Search Climate Insights Directory

The document defines seafood jurisdictional initiatives (JIs) as place-based efforts combining policy and market-based approaches to achieve holistic sustainability. It argues that traditional certification, ratings, and improvement (CRI) efforts are insufficient for global scale and systemic issues. The handbook outlines a three-step implementation process: scoping, co-designing, and co-implementing, emphasizing the necessity of government leadership, multistakeholder collaboration, and long-term blended finance.

The document outlines the concept of seafood Jurisdictional Initiatives (JIs) as place-based, multistakeholder efforts that combine policy reform and market-based incentives to address systemic sustainability challenges. It contrasts JIs with traditional certification, ratings, and improvement (CRI) projects, arguing that JIs are better suited for tackling cumulative impacts, climate resilience, and social equity across entire production geographies. The guide details a three-step implementation process—scoping, co-designing, and co-implementing—and emphasizes the critical roles of government leadership, private-sector engagement, and the inclusion of Indigenous peoples and local communities. It also provides guidance on establishing monitoring, reporting, and verification frameworks to ensure the credibility of sustainability claims.

The document outlines the concept of seafood jurisdictional initiatives (JIs) as place-based, multistakeholder approaches that combine policy reform with market-based mechanisms to address systemic sustainability barriers. It emphasizes the pivotal role of government authorities in defining boundaries, leading policy changes, and aligning national and international conservation targets. The guide details the incentives for governments to adopt JIs, such as fulfilling UN SDGs and UNCLOS commitments, and provides practical steps for policy-makers to prioritize actions, maximize impact, and monitor progress through collaborative frameworks.

The guidelines advocate for jurisdictional initiatives (JIs) as a complementary approach to traditional certification, ratings, and improvement (CRI) efforts. While CRI focuses on individual farms or fisheries, JIs operate at a broader scale to address systemic issues like climate resilience, biodiversity loss, and labor rights through policy reform and multistakeholder collaboration. The document outlines key enablers for success, including government leadership, long-term blended finance, and ecosystem-based management. It also provides frameworks for monitoring, reporting, and verifying claims, emphasizing that performance outcomes typically take eight to 20 years to materialize. Case studies, such as the Parties to the Nauru Agreement (PNA) for tuna and a shrimp aquaculture project in Indonesia, illustrate the application of these principles.

The report identifies that over 93 percent of coal power is shielded from competition via power purchase agreements (PPAs). Using a representative Indonesian PPA as a model, RMI proposes three pathways for decarbonization: early termination, replacement with clean energy PPAs, and restructuring for emission reductions. The analysis suggests that coal transition mechanisms (CTMs), such as blended finance loans and managed transition vehicles (MTVs), can maintain costs for taxpayers and earnings for investors while significantly reducing emissions. Specifically, an MTV could drive an 80 percent emissions reduction between 2025 and 2035, and combining CTMs with policy shifts could increase owner earnings by up to 30 percent and cut emissions by up to 90 percent.

The document argues that while clean energy transitions can drive development and gender equality, they risk reinforcing existing inequalities without intentional policy design. It identifies significant financing gaps, particularly for adaptation in low-income regions, and implementation barriers such as high connection fees for rural households. The authors recommend that the G20 facilitate lesson-sharing on policy innovations, promote gender-responsive programs that empower women as producers rather than just consumers, and establish a permanent platform for evidence generation on inclusive green transitions.

The "Hardest-to-Reach" (H2R) programme aims to provide clean, climate-resilient off-grid solar (OGS) energy to 72.4 million people across 16 sub-Saharan African countries. The initiative utilizes a two-pronged financing approach: a $50 million grant-funded Market Support Facility (MSF) to support market entry and capacity building for new players, and a $200 million blended finance Market Expansion Facility (MEF) providing impact-linked loans to scale existing OGS companies. The programme targets a mitigation outcome of 5.1 million tCO2eq avoided and an adaptation outcome of 54.3 million first-time energy access beneficiaries. It emphasizes gender inclusivity, targeting 32% female customers and creating approximately 13,922 green jobs, including 4,641 for women.

The Capital Mobilization Roadmap proposes four high-impact areas for reform to accelerate private investment in emerging markets and developing economies (EMDEs). It suggests creating a standardized credit guarantee facility and reforming capital allocation rules to address credit risk. To mitigate currency risk, it recommends scaling the TCX market creation capacity and exploring SDR-backed guarantees via the JET-FIT proposal. For development risk, the roadmap advocates for increased funding for existing project preparation models and a shift toward more sustainable MDB financing for project development. Finally, it proposes aligning MDB staff KPIs with mobilization targets and implementing 'originate-to-distribute' models through standardized underwriting criteria.

The document outlines 12 key policy interventions to accelerate the transition of hard-to-abate sectors, categorised into simplifying pathways, steering risk and opportunity, derisking green investments, and facilitating essential resource flows.

