Search Climate Insights Directory

The report identifies a massive funding gap for sustainable livestock in Latin America and the Caribbean, where the sector is responsible for approximately 28% of regional emissions but receives minimal climate investment. It analyzes investment risks—including governance instability, physical climate threats like El Niño, and macroeconomic volatility—and evaluates the suitability of various public and private investors. The document proposes three scenarios: Business-as-Usual, Improved Finance Strategies (IFS), and Improved Finance and Policy Strategies (IFPS), arguing that a combination of blended finance, risk-reduction tools, and institutional reforms is necessary to transition from a heavy reliance on public funding to a diversified capital base. Specific recommendations include implementing first-loss capital, long-term loans, and natural capital accounting to unlock investment in practices such as silvopasture and sustainable feed production.

Ten years after the Paris Agreement, French banks and insurers continue to heavily finance fossil fuel expansion, with some increasing their support for oil and gas extraction. The report argues that 'green finance' and ESG labels are largely greenwashing, as they fail to redirect capital away from climaticide activities. It further criticizes the French and European governments for favoring voluntary industry commitments over binding regulations and for weakening key directives like the CSRD and CSDDD under pressure from financial lobbies.

The document outlines a framework for reporting on National Adaptation Plan (NAP) progress, categorising methods into three primary objectives: monitoring activity status, evaluating performance and impact, and learning and communication. It provides a menu of 17 specific tools—ranging from low-effort checklists and traffic-light systems to high-effort indicator tracking and digital platforms—supported by real-world examples from countries such as Saint Lucia, Burkina Faso, and Finland. The guide emphasizes an iterative 'learning by doing' approach, the integration of gender equality and social inclusion (GESI), and the alignment of national reporting with international commitments under the Paris Agreement and the Sendai Framework.

The document outlines the operationalization of Indonesia's Sustainable Finance Committee (SFC) under Law No. 4/2023. It proposes a three-tier governance structure involving the Ministry of Finance, Bank Indonesia, and the Financial Services Authority (OJK) to bridge institutional silos and align national climate targets with financial market mechanisms. The paper emphasizes the need for a formal Government Regulation to ensure the SFC's authority, the creation of a centralized data platform for ESG transparency, and the use of sectoral coalitions to co-create bankable financial solutions for priority sectors like energy and transport.

The report finds that none of the 20 largest European and UK banks have developed a robust climate transition plan, with an average score of 41/100. While banks have improved reporting and governance to meet regulatory requirements, they lack concrete decarbonization and engagement strategies, often continuing to finance fossil fuel development. The analysis highlights a significant gap between public net-zero commitments and actual business model shifts, warning that current disclosures are more 'ESG marketing material' than actionable transition plans.

The document outlines a seven-tip framework for companies to engage suppliers in climate action, emphasizing cross-functional collaboration between procurement and sustainability teams. It argues that climate change is a primary driver of supply chain disruption and that engaging suppliers—particularly high-impact ones—through target-setting, capacity building, and financial incentives can reduce financial risks and improve competitive advantage. The guide provides specific recommendations on prioritizing suppliers based on emissions impact and readiness, as well as methods for collecting data and incentivizing decarbonization.

The document outlines a readiness and preparatory support proposal for Paraguay, implemented by the Global Green Growth Institute (GGGI). It addresses four primary barriers: limited coordination and monitoring of climate finance, the absence of a National Direct Access Entity, a lack of standardized green investment definitions, and insufficient climate integration in long-term development planning. Key interventions include training the Ministry of Economy and Finance (MEF) in its role as the National Designated Authority (NDA), updating the GCF Country Programme and No-Objection Procedure, and supporting the AFD's GCF accreditation. Additionally, the project aims to pilot a Green Taxonomy, develop a Green Job Strategy, and establish a climate finance MRV platform to track domestic and international flows. The proposal emphasizes gender equality and social inclusion (GESI), targeting 50% women's participation in events and integrating GESI-disaggregated indicators into national planning.

The report examines the insurance crisis in California following devastating wildfires in Los Angeles, highlighting how private insurers like State Farm have restricted coverage or exited the market, pushing risk onto the state-supported FAIR Plan. It contends that insurers are complicit in the climate crisis due to over $500 billion in fossil fuel-related assets and argues for the adoption of legislation, such as SB222, to force fossil fuel companies to pay for climate-driven losses through the right of subrogation.

The document highlights the urgent need for Canada to enhance wildfire preparedness, citing the Jasper fire as a critical warning. It identifies gaps in current zoning and governance and proposes a three-pronged adaptation toolkit involving land-use regulation, building retrofits, and landscape-level fuel management.

The We Mean Business Coalition states that the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement is a disservice to American businesses and people, as it creates policy instability and allows other economies to attract investment and talent. The Coalition emphasizes that the Paris Agreement remains a cornerstone of global action and that businesses and other nations will continue to pursue clean energy transitions due to economic necessity and climate risks.

The South African Climate Finance Landscape 2025 reports an annual average of ZAR 188.3 billion in climate finance for 2022–2023, though this remains well below the estimated annual need of up to ZAR 499 billion. Investment is heavily skewed toward the energy sector, which receives 74.1% of total flows, primarily for renewable electricity generation. In contrast, adaptation finance is lagging, accounting for only 11.3% of tracked flows. While domestic sources provide nearly 60% of funding, international flows are dominated by public development finance institutions, particularly from Western Europe. The report highlights significant barriers, including grid bottlenecks, policy uncertainty, and a lack of concessional capital for high-risk or non-revenue-generating adaptation and just transition projects.

