Search Climate Insights Directory

The report identifies a significant gap between Mexico's current climate-aligned bond issuance and the investment required to meet its emissions targets, while outlining opportunities across energy, transport, buildings, and water sectors.

The report identifies a significant gap between Mexico's climate goals and its current green bond issuance, which stood at US $1.3bn in 2016. It highlights substantial investment needs, particularly in energy (US $5bn annually) and transport (US $12bn for multimodal projects), and argues that mobilizing private institutional capital through green bonds is essential to meet these targets.

The document examines the US YieldCo model, which raised $23 billion by mid-2015 but saw valuations crash due to aggressive growth targets that introduced market-correlated risks. It argues that by prioritizing sponsor objectives—such as recycling capital and monetizing undeveloped pipelines—these vehicles sacrificed the low-risk, bond-like characteristics of renewable assets. The authors propose a 'Clean Energy Investment Trust' (CEIT) consisting of a closed set of assets with no growth expectations, which they argue would better align with the needs of institutional investors and lower the overall cost of renewable energy deployment.

The document outlines a roadmap for China to expand its green bond market by utilizing green securitisation, tax incentives, and credit enhancements. It argues that rapid growth in issuance and investment is necessary for green bonds to meaningfully contribute to China's climate finance and environmental investment requirements.

The document assesses the alignment of China's domestic green bond guidelines with international standards. It finds that while management of proceeds and reporting are fully aligned, further efforts are needed to harmonize green definitions, specifically regarding sector-specific criteria.

The paper assesses the alignment of Chinese green bond guidelines—primarily those from the People's Bank of China (PBoC)—with international practices. It finds strong alignment in the management of proceeds and reporting, but identifies significant divergence in green definitions, particularly regarding the inclusion of fossil fuel projects. The authors recommend adopting a scientific framework for project criteria, implementing a third-party certification model with approved verifiers, and standardising environmental impact reporting to reduce transaction costs for international investors.

The document argues that China requires 2 trillion to 4 trillion RMB annually for its green transition, with the private sector expected to contribute 85% to 90% of this funding. It identifies two primary barriers to scaling green bonds: the small size of individual green projects, which fails to meet the minimum issuance requirements of institutional investors (typically 100 million to 200 million USD), and the low credit ratings of non-state enterprises and green assets. To address these, the report proposes using green asset-backed securitisation (ABS) to aggregate small projects and decouple asset risk from the issuer's balance sheet. It further recommends standardising green loan contracts, establishing financial warehousing systems, implementing tax incentives to lower financing costs, and utilizing public credit enhancements such as guarantees and insurance to attract institutional capital.

China requires an annual investment of RMB 2-4 trillion (USD 320-640 billion) to address environmental and climate issues, with the private sector expected to provide 85% to 90% of this capital. While green bonds are a key vehicle for this, the market faces hurdles including the small scale of individual green projects and low credit ratings for non-state-owned corporate issuers. The report proposes green securitisation as a primary aggregation tool to bundle small assets into larger, investable securities and to detach project risk from the issuer's balance sheet. It further recommends the development of standardised green loan contracts and the establishment of financial warehouses to support this process. Additionally, the paper advocates for tax incentives to reduce funding costs and public credit enhancements, such as guarantees and subordinated debt, to improve the risk-return profile of green bonds for institutional investors.

The report outlines a strategy to scale China's green bond market, identifying a need for 2 trillion to 4 trillion RMB annually for environmental goals. It proposes a roadmap based on strategic demonstration issuances by diverse entities, capacity building for issuers, and the creation of transparent, long-term green project pipelines. Key recommendations include leveraging the existing 5.72 trillion RMB green loan portfolio for refinancing and exploring the addition of 'green labels' to existing qualifying bonds to enhance market liquidity.

The report outlines a strategy to expand China's green bond market, emphasizing the need for private capital to meet an annual environmental investment requirement of RMB 2-4 trillion. It identifies key barriers, including limited issuer knowledge and the lack of a long-term project pipeline, and recommends strategic demonstration issuances from policy banks, commercial banks, and state-owned enterprises to build market liquidity and confidence.

The document highlights a global consensus on the threats of climate change and the necessity of a massive energy transformation to limit temperature rises to below 2°C or 1.5°C. It notes that renewables became the second largest electricity source in 2014 and that costs for solar and wind technologies are falling rapidly. The briefing also emphasizes the health and economic benefits of decarbonization, specifically citing the potential for $300 million in annual health benefits from closing coal plants in Alberta and the growth of Canada's clean energy sector. Finally, it details Canada's 2013 emissions of 726 mega-tonnes and its targets to reduce these to 622 MT by 2020 and 524 MT by 2030.

