFs), which are rooted in traditional ecological knowledge and agroecological principles. It emphasises that knowledge co-creation between farmers and researchers is essential to overcome gaps in documentation and the 'epistemicide' of indigenous knowledge systems. The brief highlights the role of networks like the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA) and the Seed and Knowledge Initiative (SKI) in promoting seed sovereignty. It identifies significant funding gaps, noting that philanthropic support for agroecological transition is less than 1% of total philanthropic food and agriculture funding. The authors recommend that philanthropy shift toward community-led investment models, long-term trust-based funding, and support for participatory research to enhance climate resilience and biodiversity conservation.

The document argues that Africa's rapid urban growth necessitates immediate investment in food environments to prevent unhealthy path dependencies. It identifies a funding gap of US$100 million over the next five years across four key initiatives: AfriFOODlinks, the Africa Food Environment Research Network (FERN), the Living Off-Grid Food & Infrastructure Collaboration (LOGIC), and the Resilient Municipal Market Fund (ReMark). The brief emphasizes that urban food environments are shaped by physical, economic, social, and infrastructural factors, and suggests aligning these with agroecological principles to improve resilience, equity, and resource efficiency.

The document highlights the challenges facing African subnational governments in managing urban food systems due to rapid urbanisation, limited authority, and fragmented policy frameworks. It argues that while local governments often lack explicit mandates and funding for food security, they are critical for building climate resilience and social equity. The brief recommends that philanthropic investment focus on multi-stakeholder platforms (MSPs), capacity building for local actors, and the institutionalisation of food councils. It specifically proposes four actionable funding opportunities, including a South-South learning lab and the expansion of the AfriFOODlinks network, to transition urban food systems toward agroecological principles.

The brief argues that agrochemical use and misuse are increasing across Africa due to corporate profit motives, weak regulation, and climate change, posing severe risks to human health and the environment. It recommends strengthening governance, increasing investment in agroecology, and leveraging financial tools to reduce synthetic chemical dependence.

The document highlights the potential for small-scale African farmers to meet a growing demand for processed foods—projected to be 75% of staple food demand—by adding value to indigenous crops. However, processors face significant hurdles, including limited access to modern storage (such as cold rooms), poor packaging that reduces consumer trust, and difficulties in meeting food safety certifications. The brief emphasizes the role of traditional methods like fermentation and drying in enhancing nutrition and shelf-life, while warning that unchecked processing waste can cause environmental pollution. It recommends that philanthropies fund capacity building, research into sustainable packaging, and the development of regional labelling standards to boost the marketability of local processed foods.

The document examines 'territorial markets' in Africa—informal retail spaces where 70–90% of agricultural products are traded. It argues that while these markets are essential for food security, nutrition, and the livelihoods of smallholder farmers and women, they are frequently neglected or criminalized by governments. Through case studies in Benin, Ghana, Kenya, and South Africa, the brief highlights systemic failures in infrastructure and legal protections, advocating for philanthropic and government investment to align these markets with agroecological principles.

The document advocates for Silvopastoral Systems (SPS)—the integration of trees, forage, and livestock—to restore degraded African rangelands and mitigate resource-driven conflicts. It highlights successful models like Herding for Health and Farmer-Managed Natural Regeneration (FMNR), while urging philanthropic investment to overcome barriers such as insecure land tenure, knowledge gaps, and government subsidies for chemical-intensive farming.

The document argues that secure land tenure is a prerequisite for agroecological transitions in Africa, as it provides the security necessary for farmers to invest in long-term sustainable practices. It highlights how colonial legacies of land dispossession continue to create systemic inequalities and tenure insecurity across different African regions. The brief provides specific analysis of land systems in countries such as Kenya, South Africa, Benin, Uganda, and Malawi, noting that while some national policies recognize agroecology, institutional support often remains tied to industrial, input-intensive agriculture. It concludes with recommendations for donors to shift toward long-term, locally led, and gender-sensitive funding models that prioritize land rights and social equity.

The report argues that Brazil's agribusiness sector, dominated by giants like JBS, MBRF, and Minerva, exerts systemic control over political and public narratives to avoid climate regulation. It highlights a critical 'blind spot' in Brazil's updated NDC, which omits agricultural methane emissions despite the sector accounting for 75.6% of the country's total methane. The document details how the 'ruralist caucus' (FPA) controls Congress and pushes for controversial methane metrics like GWP* to downplay warming impacts. It also exposes the 'AgriZone' and other industry-led events surrounding COP30 as tools for greenwashing, while noting that structural weaknesses in the Climate Plan, Tax Reform, and Forest Code continue to favour industrial agriculture over sustainable agroecological farming.

The report finds that climate and health policies in Brazil are currently poorly connected, though there is a growing movement toward integration. Stakeholders identify significant barriers, including political polarization, a lack of risk perception, and institutional silos. However, they see opportunities in the upcoming COP30, the wide reach of the Unified Health System (SUS), and Brazil's renewable energy strengths. Recommended strategies include improving scientific communication, adopting 'Planetary Health' and 'One Health' frameworks, and increasing intersectoral governance to create a more resilient national health and climate infrastructure.

The document argues that carbon markets are 'false climate solutions' that enable big polluters to continue emitting greenhouse gases through 'greenwashing' while causing land grabbing and human rights violations in the Global South. It details how carbon credits are generated from nature-based solutions and 'techno-fixes', warns communities about deceptive contracts and the failure of industry 'safeguards', and provides a framework for resistance based on climate justice and the right to say no.

The document argues that carbon markets are 'false climate solutions' designed by polluters to maintain profitable systems of capitalism and neocolonialism. It explains how carbon credits are generated through nature-based solutions (NBS) and technological fixes, which often lead to land grabbing and the violation of indigenous rights. The guide provides a framework for communities to identify 'red flags' in contracts, exercise their right to say no, and employ strategies of international solidarity to oppose the commodification of nature.

The document argues that carbon markets are a continuation of colonial and capitalist systems that allow major polluters to avoid reducing emissions through 'greenwashing'. It explains how carbon credits are generated—often through flawed calculations in nature-based solutions or technological fixes—and details the risks to communities, including land grabbing and the violation of indigenous rights. The guide provides practical advice for communities to identify predatory contracts, exercise their right to say no, and seek alternatives like community forest management and agroecology.

The document argues that carbon markets are 'false climate solutions' that allow major polluters to continue emitting greenhouse gases through 'greenwashing' while causing harm to Indigenous Peoples and local communities. It describes how carbon credits are generated from projects—including nature-based solutions and technological patches—and warns that these often lead to land grabbing, human rights violations, and the failure to actually reduce global emissions. The guide provides a framework for communities to identify predatory contracts, demand Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC), and organize international solidarity to oppose the financialization of nature.

The document details the scientific diplomacy and research resources provided by the IAI to Uruguay, including specific funding for climate, health, and environment projects, as well as the participation of Uruguayan researchers in the STeP Fellows program and various advisory committees.

The document examines the interdependencies of water, energy, and food security in rural South Africa, highlighting systemic governance failures and the potential of 'WEF communities' to empower marginalised groups through transdisciplinary collaboration.

The 'One Food' toolkit by WWF South Africa promotes a holistic approach to farming that integrates human, animal, and environmental health. It identifies risks such as invasive alien plants, livestock diseases, and climate-driven hazards like heat waves and floods. The guide provides specific actionable advice for livestock and crop farmers, emphasizing agroecology, rotational grazing, and natural pest control to enhance biodiversity and climate resilience.