Search Climate Insights Directory

The report examines how the neoliberal trade and investment regime prioritizes the economic profitability of transnational corporations (TNCs) over human rights and food security. It contrasts the 'Agribusiness Model', characterized by large-scale monocrops and investor protections, with an 'Agroecology Model' based on food sovereignty and environmental justice. The document highlights how specific legal clauses in trade agreements—such as National Treatment and Investor-State dispute settlement—create a 'regulatory chilling-effect' that prevents states from protecting small-scale producers. It specifically identifies the European Union as a driver of this system through its trade strategies and funding of agroindustrial projects in Africa. The report concludes with recommendations to reform investment regimes, prioritize small-scale producers, and establish legally binding instruments to hold TNCs accountable for human rights violations.

The National Energy Transition Strategy (NETS) for Saint Lucia identifies an optimal energy portfolio consisting of solar, wind, energy storage, energy efficiency, and existing diesel generation. This combination is projected to reduce diesel expenditures by 42% and carbon emissions by 40% by 2025. The report emphasizes that utility ownership generally leads to lower customer rates and that energy efficiency is the most cost-effective resource for minimizing system costs. While geothermal energy offers significant base-load potential, its viability depends on concessional financing and successful exploration. The strategy also highlights the need for regulatory reform, specifically decoupling utility revenues from sales to incentivize energy efficiency and avoiding 'rate shock' associated with certain independent power producer (IPP) arrangements.

The document provides a detailed comparative analysis between the Kyoto Protocol's flexibility mechanisms (CDM, JI, and IET) and the emerging frameworks under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement (specifically Articles 6.2 and 6.4). It examines differences in purpose, governance, and accounting, highlighting the shift from a bifurcated system of Annex I and non-Annex I countries to a universal application for all Parties. The paper emphasizes the need for 'robust accounting' and 'environmental integrity' to avoid double counting and the transfer of 'hot air', while outlining critical unresolved questions for UNFCCC negotiations regarding the nature of internationally transferred mitigation outcomes (ITMOs) and the scope of eligible activities.

More than 100 civil society organizations express deep concern over the Green Climate Fund's (GCF) lack of adequate policies for financing high-risk activities. The statement argues that the GCF Board should not approve high-risk projects—including large hydropower and infrastructure—until it adopts a full Environmental and Social Management System (ESMS) and a free-standing Indigenous Peoples' Policy aligned with international standards like UNDRIP. The groups demand more rigorous scrutiny for high-risk sub-projects, country-driven proposals, and strict adherence to public disclosure timelines for impact assessments.

The document defines loss and damage as the "residual impacts" that occur when climate change impacts exceed the limits of adaptation. It notes that while the concept is grounded in science—citing examples such as sea-level rise submerging territory or the loss of Arctic ice—political views within the UNFCCC remain varied. The briefing specifically focuses on four traits: the unavoidability of some impacts, the potential for irreversible and intolerable harm, and the attribution of these impacts to human-driven climate change.

The text advocates for policy instruments that reward sustainable, resource-efficient production based on renewable inputs to enable a future bioeconomy and job creation. It emphasizes that the forest industry is vital for reducing climate impact and contributes 9-12 percent of Swedish industry's employment, export, turnover, and value added, significantly supporting the national trade balance.

The report outlines a strategic framework for UK-China cooperation to expand the global green bond market, identifying key challenges such as the lack of bankable projects and non-harmonised standards. It proposes specific actions, including scaling cross-border issuance, creating joint research programs between the Bank of England and the People's Bank of China, and developing globally harmonised green definitions. The document also highlights the role of the Climate Bonds Standard and Certification Scheme in providing the trust and assurance necessary for institutional investors to mobilise capital for low-carbon and climate-resilient infrastructure.

The paper finds that climate actions across examined INDCs align with 154 of the 169 SDG targets, demonstrating significant potential for mutual benefits between climate and development agendas. While global alignment is high, the authors note that few countries explicitly referenced SDGs in their INDCs, often due to separate institutional oversight between environment and development ministries. Case studies of Colombia and Uganda show high goal-level alignment, though target-level alignment varies based on national priorities. The document advocates for a 'whole-of-government' approach to maximize resources and avoid implementation silos.

The document outlines a multi-level governance approach to urban climate action, emphasizing that while cities are primary sites of emissions and vulnerability, they require supportive national policy frameworks and international financing to achieve transformative change. It details local jurisdictional powers, national enabling environments, and specific access modalities for the Green Climate Fund.

The report identifies a significant gap between Mexico's current climate-aligned bond issuance and the investment required to meet its emissions targets, while outlining opportunities across energy, transport, buildings, and water sectors.

