Search Climate Insights Directory

The IAI Strategic Plan (2019–2044) establishes a long-term framework to bridge the gap between science and policy in the Americas. The plan is organized into three themes: meeting the needs of member Parties, advancing science for regional sustainability, and ensuring the organizational sustainability of the IAI. Key priorities include promoting transdisciplinary research on climate action, water and energy security, and biodiversity, while expanding the institute's membership and establishing a 100 million USD endowment fund.

The IAI Strategic Plan (2019–2044) establishes a 25-year framework to bridge the gap between science and policy across the Americas. The plan is organized into three themes: meeting the needs of member states regarding global environmental change, advancing science for regional sustainability, and ensuring the IAI's own organizational sustainability. Key priorities include promoting open data, supporting underrepresented groups, and focusing research on critical areas such as food and water security, renewable energy, and climate action. The institute aims to expand its membership to all nations in the Americas and establish a $100 million endowment fund to secure its long-term operations.

The paper examines Zambia's experience in coordinating diverse international public funds for climate adaptation and mitigation. It identifies that while multilateral donors have helped establish early coordination frameworks, competing approaches between major donors like the World Bank and UNDP have led to institutional fragmentation and 'turf' struggles. The study highlights that coordination practices often evolve from previous development aid structures and identifies critical knowledge gaps, including the lack of a geo-located project database and insufficient coordination with international NGOs and domestic financing sources.

The statement evaluates the conclusion of COP24, noting that while negotiations were contentious, they established a foundation for the Paris Agreement's rulebook and set the stage for updated national climate commitments by 2020. It highlights progress on the Adaptation Fund and the agreement to set a new post-2020 finance goal, while criticizing the United States, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait for opposing the IPCC 1.5°C report. The author emphasizes that the world has not yet begun to aggressively reduce global emissions and calls for bold action from heads of state.

The document argues for a shift from simply mobilizing 'climate finance' to ensuring all investments are 'Paris-aligned', meaning they actively support limiting global warming to well below 2°C. It compares MDB eligibility typologies against a framework of 'aligned', 'misaligned', and 'conditional' investments. Analysis of energy and transport sectors shows that while about half of MDB typologies are aligned, two-thirds of the remainder are only conditionally aligned, necessitating stricter benchmarks and fuel-specific criteria to avoid carbon lock-in.

The document asserts that the current 'Climate Finance Paradigm' used by Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs)—which focuses on maximizing finance for mitigation and adaptation—is insufficient. It proposes a 'Paris Alignment Paradigm' that requires MDBs to align their entire portfolios with the Paris Agreement, mainstream adaptation across all operations, and assist countries in strengthening their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). The report emphasizes that MDBs and shareholders should commit to a zero-emissions energy sector and overall net-zero CO2 emissions by 2050, working with clients to find renewable alternatives to emission-intensive activities.

The document highlights a systemic lack of integration between national low-emission development strategies (LEDS) and long-term adaptation plans, noting that neither typically accounts for the other's impacts or pathways.

The document describes the Paris Agreement rulebook as the essential set of rules and guidelines required to implement the 2015 Paris Agreement. It highlights that while the Agreement established global temperature goals and the mechanism of nationally determined contributions (NDCs), it left the operational details—such as reporting standards, transparency of climate finance, and the balance between mitigation and adaptation—to be decided. The author notes that negotiations at COP 24 are complicated by the need to balance the responsibilities of developed and developing countries and the interlinked nature of transparency, the global stocktake, and compliance.

The report details two workshops held in 2018 focused on South-South and triangular cooperation for climate action. It highlights case studies of technological exchange in agriculture, water management, and urban resilience, while identifying systemic barriers such as funding gaps and a lack of institutional capacity at the subnational level.

The report details a workshop focused on aligning National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) with Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). It argues that while NDCs set high-level goals, NAPs provide the technical and operational framework for implementation. Key findings highlight that most participating countries lack a direct link between these two processes and face challenges such as institutional silos, conflicting interests between mitigation and adaptation, and a lack of common monitoring and evaluation (M&E) frameworks. The document proposes a path toward 'systematic alignment' where NDC adaptation content is derived directly from the NAP process.

The document argues that while there is significant global potential for policy coherence between the Paris Agreement and the 2030 Agenda, this must be translated into national-level implementation. Using the NDC-SDG Connections tool, the authors analyzed over 7,000 climate activities, finding strong synergies in energy, agriculture, and water. However, it warns that trade-offs—such as bioenergy competing with food security for land—are rarely documented in policy papers and must be proactively managed to avoid maladaptation.

