Search Climate Insights Directory

Friends of the Earth International argues that environmental rights are human rights and should form an autonomous basis for corporate liability in the UN Legally Binding Instrument. The document provides textual suggestions to ensure TNCs are obligated to prevent environmental harm, phase out emissions, and provide full ecological restoration, moving beyond voluntary due diligence and ESG frameworks.

The report details a workshop series organized by the Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research (IAI), the Alliance for Just Deliberation on Solar Geoengineering (DSG), and The Degrees Initiative. The program focused on solar radiation modification (SRM) as a case study for emerging climate intervention techniques. Through expert presentations and a multilateral negotiation simulation in Bogotá, Colombia, the initiative aimed to bridge the gap between science and policy for officials from Latin America and the Caribbean. Key outcomes include a consensus on the need for regional research to ensure equitable participation in global forums, concerns over 'moral hazard' regarding climate mitigation, and the importance of including Indigenous Peoples and local communities in research governance.

The document analyzes the South African Climate Change Act as a framework for transforming the food system, which contributes approximately 20% of national emissions and is highly vulnerable to climate shocks. It identifies specific legal avenues—such as the National Adaptation Strategy and Plan (NASP), municipal climate response plans, and the Presidential Climate Commission—where farmers, workers, and civil society can intervene to promote agroecology, land rights, and food price stability. The author emphasizes that while the Act provides the legal framework, it does not guarantee funding or specific ground-level obligations, making active public participation essential to ensure a 'just transition' that protects vulnerable groups including women, youth, and smallholder farmers.

The report examines eight innovative financial instruments—including the Adaptation Benefit Mechanism, biodiversity credits, carbon taxes, carbon trading, credit guarantees, debt-for-nature/climate resilience swaps, pooled investment funds, and sovereign green/sustainability-linked bonds—to bridge the climate finance gap in developing countries. It identifies common barriers such as limited institutional capacity, lack of robust project pipelines, and underdeveloped local capital markets. The document emphasizes that while these instruments can signal a government's commitment to climate action, their success depends on a supportive enabling environment characterized by effective leadership, clear taxonomies, and robust climate data. For least developed countries (LDCs), the report suggests a phased approach, first strengthening basic financial and legal prerequisites before focusing on 'climate investability'. It concludes with specific recommendations for donors and development partners to provide technical assistance, anchor investments, and pilot projects to scale up private sector mobilization.

The policy brief addresses the lack of a shared vision for implementing Article 2.1(c) of the Paris Agreement, which calls for making financial flows consistent with climate goals. It argues that current efforts are fragmented and risks of greenwashing are high. The authors propose a Theory of Change (ToC) to link high-level goals to specific activities across regulators, financial entities, the real economy, and civil society. The document emphasizes that while Article 9 focuses on the provision of public climate finance from developed to developing nations, Article 2.1(c) requires systemic reforms—such as climate-related financial disclosures, taxonomies, and fiscal policy changes—to redirect the broader global financial system. It concludes with recommendations for the COP30 (CMA7) to adopt a structured work program based on this ToC to avoid circular discussions and ensure a just transition.

The World Resources Institute (WRI) received unmodified audit opinions for its consolidated financial statements and its major federal program for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2025. Total assets decreased from $538.4 million in 2024 to $436.9 million in 2025, while total net assets fell from $489.4 million to $390.8 million. The Institute's programmatic spending for 2025 totaled $274.9 million, with the largest expenditures directed toward 'Food, Forests and Water, Ocean' and 'Climate, Economics, and Finance'. Federal expenditures for 2025 totaled $9.1 million, primarily funded by the U.S. Department of State and the U.S. Agency for International Development. The auditor identified no material weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting or compliance for major federal programs.

The study uses satellite data and the InVEST model to analyze carbon sequestration in the Senapati district of Manipur, India, comparing a 'Business as Usual' (BAU) scenario with an 'Environmentally Sound Planning' (ESP) scenario for 2029. It finds that the ESP scenario significantly reduces both dense forest loss and carbon storage decrease compared to the BAU scenario, with the estimated value of carbon sequestration under ESP reaching USD 1,151 million.

A WRI briefing demonstrating that climate adaptation investments yield significant economic, social, and environmental returns, often exceeding the value of avoided climate losses.

The We Mean Business Coalition states that current national climate plans, including those from China and the EU, fall short of the requirements for a 1.5 °C pathway and create investment uncertainty due to the use of ambition ranges rather than fixed commitments.

