Search Climate Insights Directory

The April 2019 survey reveals that 69% of Americans believe global warming is happening, with 55% attributing it primarily to human activities. While 62% express worry and 64% consider the issue personally important, social engagement remains low, as 63% rarely or never discuss it with family and friends. Public perception of risk is highest for future generations (69%) and plant/animal species (71%), while 38% believe people in the U.S. are being harmed 'right now.' The report also highlights a gap in scientific literacy, with only 17% aware that over 90% of climate scientists agree on human-caused warming. Americans primarily conceptualize global warming as an environmental (75%) and scientific (69%) issue, and 60% believe it is currently affecting U.S. weather.

The Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) and University College London (UCL) have developed a method to eliminate the opacity of cargo shipping emissions by matching satellite-based automatic identification system (AIS) data with vessel operational characteristics and shipping manifests. This approach allows for the precise allocation of greenhouse gases and air pollutants to individual commodity shipments, exporters, importers, and traders. A pilot study of Brazilian exports in 2014 revealed that shipping emissions added 5% to the country's reported CO2 emissions, with the largest shares attributed to iron ore and soybean exports to China. The authors argue that scaling this approach can inform international climate negotiations, improve lifecycle assessments, and enhance shipping industry efficiency.

The document argues that existing human rights obligations under legally binding treaties must inform climate action to protect those most affected and ensure non-discrimination and public participation. It highlights the role of UN human rights treaty bodies (HRTBs) in elaborating these obligations and reviews their 2018 guidance on emissions reduction, adaptation, procedural rights, and international cooperation, including specific contributions from CEDAW, CESCR, and the CRC.

The paper introduces a simplified cross-impact balance (CIB) approach for cross-scale scenario development, allowing global scenarios to serve as stable external conditions for local and regional analysis.

The analysis finds that Germany's current climate targets, including the Climate Mitigation Plan 2050, are insufficient to limit temperature rise to 1.5°C, potentially resulting in 20% to 130% more emissions by mid-century than allowed. To be unambiguously compatible with the 1.5°C limit and fulfill its historical responsibility, the document argues Germany must reach zero emissions by 2030. It further notes that failing to meet the original -40% target for 2020 has already consumed 10% of Germany's 1.5°C budget for 2010-2050, necessitating steeper future reductions.

The paper examines bioenergy trade flows and the necessity of developing sustainable supply chains and governance to meet 2050 global energy and climate scenarios. It emphasizes the need for innovative, integrated value chains and flexible biogenic carbon supply networks to reduce stakeholder risk and ensure economic and environmental benefits.

The Doha Declaration on Climate, Health and Wellbeing, drafted by the Global Climate and Health Alliance in December 2012, asserts that health should be central to climate action. It highlights that climate change impacts health through direct means, such as extreme weather and infectious diseases, and indirect means, such as migration and conflict, disproportionately affecting children, women, and poorer populations. The declaration argues that climate mitigation—specifically reducing fossil fuel consumption and shifting to low-carbon energy—provides significant health co-benefits, including improved air quality and increased physical activity. The signatories call for health impacts to be fully evaluated and costed in climate decisions, the cessation of global fossil fuel subsidies, increased funding for health programs in vulnerable countries, and the inclusion of the health sector in designing mitigation and adaptation strategies.

The document discusses the necessity of 'taxonomies'—systematic classifications of green assets—to prevent greenwashing and provide clear guidance for issuers and investors. It highlights the transition from voluntary international guidelines, such as the Green Bond Principles, to more comprehensive regulatory frameworks, most notably the EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Finance. The report also details the development of the ISO 14030 international standard and provides examples of regional guidelines in ASEAN, China, and other markets.

The document introduces the Transition Pathways and Risk Analysis for Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies (TRANSrisk) project, which analyzes the risks and innovation requirements for shifting from carbon-intensive to low-carbon systems to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. It identifies six categories of transition risks: economic, regulatory/institutional, political, social, environmental, and technological.

Dan Lashof, Director of WRI US, responds to the introduction of the Green New Deal resolution by Rep. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Ed Markey, stating that the proposal has revitalized the urgent conversation on climate action in the U.S. and highlights the necessity of linking ambitious climate goals with job creation and the reduction of economic inequality.

As of 31 December 2018, the GCF portfolio consists of 93 approved projects totaling USD 4.6 billion in GCF funding and USD 11.7 billion in co-financing. While 40 projects are under implementation, 53 projects (61%) have not yet started implementation, primarily due to delays in the finalization of Accreditation Master Agreements (AMAs). Total disbursements reached USD 427 million, with a significant portion flowing to the private sector. The portfolio targets 96 countries, with the largest funding allocations directed toward the African region.