The Draft IAI Strategic Plan (2019–2044) establishes a 25-year roadmap to support sustainable policies in the Americas through interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research. The plan is organized into three themes: meeting the needs of member Parties, advancing a science agenda for regional sustainability, and ensuring the organizational sustainability of the IAI. Key priorities include climate action, water and food security, biodiversity conservation, and the promotion of open science and data. The IAI aims to act as a bridge between scientific research and policy-making, targeting the co-creation of knowledge and the enhancement of institutional capacities across the region.

The draft Strategic Plan (2019–2044) outlines the IAI's vision to create a sustainable and informed American continent through science-based policy. It focuses on three main themes: meeting the needs of member states regarding global environmental change, advancing science for sustainability (covering food, water, energy, and biodiversity), and ensuring the IAI's own institutional sustainability through improved communication and funding. The plan emphasizes transdisciplinary research, open data, and the inclusion of underrepresented groups such as indigenous peoples and women.

The paper examines how the international linking of emissions trading systems (ETSs), which allows allowances to flow across borders and alter emission levels, should be accounted for under the Paris Agreement. Specifically, it focuses on the framework provided by Article 6.2 to ensure that such links are properly reflected in the achievement of nationally determined contributions (NDCs). The document notes that the European Union and Switzerland intend to use Article 6.2 to account for their ETS link.

The Centre for Environmental Rights, representing the Life After Coal/Impilo Ngaphandle Kwamalahle Campaign, is urging the South African government to prioritise the promulgation of the Climate Change Bill, 2018. The authors argue that delaying climate legislation is unacceptable given South Africa's extreme vulnerability to climate change and the urgent need for 'rapid and far-reaching' transitions to limit global warming to 1.5°C. They assert that the state has a Constitutional obligation to protect the environment and prevent pollution, citing the Dutch Urgenda case as a legal precedent for the state's duty to pursue ambitious greenhouse gas emission reduction plans.

The report promotes agroecology as a holistic science, practice, and social movement that offers a sustainable alternative to industrial agriculture. It argues that agroecological systems provide stable yields, enhance biodiversity, and increase resilience to climate change and disasters. The document contrasts this with 'false solutions' like Climate-Smart Agriculture and sustainable intensification, which it claims maintain corporate dependencies. It concludes with policy recommendations centered on food sovereignty, gender justice, and the protection of small-scale producers' rights to land and seeds.

The document advocates for agroecology—defined as a science, a set of practices, and a social movement—as the essential approach to eradicating hunger and combating climate change. It contrasts this holistic model with 'false solutions' promoted by agribusiness, such as Climate-Smart Agriculture and sustainable intensification, which it claims maintain the industrial status quo. The report provides a comprehensive set of 13 criteria for evaluating sustainable innovations and offers policy recommendations centered on food sovereignty, gender justice, and the protection of small-scale producers' rights to land and seeds.

The document finds that while some countries have improved their legal frameworks to combat deforestation, implementation remains weak due to corruption, lack of resources, and a failure to recognize the land rights of indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLCs). It highlights a strong correlation between high corruption and forest loss, and notes that illegal conversion for commercial agriculture—specifically palm oil, soy, paper/timber, and cattle—drives much tropical deforestation. While demand-side measures for timber are increasing in the EU, US, and Asia, similar measures for other commodities remain largely voluntary. The report also emphasizes the critical role of IPLCs in carbon storage, noting they manage 17% of total carbon in 64 assessed countries, yet face increasing violence and land grabbing due to insecure tenure.

The meeting established the organizational framework for the Green Climate Fund's (GCF) first formal replenishment, including the adoption of rules of conduct and a workplan leading to a pledging conference in October 2019. Key outcomes include the definition of the Global Facilitator's role, the agreement to invite the Global Environment Facility (GEF) as an observer, and the initiation of analysis regarding minimum contribution thresholds for participation in consultations. The process will be guided by a performance review of the GCF and a strategic programming document focusing on mitigation and adaptation scenarios.

The report highlights that while Africa has contributed minimally to global warming, it is disproportionately vulnerable due to high levels of extreme poverty and low state capacity. It projects that without significant intervention, the number of people in extreme poverty will rise until 2040, peaking at 590 million. The document argues that prioritizing human development—specifically education, healthcare, and water infrastructure—is essential to increasing adaptive capacity. It contrasts the 'Current Path' with a 'Green Road' scenario where inclusive, sustainable growth effectively eliminates extreme poverty by mid-century and significantly reduces the population lacking access to improved water.