The report analyzes greenhushing in Colombia's financial sector, identifying key barriers to transparency such as fear of scrutiny over imperfect data, the desire to protect competitive 'know-how', and high market expectations for quantitative metrics. While Colombia's progressive regulation (Circular 031 of 2021) and lack of climate litigation have mitigated some pressures, the document argues that a shift toward flexible, standardized reporting and collaborative regulation is necessary to transform climate transparency into a strategic asset.

The 2024 Scorecard by Insure Our Future argues that the global insurance industry is in a 'vicious cycle,' where it continues to underwrite fossil fuel expansion while simultaneously withdrawing coverage from communities facing the resulting climate risks. Using climate attribution science, the report estimates that over one-third of weather-related insured losses between 2002 and 2022—approximately $600 billion—are attributable to human-caused climate change. The analysis reveals a stark mismatch in underwriting, with renewable energy premiums representing less than 30% of the size of the fossil fuel insurance market in 2023. For 15 of the 28 major property and casualty insurers analyzed, estimated climate-attributable losses exceeded the premiums they collected from fossil fuel clients. While Generali is noted as the first insurer to restrict oil and gas expansion across the entire value chain, the report concludes that voluntary corporate leadership has stalled, necessitating urgent regulatory intervention to mandate 1.5°C-aligned transition plans and higher capital requirements for fossil fuel exposure.

The guide outlines a two-step process for choosing climate scenarios that accurately reflect the requirements for climate mitigation. First, it advises avoiding scenarios from entities with conflicts of interest, such as oil and gas companies, in favor of independent bodies like the IEA or IPCC. Second, it mandates that a robust scenario must have at least a 50% chance of limiting global warming to 1.5°C with no or low temperature overshoot to avoid irreversible tipping points. Finally, the guide warns against scenarios that rely heavily on negative emissions technologies, such as BECCS and CCS, suggesting specific IPCC feasibility thresholds (e.g., 3 Gt CO2/year for BECCS by 2050) to filter out unrealistic pathways that may delay the phase-out of heavy emitting industries.

The report finds a positive trend in European pension funds' commitment to sustainable investing, with significant growth in the adoption of mitigation targets and climate risk management. However, a persistent gap remains between these commitments and actual real-economy impact, as pension funds rarely invest directly in projects and often hold fragmented indirect ownership. The analysis highlights that larger funds, those in net-zero coalitions, and funds in countries with strong regulatory frameworks—such as the Nordic countries, the Netherlands, and France—are leading the transition. Key challenges include the gap between asset ownership and management, the difficulty of transitioning passive investments, and limited capital flow to emerging markets and developing economies (EMDEs).

Reclaim Finance identifies persistent problematic financing of the coal sector by BNP Paribas, Crédit Agricole, Société Générale, and BPCE/Natixis between 2021 and 2023. Despite overall funding decreases, the report finds that these banks supported 26 problematic groups, including coal developers and companies without climate-aligned exit dates. The analysis highlights four major policy loopholes—exclusion at the subsidiary level rather than the group level, minority ownership thresholds, the treatment of 'captive' industrial power plants, and reliance on confidential internal documents—which the report argues may constitute greenwashing and financial risk mismanagement.

CPI has introduced a bespoke taxonomy and machine learning model to better capture private sector adaptation finance, increasing the annual average tracked flows from USD 1 billion to USD 4.7 billion for the 2019-2022 period. The analysis identifies significant gaps in reporting, particularly among insurers and pension funds, while highlighting that the majority of project-level private investment is concentrated in the water and sanitation sector. The report also estimates that annual consumer and household spending on high-adaptation-likelihood products ranges between USD 48 billion and USD 61 billion.

Tracked urban climate finance reached USD 831 billion in 2021/2022, more than doubling since 2017/2018. However, this remains severely insufficient compared to estimated annual mitigation needs of USD 4.3 trillion by 2030. Finance is heavily concentrated in developed economies and China, with critical gaps in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. While mitigation flows are dominated by transport and buildings, adaptation finance is significantly lower at USD 10 billion, primarily focused on water and wastewater. The report advocates for a '4C Urban Climate Finance Agenda'—Commitment, Collaboration, Capacity, and Capital Mobilization—to bridge the investment gap.

The report examines how the Central Bank of Brazil (BCB) uses financial regulation to curb deforestation, particularly in the Amazon and Cerrado biomes. It details the BCB's 'Agenda BC# Sustainability', which integrates social, environmental, and climate risks into the national financial system. A central pillar of this strategy is the reform of rural credit, where the BCB has implemented restrictions on financing for properties with illegal deforestation, lack of environmental registration (CAR), or those located in protected areas. The document also highlights the role of the 'Bureau de Crédito Rural' and the 'Sicor' system in monitoring compliance in real-time.

The report examines how the Central Bank of Brazil (BCB) is leveraging its regulatory authority to align the national financial system with environmental goals. It details the BCB's 'BC# Sustainability Agenda', which introduces risk management requirements for social, environmental, and climate risks, and mandates disclosures based on TCFD recommendations. A significant portion of the analysis focuses on rural credit, where the BCB has implemented restrictions on financing for properties that violate the Forest Code or are located in protected areas. The report highlights the role of the Rural Environmental Registry (CAR) and the Rural Credit Bureau (SICOR) in monitoring compliance and suggests further integration of remote sensing data to enhance oversight.