Search Climate Insights Directory

The Nigerian Green Bond Market Development Programme (NGBMDP) aimed to develop a non-sovereign green bond market in Nigeria between 2018 and 2021. The programme successfully facilitated the issuance of 4 corporate green bonds and 2 sovereign green bonds, raising a total of ₦58.51 billion in sovereign issuances and ₦32.83 billion in corporate issuances. Key achievements include the training of over 500 capital market professionals, the development of mandatory Nigeria Green Bond Guidelines by the SEC in December 2018, and the certification of local verifiers such as Rubicola Consulting Limited and Agusto & Co. Limited. The programme also supported the launch of the FMDQ Green Exchange in November 2021 to improve transparency and ESG reporting. Despite these gains, the report notes that the market remains in its infancy, with a heavy reliance on public sector financing and a need for a larger pipeline of bankable green projects.

The report identifies a significant gap between the high demand for green financing driven by Morocco's Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) and the limited supply of tailored financial instruments for SMEs. While energy efficiency and renewable energy projects are well-covered, sectors like fisheries and sustainable housing are underserved. The study recommends improving the regulatory framework for ESCOs, introducing fiscal incentives, and designing new equity or guarantee mechanisms to catalyze green investment.

The study identifies a significant gap between the high demand for green financing driven by Morocco's Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) and the limited supply of dedicated instruments for SMEs. While sectors like industry and agriculture are well-served by credit lines, others such as transport, water, and construction remain underserved. The report recommends enhancing the regulatory framework, implementing a green taxonomy, and developing new instruments such as a dedicated green guarantee mechanism or an equity fund to support the transition to a green economy.

The white paper argues that African capital market regulators often face a dual mandate of both developing and regulating markets, which requires a proportional approach based on the market's maturity. It introduces a five-stage analytical framework—Foundational, Nascent, Emerging Early, Emerging Maturing, and Advanced—to help regulators determine whether to focus on building blocks, commodity markets, or sophisticated financial products. The report highlights that while some regulators like Morocco's AMMC are well-aligned, others face operational deficits or inefficiencies. It suggests a fluid funding mix of government and industry fees to ensure financial sustainability and independence.

The report argues that African cities face a critical choice between unsustainable 'business-as-usual' urban sprawl and a '3CR' model (compact, connected, clean, and resilient). Using economic modelling for 35 major cities in Ethiopia, Kenya, and South Africa, it demonstrates that while incremental investments of US$280 billion are needed by 2050, the net present value of benefits is significantly positive. It identifies systemic barriers—including poor municipal creditworthiness and restrictive national laws—and proposes four national enabling mechanisms and six specific financial instruments to unlock private and public capital.

The report examines how the COVID-19 pandemic affected local currency bond markets (LCBMs) across MEFMI member countries. It finds that while the crisis increased government borrowing needs and operational risks, most countries maintained stability through fiscal, monetary, and financial policy interventions. Key findings include a general increase in the average time to maturity of domestic debt, a shift in investor behavior toward safe assets, and the use of liability management operations like rollovers and switches. The document concludes that deepening LCBMs, strengthening debt management strategies, and improving market transparency are essential for resilience against future crises.

The Accreditation Panel (AP) recommends the accreditation of Applicant 015 (APL015) for 'Large' project sizes and 'High risk' (Category A/I-1) environmental and social risk categories. The applicant, a public international financial institution operating in over 90 developing countries, was assessed via a fast-track process as an EU DEVCO entity. The AP found that APL015 fully meets the Fund's basic and specialized fiduciary standards, including project management, grant award mechanisms, and on-lending/blending. It also complies with interim environmental and social safeguards (ESS) and gender policies, although it was advised to finalize its formal stakeholder complaints mechanism.

The Green Climate Fund's Accreditation Panel recommends the accreditation of Yes Bank Limited, a private sector financial institution in India, for medium-sized projects with a maximum environmental and social risk category of B/I-2. While the bank fully meets basic fiduciary and E&S standards, it partially meets specialized fiduciary standards for project management, grant awards, and on-lending due to a lack of demonstrated implementation of its Information Disclosure Policy. It also partially meets gender policy requirements due to limited in-house capacity for gender risk assessment. Accreditation is recommended subject to conditions regarding gender capacity building and the public disclosure of GCF project progress and results.

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) Accreditation Panel assessed KCB Bank Kenya Limited (APL104) for accreditation as a national direct access entity. The bank is recommended for accreditation for medium-sized projects and medium environmental and social risk (category B/I-2), covering basic fiduciary standards, project management, and on-lending/blending. While the bank fully meets standards for transparency, accountability, gender, and environmental and social safeguards, it only partially meets requirements for procurement oversight, independent project evaluation, and public disclosure of project results. Accreditation is recommended subject to several conditions, including the revision of its Supply Chain and Procurement Policy and the future conduct of an external audit of its environmental and social management system.

The GCF's private sector strategy aims to mobilize private investment for climate action in developing countries, particularly for the most vulnerable, including LDCs, SIDS, and African states. The strategy is organized around four pillars: promoting a conducive investment environment, accelerating innovation in business models and technology, derisking market-creating investments, and strengthening national and regional financial institutions. To implement this, the GCF is introducing the Project-Specific Evaluation Approach (PSEA) to improve access for non-accredited private entities and is expanding its use of blended finance, including guarantees, equity, and insurance products. The fund also focuses on helping countries translate their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) into bankable investment plans while mitigating currency risks and avoiding increases in sovereign debt.

