Search Climate Insights Directory

The report examines how domestic DFIs in Brazil, Mexico, and Chile can mobilize investment for their NDCs. While these institutions committed over US$11 billion in climate finance in 2015, the vast majority (98%) targeted mitigation, primarily in renewable energy, leaving a significant gap in adaptation and urban infrastructure. Key barriers include a lack of long-term low-cost capital, perceived poor risk-adjusted returns, and limited technical capacity to structure complex climate projects. The report recommends that governments provide clearer mandates and that multilateral development banks (MDBs) support NDBs through risk-mitigation instruments, technical assistance, and improved climate finance tracking.

The report analyzes environmental pledges from seven parties and two alliances for the 2017 Estonian local elections. It finds a strong focus on urban mobility—specifically cycling and public transport—in Tallinn and Tartu, but a general lack of comprehensive strategies for climate change mitigation and adaptation. While some parties like the Social Democrats (SDE) and the Greens (Rohelised) provided more detailed environmental sections, the report notes a recurring conflict between promises to increase parking/road infrastructure and the goal of preserving urban green spaces. Nationally, platforms focused more on regional development and organic farming than on specific climate targets.

Between 2010 and 2015, US$ 1,477 million in climate finance was committed to Caribbean SIDS, representing approximately 6% of total reported aid flows. The analysis reveals a heavy reliance on bilateral sources (85%), with a significant concentration of funds in a few countries and sectors. While 48% of finance targeted mitigation and 32% adaptation, the report highlights a critical gap in funding for resilience-essential sectors like health and education. Furthermore, a low regional disbursement ratio of 39% suggests significant implementation challenges compared to non-climate aid.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) supports the objectives of the Climate Change Mitigation Policies and Measures (PAMs) study but argues that its current methodology is too narrow. The CER contends that limiting the analysis to carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide excludes other critical greenhouse gases and pollutants, such as hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, sulphur hexafluoride, black carbon, and hydrochlorofluorocarbons, which could undermine the accuracy of the modelling and miss significant mitigation opportunities.

The paper identifies five key levers—power and leadership, communication and engagement, capacity building, financing implementation, and demonstration effect—essential for successful climate action in cities. Drawing on seven CDKN-supported projects across Asia, Africa, and Latin America, it argues that city governments face significant barriers, including short political cycles, fragmented governance, and limited financial resources. The framework serves as a checklist for donors and practitioners to create investable and implementable climate propositions, highlighting the importance of local champions, tailored business cases, and cross-city collaboration to scale successful interventions like India's Heat Action Plans.

The report identifies several systemic barriers to the adoption of climate-smart agriculture in Nepal, including a gap between policy recognition and actual implementation, a lack of scientific evidence tailored to specific agro-ecological zones, and poor coordination among government institutions. It highlights that many initiatives rely on unsustainable project-based approaches and that economically poor smallholder farmers are unable to afford expensive technologies like solar-pump irrigation and machine-based zero-tillage.

The briefing identifies four critical areas for the development of the Paris Agreement Rulebook: NDC communications regarding mitigation and adaptation, the enhanced transparency framework for reporting and review, the design of the Global Stocktake, and the operational modalities for implementation and compliance. It emphasizes the need for a pragmatic approach that accounts for differing national capacities and the integration of non-governmental stakeholders to ensure the Agreement is implemented effectively and fairly.

The GCF Secretariat conducted a review of the initial proposal approval process based on experience from the first several rounds of funding. Key issues identified include low quality of funding proposals, inconsistent policy decisions, and long processing times ranging from one to 18 months. The report recommends shifting toward strategic programming and a more structured concept note phase to improve 'quality at entry'. Proposed changes include a new prioritization queue for funding proposals, a revised project cycle that requires NDA confirmation of concept notes, and the development of an online submission portal. The Board is also asked to consider a two-stage approval process and a more robust policy for project restructuring and cancellation.

The document reflects on seven years of CDKN's work to integrate climate action with poverty reduction, highlighting its influence on policies in 33 countries and its support for the Paris Agreement. It identifies critical gaps in current Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), the need for diversified climate finance beyond the Green Climate Fund, and the slow pace of sustainable transport and smart city adoption in developing nations compared to the rapid energy transition to renewables.

The document argues that closing the gap between climate ambitions and implementation requires a shift from general capacity building to targeted 'capability development'. CDKN defines capability as the ability to apply tools, skills, and knowledge effectively combined with the willingness to act. The paper identifies four essential types of capability: technical, relational, strategic, and institutional. It proposes a seven-step iterative process for development, emphasizing context analysis, co-owned agendas, and adaptive programming. Case studies from Rwanda and India are used to illustrate how these capabilities enable governments to secure climate funding and implement action plans.

