Search Climate Insights Directory

The report analyzes the global trend toward 'green industrial policies'—characterized by state intervention through subsidies, procurement, and local content requirements—and warns that these measures often prioritize domestic benefits over global equity. While EMDEs can benefit from lower technology costs and new trade opportunities in critical minerals, they face risks of 'extractive lock-in' and market distortions. The authors propose pathways for a more inclusive transition, including preferential technology licensing, scaled-up climate finance, and the recycling of carbon border adjustment revenues to support industrial upgrading in developing nations.

The document advocates for a science-based 2035 NDC for South Korea, proposing a minimum 61% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions compared to 2018. It emphasizes that clear, consistent policies across the power, industry, and transport sectors are essential to attract private investment and maintain global competitiveness, particularly in the face of regulations like the EU's CBAM. Key recommendations include accelerating renewable energy deployment to at least 100GW by 2030, phasing out coal power by 2035, strengthening the K-ETS carbon price, and accelerating the electrification of transport and heavy industry.

The document advocates for South Korea to set a 2035 emissions reduction target of at least 61% relative to 2018 levels to ensure alignment with its 2050 carbon neutrality goal. It emphasizes that a credible NDC must be supported by sectoral pathways in power, industry, and transport to provide the policy certainty required to unlock private sector investment. Key recommendations include phasing out coal power by 2035, reforming the Korea Emissions Trading System (K-ETS) to increase carbon price signals, and accelerating the deployment of breakthrough technologies like hydrogen steelmaking and electrified steam crackers. The briefing also stresses the importance of structured collaboration between the government, businesses of all sizes, and subnational authorities to ensure the NDC is investible and implementable.

The analysis compares four scenarios for Africa's emissions: Business-as-usual (BAU), Net-zero by 2050 (NZ50), Net-zero by 2070 (NZ70), and Net-zero by 2100 (NZ100). While all net-zero pathways see renewables become the dominant energy source and a sharp fall in fossil fuel reliance, the timing of the transition creates significant trade-offs. The NZ50 scenario achieves the fastest emissions decline, reaching -0.33 GtCO₂/yr by 2050, but incurs the highest marginal abatement cost (averaging $78 per ton of CO₂) and causes the most disruption to food systems, including a 31% contraction in cropland and a near doubling of staple food prices. All net-zero scenarios rely on bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), which shifts water demand from agriculture to the energy sector. Regional challenges vary, with Western Africa facing steep decarbonization due to oil and gas reliance, and Southern Africa managing a coal-dependent system.

The policy brief analyzes a June 2025 non-paper from 16 EU member states seeking reforms to the ETS2, the emissions trading system for buildings and road transport. The authors argue that while some suggestions—such as publishing more data and starting auctions early—are low-risk, proposals to modify the MSR2 trigger mechanisms, extend its lifetime beyond 2031, or strengthen price controls would increase the total volume of allowances in the market. Because MSR2 allowances are already additional to the emissions cap, the brief contends that these reforms would lead to higher greenhouse gas emissions, weaken the investment signal for decarbonization, and potentially jeopardize the EU's overall climate goals.

The document examines how Brazil and South Africa use carbon pricing, green bonds, green taxonomies, and central bank regulations to fund their transitions to net zero by 2050. It highlights the inadequacy of current international climate finance, noting that developing countries pay significantly more for multilateral development bank finance and that most climate funding arrives as loans rather than grants. The brief details South Africa's carbon tax and Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP), and Brazil's voluntary carbon market and sovereign sustainable bonds. It argues that BRICS nations should use peer learning to scale these tools and collectively advocate for the restructuring of the World Bank and IMF to ensure more affordable and equitable finance for the Global South.

The report examines the financial and regulatory incentives needed to accelerate the decarbonisation of China's steel industry. It highlights a significant investment gap, noting that while pilot regions like Hebei have introduced sector-specific taxonomies and transition plan templates, national-level frameworks remain underdeveloped. The document argues that current incentives are insufficient for steelmakers due to high upfront costs and for financial institutions due to a lack of unified identification standards. It recommends expanding public subsidies, refining the capacity replacement policy to include carbon intensity criteria, and creating demand-side incentives for purchasers of low-carbon steel.

Researchers from CPI/PUC-RIO developed a dynamic economic model to evaluate the additionality of REDD projects in the Brazilian Amazon, moving beyond traditional statistical baselines. The study finds that 77% of the carbon stock in these projects is additional, meaning it would have been emitted without the projects, avoiding 0.5 Gt of CO2 equivalent. However, additionality varies by region, with significantly lower rates in forested and isolated areas, such as Portel, Pará, where low agricultural productivity makes deforestation unlikely even without carbon credits. The report argues that while some non-additionality exists, the low price of REDD credits (US$ 5 to US$ 15 per ton) limits the financial impact of these discrepancies compared to other carbon pricing mechanisms.

The report introduces a dynamic economic model to determine the additionality of REDD projects in the Brazilian Amazon, finding that 77% of the carbon traded is additional. It highlights regional variations, noting higher additionality in agribusiness-consolidated areas and lower additionality in isolated regions like Portel, while suggesting that higher carbon prices would further increase additionality rates.

