Search Climate Insights Directory

The document argues for a shift from the 'compensation' model of carbon offsetting to a 'contribution' model known as beyond value chain mitigation (BVCM). It examines several climate impact funds—including 1% for the Planet, Frontier, and Milkywire—finding that while they generally support high-impact climate action and avoid misleading neutrality claims, there is a systemic need for clearer BVCM metrics and more explicit guidance on corporate claims to prevent greenwashing.

The document challenges the narrative that carbon credits drive corporate climate ambition, asserting that existing studies showing a correlation between credit use and decarbonisation suffer from methodological flaws, including sample bias and confounding factors. It highlights risks such as the 'investment effect' and 'target effect,' where credits compete with or substitute for internal abatement. The brief recommends that companies, regulators, and standard setters treat carbon credits only as complementary contributions (Beyond Value Chain Mitigation) and maintain a strict firewall between credit use and internal emission reduction targets.

The report evaluates the IMO Net-Zero Framework (NZF), a hybrid measure combining a GHG Fuel Intensity (GFI) standard with a two-tier carbon pricing system. It concludes that the NZF is likely to result in modest emission reductions of 10-15% by 2030, falling short of the 1.5°C-compatible requirement of a 45% cut. The analysis highlights a weak effective carbon price of approximately USD 10–15/tCO₂eq, which is insufficient to make zero-emission fuels competitive and risks locking in fossil LNG. Revenue generation is projected to be limited (around USD 15 billion annually), significantly lower than a high flat levy scenario. The report also examines the distributional impacts, noting that SIDS and LDCs may not receive sufficient funding, and proposes integration pathways for the EU to maintain its climate ambition while participating in the global scheme.

The document analyzes the IMO's Net-Zero Framework (NZF), which was delayed by one year in October 2025 due to pressure from the US and oil-producing nations. A study by Cincera Consulting finds the NZF is inadequate, projecting emission reductions of only 8-10% by 2030, far below the 45% required by the Paris Agreement. The brief criticizes the NZF's hybrid approach—combining a GHG fuel standard with limited carbon pricing—noting that the effective carbon price of $14/tCO2eq is too low to drive a transition to green fuels. It recommends that the EU expand its Emissions Trading System (ETS) to cover 100% of emissions for voyages entering or leaving the European Economic Area and urges the IMO to adopt a universal levy to address absolute emissions.

The report examines climate adaptation in Afghanistan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Haiti, the Horn of Africa, Mexico, Myanmar, and Papua New Guinea. It finds that while instability often leads to risk-averse site selection and implementation delays, projects that integrate conflict-sensitivity and community-led approaches can mitigate these challenges and potentially contribute to peacebuilding. The analysis highlights the necessity of flexible implementation, the use of fragility assessments, and the importance of addressing root causes of vulnerability to avoid maladaptation and 'backdraft'—unforeseen negative spillover effects.

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) reports a portfolio of USD 19.3 billion since 2015, having reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 96 million tonnes of CO2e and reached 249 million people through adaptation projects. To address the escalating climate crisis, the GCF has launched the '50by30' vision, aiming for a USD 50 billion portfolio by 2030, with annual programming targets rising to USD 15 billion by 2035. The Fund emphasizes a balanced approach, currently allocating 59% of its portfolio to adaptation and 41% to mitigation, with a strong focus on Least Developed Countries (LDCs), Small Island Developing States (SIDS), and African states. Key operational achievements include the Readiness Programme, which has provided 874 grants worth USD 752 million to 142 developing countries, and the 'Efficient GCF' programme, which reduced the median time from project approval to disbursement to 6 months in 2024.

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) reports a portfolio of USD 19.3 billion and USD 59.3 billion in co-financing over its first ten years, reaching 249 million people through adaptation projects. The Fund is pursuing a '50by30' vision to manage a USD 50 billion portfolio by 2030, with a programming target of USD 8-9 billion in 2030. Key achievements include reducing 95.9 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent and restoring 33.2 million hectares of ecosystems. The report highlights ten case studies across various sectors, including wind energy in Djibouti, coastal protection in Tuvalu, and climate-smart agriculture in the Aral Sea Basin, emphasizing a shift toward systemic, locally-led transformation.

The assessment finds that while Vietnam has a strong legal framework for gender equality, significant disparities persist in the forestry sector, where women are often excluded from decision-making and leadership. It recommends increasing female representation in project staff, developing gender-sensitive operational manuals, and establishing a national system for gender-disaggregated data in forestry.

The gender assessment for the FORECCSA+ project in Ecuador reveals deep-seated structural inequalities and patriarchal norms that limit rural women's access to land, credit, and decision-making power. Despite a progressive national legal framework, including the 2023 Violet Economy Law, rural women continue to face a double burden of productive and unpaid care work, with significant gaps in land ownership and technical training. Survey data indicates that approximately 20-25% of men surveyed hold sexist attitudes that normalize the subordination of women and certain forms of gender-based violence. The report identifies these gaps as strategic opportunities for the project to implement gender-transformative adaptation measures, focusing on the empowerment of rural women and youth to enhance community resilience and food security.

