Search Climate Insights Directory

The report critiques the AIIB's Climate-Focused Policy-Based Financing (CPBF) instrument, arguing that it contains significant loopholes regarding fossil fuel finance and lacks robust safeguards for human rights and gender equality. Based on an analysis of programmes in Brazil and Bangladesh, the authors find that while CPBF loans are counted as 100% climate finance, the funds are fungible and not tracked for specific climate outcomes. The document recommends banning all fossil fuel finance, strengthening the Project-affected Peoples’ Mechanism (PPM), and aligning Paris alignment methodologies strictly with the 1.5°C goal.

The Energy Supply Financing Ratio (ESFR) compares a bank's financing of fossil fuels against its financing of sustainable alternatives, with a target ratio of 6:1 by 2030 based on IEA scenarios. Reclaim Finance warns that varying methodologies allow banks to present misleading ratios, often by excluding capital market activities or including fossil-fuel-related technologies like CCUS in 'low-carbon' scopes. While some North American and French banks have begun publishing these ratios, significant gaps in transparency and scope persist.

The Energy Supply Financing Ratio (ESFR) compares a bank's financing of fossil fuels against its financing of sustainable energy alternatives. Based on the International Energy Agency's (IEA) Net Zero Emissions by 2050 scenario, a ratio of 6:1 is required by 2030 to meet climate goals. However, Reclaim Finance finds that the 65 largest global banks averaged a ratio of only 0.42:1 between 2021 and 2024. The document warns that banks often use misleading methodologies—such as excluding capital markets activities or including fossil-fuel-linked technologies like CCUS in 'low-carbon' categories—to greenwash their climate strategies.

The document evaluates the early climate record of Prime Minister Andy Burnham, noting a slow initial response to the record heatwaves of summer 2026 and subsequent mixed signals. While the government has committed to net zero by 2050, invested £30 million in community energy, and planned a 'Wildfire Summit', it faces criticism over potential approvals for the Jackdaw and Rosebank oil fields, a new Heathrow runway, and possible dilution of the ZEV Mandate. The author argues that ambitious climate action is supported by the British public, including the 'Rooted Patriots' demographic, and urges the government to prioritize bold action over cautious tinkering.

The document highlights a commitment by the Caisse Centrale de Réassurance (CCR) in June 2026 to cease new investments in companies developing new oil and gas projects. It argues that this is a necessary preventive measure to avoid financing the drivers of global warming, which in turn increases the climate risks these entities underwrite. Reclaim Finance calls on other European public-private schemes—specifically Flood Re (UK), Consorcio de Compensacion de Seguros (CCS, Spain), and SACE (Italy)—to adopt similar investment policies and use their leverage with asset managers and insurance clients to combat fossil fuel expansion.

Reclaim Finance calls on European public reinsurers, specifically Flood Re (UK), CCS (Spain), and SACE (Italy), to follow the example of France's Caisse Centrale de Réassurance (CCR) by committing to cease new investments in companies developing new oil and gas projects. The document asserts that financing fossil fuel expansion contradicts the mandate of these entities to preserve the insurability of climate risks, noting that a world warming by 3°C would render such risks untransferable to the insurance sector. It highlights that bonds make up between 70% and 97% of the financial asset portfolios of these public reinsurers, providing a significant lever for change. Furthermore, the author urges these actors to demand alignment from their asset managers and to integrate financial incentives or strict conditions into reinsurance contracts for insurance clients that continue to support fossil fuel development.

The report argues that the IMF's 'climate turn' is contradictory, as its conventional lending programmes (Upper Credit Tranche) often prioritize fiscal consolidation and extractive industries, undermining the climate goals of the Resilience and Sustainability Facility (RSF). Through case studies in Ecuador, Egypt, the DRC, Tanzania, and Pakistan, the document demonstrates how IMF-mandated expenditure compression and reliance on fossil fuel exports create structural climate vulnerabilities. Key findings indicate that while the IMF has improved its climate analysis, this does not translate into programme design, which continues to favor private investment and cost recovery over the public investment needed for a just transition.

The 2026 Private Equity Climate Risks Scorecard reveals that 20 private equity firms, managing $7.3 trillion in assets, back 244 energy companies operating over 1,050 fossil fuel assets. These portfolios generate approximately 1.5 gigatons of annual greenhouse gas emissions, a volume that exceeds the emissions of the international shipping and aviation industries and ranks fifth globally, behind China, the U.S., India, and Russia. The report highlights that these firms own 15,000 miles of pipelines and 124GW of capacity across 324 fossil fuel plants. Furthermore, an analysis of dedicated oil and gas private equity funds active since 2001 indicates poor financial performance, with inflation-adjusted returns being negative on average. The document concludes that most of the studied firms have made limited progress in aligning their portfolios with climate standards to mitigate climate and financial risks.

The Clean Air Task Force (CATF) provides recommendations for the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) $10.75 million funding opportunity for Innovative Research and Training for Subsurface Energy Production. CATF argues that to move beyond regions with shallow heat, funding must target the primary hurdles of drilling deeper than 7km and completing wells in temperatures exceeding 400°C. The document highlights the need for advanced digital twin capabilities and system-wide modeling to reduce development risk, noting that current data for extreme environments is insufficient. It emphasizes that public-private partnerships are essential to share the high cost and risk of exploratory drilling and to develop a skilled workforce. Specifically, CATF recommends that the DOE award projects focusing on either well field development at temperatures >400°C in shallow heat regions or drilling to 200°C at depths >7km.

