Search Climate Insights Directory

Rwanda's NDC 3.0 sets an ambitious target to reduce net greenhouse gas emissions by 53% by 2035 compared to a business-as-usual scenario, integrating Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) for the first time. The plan prioritizes adaptation across eight sectors, including agriculture and water resources, and establishes a dedicated loss and damage response mechanism. Implementing these goals requires an estimated USD 12 billion, with USD 5 billion for mitigation and USD 7 billion for adaptation.

The document describes the Paris Agreement's 'ambition cycle' as a four-stage iterative process: formulation of long-term strategies (LTS) and Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), implementation, monitoring via Biennial Transparency Reports (BTRs), and collective evaluation through the Global Stocktake (GST). It emphasizes the need for alignment between short-term NDCs and long-term net-zero goals, while warning against over-reliance on carbon markets and carbon capture technologies. The guide provides a national implementation roadmap and case studies from Costa Rica, the United Kingdom, Colombia, and Panama to illustrate best practices in climate governance and transparency.

The document outlines the framework for state Clean Electricity Standards (CES), emphasizing that effective policies must be mandatory, technology-inclusive, and ambitious. It contrasts CES with Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) by highlighting the inclusion of clean firm resources like nuclear and carbon capture. The brief details various design options—such as retail sales vs. emission-based standards—and explains how federal incentives from the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) reduce implementation costs. It also discusses advanced features like clean capacity standards and hourly matching to accelerate the deployment of long-duration storage and firm clean power.

Russia used COP29 to promote fossil fuels and present revised GHG emission data based on a 'sovereign methodology' that claims a 34% reduction in emissions through forest carbon absorption. The document highlights that Russia's 'climate projects' are inconsistent with Paris Agreement standards on additionality and transparency, often serving to prolong fossil fuel use. Despite these issues, Russia has begun selling carbon credits to foreign buyers, such as the Arab Investment Fund, and seeks to expand these practices through BRICS+ and other business associations.

The report provides a snapshot of the implementation of Brazil's Forest Code in 2024, focusing on the Rural Environmental Registry (CAR) and the Environmental Compliance Program (PRA). It highlights a steady increase in CAR registrations, reaching 7.65 million by November 2024, and notes that all states have now initiated the analysis stage, though this remains a significant bottleneck. While some states like São Paulo and Mato Grosso have made substantial progress through automation and legislative changes, only about 3.3% of all registrations nationwide have completed analysis. The report also details the expansion of the PRA, with 19 states and the Federal District having regulated it, and notes the increasing use of Terms of Commitment (ToC) for environmental recovery in states such as Mato Grosso and Pará.

The report argues that COP29 failed to advance human rights-based climate action, citing a weak new climate finance goal, the operationalization of flawed carbon markets, and a restrictive civic environment in the host country. It highlights the removal of references to the right to a healthy environment and the lack of progress on just transition and gender justice, calling for stronger legal obligations and human rights safeguards in future UNFCCC processes.

The document argues that carbon markets can fill a critical funding gap for African smallholder farmers, who received only 0.8% of climate finance in 2023. It highlights that soil carbon interventions provide dual benefits of climate mitigation and adaptation by improving soil health, water retention, and crop yields. However, the briefing notes that African agriculture remains underrepresented in carbon markets, with only 12 identified projects across the continent. Barriers include high soil sampling costs, strict evidence requirements for baselines, and a lack of localised research. The author recommends that policymakers avoid 'one-size-fits-all' regulations and instead prioritise projects that deliver non-carbon co-benefits like food security and nutrition.

The document outlines the key priorities for COP29, emphasizing the establishment of the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) for climate finance and the operationalization of the Loss and Damage Fund. It highlights the need for intensified Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) before the 2025 deadline and the advancement of the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) and Biennial Transparency Reports (BTRs). Additionally, it identifies the importance of nature-based solutions, the operationalization of Article 6 regarding carbon markets, and the need to address transboundary climate risks and socioeconomic disparities in adaptation, all within a complex geopolitical landscape influenced by Azerbaijan's fossil fuel economy.

The document analyzes the implementation of Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, focusing on the distinctions between the bilateral/multilateral trades of Article 6.2 and the UN-overseen global market of Article 6.4. It highlights critical loopholes, including the risk of double counting in aviation offsetting (CORSIA), the lack of oversight for Article 6.2 trades, and the potential for 'junk' credits from the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) to transition into the new system. The author argues for stricter authorization processes, mandatory transparency, and a 'firewall' between carbon markets and the new climate finance package being negotiated at COP29.

The policy brief contends that carbon markets are a flawed mechanism that fails to provide real climate finance, instead allowing Global North polluters to avoid direct emission reductions while potentially harming Global South communities.