The report argues that current NDCs and financial frameworks are insufficient to reach net-zero emissions, particularly in developing and emerging economies facing high debt. It proposes nine principles for international climate finance, emphasizing that developed countries must scale up support based on common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR). Key recommendations include adopting bottom-up, sector-specific finance needs, utilizing innovative mechanisms like debt-for-climate swaps, and aligning finance with national policy processes to avoid carbon lock-ins. The report highlights the importance of 'just transitions' and the synergy between mitigation, adaptation, and loss and damage funding.

The document argues that MDBs must shift from a project-by-project approach to a systemic, program-based model to address the climate crisis in emerging markets and developing economies (EMDEs). It recommends scaling country sector platforms, deploying risk-sharing instruments like guarantees and local currency financing, and overhauling MDB business models through standardization and an 'originate-to-distribute' balance sheet strategy. The authors emphasize the need for better integration of domestic financial institutions and increased transparency in data sharing to mobilize private capital at scale.

The PIDACC-Zambezi programme seeks USD 100 million from the Green Climate Fund (GCF) to complement a total budget of USD 312.3 million. It targets the Zambezi Watercourse, where climate change is causing increased drought, flooding, and reduced hydropower potential. The programme focuses on four components: building community resilience through infrastructure and agribusiness, strengthening integrated landscape management, enhancing adaptive and institutional capacity, and programme coordination. Key targets include benefiting 3.79 million direct beneficiaries, restoring 970,000 hectares of degraded land, and reducing emissions by 37.1 million tCO2eq. The initiative emphasizes the use of digital technologies, carbon farming via the Boomitra model, and the establishment of a Direct Credit Window to de-risk private sector investment in agribusiness.

The report identifies barriers to private urban climate investment across macro, city, and project levels, and provides recommendations for city governments, public sector partners, and private/third sector entities to improve enabling conditions. It analyzes five case studies from Chile, Ecuador, India, South Africa, and Turkiye to highlight success factors such as bulk procurement, green bonds, and strategic partnerships.

The document argues that current climate finance flows are insufficient to meet Paris Agreement goals, with a significant gap in EMDEs and LDCs due to high capital costs and strained public finances. It proposes that G7 countries accelerate finance through blended finance, debt-for-climate swaps, and MDB reforms. Specific recommendations include establishing a global risk mitigation facility, coordinating green industrial policies to avoid protectionism, and implementing universal disaster index insurance to reduce vulnerability in emerging economies.

The report analyzes why private finance for climate adaptation in developing countries remains low, citing lack of clear revenue streams and high transaction costs for small-scale projects. It evaluates established and emerging financial instruments—such as blended finance, guarantees, and payment for ecosystem services—and argues that the most effective path forward is not the creation of new instruments, but the innovative combination and application of existing ones to match specific project needs.

The document examines the funding gap for marine and coastal ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA), specifically within the SADC region. It analyzes various financing streams—including national budgets, international bilateral and multilateral funds, philanthropy, and private capital—while highlighting the challenges of access to finance due to economic categorizations. The paper emphasizes blended finance solutions, such as blue bonds and debt-for-nature swaps, using the Seychelles as a primary case study, and discusses the emerging potential of blue carbon markets. It concludes that public funding remains the dominant source and recommends that SADC countries integrate EbA into their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and establish independent trust funds to ensure long-term sustainability.

The document analyzes Brazil's public policies for reducing methane emissions in agriculture, noting that while frameworks like the Ecological Transformation Plan and the Brazilian Sustainable Taxonomy exist, there is a lack of specific, targeted incentives for methane abatement in the livestock sector, which is the primary source of these emissions.

The document argues that MDBs must shift from a project-by-project approach to coordinated country and sector platforms, utilizing 'Just Term Sheets' to standardize transition investments. It recommends scaling risk-sharing instruments, such as guarantees and local currency loans, to lower the cost of capital in EMDEs. Furthermore, it calls for a business model overhaul, transitioning from an 'originate to hold' to an 'originate to distribute' model to recycle capital and increase lending capacity. The paper also emphasizes the need for standardized KPIs, improved data sharing via entities like the GEMS risk database, and the institutionalization of crisis-response toolkits for regular climate action.

The document outlines a comprehensive framework of 101 sustainable finance policies categorized by three primary ambitions: speed, steer, and simplify. It provides specific recommendations across various government departments—including fiscal, trade, energy, and industrial policy—as well as for central banks and financial regulators. The guide emphasizes the need for science-based targets, the removal of fossil fuel subsidies, the use of green taxonomies, and the implementation of derisking mechanisms like blended finance to mobilize private capital for the 1.5°C transition.

The document argues that the global biodiversity finance gap—estimated at an annual need of USD 536 billion by 2050—cannot be closed by grants alone. It proposes a blended finance approach that integrates information, regulatory, economic, institutional, and financial instruments to de-risk investments and catalyze private capital. Using the Green Climate Fund's (GCF) portfolio as a basis, the paper demonstrates how combining instruments (e.g., pairing carbon credits with parametric insurance), sequencing them along a maturity-concessionality gradient (e.g., the Amazon Bioeconomy Fund), and establishing long-term partnerships (e.g., Project Finance for Permanence) can create sustainable financial models for nature-based solutions.