Search Climate Insights Directory

The synopsis asserts that the petroleum industry was unequivocally warned of climate change by 1968 and that internal documents from companies like Exxon show a stark contrast between their internal scientific certainty and their public campaigns of disinformation. It highlights that while these companies protected their own infrastructure from rising sea levels and warming, they funded 'AstroTurf' organizations and misinformation plans to ensure the public viewed climate science as uncertain. The document also notes that attribution science now allows for the tracing of specific climate impacts to individual companies, providing a legal basis for accountability.

The document argues that Canada has historically struggled to translate high-level climate adaptation aspirations into concrete action due to a lack of interministerial coordination and systematic integration. It proposes moving beyond voluntary, informal approaches toward a 'whole-of-government' approach. Key recommendations include enacting a national climate change adaptation law, issuing centralized policy directives, establishing a dedicated central adaptation policy unit, and utilizing ex ante evaluation tools. The paper highlights the UK's Climate Change Act as a successful model of legislative accountability and notes that most OECD countries possess specialized units for adaptation coordination, a feature currently lacking in Canada.

This report details the institutional frameworks used by the United States, United Kingdom, British Columbia, France, Germany, Australia, Denmark, and Singapore to implement a whole-of-government approach to climate change. It catalogs specific committees, task forces, and legislative mechanisms designed to integrate climate priorities across different government departments and agencies.

The Augures! project's 2023/2024 results evaluate the accuracy of seasonal weather forecasts and their ability to predict crop yields and economic impacts. Findings indicate that temperature anomalies are most accurately predicted in Southeastern Europe during summer months, while wheat and maize yields in Greece can be forecast 3-4 and 2 months in advance, respectively. The report emphasizes that extreme weather events cannot be predicted months in advance, necessitating investment in disaster preparedness, and calls for better farm management data to improve socio-economic impact predictions regarding poverty and food security.

This guide outlines strategies for legal professionals to drive corporate climate action. It focuses on four key areas: enhancing corporate governance by tying executive pay to climate targets and diversifying boards; managing external counsel to ensure alignment with decarbonization; incorporating climate risk and emissions data into legal contracts and financial instruments; and navigating evolving environmental regulations.

The PREPARE Act is proposed legislation designed to address the federal government's lack of organization and systematic information sharing regarding extreme weather risks. Based on GAO findings that extreme weather is a high-risk fiscal exposure, the Act proposes creating an interagency oversight council, collaborating with state and local planners on best practices, and establishing regional coordination plans to protect national assets and citizens.

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) Accreditation Panel (AP) recommends the accreditation of Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH (APL038) for international access under a fast-track process. GIZ is recommended for a 'medium' project size limit (up to USD 250 million), medium environmental and social risk (Category B/I-2), and specific fiduciary functions including project management and grant award mechanisms. The recommendation is conditional upon GIZ submitting an operational manual detailing its fiduciary due diligence process, specifically regarding 'know your customer' and anti-money laundering (AML) standards. The assessment highlights GIZ's global presence in over 130 countries and its track record of managing approximately 1,300 projects as of December 2014, with 40% being climate-related.

The document outlines the GCF's investment criteria indicators, which serve as guidance for Accredited Entities, the Technical Advisory Panel, and the Board. These indicators are not binary filters for approval but tools to describe how proposals meet investment criteria while considering national circumstances. Key criteria include impact potential (mitigation and adaptation), paradigm shift potential, sustainable development potential, beneficiary needs, national ownership, and efficiency and effectiveness.

The document outlines the regulatory and operational framework established by the GCF Board to transition from initial resource mobilization to its first formal replenishment. It details the criteria for receiving financial inputs, the 50:50 balance target between mitigation and adaptation, the Initial Investment Framework, and the roles of the Secretariat, Trustee, and independent units. Key operational priorities for 2015–2018 focused on scaling investments and maximizing impact while ensuring country ownership and private sector engagement.

The document outlines the implementation goals and specific indicators for the Green Climate Fund's (GCF) investment criteria. These indicators are designed to provide transparency and consistency in funding proposals without serving as binary pass/fail tests. The criteria cover six main areas: impact potential (mitigation and adaptation), paradigm shift potential, sustainable development potential (co-benefits), recipient needs, national ownership, and efficiency and effectiveness.

