Search Climate Insights Directory

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 report finds that new oil and gas developments in the North Sea could produce up to 984 megatonnes of CO2 equivalent, potentially causing the UK to exceed its 2023-2037 carbon budget by a factor of two. It argues that the development of the 21 largest undeveloped fields is incompatible with limiting warming to 1.5°C and that the government's Climate Compatibility Checkpoint system fails to account for all climate risks. Additionally, the report states that these developments would not lower energy prices for UK consumers.

This research paper by the Stockholm Environment Institute examines transboundary climate risks to Sweden's international trade, arguing that traditional analysis overlooks hidden vulnerabilities in deeper supply chain tiers, specifically regarding inputs from Asia, Africa, and soy production in Brazil.

The document argues that while the costs of climate action are high, the costs of inaction are higher, noting that physical climate risk has already increased the cost of capital for V20 countries by USD62bn over 10 years. It proposes a three-pillar policy framework: providing clarity on green investments via taxonomies, tilting investment toward green opportunities through de-risking and carbon pricing, and building green investment pipelines. Key mechanisms suggested include the use of junior capital by development finance institutions to mobilize private investment, the removal of fossil fuel subsidies, and the implementation of carbon border adjustment mechanisms (CBAMs). The summary concludes with a list of 101 specific policy ideas across sectors including energy, transport, and agriculture to be detailed in a full report.

An open letter from Reclaim Finance and other signatories calling on the European Central Bank (ECB) to specify and strengthen the criteria for 'tilting' its corporate bond holdings toward better climate performance. The authors propose four key requirements: excluding coal and new fossil fuel projects, prioritising climate neutrality over market neutrality, requiring science-based emission targets aligned with the EU Climate Law, and making climate-related disclosures mandatory for eligibility.

The briefing reveals that the US Federal Reserve, Bank of England, and European Central Bank have invested in bonds from agribusinesses like Cargill, ADM, and Bunge, which are linked to deforestation and land-grabbing in regions such as the Brazilian Cerrado and Indonesia. The document argues that such investments subsidize environmentally destructive companies and send a negative signal to private investors. It highlights a gap between central banks' public climate commitments and their actual portfolios, noting that deforestation is often missing from their risk assessments and 'stress tests'. Global Witness recommends that central banks divest from deforestation-linked bonds, implement zero-deforestation policies, and increase prudential supervision of the private financial sector's exposure to these risks.

The 2022 Private Equity Climate Risks Scorecard evaluates eight major private equity firms, finding that most maintain significant fossil fuel holdings and lack transparency. The Carlyle Group ranked lowest (F), while TPG earned a B due to a smaller fossil fuel portfolio. The report advocates for five primary demands, including alignment with 1.5°C warming targets and full disclosure of emissions and fossil fuel exposure.

The Private Equity Climate Risks Scorecard 2022 evaluates eight major private equity firms on their fossil fuel exposure, downstream emissions, and alignment with science-based climate targets. The analysis finds that most of these firms maintain significant fossil fuel holdings and lack transparency, with The Carlyle Group ranking lowest (F) and TPG Capital ranking highest (B). The report argues that private equity firms often acquire polluting assets shed by public markets, thereby increasing climate and financial risks while operating with minimal regulatory oversight. It concludes with five primary demands for the industry, including aligning with 1.5°C warming targets and disclosing full fossil fuel exposure.

The proposal seeks USD 627,331 over 24 months to help Costa Rica mobilize private finance for its National Decarbonization Plan (NDP) and Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC). It focuses on creating a national sustainable finance taxonomy and implementing Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) recommendations for the banking and insurance sectors. Key activities include establishing a Financial Advisory Group (FAG), developing a GCF Country Programme, and creating online reporting modules within the SINAMECC and SICVECA platforms. The project aims to address gaps in climate risk data and the lack of unified classification systems for green investments.

The document examines the challenges African countries face in accessing sustainable finance for regional infrastructure, noting a significant financing deficit and a lack of bankable projects. It highlights the disparity between climate mitigation and adaptation finance, arguing that adaptation is more critical for Africa's vulnerability. The brief analyzes the ASEAN regional approach—specifically its sustainability taxonomies and the ASEAN Catalytic Green Finance Facility—as a model for Africa. It evaluates current AU initiatives, such as the Alliance for Green Infrastructure in Africa and the Green Infrastructure Corridor for Intra-African Trade, and recommends integrating sustainability more deeply into AfCFTA protocols to attract investment and enhance climate resilience.