The document defines carbon dioxide removal (CDR) as the physical extraction and permanent storage of atmospheric CO2. It argues that CDR must supplement, not substitute, deep emission reductions of over 90%. The handbook evaluates six negative emissions technologies and practices (NETPs)—biochar, BioCCS, DACCS, enhanced weathering, afforestation/reforestation, and soil carbon sequestration—detailing their technical readiness, permanence, and environmental trade-offs. It emphasizes the need for robust 'cradle-to-grave' carbon accounting, separate targets for reductions and removals to avoid mitigation deterrence, and the integration of the Planetary Boundaries framework to ensure Earth system stability. The text also critiques current EU legislation, such as the Carbon Removal Certification Framework (CRCF) and the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), for lacking ambition and failing to distinguish between permanent and temporary storage.

The document defines carbon dioxide removal (CDR) as the physical extraction of CO2 from the atmosphere and its permanent storage. It argues that CDR must be a complement to, not a substitute for, aggressive emission reductions (over 90%). The guide evaluates six negative emissions technologies and practices (NETPs)—including Bio-CCS, DACCS, and biochar—while critiquing current EU policies for failing to distinguish between permanent removals and temporary biological sequestration. It advocates for a diversified portfolio of CDR methods, rigorous life-cycle accounting, and a governance framework based on the 'planetary boundaries' to avoid ecological trade-offs.

FSD Africa is working to deepen African capital markets to reduce reliance on banks and external debt, leveraging an estimated $2 trillion in domestic assets. The organization employs a four-pronged strategy: policy and regulatory development, market infrastructure creation, product development (specifically GSSS bonds), and stakeholder convening. Key achievements include mobilising over $1.2 billion through 21 thematic bond transactions and establishing critical infrastructure like the Ethiopian Securities Exchange. Future priorities include carbon markets, sovereign debt management, and financing the energy transition.

The COP29 South African Youth Statement outlines five main mandates for climate justice, emphasizing human rights, gender equality, and the needs of marginalized communities. It calls for a shift in climate finance toward grants and debt cancellation for the Global South, the integration of renewable energy into the national grid, and the empowerment of youth and community-based organisations in policymaking. The statement specifically highlights environmental injustices in water sanitation, waste management, and the health impacts of coal mining in Mpumalanga, while advocating for agroecological farming and the regulation of AI and the 'fast-fashion' industry.

The document details the operational and structural differences between Article 6.2 (bilateral/multilateral agreements), Article 6.4 (a UN-overseen global carbon market), and Article 6.8 (non-market approaches). It highlights the role of 'corresponding adjustments' in preventing double-counting and the specific financial contributions required under Article 6.4, such as the Share of Proceeds for the Adaptation Fund and the Overall Mitigation of Global Emissions. The author emphasizes that establishing high standards for credit quality and transparency is essential for the success of these markets at COP29.

The proposal seeks USD 999,998.93 to create a centralized Secretariat for the Brazil Climate and Ecological Transformation Investment Platform (BIP), hosted by the National Bank for Economic and Social Development (BNDES). The BIP aims to bridge the gap between climate-positive projects and investors to help Brazil meet its NDC target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 53.1% by 2030. The project focuses on three priority areas: Nature-based Climate Solutions, Industry and Mobility, and Energy. Key activities include developing a project pipeline, creating innovative financial mechanisms, and establishing ICT infrastructure to facilitate public-private collaboration.

ASEAN's electricity demand grew by 3.6% in 2023, a rise entirely met by fossil fuels, leading to a 6.6% increase in power sector emissions. While solar and wind costs are falling, the region remains heavily dependent on coal and gas, and hydropower has become less reliable due to climate-induced droughts. The report argues that scaling renewable capacity by 3-5x by 2035, implementing direct power purchase agreements, and expanding the ASEAN Power Grid are essential to meet rising demand and climate goals. It also highlights the potential for a regional compliance carbon market and the importance of a just transition to secure social acceptance.

Nature-based solutions (NbS) are being integrated into climate strategies across Latin America and the Caribbean to address biodiversity loss and climate change. While they offer significant economic and ecological potential—such as protecting coastal resilience and sequestering carbon—they cannot replace the need for deep emissions reductions from fossil fuels. The document warns that vague definitions of NbS can lead to 'greenwashing' by polluting corporations and risk the displacement of Indigenous and local communities through land grabs and monoculture plantations. For NbS to be sustainable, the author argues they must be based on local knowledge, ensure Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC), and be supported by diverse financing mechanisms beyond voluntary safeguards.

The document critiques biodiversity offsets and credits, asserting they are based on a flawed 'mitigation hierarchy' and fail to maintain ecosystem integrity. It argues that these schemes, often modelled on dysfunctional carbon markets, lead to greenwashing, land grabbing, and human rights violations, particularly against Indigenous Peoples. The authors call for a shift away from market-based financial flows toward non-market approaches, debt and tax justice, and the protection of land tenure rights.

The document critiques biodiversity offsets and certificates, asserting they are conceptually and methodologically flawed tools that facilitate nature destruction. It argues that these mechanisms, often modeled after failed carbon markets, ignore ecosystem integrity, lead to land grabbing, and violate the human rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities. The authors call for a systemic shift away from market-based financialization toward community-led, rights-based conservation and the reduction of harmful financial flows.