The document describes a comprehensive training program focused on transitioning from isolated pilot projects to system-wide health adaptation in the Americas. It details eleven sessions covering the urgency of climate threats, the conceptual difference between incremental and transformational adaptation, and the use of vulnerability and adaptation assessments (V&As). The course emphasizes overcoming institutional resistance, integrating climate considerations into bureaucratic structures, and the importance of inclusive, Indigenous-led approaches to ensure health equity. Additionally, it addresses the need for strategic communication, cross-jurisdictional collaboration, and the synergy between health system decarbonization and climate resilience.

The document describes the Community-based Risk Screening Tool (CRiSTAL), a decision-support application used to integrate climate adaptation into local projects. It outlines the tool's objective to analyze how climate hazards affect livelihoods and project activities, its three-phase analytical approach, and the various training and consultancy services provided by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) and its partners.

The IISD Mining and Sustainable Development Initiative works to ensure mining contributes to economic and social development without compromising the environment. It employs a shared-value approach to maximize intergenerational benefits and ecological restoration. The initiative provides legal advice, economic analysis, and capacity building for governments and companies, with specific recent work in Asia, Africa, the Caribbean, and Canada regarding contract negotiations, policy frameworks, and climate risk management.

The Norwegian Sovereign Wealth Fund (the Oil Fund) held US$6.15 billion in bonds across 39 oil and gas developers as of June 2024. The report argues that these bonds provide fresh capital for upstream and midstream expansion, contradicting the Fund's ambition to lead in climate risk management. Case studies on TotalEnergies, Enbridge, and ExxonMobil highlight the misalignment between the Fund's financial support and the companies' lack of credible transition plans. The authors recommend a policy to halt new bond purchases from oil and gas developers and a phased divestment from existing holdings.

The policy brief identifies a gap between the climate commitments of institutional investors and their actual impact on corporate behavior, citing limited transparency and high barriers to shareholder action. It proposes four primary reforms to the Shareholder Rights Directive (SRD) II: introducing a mandatory 'Say on Climate' vote every three years, ensuring legal security for submitting environmental resolutions, increasing transparency requirements for asset owners, managers, and proxy advisors, and lowering the shareholding threshold for submitting resolutions to a maximum of 2% (and 0.2% for large companies).

Reclaim Finance responds to the Bank of England's consultation on the Corporate Bond Purchase Scheme (CBPS), urging the Bank to prioritize the exclusion and divestment of fossil fuel assets to mitigate climate-related financial risks. The organization argues that engagement is often ineffective for high-carbon companies and recommends that the Bank set ambitious, short-term portfolio targets, integrate scope 3 emissions, and implement a heavy negative tilt strategy. Reclaim Finance further suggests that the Bank should lead the market in climate risk management by increasing capital requirements for fossil fuel exposures and expanding its environmental focus to include nature-related financial risks.

The document outlines the shift from TCFD to IFRS S2 (NIIF S2), emphasizing that IFRS S2 does not merely replace but expands TCFD recommendations. Key changes include a requirement for greater granularity in governance disclosures, the introduction of formal transition plans in strategy, more detailed risk and opportunity management processes, and the mandate for industry-specific metrics based on SASB standards. It also specifies stricter requirements for GHG emissions reporting across Scopes 1, 2, and 3, and more rigorous documentation for climate goals, including third-party verification.

The document argues that Colombian national development banks, specifically Finagro and Findeter, have a significant opportunity to incorporate climate risk and stranded asset analysis into their existing financial management frameworks. While current regulations from the Superintendencia Financiera de Colombia (SFC) require asset valuation and risk management, they do not explicitly mandate the inclusion of climate variables. The report highlights that in the Global South, stranded assets can extend beyond the energy sector to include agriculture, road infrastructure, and construction. Case studies of Finagro and Findeter reveal that while both comply with SFC standards and report low credit risk, they do not publicly detail how climate-related risks or potential stranded assets are identified or managed, creating a gap in their long-term financial sustainability planning.

The We Mean Business coalition argues that corporate climate leadership is essential for long-term business success and global economic resilience. It defines leadership as the combination of science-based ambition, transformative business action, and pro-change policy advocacy, emphasizing that current levels of corporate action are insufficient to ensure a sustainable future.

The document outlines how financial institutions can apply the Greenhouse Gas Protocol's Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard to develop GHG inventories. It emphasizes that inventories should drive emissions reductions and serve business imperatives, such as managing reputational and fiduciary risks. The brief suggests specific accounting approaches for investments, including equity share methods and the reporting of relevant indirect emissions.