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) Secretariat developed this guidance to address historical challenges where funding proposals, particularly for adaptation, failed to demonstrate a sufficient climate rationale, leading to delays or non-endorsement by the Technical Advisory Panel (TAP). The document defines climate rationale as the 'overarching narrative of a proposal which ensures that it addresses climate change'. It establishes four high-level principles for adaptation (Identification, Response, Alignment, and Monitoring and Evaluation) and five principles for mitigation (alignment with country priorities, methodological quantification, relevance of methodology, consistent assumptions, and MRV systems). To support these standards, the GCF plans to launch the 'GCF Climate Information Gateway' and a 'Climate Information Expert Advisory Forum' to provide AEs and countries with tools, data, and capacity-building support.

The report identifies a dilemma in India's financial system where policies to increase green finance may raise overall credit risk due to the perceived lower quality of green assets, while risk-management policies may inadvertently reduce green finance flows by increasing the cost of capital. It highlights gaps in current regulatory, fiscal, and capital market frameworks, including the inadequacy of ESG ratings and credit rating systems to factor in climate risks. To resolve this, the author proposes a three-pillar strategy consisting of Policy Interventions, Regulatory Prescriptions, and Market and Institutional Mechanisms to support India's 1.5-degree pathway goals.

This briefing by the Climate Policy Initiative (CPI) provides a framework for financial institutions to evaluate the credibility of climate transition plans from their counterparties. It emphasizes that because the vast majority of financial institutions' emissions reside in their portfolios, active engagement with counterparties is essential to achieve real-economy results aligned with the Paris Agreement and Sustainable Development Goals.

The document identifies a dilemma in India's financial system where increasing green finance is perceived to raise credit risk, while strict risk management may constrain green capital flows. It argues that current frameworks, including Basel III, do not adequately factor in climate-related financial risks. To bridge the investment gap—estimated at USD 170 billion per annum—the report recommends a three-pillar approach: policy interventions (such as carbon pricing and green government securities), regulatory prescriptions (including modified risk weights and carbon ratings), and market mechanisms (such as standardized disclosure frameworks and capacity building).

The report analyzes how insurance regulators in 31 sub-Saharan African countries responded to COVID-19, proposing a four-phase framework (Identify, Implement, Monitor, Adapt) to handle systemic risks. Key findings highlight the importance of risk-based supervision (RBS), proactive digital communication, and the need for real-time data via Suptech. It also identifies emerging future risks, including climate change, cyber-security, and political unrest.

The report by Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR) finds that the Institution of Mechanical Engineers (IMechE) lacks transparency regarding its investments, making it impossible to determine the full extent of its financial ties to fossil fuels and arms. While IMechE has implemented some internal sustainability measures, such as LED lighting and travel reduction, it maintains corporate links to arms companies like Meggitt and Rolls Royce, and fossil fuel company Fugro, through its Company Based Registration scheme. SGR argues these links contradict IMechE's professional code of conduct and its role as a climate change thought leader, noting that several peer organisations have already divested from such industries.

This report by the South African Institute of International Affairs, commissioned by Oxfam South Africa, examines the potential role of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in supporting South Africa's transition to cleaner energy. It discusses the IMF's integration of climate risks into its global financial stability mandate and the specific macroeconomic challenges facing South Africa, while cautioning against the IMF's historical policy orthodoxies.

The document argues that the financial sector is a critical driver of the economic model and must be regulated to enable a transition to sustainable societies. It outlines six actionable proposals for French and European implementation during a presidential term, focusing on ending support for fossil fuels, preventing greenwashing, and aligning central bank operations with climate targets.

The document outlines a comprehensive approach for Chinese financial institutions to manage environmental and social (E&S) risks in BRI projects. It emphasizes that proactive stakeholder engagement—comprising environmental information disclosure, public consultation, and the establishment of grievance mechanisms—reduces the likelihood of project delays and cancellations. The guide details the responsibilities of both financial institutions and their clients across the project lifecycle, from initiation and evaluation to construction and decommissioning. It aligns these practices with international standards such as the Equator Principles and IFC Performance Standards, while also mapping relevant Chinese regulatory requirements from bodies like the PBOC and CBIRC. A significant portion of the text is dedicated to the operationalization of an Environmental and Social Management System (ESMS) and provides case studies on tailoring engagement to local contexts in the DRC, Russia, and the Philippines.

This report section analyzes the middle-income population at risk due to a lack of access to sustainable cooling in 2022, focusing on high-impact countries. It details a global decline in this demographic, driven largely by the economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, and provides regional and country-specific breakdowns of population shifts.