Search Climate Insights Directory

The report identifies that Canada's federal adaptation governance is currently 'weak' and fragmented, primarily operating at the director general level with limited connection to senior decision-makers. It argues that the upcoming National Adaptation Strategy (NAS) provides a critical opportunity to revitalize this structure. The authors suggest several options for improvement, including establishing a dedicated DM-level committee for adaptation, creating a formal legal mandate through legislation, and developing a specialized knowledge-brokering unit. The report emphasizes that success depends on sufficient funding, senior-level leadership, and a deeper understanding of the distinct characteristics of adaptation compared to climate mitigation and emergency management.

The brief argues that the private sector is critical for global climate adaptation due to the economic toll of extreme weather and the vulnerability of international supply chains. It emphasizes that business-led adaptation must integrate justice and equity to benefit workers and ecosystems, and calls for collaborative enabling environments between governments and private actors to accelerate the deployment of adaptation technologies.

Earthjustice evaluates COP27 as having 'lackluster outcomes' regarding fossil fuel phase-outs but notes a 'breakthrough agreement' to create a loss and damage fund. The author emphasizes the significance of the Climate Justice Pavilion in fostering connections between youth activists and foundational environmental justice leaders, and notes the positive momentum from U.S. climate legislation and Brazil's recommitment to the Amazon.

Good Governance Africa evaluates COP27, noting the establishment of a fund for vulnerable developing countries as a major achievement but criticizing the lack of accountability from the Global North. The statement highlights that Africa is disproportionately affected by climate change despite contributing only 4% of global emissions. It identifies critical gaps in adaptation finance, noting that the $100 billion pledge remains unmet and that $300 billion is needed by 2030. The document also critiques African disunity over the role of gas in energy transitions, poor local governance in disaster management, and the failure of oil-wealthy nations like Nigeria and Angola to achieve sustainable development due to corruption.

The statement asserts that low-income communities in the Global South and marginalized groups are disproportionately affected by climate change but are excluded from media representation and policy conversations. It argues that ensuring these groups have access to affordable digital platforms and communication tools is vital for implementing viable climate justice solutions, despite the likelihood that COP27's final texts will ignore the role of communications.

The research examines the tension between the political utility of simple anti-fossil fuel norms and the risk of overlooking equity issues, particularly for the Global South. Based on 14 expert interviews, the authors argue that norms for phasing out fossil fuels must be paired with norms that address the development and energy needs of low-income countries and provide necessary international support to avoid unintended inequitable consequences.

The document outlines how U.S. local governments can use aggregated procurement—forming buyers' groups to pool demand—to lower costs and accelerate clean energy deployment. It identifies key benefits such as economies of scale and shared expertise, while noting barriers like lack of staff expertise and complex legal requirements. The guide provides five strategies for success, including appointing dedicated project managers and targeting a minimum aggregated demand of 20MW for optimal pricing, and suggests ways to integrate equity and community benefits into these contracts.

The document advises journalists to avoid cynicism when covering COP27, urging them to humanize and localize stories while holding powerful actors accountable. It emphasizes the critical nature of the 1.5-degree-C target and the central role of 'loss and damage' payments from rich to poor countries as a matter of climate justice.

The document calls for the recognition of the link between the climate crisis and violence against environmental defenders. It proposes specific actions within the Action for Climate Empowerment (ACE) plan and the Global Stocktake to protect defenders' rights to information and participation, while urging COP host governments to guarantee freedom of assembly for civil society observers.

The authors contend that the climate crisis is a human rights crisis, citing the 2022 Pakistan floods as an example where the right to life, housing, food, education, and health were severely impacted. They argue that wealthy industrialized nations and corporate actors bear the primary responsibility for these harms but have neglected the duty to provide effective remedy. The document calls for COP27 to establish a needs- and rights-centered Loss and Damage Finance Facility and to operationalize the Warsaw International Mechanism and Santiago Network in a rights-compliant manner.

The document outlines the shift from static school bus business models to new arrangements necessitated by the different cost structures of electric school buses (ESBs). While ESBs have higher upfront capital costs, they offer lower operating costs and a lower total cost of ownership (TCO) over time, with TCO parity with diesel buses projected by 2029. The guide identifies six key roles in the ESB ecosystem—bus owner, charger owner, bus operator, bus maintenance provider, energy/fuel manager, and electricity customer—and provides examples of various business models, including Charging-as-a-Service and Transportation-as-a-Service, implemented by districts in California, Quebec, Virginia, Illinois, and Maryland.

