Search Climate Insights Directory

The LAC campaign urges South Africa to advocate for climate reparations and a non-fossil fuel development vision for Africa at COP27, while domestically accelerating the transition to renewable energy and phasing out coal by 2040.

The document argues that climate finance for Africa is grossly insufficient, with an estimated annual shortfall of $112 billion for the 2020-2030 period. It calls for a total commitment of $1.3 trillion from rich countries to cover adaptation, mitigation, and loss and damage, while advocating for the use of natural gas as a transition fuel and the reform of the global financial architecture.

Earthjustice criticizes the continued reliance on a centralized fossil-fuel energy grid in Puerto Rico, citing the failure of LNG and coal plants and the resulting energy-related deaths following Hurricane Fiona. The organization advocates for the use of unspent FEMA funds to implement distributed rooftop solar and storage systems, as supported by US Department of Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm and local communities like Adjuntas.

The Framework for Integrating Rights and Equality (FIRE) integrates human rights-based approaches (HRBA) and gender equality principles into disaster risk reduction (DRR) and climate change adaptation (CCA). Developed through international standards and feminist political ecology, FIRE is intended for state and non-state actors across various governance levels to improve risk assessment, land-use planning, and emergency preparedness.

The Global Climate and Health Alliance argues that climate change is a critical health crisis causing millions of avoidable deaths. The organization calls for the complete phase-out of fossil fuels as a public health imperative and demands that wealthy nations fulfill the $100 billion global climate finance goal, with half dedicated to adaptation and increased investment in health systems. The statement emphasizes that health is both a prerequisite and a driver for climate resilience and economic productivity.

The Global Climate and Health Alliance calls for the integration of health metrics into global climate frameworks and the immediate phase-out of fossil fuels to prevent millions of avoidable deaths. The statement emphasizes that wealthy nations must meet the $100B climate finance goal, with half allocated to adaptation and significant investment in health systems. It highlights that the healthcare sector contributes 4-5% of global emissions and must be part of mitigation efforts while becoming more resilient to climate shocks.

The document highlights how global climate decisions at COP27 affect local areas through three primary tools: an analysis of U.S. warming scenarios, the Global Climate Shift Index (CSI-Global) tracking daily temperature influences in over 1,000 cities, and the Picturing Our Future tool visualizing sea level rise. It emphasizes the gap between current emissions trajectories and the 1.5°C to 2°C warming limits agreed upon in 2015.

The We Mean Business Coalition calls for urgent global action at COP27 to keep the 1.5°C goal within reach, advocating for a partnership between business and government to halve global emissions by 2030. The Coalition emphasizes the need for a sectoral Mitigation Work Programme, scaled-up adaptation finance for vulnerable nations, and the fulfillment of the US$100 billion annual climate finance commitment.

The document highlights the disproportionate impact of climate hazards on women, particularly those in marginalized communities, and argues that women's participation in decision-making leads to more effective climate-resilient policies. It reviews the Lima Work Programme on Gender and specific pledges from COP26, such as the UK's £165 million commitment to address inequalities, while calling for stricter implementation of gender-related goals during COP27.

The document emphasizes that gender equality and women's empowerment are catalysts for progress in agriculture, health, and climate change adaptation, yet significant gaps persist in asset ownership and governance. It warns that 'gender-blind' research and data create a 'cycle of invisibility' that reinforces existing inequities and produces policies that primarily benefit dominant social groups. The note advocates for an intersectional approach in R4D to improve the quality of science and generate more equitable outcomes in food systems.

The report examines the growth of green bonds in emerging markets, identifying critical success factors such as sound regulatory frameworks, investor demand, public sector participation, and macroeconomic stability. It details barriers including underdeveloped capital markets, a lack of bankable projects, and the risk of greenwashing. The document provides a five-step issuance process and analyzes the roles of development banks and national governments in catalyzing markets. Case studies on India and Kenya illustrate different stages of market readiness, from a corporate-led leader (India) to a nascent market (Kenya), offering tailored policy advice to enhance sustainable finance flows.

The report provides a comprehensive overview of the climate finance landscape in Bangladesh, India, and Nepal, detailing the mechanisms used to fund climate action. It analyzes the roles of multilateral funds (such as the GCF and GEF), bilateral aid, national budgets, and emerging private sector instruments like green bonds and blended finance. The document highlights significant funding gaps, particularly for adaptation, and recommends strengthening institutional frameworks, adopting climate budget tagging, and improving technical capacity to develop bankable projects.

