Search Climate Insights Directory

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 report identifies a critical lack of institutional and individual capacity for climate compatible development (CCD) in Angola, particularly within universities, which are largely disconnected from national climate research. While the government has established policy frameworks and some international projects (such as those by UNDP and GEF) employ transdisciplinary approaches, university-level research and curriculum integration are nearly non-existent. The report highlights urgent needs for meteorological data, skilled researchers in hydrology and agro-meteorology, and the development of CCD materials in Portuguese. Potential pathways for improvement include the newly established Centre of Excellence for Sciences Applied to Sustainability (CESSAF) and the Climate Change and Tropical Ecology Research Centre at José Eduardo dos Santos University.

The report identifies Mozambique as highly vulnerable to climate change, particularly regarding agriculture, coastal areas, and disaster risk. It finds significant gaps in technical capacity, research funding, and the integration of CCD into university curricula. While some research exists at institutions like Eduardo Mondlane University, there is a lack of international publication and a need for transdisciplinary approaches to knowledge co-production.

The report identifies Namibia as highly vulnerable to climate change, particularly in agriculture and water resources. It finds that while national policies like the Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan (2012) are strong, there is a significant gap in translating these into university curricula and coordinated research. The University of Namibia (UNAM) and the Polytechnic of Namibia are key partners, with UNAM's Multidisciplinary Research Centre (MRC) emerging as a hub for interdisciplinary work. However, the report highlights a lack of dedicated CCD postgraduate degrees, insufficient institutional coordination, and a need for greater transdisciplinary research that engages local communities and indigenous knowledge.

The report identifies Swaziland as highly vulnerable to climate change, with observed temperature increases exceeding 3°C between 1961 and 2000. It assesses the role of higher education institutions, such as the University of Swaziland (UNISWA), in addressing these risks through research, teaching, and community outreach. The analysis reveals significant gaps in observational data, a lack of postgraduate research (Masters and PhDs), and a need for transdisciplinary approaches that integrate indigenous knowledge with scientific methods. While some initiatives in agriculture, water, and energy are active, the report argues for a more coordinated national strategy and the mainstreaming of CCD into university curricula and government policy.

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 identifies significant barriers to integrating climate science into African policy-making, including systematic biases in climate models, a decline in observational data networks, and a lack of technical capacity to interpret data. It emphasizes that current climate information is often too coarse in resolution for local decision-making and is poorly communicated to policy-makers. To address these gaps, the authors recommend promoting African-led science, improving the translation of research into non-technical formats, and engaging influential finance and development ministries rather than relying solely on environment ministries.

The guide argues that effective mainstreaming of disaster risk management (DRM) requires a supportive policy environment, strong leadership, risk knowledge, consistent financing, and innovation. It identifies key barriers, such as the compartmentalisation of DRM, climate change, and development into separate policy streams, and the lack of technical capacity for risk assessment. The document proposes solutions including strategic inter-ministerial coordination, the use of 'data-light' risk assessment methods, and the creation of political incentives by demonstrating the economic returns of risk-informed investments. It emphasizes that mainstreaming is a political process requiring inclusive partnerships and the navigation of vested interests to protect development gains from climate-related disasters.

The document identifies significant gaps between the production of disaster risk assessments and their application in policy, particularly in Latin America and the Caribbean. It argues that risk assessments often fail because they are treated as one-off projects rather than continuous processes, lack alignment with political timescales, and are presented in overly technical language. To improve uptake, the guide recommends engaging end-users in design, targeting sectoral agendas, and building local technical capacity.

The document analyzes the gap between current and ideal governance practices for sustainable development in Asia-Pacific, focusing on multistakeholder processes, vertical and horizontal integration, and monitoring and evaluation. It identifies a prevalence of 'silo' approaches where sustainable development is managed primarily by environment ministries and recommends a comprehensive capacity-building agenda to improve long-term strategic planning, data quality, and subnational implementation.