The report argues that current climate finance is largely inaccessible and unsuitable for loss and damage, recommending a shift toward grant-based, community-led funding models based on historical responsibility and the 'polluter pays' principle.

The document critiques the reliance on 'net zero' frameworks, carbon offsets, and technological fixes, asserting that these mechanisms allow polluters to continue emissions while risking land grabbing and violating indigenous rights. It specifically analyzes the implications of Article 6 of the Paris Agreement and the promotion of Nature-based Solutions (NbS) and geoengineering, calling instead for a systemic shift toward energy sovereignty and the phased elimination of fossil fuels.

The document critiques the 'net zero' framework and the expansion of carbon markets under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, labeling them as 'false solutions' used by the fossil fuel industry to avoid drastic emission cuts. It specifically warns that 'nature-based solutions' (NBS) lead to land grabbing and that geo-engineering technologies are unproven and risky. The briefing outlines the outcomes of COP26 and the expected agenda for COP27, advocating instead for a coordinated phase-out of fossil fuels, support for agroecology, and the recognition of indigenous land sovereignty.

The document critiques the 'net zero' narrative, asserting that it relies on unproven carbon removals and offsets that allow polluters to continue emissions. It specifically highlights the risks of 'Nature Based Solutions' (NBS) leading to land grabbing in the Global South and the dangers of techno-fixes like BECCS and DACCS. The briefing details how the Article 6 'Rulebook' agreed at COP26 facilitates global carbon markets and warns that COP27 may further entrench these mechanisms. It concludes by advocating for 'real solutions' centered on a coordinated fossil fuel phase-out, food sovereignty, and Indigenous rights.

The 2022 Green Central Banking Scorecard evaluates G20 monetary and prudential authorities, finding that most remain insufficiently ambitious in mitigating climate risks. While research and advocacy have improved, the report argues that central banks prioritize analysis over action and are hindered by a commitment to 'market neutrality' and flawed taxonomies. The Banque de France is the top-ranked institution, while Saudi Arabia is the lowest. The report recommends implementing green lending schemes, increasing capital requirements for fossil fuel exposures, and adopting a 'double materiality' framework to account for the financial sector's impact on the environment.

The document examines how anti-fossil fuel norms—specifically the phase-out of coal, oil, and gas, the end of public financing for fossil fuels, and subsidy reform—can overlook the needs of marginalized communities and the Global South. It argues that while these norms create political momentum, they risk causing unintended inequitable consequences, such as asset stranding in developing nations, unless paired with financial support and a focus on energy access.

The report argues that current climate finance is inadequate for loss and damage due to accessibility barriers, a reliance on loans, and a lack of focus on slow-onset and non-economic losses. It proposes six guiding principles—historical responsibility, equitable support, grant-based finance, accessibility, recipient ownership, and transparency—to inform a new UNFCCC-hosted facility. The authors recommend a phased approach, prioritizing small grants and unconditional cash transfers to empower vulnerable communities.

The document argues that the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated existing inequities in the UNFCCC process, particularly for Global South negotiators and civil society organizations. It highlights how travel restrictions, vaccine inequality, and the digital divide hindered participation and coordination, while broader geopolitical power dynamics and aid dependencies allowed Global North countries to maintain disproportionate influence over negotiation outcomes. The authors recommend short-term funding and logistical reforms, long-term institutional changes such as capping delegation sizes and shifting COP venues to the Global South, and a broader effort to decolonize research and build allyship to shift global power dynamics.

The report evaluates seven ocean-based carbon dioxide removal (CDR) strategies: coastal blue carbon restoration, seaweed cultivation, ocean fertilization, artificial upwelling, alkalinity enhancement, electrochemical techniques, and artificial downwelling. It finds that most of these methods are in early development with significant scientific gaps and environmental risks. The authors argue that current international legal frameworks, such as UNCLOS and the CBD, are insufficient to proactively regulate these technologies. To address this, the report recommends increasing funding for collaborative research, establishing an international code of conduct for at-sea trials, and developing a comprehensive global governance regime to manage transboundary impacts and ensure equitable benefit sharing.