The toolkit argues that rights-based approaches lead to more effective and legitimate climate outcomes. It outlines a three-step process for integrating rights into NDCs: inclusive planning, transparent communication of how rights informed that planning, and reflecting human rights obligations in implementation and monitoring. The document provides specific recommendations across seven thematic areas: ambition, participatory planning, general human rights integration, gender mainstreaming, Indigenous Peoples' rights, land tenure, and just transition. It emphasizes that states must align their climate ambition with the 1.5°C target to fulfill human rights obligations and should account for all emissions under their jurisdiction, including extraterritorial ones. The toolkit includes guiding questions and illustrative examples from the NDCs of Canada, Mexico, Vanuatu, Nepal, Costa Rica, Bolivia, and Chile to demonstrate best practices in human rights-based climate action.

The document argues that climate action must be aligned with human rights to be effective and legitimate. It provides a framework for integrating these rights into NDCs, focusing on scientific ambition, inclusive public participation, gender equality, the rights of Indigenous Peoples, land tenure, and a just transition for workers.

The document argues that climate action is most effective and legitimate when based on a human rights approach. It outlines a framework for integrating these rights into NDCs, focusing on scientific ambition, inclusive public participation, gender equality, the rights of indigenous peoples, land tenure, and a just transition for workers.

As of September 30, 2022, the cumulative issuance of GSS+ bonds exceeded $3.5 trillion, with green bonds surpassing $2 trillion. While the market saw a decline in Q3 2022 compared to previous periods due to geopolitical and macroeconomic factors, green bonds remained the dominant type, accounting for 52% of issuance year-to-date. International organizations are the largest issuers, and the market is heavily concentrated in Euro, US Dollar, and RMB denominations. A dedicated section highlights the Middle East and Africa market, which has reached $33.3 billion in cumulative issuance, characterized by a high proportion of green bonds and sustainability-linked bonds (SLBs).

IDFC members reported a record $224 billion in green finance commitments in 2021, with climate finance accounting for 95% of the total. Mitigation finance reached $186.6 billion, while adaptation finance decreased by 24% to $20.9 billion. Biodiversity finance grew by 31% to $18.4 billion. The majority of climate finance was provided by non-OECD institutions and directed toward the East Asia and Pacific region.

In 2019/20, Ethiopia's tracked climate finance averaged USD 1.7 billion, representing only 7% of its estimated annual needs of USD 25.3 billion. The landscape is heavily dominated by international public finance (92%), with a strong preference for adaptation projects (56%) over mitigation (38%). While the Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU) sector received the most sectoral finance (29%), it remains significantly underfunded relative to its 83% contribution to national GHG emissions. Key barriers to scaling finance include a highly regulated financial sector, lack of a stock market, unfavorable collateral policies for SMEs, and a heavy reliance on grants over private capital. The report recommends establishing a comprehensive climate budget tagging system, conducting bottom-up needs assessments, and developing capital markets to mobilize private investment.

The report identifies three primary categories of climate security vulnerabilities for China: direct risks to military and critical infrastructure, compounding risks to internal political stability, and external risks that amplify regional tensions in the Indo-Pacific. It notes that while China is investing heavily in hard infrastructure adaptation and disaster response, political incentives and a lack of societal trust may undermine these efforts. The document recommends that the US government improve its predictive data on China's physical risks, use forecasting tools like wargaming, and prioritize climate resilience funding for Indo-Pacific allies to counter Chinese influence.

The report examines how climate change acts as a risk multiplier in Mainland Southeast Asia, specifically Burma, Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, and Vietnam. It identifies state governance capacity and social and economic inequality as the primary drivers of regional insecurity. Through four scenarios—ranging from 'Paralyzed States, Vulnerable Populations' to 'Building Resilience, Strengthening Communities'—the analysis explores how these drivers influence outcomes like food insecurity, forced migration, and the proliferation of criminal networks. The document recommends that external stakeholders support policies to reduce inequality, engage regional security services for cooperation, and utilize ASEAN as a platform for climate risk mitigation to navigate the geopolitical tensions between the U.S. and China.