Search Climate Insights Directory

The review finds that the relationship between climate change mitigation and adaptation varies by scale and perspective. At the global level, economic literature often views them as substitutes, while scientific literature sees them as complementary; however, implementing a global mix is considered highly contentious. At national and local scales, there is greater potential for complementarity, though institutional and governance barriers prevent such actions from occurring autonomously.

The document analyzes the shift toward polycentric climate governance, noting that while new dynamic forms of governing are emerging in alternative domains to complement the UNFCCC regime, it is currently too early to determine if these forms will effectively fill existing gaps due to untested assumptions about their performance.

The project 'Public, Private, People Partnerships for Climate Compatible Development' (4PCCD) focused on the Chamanculo C neighbourhood in Maputo to test participatory planning methods. By establishing a community-led Climate Planning Committee (CPC), the project enabled residents to integrate climate concerns with local development priorities, such as drainage and waste management. The findings suggest that local citizens are eager to engage in climate action and that participatory methods can bridge the gap between technical climate information and the lived experience of vulnerable urban populations.

The paper proposes four complementary mechanisms to enhance the UNFCCC's effectiveness for the 2015 agreement: specifying a global long-term emissions goal (such as net zero by mid-century), establishing a predictable commitment cycle for national contributions, ensuring each cycle results in increased emissions reductions, and implementing an assessment and revision process to identify further low-carbon policies.

The 4PCCD project (2011-2013) implemented a Participatory Action Plan Development methodology in Maputo, Mozambique, to integrate local community knowledge into climate adaptation planning. By establishing a Climate Planning Committee (CPC) in the Chamanculo C bairro, the project empowered residents to develop a Community Plan for Climate Change Adaptation focused on drainage, waste management, and infrastructure to combat recurrent flooding. The project demonstrated that municipalities can accelerate climate policy development by engaging local communities, though it highlighted the need for sufficient time and funding for meaningful consultation and detailed scientific impact assessments. While formal long-term partnership commitments were not fully proven within the project's lifetime, the initiative fostered new networks between residents, the National Fund for the Environment of Mozambique (FUNAB), and other institutional actors.

The World Resources Institute (WRI) reports its internal climate management and GHG emissions for the 2013 reporting year. WRI has established 2020 reduction targets for Scope 2 and Scope 3 emissions, supported by an internal carbon fee of $50/mt CO2e on business travel. While Scope 1 and 2 emissions decreased, Scope 3 emissions—particularly from purchased goods and services—increased. WRI identifies reputational and operational risks related to climate change and is piloting primary data collection with its supply chain.

The Climate Action Network (CAN) argues that the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and Joint Implementation (JI) have failed to deliver real emissions reductions, potentially contributing to an increase of 1 billion tons of global emissions. The statement demands fundamental reforms to additionality requirements, the mandate of net atmospheric benefits, and improved governance, while specifically calling for a halt to the issuance of JI offsets during the interim period.

The report examines the evolution of low-carbon, climate-resilient development (LCCRD) in developing countries, highlighting the integration of mitigation and adaptation into national planning. It identifies critical barriers, including limited human capacity and a significant imbalance in climate finance, where adaptation receives far less funding than mitigation. The document analyzes the shift from top-down to bottom-up international governance and the role of Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs) as a vehicle for sustainable development. It also discusses the challenges of monitoring and evaluating adaptation investments and the proliferation of online knowledge platforms, recommending a greater focus on user needs and the translation of high-level strategies into concrete actions.

A survey of United Nations member states between 2007 and 2012 reveals a significant increase in national climate mitigation efforts, with 67% of global greenhouse gas emissions covered by national legislation or strategy by 2012, up from 45% in 2007. The growth was most prominent in non-Annex I countries, specifically in Asia and Latin America, while OECD countries remained relatively stagnant. The data indicates a general preference for non-binding climate strategies over binding legislation, with China noted as a significant exception to this trend.