The report argues that G20 countries are locked into oil and gas systems due to economic, geopolitical, and institutional factors, despite climate commitments. It highlights a contradiction where G20 nations are on track to produce and consume more than twice the fossil fuels permitted under a 1.5°C pathway. The document analyzes the role of National Oil Companies (NOCs), the limitations of carbon capture and storage (CCS), and the regressive nature of fossil fuel subsidies. It proposes a 'Just Transition Taxonomy' to ensure the phase-out protects workers and marginalized communities, particularly in the Global South, and recommends legislating national phase-out plans and redirecting subsidies toward renewable energy.

The document examines the proliferation of trade-climate measures and the resulting risks of trade barriers and disadvantages for developing countries. It proposes a multi-level approach to cooperation at the WTO, ranging from high-level legal principles and good regulatory practices to specific design features and technical interoperability of carbon accounting.

The document provides a comprehensive analysis of how the transition to net-zero emissions affects nine global sectors: agriculture, carbon markets, critical minerals, digital transformation, energy transition, fisheries, heavy industries, shipping, and textiles and garments. It examines the intersection of trade policies and climate action, highlighting the risks of 'green protectionism' and the potential for developing countries to capture new economic opportunities through value addition and green industrialization. The reports emphasize the need for international cooperation to ensure a just transition, particularly for least developed countries (LDCs) and small island developing states (SIDS).

Carbon Market Watch argues against scrapping the CBAM despite industry complaints about administrative complexity, suggesting instead that the EU quantify actual carbon leakage and circumvention risks before expanding the mechanism to downstream products. The organization emphasizes that complementary EU policies like the Digital Product Passport and international standards can mitigate administrative burdens. It further recommends providing special treatment for Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Small Island Developing States (SIDS) to align with UNFCCC principles.

The report argues that allowing African exporters to use Article 6 carbon credits to reduce their EU CBAM liabilities would address equity concerns, retain climate finance within Africa, and provide policy flexibility. It notes that current CBAM regulations only permit deductions for explicit carbon prices (taxes or ETS), making Article 6 credits ineligible. The document highlights the significant economic risks CBAM poses to African GDP and the specific challenges African nations face in implementing traditional carbon pricing due to their emissions profiles and administrative constraints. It concludes with recommendations for the EU to amend its regulations to include high-integrity international credits, specifically those from Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Africa, to align with the principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDR-RC).

Carbon Market Watch proposes extending the EU ETS to include all departing flights from the European Economic Area (EEA), non-CO2 aviation effects, and private jets. The brief argues that the current limited scope—covering only intra-EEA flights—fails to address the sector's full climate impact and misses significant revenue opportunities. By implementing these extensions and applying carbon price multipliers for private jets, the EU could generate substantial funds to finance e-kerosene development, upgrade railway infrastructure via the Trans-European Transport Core Network (TEN-T), and meet international climate finance targets. The author specifically recommends replacing support for biofuels with a focused e-kerosene scheme extended to 2040.

Canada is falling behind its major non-U.S. trading partners in the implementation of key climate and sustainable finance policies, particularly in mandatory climate disclosure and the development of a national climate investment taxonomy. While Canada aligns on net zero commitments and carbon pricing, the lack of progress in other areas creates economic friction and risks exposing Canadian businesses to carbon tariffs. The report argues that accelerating these policies will help Canada diversify its trade and identify new growth opportunities in a global economy increasingly aligned on climate fundamentals.

The Canadian Climate Institute finds that Canada is lagging behind its major global trading partners in the adoption of key climate and sustainable finance policies. While Canada has implemented carbon pricing and net-zero commitments, it lacks a national taxonomy, mandatory climate disclosure, and formal transition plan frameworks. This policy gap risks increasing costs for Canadian businesses and hindering their ability to compete in markets that are increasingly aligning around carbon neutrality and transparent climate risk reporting.

India's export economy is increasingly vulnerable to carbon-based trade measures, with 68% of its exports going to countries committed to net zero. The report highlights that 7.5 million jobs are exposed to active Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanisms (CBAMs), and sectors like professional services are among the most carbon-intensive globally. To maintain competitiveness against rivals like Vietnam and China, the document argues India must accelerate grid decarbonisation and update its 2025 Nationally Determined Contribution.

Carbon Market Watch criticizes proposals to compensate EU exporters under the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), arguing that the actual competitiveness risk is limited and that subsidies would reward polluters. The author contends that CBAM revenue should not be used to subsidize EU producers, as this could conflict with WTO rules and encourage the export of polluting products. Instead, the document advocates for targeted financial support for clean technology innovation and the global expansion of carbon pricing.

The document warns that reforming the MSR2 before the ETS2 launches in 2027 could lead to an oversupply of allowances, weakening the price signal and jeopardizing the EU's 2030 climate target of a 42% reduction in covered emissions. It argues that high prices should be managed through 'complementary measures'—such as CO2 standards for vehicles and boiler phase-outs—and the strategic use of the Social Climate Fund and €300 billion in ETS2 revenue. The authors contend that existing safeguards, including a 'soft price cap' of approximately €55 per tonne and the early auctioning of 30% more allowances, are sufficient for the initial phase. They caution that any increase in allowance supply must be 'cap neutral' to avoid exceeding the carbon budget.