Search Climate Insights Directory

The report identifies Seychelles as highly vulnerable to sea-level rise and ocean warming, which threaten its fisheries, tourism, and water security. It finds that while the University of Seychelles is in its infancy and has limited research output, there is significant potential for it to lead a national CCD framework. Current climate research is primarily driven by NGOs and international agencies. The document recommends the establishment of a strategic national research framework and the integration of CCD into higher education curricula to address critical gaps in technical expertise and evidence-based policy making.

The report assesses South Africa's readiness for climate compatible development (CCD), defining it as low-carbon, climate-resilient development. It identifies significant research needs across eleven themes, including water security, food security, and health. While South Africa possesses a strong, networked research infrastructure led by the DST and NRF, the report highlights critical gaps in individual skills (such as systems thinking), institutional funding cycles that are too short for complex social-ecological research, and an uneven distribution of capacity across the 23 public universities. It emphasizes the need for transdisciplinary approaches and a shift from 'siloed' sectoral planning to integrated CCD strategies.

The report identifies Swaziland as highly vulnerable to climate change, with observed temperature increases exceeding 3°C between 1961 and 2000. It assesses the role of higher education institutions, such as the University of Swaziland (UNISWA), in addressing these risks through research, teaching, and community outreach. The analysis reveals significant gaps in observational data, a lack of postgraduate research (Masters and PhDs), and a need for transdisciplinary approaches that integrate indigenous knowledge with scientific methods. While some initiatives in agriculture, water, and energy are active, the report argues for a more coordinated national strategy and the mainstreaming of CCD into university curricula and government policy.

The report argues that South Africa's existing legal and policy frameworks, particularly those addressing social equity and industrial development, provide sufficient space to implement sustainable public procurement (SPP) without requiring new legislation. While the social pillar of SPP is well-established through Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment (B-BBEE) and preferential procurement, the environmental pillar is less formalized but gaining traction through renewable energy targets and subnational initiatives. The document highlights that government spending represents 29.1% of GDP, offering significant leverage for sustainable development. It identifies a decentralized procurement system that allows provinces and municipalities, such as the City of Cape Town and Western Cape, to run pilot projects. The report recommends aligning SPP with existing investment incentives and developing specific technical guidance to scale up 'green' procurement.

The document explains the various safeguard frameworks governing REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation), specifically those from the UNFCCC, UN-REDD, REDD+ SES, and the World Bank's FCPF. It highlights the risks of displacement and loss of land rights, the importance of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC), and the challenges of translating international guidelines into binding national policies. It provides practical guidance for communities to engage in national safeguard development and advocate for their rights.

The document examines the role of guidance tools in bridging the gap between climate adaptation, mitigation, and development. It argues that tools should be viewed as mechanisms for defining goals rather than just implementation aids, and emphasizes that tools must be complemented by analysis of actors and outcomes because they cannot solve complex problems in isolation.

The document argues that climate compatible development is won or lost at the subnational level, where local actors face intense pressure from climate extremes but possess unique advantages in local knowledge and cross-sectoral coordination. It identifies key barriers, such as scientific uncertainty at local scales and a gap between public expectations and available resources. To overcome these, the paper recommends strategies including the cultivation of local political 'champions', the creation of 'knowledge partnerships' to translate climate science for communities, and the use of participatory planning to mobilise in-kind resources. It emphasizes that for these local successes to contribute to global transformational change, they must be 'scaled out' to other localities and 'scaled up' into national policy frameworks.

The document outlines the role of the private sector in achieving Kenya's low carbon climate resilient development pathway as defined in the National Climate Change Action Plan 2013-2017. It details sector-specific opportunities for mitigation and adaptation, highlighting existing private sector investments in geothermal power, bagasse cogeneration, and solar panel assembly. The briefing emphasizes that the plan creates new market opportunities and cost savings for businesses across agriculture, energy, ICT, and urban development.

The Kenyan agricultural sector, which accounts for over a fifth of the GDP, is highly sensitive to climate change, facing risks from unpredictable rainfall, droughts, and pests. While the sector is a significant emitter of greenhouse gases—primarily from livestock—the document emphasizes that adaptation to ensure food security and export earnings is the priority. It suggests climate-smart practices such as agroforestry and conservation tillage to build resilience and reduce emissions, while noting that the carbon market currently offers limited financial benefits due to high monitoring costs.

The document highlights that Kenya's economy is highly exposed to climate change, with droughts and flooding estimated to cost approximately 2.4% of GDP annually. It argues that the private sector can mitigate risks and gain competitive advantages through resource efficiency, renewable energy, and product innovation. The Kenya Private Sector Alliance (KEPSA) is identified as a key entity supporting firms in managing these risks and accessing opportunities, such as those outlined in the National Climate Change Action Plan 2013-2017 (NCCAP).