The report examines the increasing engagement of UN human rights treaty bodies (HRTBs) with climate change, specifically analyzing their 2018 Concluding Observations (COBs), general comments, and thematic initiatives. It highlights a shift toward addressing a broader diversity of countries, including developed nations, and identifies a continuing emphasis on adaptation and procedural rights over mitigation. The document provides detailed syntheses of recommendations from the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), and the Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC), emphasizing the disproportionate impacts of climate change on women, children, and persons with disabilities.

The document argues that climate change poses an existential threat to economic, social, and cultural (ESC) rights, necessitating urgent State action through mitigation, adaptation, and finance. It establishes a 'human rights red-line' at 1.5°C, asserting that warming beyond this limit severely threatens rights to food, water, health, and work. The briefing outlines five key State obligations, including adopting science-based emission targets and addressing extraterritorial emissions. It further critiques current climate finance, noting a gap in adaptation funding and a reliance on loans over grants, while providing a directory of independent tools like the Climate Action Tracker and Oxfam's shadow reports to monitor State performance.

The document reports on the growth of sovereign green bond issuance in 2018, noting that sovereign issuance reached 10.5% of the green bond market share. It details specific issuances from countries like France, Indonesia, and the Seychelles, and outlines the development of the Green Bond Market Development Toolkit for emerging markets. Additionally, it describes the EU's progress toward a sustainable finance taxonomy and the efforts of central banks, such as the Bank of England and De Nederlandsche Bank, to integrate climate risk into financial supervision and stress testing.

The report argues that Brazil can align agricultural growth with natural resource protection by linking rural credit access to compliance with the Forest Code. It proposes amplifying credit limits for producers without environmental liabilities or those with approved Environmental Regularization Programs (PRA). The authors assert that this alignment would require no additional treasury resources, as it merely redirects existing funds toward producers providing public goods like forest conservation. The document highlights that a significant portion of current credit contracts are near their limits, suggesting that such a policy would have a substantial impact. It draws parallels to the European Union's Common Agricultural Policy, which conditions payments on environmental rules, and notes that previous Brazilian Central Bank resolutions linking credit to environmental compliance in the Amazon led to a 15% reduction in deforestation between 2008 and 2011.

The white paper proposes increasing credit limits for Brazilian rural producers who comply with the Forest Code, specifically those without environmental liabilities or those with approved regularization programs. It argues that this alignment would use public subsidies to provide public goods (environmental conservation), improve international trade competitiveness, and accelerate agricultural modernization. The authors suggest reinstating rules from previous Central Bank resolutions (4.106/2012 and 4.226/2013) to implement these limits. Analysis of 2016/2017 data shows that 14% of the total credit volume across ten analyzed lines was granted in contracts exceeding 95% of their limits, indicating a significant potential impact for producers who could benefit from expanded limits.

The report details a series of Swedish-led dialogue forums in five countries aimed at integrating climate policies (NDCs) with sustainable development goals (SDGs). Common findings across the forums include a critical need for capacity building at local levels, the challenge of translating national policies into regional implementation, and the necessity of securing both international and domestic financing. While stakeholders generally recognized the synergies between NDCs and SDGs, concerns persisted regarding trade-offs between rapid industrialization and environmental sustainability. Country-specific insights highlight Vietnam's focus on integrated water management, Tanzania's debate on the economic costs of environmental degradation, Zambia's emphasis on research and solar potential, Cambodia's focus on inter-ministerial policy coherence, and Uganda's concerns over institutional silos and external financing dependencies.

The document describes Arctic wetlands as critical ecosystems that store vast amounts of carbon and support biodiversity and Indigenous livelihoods. It warns that climate-driven permafrost degradation and human activities like drainage turn these areas into a 'time bomb' by releasing greenhouse gases and toxic mercury. Conversely, it argues that restoration and conservation can serve as a 'saving grace' for climate mitigation and adaptation. The briefing highlights the need for better wetland inventories and comparative analysis of management strategies to improve governance across Arctic states.

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) asserts that emission reductions and adaptation are the primary responses to climate change. While opposing the deployment of solar geoengineering due to environmental, ethical, and geopolitical risks, UCS supports computer modeling and the study of natural events like volcanic eruptions. The organization opposes large-scale stratospheric tests and maintains that small-scale outdoor experiments must be subject to transparent, inclusive, and independent governance mechanisms involving climate-vulnerable communities.

The document examines the link between community land tenure and global sustainability goals, highlighting that while indigenous and rural communities manage over 50% of the world's land, only 10% is legally recognized. It presents evidence that secure tenure reduces deforestation and carbon emissions more cheaply than technological carbon capture. The author calls for legal reforms, simplified formalization procedures, and a more equitable playing field between communities and corporations to protect these critical carbon sinks and support rural livelihoods.