The 2016 World Conservation Congress, convened by the IUCN, aims to develop governance responses to biodiversity loss through a series of motions and resolutions. The document emphasizes the need to integrate biodiversity into all development choices and align the IUCN's 2017–2020 Programme with global frameworks like the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Paris Agreement. For Africa, the brief highlights the importance of Motion 086 and the need for consolidated voting positions to protect vulnerable ecosystems.

The proposed programme aims to transition Rwanda's agriculture sector toward a low-carbon, climate-resilient model by mainstreaming adaptation and mitigation into national policies and the Strategic Plan for the Transformation of Agriculture (PSTA-4). With a requested grant of 30 million USD, the initiative focuses on implementing climate-smart pilots, building institutional capacity, and creating an enabling environment to overcome economic and policy barriers. The programme targets the agriculture sector, which is responsible for 78% of Rwanda's total greenhouse gas emissions and is highly vulnerable to climate variability, including floods and droughts.

The briefing identifies six critical challenges to connecting climate action and sustainable development: creating a unified national narrative, developing integrated planning and policies, ensuring institutional coherence, adopting a whole-of-society approach, reforming finance, and aligning monitoring and reporting systems. It emphasizes that because climate change impacts development and the sectors driving development are the same as those critical for mitigation, treating these agendas as separate risks undermining both. The document highlights examples of integrated strategies in Ethiopia, Colombia, France, Gabon, and Bangladesh, while calling for a shift from fragmented bureaucratic silos toward systemic transformation and inclusive governance.

The document analyzes the 'Six Americas' framework to show that while climate change is a top-tier voting issue only for the 'Alarmed' segment (17% of the population), candidates supporting climate action are more likely to attract the 'Concerned' and 'Cautious' groups. Conversely, only the 'Dismissive' group (10% of the population) is more likely to vote for a candidate who opposes climate action. The data, from a March 2016 survey of 1,204 adults, indicates that 45% of Americans fall into the most engaged segments (Alarmed and Concerned), while 21% are skeptical (Doubtful and Dismissive).

The report categorizes the U.S. population into six groups based on their attitudes toward global warming: Alarmed, Concerned, Cautious, Disengaged, Doubtful, and Dismissive. In March 2016, 45% of Americans were in the most engaged groups (Alarmed and Concerned), while 21% were in the skeptical groups (Doubtful and Dismissive). The Alarmed group is the most likely to prioritize climate change in voting decisions and participate in climate action campaigns, whereas the Dismissive group generally views the issue as a hoax and may prefer candidates who oppose climate action.

The document argues that the draft Regulations unfairly place the burden of GHG emission calculations on data providers rather than the competent authority. It recommends shifting the data provider's role to reporting activity data at a facility level, expanding the scope of GHGs to include fluorinated gases, and ensuring full public disclosure of emission data to meet South Africa's obligations under the Paris Agreement and its Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC).

The research analyzes how climate finance investments generate economic value added not only in recipient countries but also in third countries through international trade, termed 'spill-overs'. Using a GMRIO model, the study finds that on average 28.6% of the total economic impact spills over to other countries. The ability to retain value added varies by country, with India and Brazil retaining around 80%, while Mexico and Indonesia retain no more than two thirds. The EU is the primary beneficiary of these spill-overs. The study also identifies that different types of climate actions produce varying levels of spill-overs: renewable energy technologies often generate high spill-overs (exceeding 35% for some), whereas forestry and coastal protection generate fewer than 20%. The authors suggest that donor countries may be influenced by these spill-over prospects when allocating funds, and recipient countries should improve industrial competitiveness to retain more economic gains.

The document argues that current development and climate policies in Brazil, Colombia, and Peru often conflict, particularly where biofuel and hydropower expansion undermine forest conservation and water security. It advocates for a 'security agenda' based on the water-energy-food nexus to better manage resource trade-offs and improve coordination between national and subnational governments.

The report examines the Watershared model, which uses local negotiations and non-economic incentives to encourage upstream landowners to protect forests for the benefit of downstream water users. Unlike national PES schemes, Watershared relies on social norms and local consensus, allowing participation from those without formal land titles and reducing bureaucratic overhead. In Bolivia, the model expanded from six farmers in 2003 to 4,500 families conserving 210,000 hectares by 2016. The approach is presented as a tool for climate compatible development, integrating mitigation through forest protection and adaptation through secured water supplies.

The guide examines the politics of climate change in three Latin American mega-cities, finding that while political leadership and local framing drive policy adoption, implementation is often hindered by a lack of broad social coalitions and low electoral salience of climate issues.