The report analyzes 33 barriers across various sectors in Kenya that hinder private sector action on climate change, as identified in the National Climate Change Action Plan (NCCAP) 2013-2017. Key systemic issues include limited access to affordable long-term finance, high upfront costs for low-carbon technologies, and a lack of information on building business resilience. The document prioritizes six key areas for the Kenya Private Sector Alliance (KEPSA) and the Climate Business Information Network (CBIN) to address through government engagement: establishing a National Climate Fund, providing financial incentives for renewable energy, restructuring the Feed-in Tariff (FiT) policy, streamlining renewable energy approvals, improving energy efficiency standards, and coordinating climate-friendly agricultural programs.

The document identifies three critical sets of conditions for the effective implementation of local climate policies in developing countries: government capacity, problem framing, and political factors. It argues that while government capacity (legal, financial, and technical) acts as a necessary enabling condition, the actual motivation for policy action depends on how climate goals are framed to align with local socioeconomic concerns and the influence of political entrepreneurs and interest groups. The author emphasizes that implementation is more politically challenging than adoption and suggests a 'configurational' approach to understanding how these various factors combine to produce successful outcomes.

The report argues that low-carbon technology adoption in developing countries requires tailored innovation systems rather than a one-size-fits-all approach. It identifies specific needs for the 'bottom of the pyramid' (energy access), the rising middle class (lifestyle and urban planning), and industrial sectors (efficiency and value chain integration). The authors emphasize that the public sector must mitigate risks through financial support and coordination, while international bodies like the UNFCCC's Technology Mechanism should act as brokers to link finance, R&D, and knowledge sharing.

The document argues that the Green Climate Fund's Private Sector Facility (PSF) must address specific risk gaps—namely policy and financing risks—to unlock large-scale private capital for climate mitigation and adaptation. It proposes two primary business models: a 'Facilitated Model' acting as a fund-of-funds through intermediaries, and a 'Full-service Model' engaging directly with private actors. The authors emphasize the need for a clear separation between governance and management, suggesting the use of independent due diligence and private sector expertise, potentially through a dedicated Investment Panel, to ensure efficient decision-making and risk management.

The document examines how climate change affects bioenergy supply, demand, and logistics, specifically within the Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden). It argues that while the Nordic region may benefit from increased biomass productivity and reduced heating demand, its reliance on international bioenergy trade exposes it to global climate risks. The paper explores synergies between mitigation and adaptation, such as the use of perennial grasses and agroforestry, and warns of conflicts, including the potential for bioenergy demand to drive indirect land use change (ILUC) and soil erosion in other regions.

The document argues that a gap exists between climate adaptation research and action because traditional framing ignores agency and separates adaptation from mitigation. It proposes an actor-oriented approach to overcome five identified bottlenecks, applying modelling, visualization, and policy analysis to land-use change, energy transitions, and insurance and finance.

The document examines the impact of governance structures on urban climate action in Italy and Spain, comparing a top-down approach in Spain with a more reactive, bottom-up approach in Italy. It finds that while national and regional frameworks often fail to sufficiently support cities, transnational networks like the Covenant of Mayors (CoM) are pivotal in driving the development of local mitigation plans. In Spain, the Central Government's collaborative efforts were partially diluted by regional 'gatekeepers', whereas in Italy, the lack of national guidance led proactive cities to rely on networks and EU projects. Both countries show a strong focus on mitigation (energy and transport) but a significant deficiency in local adaptation planning.

The study finds that Italian cities are generally more proactive in climate mitigation than Spanish cities, with earlier plan implementation and more ambitious emission targets. In both countries, mitigation efforts significantly outweigh adaptation efforts, despite high vulnerability levels. The Covenant of Mayors (CoM) is identified as a more influential driver for local action than national policies or networks.

The document argues that climate change and development are inextricably linked, as climate impacts threaten to undermine poverty eradication and sustainable development goals. It suggests that the post-2015 framework should be 'climate-smart,' incorporating targets that simultaneously address poverty, low-carbon development, and resilience. The briefing explores two primary integration options: mainstreaming climate-related targets across various goal areas or establishing a stand-alone climate change goal. It highlights that people living in poverty are disproportionately affected by climate change, particularly through impacts on agriculture, water security, health, and infrastructure. The document concludes that the success of the post-2015 agenda depends on its ability to foster policy coherence and encourage private sector and sub-national engagement.

The report argues that climate policy is often contested because it creates winners and losers, necessitating a strategic communication and policy plan. The proposed five-point plan includes: simplifying the narrative through relatable examples and imagery; creating a positive message focused on the transformational benefits of a low-carbon transition; designing policy packages that compensate 'losers' (such as through payments for ecosystem services); building broad, long-term political consensus to avoid policy reversals; and maintaining a relentless focus on implementation. The author emphasizes 'climate compatible development,' where mitigation, adaptation, and development goals are integrated to ensure climate action does not hinder poverty eradication.