The review analyzed over 1,500 courses from 24 international organizations between 2013 and 2014. It found a significant gap in training that directly addresses sustainable development policy and planning, with less than 4% of reviewed courses focusing on this area. While many courses integrate sustainable development into specific themes like the green economy or climate change, there is a lack of training that combines broad strategic frameworks with specific planning and management tools. The report recommends designing targeted courses for policymakers and mainstreaming sustainable development into existing sectoral training to support the implementation of the Post-2015 Development Agenda and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

The research demonstrates that participatory scenario development serves as a critical tool for capacity-building and awareness-raising in developing countries, complementing traditional vulnerability assessments by integrating socioeconomic trends with climate projections. Through case studies in Ghana, Honduras, and Tajikistan, the authors show that PSD can validate and complement donor-driven initiatives and national strategies. The paper emphasizes the need to combine qualitative stakeholder knowledge with quantitative data—such as downscaled global scenarios and crop modeling—to avoid 'myopic traps' and ensure adaptation options are compatible with broader development goals like poverty reduction and food security.

The briefing argues that while the Green Climate Fund's initial readiness program may be narrowly focused on facilitating access to the Fund, it must eventually address broader enabling conditions—such as policy development and capacity building—to achieve transformational climate-resilient development. It further suggests that the GCF should remain flexible regarding the institutions used to channel readiness funds before the formal accreditation process is complete.

The paper argues that while South Africa possesses comparative advantages in access and shared experience, its previous aid efforts—managed via the African Renaissance Fund (ARF)—were often ad hoc and lacked strategic coordination. It recommends that SADPA move beyond high-level diplomatic agreements to engage with national aid architectures and employ political-economy analysis to ensure local ownership of projects.

The African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM), established in 2003 under NEPAD, is a voluntary governance assessment system where African states evaluate their own political, economic, and corporate governance. By 2013, 33 states had acceded, with 17 completing their first review. The mechanism utilizes a process of self-assessment, expert missions, and high-level peer review to identify deficiencies and implement National Programmes of Action (NPoAs). While the APRM has successfully expanded democratic space and fostered a common governance vocabulary, it faces challenges in integrating NPoAs into national budgets and ensuring consistent high-level oversight of implementation.

The document outlines the three primary areas of MRV—greenhouse gas emissions, mitigation actions, and support—and highlights the specific challenges LDCs face, particularly regarding the lack of common definitions for climate finance and the capacity burdens of reporting requirements.

The IISD has developed a six-step methodology to evaluate national mining policy frameworks against the IGF Mining Policy Framework (MPF). The process involves desk-based research, the use of a detailed scoring template, stakeholder consultations, and a validation meeting to identify strengths, weaknesses, and gaps in implementation. The methodology is designed to be adaptable to other frameworks, such as the Africa Mining Vision, and aims to inform capacity-building efforts for governments.

The document serves as a mapping tool between the NAP Technical Guidelines (NAP-TG) and the PROVIA Guidance, providing policy-makers in Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and other developing nations with specific methods and tools for climate adaptation planning. It aligns the NAP-TG's four elements—laying groundwork, preparatory elements, implementation strategies, and monitoring/evaluation—with the PROVIA adaptation learning cycle. Key guidance includes using stakeholder and network analysis for gap assessments, employing scenario analysis for future risk characterization, and applying multi-criteria analysis for appraising adaptation options. The document emphasizes that neither the NAP-TG nor the PROVIA Guidance is prescriptive, allowing countries to define activities based on their unique circumstances.

The document examines how the Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (SAICM) has been implemented in Cambodia. It finds that while SAICM has driven positive outcomes—such as a new draft law on chemicals and improved inter-ministerial coordination—significant barriers remain, including a lack of ground-level enforcement capacity and inadequate long-term funding. The brief highlights that SAICM's voluntary status, broad scope, and multi-stakeholder approach are generally beneficial for developing countries. However, it criticizes the global monitoring system, noting that the 20 existing indicators are insufficient for measuring actual progress toward the '2020 goal' of minimizing adverse chemical impacts on health and the environment.

The document outlines the evolution of weADAPT from its 2007 launch as wikiADAPT, detailing the transition from a simple wiki to a sophisticated knowledge platform. It highlights the critical role of trust, long-standing relationships, and face-to-face engagement in overcoming barriers to knowledge-sharing. Key technical improvements discussed include semantic tagging for better searchability, a user-friendly editing interface, and the creation of the Google Earth Adaptation Layer for spatial case studies. The authors argue that a successful platform must move beyond simple information supply to support actual decision-making through tools and a distributed ownership model involving expert Knowledge Partners.