The report outlines the design of a proposed Country Platform for Nigeria's energy transition, arguing that the framework must be state-owned, politically anchored, and integrated with national development goals rather than being a donor-driven replica of other JETPs. It identifies critical needs for high-level presidential leadership, vertical coordination with oil-producing states, and the resolution of institutional bottlenecks that hinder the disbursement of climate finance. The proposed platform emphasizes a 'people-centred transition' that prioritizes job creation, energy access, and social protection for displaced workers, while strategically navigating global geopolitical pressures such as the EU's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism.

The document highlights the critical role of waste characterization in reducing methane emissions, which account for nearly 20% of global totals. It details available global tools for emissions estimation, examines the varied regulatory approaches to waste data in several Latin American countries, and advocates for the integration of field-based assessments with satellite monitoring to identify methane super-emitters.

Natural Justice critiques South Africa's Draft Second NDC, noting that while it introduces tighter 2030 targets and a 2031–2035 carbon budget, it lacks enforceable commitments, funding for adaptation, and a coal phase-out schedule. The submission recommends unconditional emissions reductions, grant-based loss and damage finance, and the integration of human rights indicators and Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) into climate planning.

The Institute for Policy Integrity disputes a draft U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) report titled “A Critical Review of Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on the U.S. Climate,” which claims that climate impacts are too small to justify aggressive abatement. The Institute asserts that surveys of economic experts actually show a broad consensus that significant mitigation is warranted and that climate change will cause significant damage, including limited economic growth and increased mortality.

The policy brief highlights the critical role of local governments in Africa and the Global South as implementers of climate adaptation, mitigation, and biodiversity goals. It identifies systemic barriers—including severe finance gaps, technical capacity constraints, and data deficiencies—that hinder municipal action. The authors recommend that South Africa's 2025 G20 presidency establish a multi-level climate governance declaration, a dedicated local climate action forum, and a specialized finance access facility to empower subnational governments as equal partners in global climate governance.

The document highlights a misalignment in climate finance, noting that less than 10% of agricultural climate finance reaches the livestock sector in LMICs. It argues that livestock are multifunctional assets providing 'triple wins'—climate mitigation, adaptation, and socio-economic benefits—but are often viewed narrowly as sources of greenhouse gas emissions. The authors identify barriers to funding, including poor data, complex measurement, reporting and verification (MRV) procedures, and institutional fragmentation. To address this, the brief recommends that the G20 promote blended finance instruments, scale carbon credit standards for rangelands, update climate fund eligibility criteria, and develop standardized climate-smart livestock indicators.

Mexico's Directorate-General for Climate Action Policies confirms its alignment with the LAC Common Position on Climate Change and Health, detailing how its Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) 3.0 integrates health as a cross-cutting issue across adaptation, mitigation, and loss and damage components.

The report analyzes climate finance flows in Southeast Asia, finding a heavy reliance on international capital despite growing domestic interest. It focuses on Indonesia, the Philippines, and Vietnam, identifying that while corporates are the primary local investors, institutional and financial institutions remain underutilized due to risk perceptions and loan tenor mismatches. The document argues that blended finance—through guarantees, technical assistance, and project aggregation—can catalyze local investment in nature-based solutions, adaptation, and utility-scale renewables.

The submission argues that South Africa's draft second NDC lacks sufficient ambition and fails to reflect the 'highest possible ambition' required by the Paris Agreement. It proposes more stringent emission targets—350 Mt CO2e for 2025-2030 and 248 Mt CO2e for 2031-2035—based on 'fair share' calculations and the best available science. The document highlights legal risks under the South African Constitution, the Climate Change Act, and NEMA, while criticizing the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment (DFFE) for a non-transparent process that delayed the release of the underlying technical report. It further calls for a stronger focus on phasing out fossil fuels, enhancing climate adaptation for vulnerable groups, and incorporating climate justice principles from the Presidential Climate Commission's recommendations.

The document outlines a set of 'dos and don'ts' for communicators to explain the dual necessity of reducing pollution and adapting to climate impacts. It provides tailored messaging strategies for four specific audience groups: Progressive Activists, Incrementalist Left, Established Liberals, and Traditional Conservatives, emphasizing the need to avoid pitting adaptation against mitigation and instead highlighting progress, stability, and the protection of local environments and livelihoods.

The document finds that while 74% of people in Britain consider climate change an important issue, their support for specific actions is heavily influenced by the language used. Framing climate action as 'protecting our environment' (59% support) is more effective than using technical terms like 'net zero' (43% support). There is a strong, unifying connection between climate change and nature, with 'harm to nature and wildlife' being the top concern for 41% of respondents. The report highlights that people across all socio-economic backgrounds are concerned, though many distance themselves from the topic due to immediate life pressures or the depressing nature of the subject. It recommends using tangible, local examples of progress and a holistic approach that links climate action with nature preservation to increase public engagement.