The report identifies that while Peruvian SMEs represent 99.5% of registered companies and face higher proportional energy costs than large firms, significant barriers—including lack of information, low economic incentives due to low energy prices, and limited financial mechanisms—hinder energy efficiency adoption. A pilot study of 12 SMEs in Lima's energy-intensive sectors (primarily manufacturing) demonstrated a strong business case for investment, with an average reduction in energy consumption of 15%, total annual financial savings of US$750k, and an average payback period of two years. Key recommendations include government-led market analysis, improved auditing standards, and the creation of partnerships between finance providers, consultants, and equipment suppliers.

The document details CDKN's support for Kenya's climate goals, highlighting the impact of the 2016 Climate Change Act and the National Climate Change Action Plan (NCCAP). Key achievements include a 140 MW increase in geothermal energy in 2015, the development of the CaRROT tool for the flower sector, and the submission of four proposals to the Green Climate Fund. It also discusses the 'Raising Risk Awareness' initiative for extreme event attribution and efforts to integrate water, energy, and food (WEF) security planning at the county level.

The document argues that while climate-smart agriculture (CSA) can enhance food security and climate resilience in sub-Saharan Africa, its adoption is hindered by physical input shortages and institutional failures. It recommends improving tenure security, expanding financial instruments like crop insurance, and strengthening local governance and scientific research to scale these practices.

The Republic of Maldives, supported by UN Environment, is requesting USD 300,000 from the Green Climate Fund (GCF) for a 12-month readiness program (April 2017 to March 2018). The proposal focuses on strengthening the National Designated Authority (NDA), creating a Five Year National Strategic Framework to mobilize international climate finance, and developing a first draft of a Country Programme. Key activities include broad-based stakeholder consultations, the development of at least three project concept notes aligned with the Maldives Climate Change Policy Framework and NDC, and the creation of a monitoring platform on the Ministry of Environment and Energy (MEE) webpage. The project aims to leverage existing initiatives, such as the BML Green Fund and UN Environment's work on energy efficiency in housing, to enhance the country's ability to access and manage climate finance.

The statement asserts that the U.S. decision to withdraw from the Paris Climate Agreement isolates the country and threatens global efforts to limit temperature rise. It argues that climate protection is essential for the 2030 Agenda, job creation, and the protection of marginalised groups. The signatories call for Germany, the European Union, and middle-income countries in the South to intensify their implementation of the Accord and strengthen international climate alliances to counter the U.S. exit.

The We Mean Business coalition argues that the Paris Agreement provides the certainty needed for long-term business investment in innovation and infrastructure. The coalition highlights that low-carbon investments are economically advantageous, citing an average internal rate of return of 27% and specific examples from Walmart and Hewlett Packard Enterprise. Despite the US government's decision to withdraw, the coalition maintains that businesses in the United States will continue to pursue climate goals because they align with business growth and risk management.

The document explores the multifaceted meaning of 'bankability' in climate finance, arguing that it extends beyond traditional financial returns to include socioeconomic and environmental impacts. It provides lessons from CDKN's work in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, highlighting how bankability requirements differ between public and private funders and between mitigation and adaptation projects. The paper concludes with a guiding checklist for project developers to improve the success rate of proposals submitted to multilateral funds like the Green Climate Fund (GCF).

The Green Climate Fund Proposal Toolkit 2017 serves as a comprehensive manual for creating funding proposals for the GCF. It details the roles of National Designated Authorities (NDAs), Accredited Entities (AEs), and Executing Entities (EEs), while outlining a ten-step approach to project design. Key requirements include alignment with the GCF's Results Management Framework (RMF), adherence to International Finance Corporation (IFC) Performance Standards for environmental and social safeguards, and the integration of gender-sensitive objectives through a Gender Action Plan (GAP). The document also explains the GCF's six investment criteria—impact potential, paradigm shift potential, sustainable development potential, recipient needs, country ownership, and efficiency and effectiveness—and provides guidance on selecting financial instruments such as grants, concessional loans, equity, and guarantees.

The paper examines the governance of the water-energy-food (WEF) nexus, arguing that while integrated approaches are essential for climate compatible development, they are often hindered by siloed government structures, political contestation over mandates, and limited local capacity. Using evidence from Indonesia, Kenya, and the Amazon basin, it highlights that horizontal and vertical coordination are critical but can be undermined by power imbalances between central and local governments. The author suggests a pragmatic approach to nexus governance, focusing on strengthening the technical and administrative capacities of local government institutions rather than striving for an impractical ideal of total comprehensiveness.

The document provides a comprehensive historical record of the IAI's governance, detailing the outcomes of its Conferences of the Parties (CoP) from 1997 to 2017. Key recurring activities include the election of the Executive Council (CE), the Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC), and the Science-Policy Advisory Committee (SPAC), as well as the approval of annual operating budgets and country contributions. The records track the evolution of the institute's administrative framework, including the establishment of a Tripartite Headquarters structure, the development of open data and science policies, and the implementation of strategic plans for global change research. It also documents the institute's efforts to enhance science communication, manage funding through mechanisms like the Belmont Forum, and maintain diplomatic relations with member states across the Americas.