Global Energy Monitor reports that 216 GW of proposed green hydrogen projects in 11 African countries are primarily designed for export to Europe, despite a lack of established markets, funding, and infrastructure. The analysis highlights a disconnect between these massive, often hypothetical projects and the urgent need for domestic electrification, noting that 61% of prospective utility-scale wind and solar projects in Africa are earmarked for hydrogen. While small-scale distributed solar and wind projects have successfully improved energy access, the large-scale hydrogen push risks creating stranded assets and depleting local water resources without providing significant local economic value.

The report argues that current multilateral governance frameworks—including WTO rules, Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) clauses, and biased financial risk models—systematically restrict the 'policy space' for developing countries to pursue sustainable industrialization. It highlights that while advanced economies historically used industrial policy to develop, current global norms 'kick away the ladder' for the Global South. The authors call for a 'transformational multilateralism' that reasserts the legitimacy of state-led industrial strategies, reforms restrictive trade and investment treaties, expands access to technology through a 'Global Technology Commons,' and addresses the 'penalisation of poverty' in global finance to enable a just and green transition.

The G20 is assessed as an effective tool for short-term macroeconomic crisis response but a failure in delivering structural economic justice. While it mobilised trillions during the 2008 financial crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic, it has consistently prioritised creditor interests and market stability over the needs of the Global South. The report highlights systemic failures in international financial architecture reform, sovereign debt restructuring, and climate finance, where funding remains insufficient and skewed toward profitable mitigation. However, recent Global South presidencies (Indonesia, India, Brazil, and South Africa) have successfully introduced new priorities, such as taxing the super-rich and the care economy. The authors recommend that the G20 redefine 'crisis' to include social and ecological threats and adopt justice-based metrics for success.

The guide argues that fossil fuel subsidies (FFSs) are misaligned with climate and fiscal goals and proposes a three-step approach to phase them out: establishing a whole-of-government coordination mechanism, categorizing subsidies into three timelines based on risk and feasibility, and executing detailed implementation plans with clear accountability. It emphasizes that while developed countries should lead with faster reforms, developing countries may require longer timelines and more robust social protection measures to ensure a just transition.

The report argues that G20 countries have failed to meet their 2009 pledge to phase out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies, with spending reaching USD 665 billion in 2023. It introduces a categorization framework that divides subsidies into 'quick phase-out' (within 1 year), 'phase-out with a robust strategy' (2-4 years), and 'time-limited exemptions' (4+ years). Applying this to Brazil, Germany, Italy, Mexico, and South Africa, the authors find that while a significant number of measures (30-55%) can be removed quickly, the majority of fiscal value is tied to deeply embedded structural subsidies requiring sequenced reform and mitigation measures.

The report examines the land-use intensity of various renewable energy sources and proposes dual-land-use systems—such as agrivoltaics and ecovoltaics—to mitigate land degradation and enhance biodiversity and food security. It emphasizes the need for cross-sectoral policy coordination, inclusive governance, and targeted finance to ensure the energy transition does not compromise land health or local livelihoods.

The IISD response asserts that Equinor's application for the Rosebank field development ignores critical Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) guidance regarding downstream Scope 3 emissions. The document argues that the project is incompatible with the Paris Agreement's 1.5°C target, as no new oil and gas fields are needed or permissible in such scenarios. Furthermore, the IISD claims the project offers minimal economic benefit, potentially resulting in a net loss to the UK Treasury and providing negligible contributions to energy security.

Albania has transitioned from foundational planning to active implementation of its National Adaptation Plan, with completed measures rising from 15% in the first cycle to 50% by 2025. Significant progress was noted in local adaptation planning, where seven of eight municipalities integrated plans into budgets, and in the establishment of a monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL) system. However, the report identifies critical gaps in domestic financing, fragmented data collection, and uneven inclusivity, particularly in the health sector. While international funding from the EU, World Bank, and GCF provides essential support for agriculture, energy, and urban resilience, a substantial financing gap remains across most sectors, with total estimated needs reaching approximately USD 9.8 billion.

The report finds that while 98% of National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) mention education, there is a significant gap in systemic integration. Only 40% include the education sector in impact and vulnerability assessments, and only 11% consulted Ministries of Education during the design process. While curriculum changes are common priorities (71%), school infrastructure (34%) and educational continuity (26%) are frequently overlooked. Furthermore, only 27% of NAPs provide cost estimates for education-related adaptation measures, hindering the transition from planning to implementation.

The report finds that while 98% of analyzed National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) mention education, there is a significant gap in substantive integration. Only 40% include the education sector in risk and vulnerability assessments, and only 27% provide cost estimates for education-related measures. The analysis highlights a lack of systemic involvement from education ministries during the design phase, with only 11% being consulted, despite the sector's critical role in building community resilience and protecting millions of students from climate-driven disruptions.

The report finds that while 98% of analyzed NAPs reference education, there is a significant gap in systemic integration. Only 40% include the education sector in impact, risk, and vulnerability assessments, and only 16% address all three components of a climate-resilient education system: curriculum change, resilient infrastructure, and educational continuity. While 84% of NAPs include education-related priorities, only 27% provide cost estimates for these actions. Institutional gaps are prominent, with only 11% of NAPs showing evidence that education ministries were consulted during the design process. The report also notes that while 94% of NAPs mention children and youth, only 23% reference their rights.