Search Climate Insights Directory

The document outlines the requirements and opportunities for Parties to the Paris Agreement to report on climate change impacts and adaptation through Biennial Transparency Reports (BTRs). While the adaptation chapter (A-BTR) is generally optional, it is required if the BTR is submitted jointly with a National Communication (NC) or serves as an Adaptation Communication (AdCom). The briefing emphasizes that countries can reduce reporting burdens by cross-referencing existing documents, such as NAPs, and using the A-BTR to provide data for the Global Stocktake's assessment of the Global Goal on Adaptation.

The report explores how repeating national climate risk assessments (CRAs) can support the monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL) of national adaptation efforts. While CRAs are traditionally used to inform planning, the author argues they can also track changes in vulnerability over time to assess adaptation success. Analysis of 12 countries reveals a shift toward viewing CRAs as continuous learning processes rather than static reports, with a growing consensus that updates should occur roughly every five years to align with policy cycles. However, the report finds that fully standardized approaches to repeating CRAs are often impractical due to evolving science and shifting policy priorities. Instead, it suggests a flexible approach where only specific components are standardized. Early adopters like Germany and the United Kingdom have begun using CRAs to evaluate NAP effectiveness, though they face methodological challenges, including the time lag between implementing measures and seeing tangible risk reductions.

The report explores how national climate risk assessments (CRAs) can transition from one-off planning documents to iterative tools for monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL). Based on analysis from 12 countries, it argues that while periodic CRAs are essential for evidence-based National Adaptation Plans (NAPs), a fully standardized approach is often impractical due to evolving scientific knowledge and shifting policy priorities. The document highlights that countries like Germany and the UK are beginning to use CRAs to assess whether vulnerability is decreasing, though methodological challenges remain, such as the time lag between adaptation action and observable risk reduction.

The research examines the role of knowledge co-production between scientists and stakeholders in climate risk assessments, specifically using the impact chain method. It argues that conventional research often fails to provide actionable information for policy and practice, suggesting instead a flexible, iterative participatory approach to improve the uptake of climate services in planning and decision contexts.

The proposal seeks USD 2,726,404 over 36 months to overcome five primary barriers to climate change adaptation (CCA) in Georgia: limited national and regional coordination, insufficient mainstreaming of CCA in policies, low awareness among decision-makers, limited funding, and the lack of a comprehensive monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system. The project, implemented by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the Ministry of Environmental Protection and Agriculture (MEPA), will establish thematic working groups, conduct climate risk assessments in four representative regions, develop six sectoral adaptation plans, and create a private sector engagement strategy. A central goal is the formulation and submission of a costed National Adaptation Plan to the UNFCCC, supported by a new M&E framework and a targeted adaptation finance action plan.

The document analyzes adaptation planning across 136 large coastal cities, finding that over 50% lack formal plans and most existing policies fail to align with actual climate risks. It introduces the ARPA and APC frameworks to measure policy alignment and credibility, noting a significant gap between planning and implementation. Furthermore, it highlights a critical lack of outcome-based monitoring and evaluation, with 95% of indicators focusing on outputs. The brief argues for the integration of 'subaltern' knowledge to improve the social legitimacy and effectiveness of urban adaptation.

The document outlines 12 key policy interventions to accelerate the transition of hard-to-abate sectors, categorised into simplifying pathways, steering risk and opportunity, derisking green investments, and facilitating essential resource flows.

The document outlines a comprehensive approach to integrating biodiversity co-benefits into nature-based solutions (NbS) for climate adaptation. It proposes a six-stage implementation cycle—ranging from system understanding and risk assessment to monitoring and learning—and emphasizes the need for a mix of biodiversity, structural, and functional indicators to measure success. The report highlights the importance of traditional knowledge, inclusive governance, and long-term monitoring to avoid socio-ecological trade-offs and ensure the sustainability of adaptation projects.

The policy brief advocates for the adoption of the Impact Chain approach to make climate adaptation in Europe 'smarter' and more systemic. It recommends shifting from a 'predict-then-act' to a 'reflect-then-act' paradigm to better manage uncertainties, accounting for transboundary climate risks that cascade across jurisdictions, and integrating social vulnerability assessments to ensure equitable adaptation. The brief emphasizes the need for collaborative, iterative co-production of knowledge with stakeholders and citizens to bridge the gap between scientific data and actionable policy.

The We Mean Business Coalition's framework for Responsible Policy Engagement (RPE) addresses the 'advocacy gap' where corporate climate commitments are not matched by their political influence. It defines RPE as engagement that supports policy interventions to reduce emissions in line with net zero by 2050. The report identifies drivers for RPE, including investor pressure via the Global Standard on Responsible Climate Lobbying and increased scrutiny from civil society and regulators. It outlines a business case for RPE based on risk reduction, regulatory certainty, and reputation. The core of the document is a resource library categorized into five action areas: committing to speak up, establishing governance, direct engagement, aligning trade associations, and allocating advocacy spending. It emphasizes the 'ambition loop,' where corporate advocacy spurs ambitious government policy, which in turn enables companies to meet their own climate targets.

