Search Climate Insights Directory

The case study finds that while Malawi has a Climate Change Policy and priority areas in its Growth and Development Strategy, ministries are not yet using long-term climate projections in decision-making. Barriers include a perceived lack of sub-national and sector-specific data, timing mismatches with planning cycles, and difficulties in accessing technical information. Planners identified a need for multi-year forecasts (up to five years) and information on extreme events like floods and droughts to inform medium- and long-term planning.

The document describes the integration of resilience into infrastructure as a 'wicked problem' that requires moving beyond the thinking that created current challenges. While global agreements like the SDGs, the Paris Agreement, and the Sendai Framework provide a foundation, the author notes that weather-related disasters account for approximately 80% of global disasters, disproportionately affecting infrastructure in low-income countries. The text emphasizes a dual need for small-scale infrastructure for immediate disaster response and large-scale infrastructure for long-term climate variability. It highlights the work of CDKN and the Global Water Partnership (GWP) in Kenya, Rwanda, Ethiopia, and Tanzania to move from policy frameworks to the mainstreaming of climate into infrastructure design and delivery.

The CDKN Innovation Fund (Round 2) offers a total of GBP200,000, split into two awards of up to GBP100,000 each, specifically for innovation processes focused on Africa. Eligible applications must be led by an African organization and include at least two partners, with the majority of funds allocated to African institutions. The fund prioritizes 'demand-led' projects with demonstrated government buy-in and excludes fully-fledged research proposals, instead seeking interactive processes that produce outputs like policy briefs or road maps.

The LCCR Training Module Guide outlines a two-day workshop for building professionals in India, focusing on low carbon construction for rural areas and small towns. The curriculum covers global climate challenges, energy assessment, passive design, alternative materials, and policy linkages, concluding with practical application through site visits and group design exercises.

The report analyzes the legal distinctions between a protocol, another legal instrument, and an agreed outcome with legal force within the context of the UNFCCC. It distinguishes between 'legal force' (being part of international law) and 'legally binding' (having definite procedures and sanctions for non-compliance). The author argues that the legal character of the final agreement depends more on the prescriptive nature of its content and its enforcement mechanisms than on its formal legal designation.

The document highlights the disproportionate contribution of livestock to anthropogenic methane emissions and the failure of major meat and dairy producing nations and corporations to set ambitious reduction targets. It argues that technical fixes alone are insufficient and that a systemic shift toward lower meat and dairy consumption is required to meet Paris Agreement goals.

The briefing contends that addressing international drivers of deforestation is essential for the success of REDD+ and is legally permissible under both UNFCCC and WTO frameworks. It asserts that UNFCCC Article 3.5 does not prohibit trade-impacting measures as long as they are not arbitrary or disguised restrictions. Furthermore, it highlights that the WTO allows trade-related measures to protect the environment, specifically citing GATT Article XX exceptions for protecting life, health, and exhaustible natural resources. The authors point to at least fifteen existing Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) that incorporate trade measures as precedent, arguing that collective action within the UNFCCC would demonstrate the 'good faith negotiations' often required by WTO arbitration panels. The document concludes that ignoring international drivers due to perceived WTO conflicts risks 'leakage' and undermines the goal of halting forest loss.

The document serves as a bibliography of resources detailing how the fossil fuel industry, trade associations, and third-party intermediaries have worked to obstruct climate policy and discredit climate science. It categorizes these resources into themes such as corporate influence on policy, the funding of climate deniers, and the suppression of activism. Additionally, it includes specific quotes from industry entities like Peabody Energy and ExxonMobil that illustrate contradictory or denialist stances on climate change.

The document argues that the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT) is incompatible with EU law and climate goals, citing the CJEU ruling in Case C-741/19 (Republic of Moldova v Komstroy) which found ECT ISDS provisions inapplicable to intra-EU disputes. It highlights the risk that investment tribunals may ignore this ruling and notes that the ECT modernization process is unlikely to succeed due to the requirement for unanimity among contracting parties. The author points to lawsuits by RWE and Uniper against the Netherlands over coal phase-out decisions, seeking over 2.4 billion euros, as evidence that the ECT hinders climate action. Consequently, the document calls for a coordinated EU withdrawal from the ECT and the use of an 'inter se' agreement to eliminate obligations that persist after withdrawal.

The document outlines key findings from a global report on the health impacts of fossil fuels, asserting that pollution affects individuals from fetal development to old age and causes harm throughout the entire fossil fuel life cycle. It highlights that these health impacts are systemic, persistent, and unjustly distributed across communities and nations, while noting that climate and health policies have generally ignored these multidimensional harms.