The Canadian Climate Institute asserts that climate policy and economic growth are not mutually exclusive, arguing that Canada's long-term prosperity depends on a robust energy transition plan. The document highlights the global growth of clean energy technologies, noting that the US and China are leading in this sector. It advocates for investments in clean electricity networks, critical minerals, and a clean innovation strategy in the 2026 federal budget to prevent long-term GDP reduction caused by climate change.

The Procurement Toolkit by Clean Creatives is designed to help CMOs, procurement teams, and sustainability leads identify and eliminate fossil fuel conflicts of interest within their marketing and PR supply chains. It argues that the communications industry enables a "creative cover up" for the fossil fuel industry, which is responsible for 80% of global carbon emissions since 2016. The toolkit promotes the use of the 'F-List', a database of 803 agencies and seven holding companies with documented fossil fuel ties, to facilitate ethical sourcing. It outlines a decision-making framework for agency selection based on transparency and commitments to phase out fossil fuel clients, while highlighting that most agencies derive less than 1% of their revenue from such contracts.

A joint letter from European and Irish civil society organisations requests that Ireland, during its EU Presidency, advocate for an EU-wide tax on fossil fuel profits at the September 18-19, 2026, ECOFIN meeting. The authors argue that colossal industry profits, including €82 billion in post-tax profits from EU operations in 2023, should be taxed to fund the energy transition, support households, and provide international climate finance. They propose that the European Commission monitor profit margins, analyze national tax best practices, explore tax designs based on the 2022 Solidarity Contribution and models in Norway and the UK, and implement mechanisms to prevent profit shifting, such as unitary taxation of consolidated global profits.

The policy brief examines the 'cross-chain' risks in the carbon capture and storage (CCS) value chain, where delays in transport or storage infrastructure leave industrial emitters facing a 'double burden': the cost of capture equipment and continued EU ETS payments for uncaptured emissions. It contrasts the EU's current funding gaps with the UK's 'CCS business models' and suggests the EU utilize ETS revenues or the proposed Industrial Decarbonisation Bank to provide financial safeguards during infrastructure outages.

The document argues that financial choices are often overlooked in corporate decarbonization strategies despite the direct impact of bank deposits, asset managers, and insurers on the real economy. It encourages organizations to shift their funds toward financial institutions with robust climate commitments and identifies specific French institutions that limit their support for fossil fuel expansion.

The document argues that hiring agencies that promote fossil fuels creates conflicts of interest and exposes brands to risks, as climate change disrupts supply chains and operations. It encourages organisations to use the F-List to verify agency partners and implement fossil-free procurement criteria in briefs, RFIs, and RFPs. The guide highlights that over 1,650 agencies in 60 countries have signed the Clean Creatives pledge and suggests that clients have leverage to decarbonise the marketing industry because fossil fuel marketing represents less than 1% of global marketing spend.

The report advocates for a 'New Security Agenda' that treats clean energy and ecosystem health as critical national security infrastructure. It argues that breaching planetary boundaries and relying on volatile fossil fuel markets create systemic risks to food security, public health, and economic stability. The authors call for binding legislative measures to phase out fossil fuels, the adoption of national restoration plans for biodiversity, and the alignment of public budgets to eliminate environmentally harmful subsidies.

The document analyzes the CSDDD's environmental scope, due diligence obligations, and enforcement mechanisms following the Omnibus I Directive amendments. It argues that the current scope is too narrow, particularly regarding downstream activities and climate transition plans, and recommends that Member States use their transposition discretion to strengthen environmental protections, ensure a comprehensive definition of environmental impacts, and establish robust civil liability and administrative enforcement regimes.

The document outlines a comprehensive strategy for state, local, and tribal governments to combat information threats associated with extreme weather. It categorizes threats into environmental, geopolitical, and hate-based vectors, and advocates for a shift from reactive crisis communications to proactive 'trust architecture' built through grassroots partnerships. The guide provides a risk matrix for triaging threats based on immediacy, severity, and prevalence, and offers technical advice on 'pre-bunking' and Generative Engine Optimization (GEO) to ensure high-trust information remains visible in AI-driven search environments.

The report identifies 'Europe’s Democracy Stack' as a strategic public infrastructure consisting of independent organizations that perform nine critical public-interest functions, including disinformation research, digital rights litigation, and compliance monitoring. Despite its importance to the EU's digital sovereignty, the analysis finds that the stack is overwhelmingly dependent on non-EU funding—specifically US government and philanthropic sources—which is currently contracting. The authors argue that the EU's current short-term grant-based funding is structurally mismatched with the long-term nature of these functions. To close this capability gap, the paper proposes two primary reforms for the 2028–2034 Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF): cost-neutral changes to the AgoraEU program to provide multiyear operating grants and the creation of a €1 billion European Democracy Stack Endowment Fund to provide a permanent funding anchor.

The report argues that the European Central Bank (ECB) fails to account for the biodiversity risks associated with the fossil fuel industry in its monetary and supervisory operations. Despite recognizing nature-related risks, the ECB maintains assets from high-risk fossil fuel companies in its corporate portfolios and allows them as collateral. Furthermore, the report finds that EU banks under ECB supervision provided US$161 billion to companies with fossil fuel projects in critical biodiversity areas between 2021 and 2025. The authors recommend that the ECB adopt a 'double materiality' approach, exclude biodiversity-harming fossil fuel companies from its portfolios and collateral framework, and require banks to implement roadmaps to cease financing such activities.