Carbon Market Watch outlines critical reforms needed for the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) review at COP-19. The author warns that failure to address quality issues, particularly regarding additionality, could lead to an over-supply of more than 4 gigatonnes of CO2 offsets and drive prices below 1 EURO. Key recommendations include transitioning away from large-scale power supply projects, moving beyond pure offsetting to avoid double counting, shortening crediting periods to match technology lifespans, and establishing human rights standards. The document also calls for improved sustainable development monitoring, strengthened civil society participation through a CDM Ombudsman, and a restructuring of auditor payment to eliminate conflicts of interest.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) submitted comments on the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Amendment Bill, 2012, arguing that while the application of the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) to mining is welcome, the Bill fails to ensure adequate community consultation and transparency. The CER criticizes the proposed administrative penalty system for lacking an independent tribunal and warns that the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR) lacks the capacity to act as the competent environmental authority. The document further advocates for the reinstatement of joint and several liability for company directors and the removal of state immunity from criminal liability.

Transparencia Mexicana analysed 150 Project Design Documents (PDDs) for CDM projects in Mexico as of June 2012 to evaluate the integrity of public consultation processes. The study found that a lack of regulation allows project developers full discretion over consultation design, leading to poor reporting of results and minimal recording of public requests for mitigation or compensation. The authors argue that current guidelines are insufficient and recommend reforming the CDM consultation process to better facilitate interactions between diverse stakeholders, including local communities, academics, and specialized public authorities, to prevent manipulation and exploitation.

CDM Watch asserts that the CDM Executive Board must integrate human rights considerations into its project selection and review processes, citing the UN Charter and the Cancun Agreements. The organization criticizes the Board for registering projects in 2011 despite evidence of human rights abuses and advocates for the creation of a grievance mechanism to provide remedies for affected people.

The submission argues that current climate pledges are insufficient to limit warming to 2°C and warns that 'hot air' (surplus allowances) could allow developed countries to maintain business-as-usual emissions. It calls for a robust governance structure for Joint Implementation (JI) projects, focusing on transparency, environmental integrity, and the treatment of projects during the gap period.

Carbon Market Watch urges the CDM Executive Board to reform additionality requirements, shorten crediting periods, and mandate human rights compliance. The organization recommends establishing global sustainability standards, improving civil society participation through grievance mechanisms, reforming the appointment and payment of Designated Operational Entities (DOEs), and implementing a strict code of conduct for the Executive Board to prevent conflicts of interest.

The document examines the role of non-UNFCCC institutions in addressing climate change, suggesting that while the UNFCCC must remain the central coordinator due to its legitimacy and legal authority, other multilateral and minilateral venues can provide faster action or target specific pollutants. It warns against the risks of 'forum-shopping' and the marginalization of the UNFCCC, recommending formalized coordination and the application of UNFCCC principles, such as 'common but differentiated responsibilities', across all climate-related initiatives.

The document argues that international climate governance lacks the systematic evaluation criteria present in domestic policy contexts. To address this, it proposes a matrix consisting of six specific criteria—Level of Ambition, Compliance Facilitation and Control, Institutional Capacity, Participation and Inclusiveness, Systemic Coherence, and Political and Economic Feasibility—to facilitate a more transparent assessment of competing climate architectures and regimes.

The document outlines two primary categories of geoengineering: carbon geoengineering (CO2 removal) and solar geoengineering (solar radiation management). It details a four-stage research progression from theory to large-scale testing and highlights critical ethical, political, and social risks, including moral hazard and equity for vulnerable populations. The authors argue for the urgent development of a transparent international governance framework to manage these technologies responsibly.

The statement outlines requirements for a fair appeals process for CDM Executive Board decisions, emphasizing the need for an independent appeals body, broad legal standing for civil society organizations, and the ability to challenge both procedural and substantive violations.

CDM Watch recommends several procedural improvements to the CDM Executive Board to enhance accessibility and communication for civil society, including better notification systems, language translation of project documents, and extended public commenting periods.