Search Climate Insights Directory

The Canadian Climate Institute proposes that Canada's commitment of over $13 billion in climate finance over the next five years should be treated as a strategic investment to diversify trade beyond the US market. The author suggests a three-pillar approach: increasing the global presence of Canadian clean energy expertise, establishing strategic partnerships based on host-country priorities, and ensuring high-integrity climate results through rigorous measurement, reporting, and verification (MRV). The document advocates for a governance framework that integrates climate finance with carbon markets and project development to mobilize private capital and create new export opportunities for Canadian technologies and services.

The First Conference for the Transition beyond Fossil Fuels, held in Santa Marta, Colombia, from April 24 to 29, aims to establish practical solutions for phasing out coal, oil, and gas. Co-sponsored by Colombia and the Netherlands, the event brings together at least 45 countries, including major exporters like Canada and Australia, though the largest producers—the US, China, Russia, and Saudi Arabia—are absent. The conference seeks to bypass the consensus-based delays of UN COPs to produce a report for COP30 and COP31, focusing on eliminating fossil fuel subsidies, planning production decline, and increasing renewable energy demand within a just transition framework.

The document identifies climate disinformation as an escalating geopolitical threat driven by hostile states, fossil fuel interests, and AI, which undermines public trust and climate action. It highlights a critical gap in international response due to the closure of the U.S. Global Engagement Center (GEC) and urges the EU to expand its global role through multilateral cooperation, partner support, and investment in information integrity tools.

The document analyzes Nigeria's climate policy through four 'policy moments', highlighting a persistent struggle with institutional overlap and fragmented governance. It examines how internal competition between bodies like the National Council on Climate Change (NCCC) and the Office of the Special Presidential Envoy on Climate (OSPEC) dilutes Nigeria's international bargaining power. The paper also discusses the impact of global energy market shifts, the divestment of onshore assets by International Oil Companies (IOCs), and the challenges of removing fuel subsidies. It concludes that Nigeria must move away from transplanting foreign institutional models and instead develop a domestically driven, streamlined framework that integrates the petroleum sector into its climate goals.

Nigeria's climate agenda is hampered by overlapping institutions and a lack of elite consensus, which diminishes its bargaining power internationally. While the Tinubu administration has attempted to centralize governance through the Office of the Special Presidential Envoy on Climate (OSPEC) and the Presidential Climate Action Committee (PCAC), these moves risk further fragmentation by sidelining statutory bodies like the National Council on Climate Change (NCCC). Externally, Nigeria faces declining oil exports to China and India and increased competition from the US in European markets, intensifying the need for a successful energy transition. The report highlights a trend of International Oil Companies (IOCs) divesting from onshore assets due to regulatory instability, while noting that agile local firms are better positioned to navigate domestic complexities.

The Middle East, particularly Gulf nations, is positioned to export its advanced district cooling infrastructure and engineering know-how to regions facing escalating heat crises, such as Europe, Asia, and Africa. As global cooling demand is projected to triple by 2050, the document suggests that the region can redefine its geopolitical role from an oil and gas provider to a leader in climate adaptation and green infrastructure finance.

The document finds that while deep distrust in politicians and institutions affects how climate action is perceived, there remains enduring support among Brits for ambitious climate leadership. People value leaders who are credible, passionate, and empathetic, and who prioritize tangible local benefits and global collective action over a reliance on statistics. The report suggests that climate leadership should be grounded in local contexts and delivered by authentic messengers to overcome disillusionment.

Mighty Earth calls for a full veto of Brazil's "Devastation Bill," arguing that the legislation would weaken environmental licensing and safeguards for the Amazon, Cerrado, and Pantanal biomes. The statement highlights that the bill contradicts Brazil's international pledges to achieve zero deforestation by 2030 and would undermine the country's credibility ahead of hosting COP30 in Belém.

The report details a 'Futures Dialogue' held in April 2025 between South Africa and the Netherlands, which used strategic foresight tools to reimagine Africa-Europe climate and energy relations. By employing methods like Causal Layered Analysis and the Three Horizons Framework, participants moved beyond traditional diplomatic scripts to address systemic issues such as extractive trade, energy poverty, and asymmetric finance. The dialogue identified pathways for green industrialisation, transformative climate finance, and a shift toward African leadership in climate governance, ultimately recommending that governments institutionalise 'anticipatory diplomacy' within their foreign ministries.