The San Giorgio Group (SGG) met in February 2016 to discuss moving climate finance from diplomacy to implementation following the Paris Agreement. Key discussions focused on the need for better tracking methodologies for the USD 100 billion goal, the role of cities in climate action, the use of climate risk insurance in vulnerable countries, and the application of innovative financial instruments like green bonds and YieldCos to scale up Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).

The document serves as a comprehensive guide for countries to translate their NDC promises into actionable plans. It breaks down the implementation process into five interconnected modules: governance, mitigation, adaptation, finance, and MRV. Each module provides a structured set of activities, from reviewing existing institutional landscapes and analyzing national potential to designing policies and establishing monitoring systems. The manual emphasizes a holistic approach, highlighting synergies between climate action and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the importance of gender equality in decision-making, and the necessity of mobilizing both public and private finance. It includes numerous global case studies—ranging from Kenya's legislative approach to India's use of green bonds—to illustrate practical applications of the recommended activities.

The document argues that engaging the private sector is critical for scaling up climate adaptation and mitigation in Bangladesh due to high costs and public budgetary constraints. While the private sector is already pursuing market opportunities—such as climate-resilient seeds and solar home systems—significant barriers remain, including information gaps, weak financial markets, and policy constraints. The Green Climate Fund (GCF), specifically its Private Sector Facility (PSF), is presented as a key mechanism to overcome these barriers by providing low-cost finance and support for SMEs. The brief recommends that the Government of Bangladesh develop a clear roadmap for private sector involvement in climate policy and integrate climate considerations into public procurement.

The document outlines a three-step process for NDC implementation: preparatory work, plan elaboration, and execution. It organizes these activities into five core modules: governance, mitigation, adaptation, finance, and measurement, reporting, and verification (MRV). The guide emphasizes integrating climate actions into national development planning, ensuring gender sensitivity, and aligning with Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). It provides detailed activity lists for each module and includes case studies from countries such as Kenya, Colombia, and India to illustrate best practices in legislative frameworks, private sector mobilization, and integrated MRV systems.

The green bond market experienced substantial growth in 2016, with issuance on track to double from 2015 levels, driven largely by China and other emerging markets. While mitigation projects in clean energy and energy efficiency receive the majority of capital, adaptation financing is increasing, particularly through US municipalities. The private sector now accounts for 66% of issuance. To meet Paris Agreement targets, the report advocates for governments to develop green investment pipelines and implement five key actions: issuing demonstration bonds, applying green standards, enabling domestic verifiers, providing market infrastructure, and promoting international collaboration.

The Green Economy Barometer 2016 reports that while the transition to green economies is accelerating—marked by record investments in renewables and a maturing international policy architecture—it remains insufficient in depth and breadth. The report highlights a significant shift in investment toward developing countries and the emergence of ambitious national sectoral targets. However, it argues that structural reform is lacking, as most national plans ignore the informal economy and the needs of the poorest populations. The document concludes that the green economy remains politically fringe and requires a more inclusive narrative to achieve large-scale societal transformation.

The report outlines a framework for financing the implementation of National Adaptation Plans (NAPs), focusing on three primary sources: domestic public budgets, international public funds, and private sector investment. It emphasizes the role of NAPs in articulating priorities to secure funding and highlights the necessity of integrating adaptation into national planning and budgeting cycles. Key discussions include the use of fiscal instruments to raise domestic revenue, the challenges of tracking adaptation finance, the process of developing 'bankable' project pipelines for international funds, and the public sector's role in creating an enabling environment for private investment.

The document outlines a diverse landscape of climate financing for cities, categorised into local internal revenues, external third-party sources, and international funds. Local options include property and land taxes, user fees, development charges, and Tax Increment Financing (TIF), as well as 'intracting' for energy retrofits. External sources feature Energy Performance Contracting (EPC), green bonds, and crowdfunding. International support is available through climate funds like the Green Climate Fund (GCF) and Global Environment Facility (GEF), Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs), and philanthropic organisations, though the authors note that most international funds require cooperation with national governments due to strict fiduciary and creditworthiness standards. The guide emphasizes that while international funds are necessary for large-scale projects, local sources foster greater municipal autonomy and sustainability.

The report outlines a systematic approach to identifying and addressing financial barriers to low-carbon investment. It proposes an analysis matrix that intersects various financial stakeholders with specific barriers—such as high cost of capital, perceived risk, and split incentives—to determine where public intervention is most effective. The authors argue that dedicated institutions like green banks can be advantageous by co-housing policies to allow for flexible funding, creating a 'brain trust' of expertise, and simplifying access for consumers. The document also provides a table of existing public green infrastructure banks in the OECD, including examples from Australia, the UK, Korea, Canada, and the USA.