The document outlines the necessity of reforming financial systems to meet climate targets and support the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). It advocates for a shift away from short-termism and 'brown' investments toward a system that serves society's long-term needs. Key proposals include the use of 'blended' finance to de-risk investments, decentralized financing to reach local organizations, and the implementation of a 'brown penalising factor' to discourage unsustainable lending. The brief also highlights the role of the 2019 PAGE Ministerial and initiatives like the UNEP Finance Inquiry in shaping this transition.

The Economics for Nature (E4N) partnership developed tools, networks, and best practices to embed the value of natural capital into government, business, and financial decision-making. Key achievements include the Green Economy Tracker, the '3-returns' investment framework, and the mainstreaming of natural capital into the EU Green Deal and African Development Bank programmes. The document identifies a divergence between OECD countries and debt-stressed nations in adopting these approaches and outlines four 'frontiers' for future progress: centering people and Indigenous knowledge, standardizing valuation frameworks, implementing systemic economic reform, and scaling nature-based solutions.

The report analyzes India's steel industry, which accounts for 12% of the country's CO2 emissions, and argues that transitioning to green hydrogen-based steelmaking is the most viable path to net zero by 2070. It identifies significant barriers, including the high cost of green hydrogen, the lack of a legal definition for 'green steel', and the young age of existing blast furnace fleets. The authors recommend government intervention through carbon pricing, mandatory green steel procurement in public projects, and the implementation of green hydrogen purchase obligations to make low-carbon technologies commercially competitive.

The Climate Finance Accelerator (CFA) is a UK-funded global programme, led in South Africa by NBI and GreenCape, that provides technical, financial, and social inclusion support to low-carbon projects to improve their bankability. The programme does not provide direct funding but facilitates connections between project developers and commercial or concessional investors. Eligible projects must be at least at the pre-feasibility stage, have a financing need between USD $5m and $150m, and demonstrate measurable greenhouse gas emission reductions.

The report examines the role of South-South and Triangular Cooperation (SSTC) in fostering sustainable urban development and climate resilience in the Global South. It highlights the importance of the New Urban Agenda and the 2030 Agenda, arguing that traditional North-South cooperation is insufficient. Through various case studies from Africa, Asia, and Latin America, the document demonstrates how cities share knowledge on green transportation, water management, and urban planning. Key examples include Shenzhen's carbon trading, India's water resilience efforts, and Mexico City's green bonds. The report concludes that while cities are critical to the 'climate battle,' they often face institutional and financial barriers that SSTC can help overcome through peer-to-peer learning and innovative financing.

The document outlines a four-step process for issuing green bonds in China: identifying eligible green projects, arranging independent reviews, establishing tracking and reporting procedures, and executing the bond issuance. It emphasizes that green bonds are defined by the 'green designated use' of funds rather than the overall nature of the issuing company. The guide highlights the potential for 're-labeling' existing Chinese government debt—estimated at $164 billion used for green assets—as green bonds if verification procedures are implemented. It also provides international examples from the European Investment Bank, EDF, and the City of Gothenburg to illustrate best practices in certification and transparency.

The document argues that green bonds can help China meet its massive funding needs for a low-carbon economy while addressing systemic financial issues, such as over-reliance on short-term bank lending. It suggests that China can leverage its experience with Green Credit Guidelines to establish a robust market based on clear standards and independent verification. The report proposes a comprehensive action plan including public demonstration issuances, dual recourse structures for municipal bonds, green warehousing to aggregate small projects, and tax incentives. It emphasizes that these tools, combined with carbon pricing and the greening of development banks, could position China as a global leader in green capital markets.

The document presents a classification of financial instruments for climate adaptation, categorised by their maturity level (mature, emerging, or pilot) and their applicability to specific sectors and regions. It identifies three main categories of instruments: debt instruments, results-based financing instruments, and financial risk management instruments.

The document details the reactions of eleven major European banks to a report on fossil fuel asset exposure. It provides specific 2019 data on fossil assets and equity for each bank, calculating a risk ratio. While some banks like BNP Paribas, Société Générale, and BPCE provided detailed rebuttals or highlighted their transition policies and green financing, others, such as Deutsche Bank and Santander, declined to respond. The banks generally contest the report's methodology, arguing that it ignores portfolio selectivity, client transition strategies, and the broader solvency of banking groups.

Reclaim Finance responds to the Bank of England's consultation on the Corporate Bond Purchase Scheme (CBPS), urging the Bank to prioritize the exclusion and divestment of fossil fuel assets to mitigate climate-related financial risks. The organization argues that engagement is often ineffective for high-carbon companies and recommends that the Bank set ambitious, short-term portfolio targets, integrate scope 3 emissions, and implement a heavy negative tilt strategy. Reclaim Finance further suggests that the Bank should lead the market in climate risk management by increasing capital requirements for fossil fuel exposures and expanding its environmental focus to include nature-related financial risks.