The Net Zero Stocktake 2023 reveals that while net zero targets now cover 92% of global GDP and 88% of global GHG emissions at the national level, the momentum for new national and subnational targets has slowed. In contrast, corporate target-setting continues to grow, with 929 Forbes Global 2000 companies now having targets. However, the report highlights a critical 'integrity gap': fewer than 5% of subnational and corporate targets meet the minimum 'starting line' criteria of the Race to Zero campaign. National targets have seen a significant shift toward formalization, with the share of targets enshrined in law or policy documents rising from less than 10% in December 2020 to 75% in 2023. The analysis also finds that no major fossil fuel producing countries or companies have committed to a full phase-out of fossil fuel extraction or production, and there is a growing but potentially problematic reliance on carbon dioxide removals (CDR) to meet targets.

The IAI Directorate reported progress in integrating gender and equity into scientific projects, enhancing the science-policy interface through the Science Diplomacy Center (SDC) and STeP fellowships, and implementing regional climate and health initiatives. Key achievements include the launch of a climate and health responder course for Latin America, the publication of a compendium on climate impacts in the LAC region, and the development of a drought information system for Southern South America. The Directorate also expanded its collaborative research actions with the Belmont Forum and established partnerships with organizations like the WMO and PAHO to improve climate risk assessments and early warning systems.

The IAI Executive Direction reports progress across science, capacity building, and strategic implementation between 2022 and 2023. Key achievements include the establishment of a Gender, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (GEDI) committee, the launch of the Science Diplomacy Center (SDC), and the expansion of the Science, Technology, and Policy (STeP) Fellowship program to 64 fellows from 13 countries. The IAI also advanced regional initiatives on the climate-health nexus, drought information systems in South America, and collaborative research through the Belmont Forum. Strategic partnerships were strengthened with organizations such as the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) to enhance climate risk assessment and science-policy interfaces in the Americas.

This briefing provides an update on the Initiative for enhancing capacity for climate risk assessment and catalyzing partnerships to inform decisions in Latin America and the Caribbean (LACI). It details the initiative's progress from a scoping and partnership building phase involving 14 countries to a pilot co-design phase featuring four specific projects aimed at strengthening climate risk assessments and data interoperability in the region.

This briefing provides an update on the Initiative for Conducting a National Climate Assessment in Support of Adaptation and Mitigation (LACI), an effort led by the Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research (IAI) to strengthen climate risk assessments and decision-making in Latin America and the Caribbean.

The briefing advocates for a Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty based on three pillars: non-proliferation of new fossil fuels, a fair phase-out of existing production, and a global just transition. It positions the treaty as a necessary supply-side complement to the Paris Agreement, arguing that current production plans exceed the 1.5°C carbon budget. The document outlines a business case for support, citing risks such as stranded assets and increased climate litigation, while proposing specific actions for companies, including public advocacy and the implementation of absolute emission reductions.

The briefing advocates for business support of the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty, asserting that a global mechanism to phase out coal, oil, and gas is essential to avoid overshooting 1.5°C. It highlights that current government production plans exceed 1.5°C limits and that existing reserves alone would result in seven times the emissions allowed by the remaining carbon budget. For businesses, supporting the treaty is presented as a way to reduce physical and transitional risks, unlock renewable energy investment, provide integrity to net zero pledges, and improve corporate reputation among employees and stakeholders.

This briefing provides an update on the Latin America and Caribbean Initiative (LACI), an effort by the Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research (IAI) to strengthen climate risk assessments and capacity building for adaptation and mitigation in the region.

The report outlines the progress of the LACI initiative, which aims to strengthen climate risk assessments to support local and regional decision-making. Following a scoping phase involving 14 countries to identify priorities and map capacities, the initiative has entered a pilot co-design phase with four specific projects focusing on El Salvador, regional data interoperability, Amazonia, and Jamaica.

The Climate Bonds Standard 4.0 provides a comprehensive framework for certifying Use of Proceeds (UoP) debt instruments, physical assets, non-financial legal entities, and Sustainability-Linked Debt (SLD). It requires independent verification by accredited verifiers and mandates rigorous disclosure and reporting to maintain certification. For entities and SLDs, the standard emphasizes a 'credible transition' based on five characteristics: alignment with the Paris Agreement, robust planning, implementation of actions, internal oversight, and external reporting. Certification levels are divided into 'Aligned' (already meeting industry standards) and 'Transition' (expected to meet standards by December 31, 2030).