The CLEANAIR NDC Scorecard evaluates the alignment of national climate commitments with clean air goals, categorizing countries by air pollution mortality rates and scoring them across health impacts, air pollutants, source sectors, and economics and finance.

The document argues that Canada currently lacks a formalized national system for monitoring and evaluating climate adaptation, with most existing efforts focused on policy implementation (outputs) rather than actual resilience gains (outcomes). It proposes a framework based on four building blocks—context, content, operationalization, and communication—and outlines nine best practices. These include legislating a federal mandate, integrating Indigenous Knowledge Systems, and combining quantitative indicators with qualitative methods to better understand how adaptation actions reduce vulnerability.

The Canadian Climate Institute has implemented several organizational changes to support Indigenous reconciliation, including hiring a Director of Indigenous Research, establishing cultural leave, and adopting an equity analysis framework. The Institute has integrated Indigenous Knowledge systems into its approach, applying the '4 R’s of Indigenous Research' (respect, relevance, reciprocity, and responsibility) and developing an Indigenous peer review process. Its research efforts include partnerships with Indigenous organizations on topics such as clean energy and permafrost thaw, and the launch of an Indigenous climate case studies program to amplify Indigenous-led research. Ongoing goals include increasing Indigenous representation across the organization and establishing formal Indigenous competencies and standards for staff.

The document argues that while Canada has made progress in decarbonizing power supply, achieving net-zero requires Energy Systems Integration (ESI)—the coordination of energy systems across multiple pathways and scales. It examines five key ESI technologies (electric vehicles, heat pumps, demand response, distributed generation, and hydrogen) and finds that Canadian policy is currently too siloed, relying on voluntary 'soft' incentives rather than systemic market reforms or mandatory legislation. The author highlights significant gaps in information, governance, and implementation, suggesting that a holistic, pan-system approach to modelling and planning is essential to avoid sub-optimal infrastructure lock-in.

The Canadian Climate Institute recommends that all levels of government implement health adaptation policies addressing both the symptoms and root causes of climate-related health threats. Key proposals include mapping policy levers within a national adaptation strategy, incorporating health resilience into government cost-benefit analyses, and investing in research on emerging and local health impacts, such as mental health and wildfire-related respiratory issues.

The report argues that Canada lacks a comprehensive national system to evaluate the effectiveness of its climate adaptation policies, noting that current efforts are largely focused on tracking policy implementation (outputs) rather than actual resilience outcomes. It proposes a four-pillar foundation for a new M&E system: context, content, operationalization, and communication. The authors recommend that the federal government establish a legally binding mandate for M&E, integrate Indigenous knowledge, and employ a mix of quantitative indicators and qualitative methods to ensure iterative policy improvement.

The Canadian Climate Institute has implemented a series of organizational changes to integrate Indigenous perspectives into its climate research and governance. These include creating a leadership role for Indigenous research, establishing cultural leave policies, and implementing an Indigenous peer-review process based on respect, relevance, reciprocity, and responsibility. The Institute also focuses on amplifying Indigenous climate leadership through case studies, research partnerships, and the adoption of guidelines from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

The document argues that while Canada possesses a competitive advantage in clean energy, its electricity grids are often optimized for legacy technologies and lack sufficient planning for industrial growth. It compares Ontario, Alberta, Quebec, and British Columbia with international peers, highlighting that hydro-dominant provinces have a flexibility advantage, while others must proactively develop storage and interconnections. The report recommends that the federal government support interprovincial planning, provide targeted funding for grid development, ensure climate policy stability, and prioritize grid flexibility to avoid wasting renewable energy and to attract global capital.

Saskatchewan faces significant economic risks due to its reliance on oil and gas, with 6% of its workforce in transition-vulnerable sectors. While the province has strengths in agricultural technology, critical minerals, and renewable energy potential, it lags behind other Canadian provinces in attracting transition-consistent investment. Growth is concentrated in Saskatoon and Regina, primarily within ag-tech and alternative proteins. Barriers to scaling include a lack of early-stage policy support, low R&D funding, and continued subsidies for fossil fuels, which create uncertainty for clean-tech investors.

The document evaluates three frameworks for climate milestone implementation: where milestones are bound (national, provincial/territorial, or sectoral levels), how the pathway is determined (by provinces/territories, collectively, by the federal government, or by an expert body), and which government order drives policy development (federal, collaborative with a federal backstop, or provincial/territorial). It weighs the trade-offs between national consistency, regional flexibility, and the likelihood of achieving long-term targets.