Russia's climate policy is characterized by a 'hydrocarbon culture' that prioritizes fossil fuel exports over mitigation. While the country has implemented domestic regulations and a pilot emissions trading scheme, there is uncertainty regarding actual greenhouse gas emission reductions. Russia intends to meet its 2060 carbon neutrality target by recalculating forest carbon absorption to offset emissions. Furthermore, the war in Ukraine and subsequent Western sanctions have severed climate diplomacy with the West, exacerbating Russian climate obstructionism.

The report assesses the AU-EU climate partnership, noting it is under strain due to unmet commitments and limited finance. It calls for the EU to double adaptation finance by COP30, contribute its 'fair share' to the New Quantified Collective Goal, and establish a new adaptation finance target to replace the COP26 pledge.

The World Resources Institute asserts that the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement will not stop global climate action but will diminish American political influence and cede a competitive advantage in the green energy economy to China and the European Union. The statement emphasizes that subnational entities and the Inflation Reduction Act will maintain U.S. climate progress.

Russia used COP29 to promote fossil fuels and present revised GHG emission data based on a 'sovereign methodology' that claims a 34% reduction in emissions through forest carbon absorption. The document highlights that Russia's 'climate projects' are inconsistent with Paris Agreement standards on additionality and transparency, often serving to prolong fossil fuel use. Despite these issues, Russia has begun selling carbon credits to foreign buyers, such as the Arab Investment Fund, and seeks to expand these practices through BRICS+ and other business associations.

The document outlines the structure of climate negotiations at COP29, listing various negotiating blocs such as the G77+China, EU, and AOSIS, while providing a glossary of terms and a calendar of thematic focus areas.

The BRICS bloc is reaching a milestone where non-fossil power capacity is set to exceed fossil-fueled capacity for the first time in 2024. While the group hosts a significant portion of the world's coal fleet and continues to develop new fossil plants, there is a massive pipeline of wind and solar projects. The report finds that the BRICS countries have enough renewables in development to nearly triple their capacity by 2030, though the actual construction rate varies significantly by member, with China leading the transition.

The report identifies a strategic window for the EU and UK to reset their climate and energy relationship following recent elections. It argues that the current Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) is too limited and suggests a comprehensive new agreement covering industrial decarbonisation, methane, carbon capture, hydrogen, and nuclear energy. The document advocates for an 'options-based strategy' that includes clean firm power to complement renewables, and recommends aligning regulatory frameworks—such as the Emissions Trading Systems (ETS) and carbon removal certifications—to facilitate cross-border trade and infrastructure sharing.

The EU must reform its climate diplomacy strategy for the 2024-2029 cycle to address geopolitical tensions and competition from China and the US in cleantech. The brief advocates for treating climate considerations as a cross-cutting issue across all foreign policy domains and proposes reforms focused on strategy, governance, coordination, and resources to bolster the external dimension of the Green Deal.

The EU has deployed various climate partnerships, including the Global Gateway and Just Energy Transition Partnerships, to bolster its climate diplomacy and counter global influences like China's Belt and Road Initiative. However, the report finds these efforts are hindered by fragmented communication, a lack of coherent vision across EU institutions and Member States, and insufficient resource allocation. To improve effectiveness, the report recommends aligning EU and Member State priorities, developing a long-term strategic vision, and securing high-level political leadership to ensure sustained commitment and resources.

The paper examines the security implications of geoengineering, distinguishing between long-term risks of unilateral deployment and near-term risks involving geopolitical competition and misinformation. It highlights how a lack of trust between the Global North and South, combined with strategic competition between powers like the US, China, and Russia, could lead to states attributing natural disasters to perceived geoengineering attempts. Drawing on historical examples like Project Popeye and the 1978 ENMOD treaty, the author argues against a total ban on geoengineering, suggesting instead that the US lead the development of transparent, civilian-led guardrails and robust science diplomacy to mitigate these risks while continuing the transition from fossil fuels.

The report examines the necessity of international cooperation to prevent the uncoordinated proliferation of divergent Border Carbon Adjustment (BCA) mechanisms, which could increase transaction costs and hinder climate diplomacy. It evaluates three emerging cooperation models: the G7 Climate Club, the Global Arrangement on Sustainable Steel and Aluminium (GASSA), and the OECD's Inclusive Forum on Carbon Mitigation Approaches (IFCMA).