Search Climate Insights Directory

The report argues that tropical forests must be transitioned from being viewed as climate risks to central climate solutions. Based on an assessment of 91 countries, it highlights that restoring areas deforested since 2001 could capture up to 49 GtCO2. To achieve this, the authors propose the Reversing Deforestation Mechanism (RDM), a results-based financial tool designed to reward net carbon removals at the jurisdictional level. RDM is intended to complement existing frameworks like Jurisdictional REDD+ (JREDD+) and the Tropical Forest Forever Facility (TFFF). At a carbon price of US$ 50 per ton, the RDM could remove up to 2 GtCO2 annually, potentially closing 11–13% of the 2035 emissions gap and generating US$ 100 billion in annual revenues.

The document explains that limiting global warming to 1.5°C will likely involve 'temperature overshoot', where targets are exceeded before returning to lower levels. Such overshoot increases the risk of triggering irreversible climate tipping points, such as the transformation of the Amazon rainforest into a savanna. The author argues that relying on large-scale carbon dioxide removal (CDR) or geoengineering to correct overshoot is risky and uncertain, emphasizing that immediate, deep emissions cuts are the only reliable way to maintain a habitable planet. It also introduces the concept of 'positive socio-economic tipping points' as a strategic means to accelerate the transition to net zero.

The statement contends that the European Union Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) should be implemented without further delay, as major cocoa companies and governments in Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana have already invested heavily in traceability and farmer mapping. It warns that postponing the law would undermine the investments of early adopters, jeopardize forest preservation, and damage the EU's credibility as a global climate leader.

The document highlights the deployment of a cattle traceability program in Pará, Brazil, and a proposed traceability bill in Colombia to combat 'cattle laundering' and deforestation. It warns that the Amazon Soy Moratorium is under threat from a Brazilian anti-competition body ruling and discusses the Tropical Forest Forever Facility (TFFF), for which Brazil has committed $1 billion, though the author argues $25 billion is needed to achieve necessary scale.

The report examines four EU climate regulations—the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR), the EU ETS for Shipping, and Methane Regulations—and their disproportionate effects on African economies. It highlights risks such as GDP reduction, loss of export revenue, and increased maritime costs, while calling for financial support, technical capacity building, and a shift toward global rather than unilateral regulatory frameworks.

The document details the methodology used to evaluate investment risks and attributes for the livestock sector in Latin America and the Caribbean, categorizing risks into governance, financial, physical climate, market, infrastructure, and nature. It establishes a framework for matching these risks with the preferences of public and private investors and models three capital scenarios: business-as-usual (BAU), improved financial strategies (IFS), and improved financial and political strategies (IFPS). The analysis distinguishes between small-scale farms (2-10 hectares) and large-scale commercial operations, noting that small-scale systems are more dependent on public funding. Geographically, it segments the region into Brazil, Argentina, Mexico, and the 'rest of LAC', highlighting Brazil's role as the region's primary beef producer and the significant underreporting of private climate finance in the sector.

The document outlines a comprehensive methodology for evaluating investment risks and attributes in the livestock sector across Latin America and the Caribbean, specifically distinguishing between small-scale and large-scale commercial farms. It establishes a scoring system across six risk categories—governance, financing, physical climate, market, infrastructure, and nature—and compares these against the risk tolerances of public and private investors. The annexes also model three financial scenarios: Business-as-Usual (BAU), Enhanced Financial Strategies (IFS), and Enhanced Financial and Policy Strategies (IFPS), predicting how targeted interventions can shift capital composition from predominantly public to increased private investment. Geographic analysis highlights Brazil's relative stability and market dominance, while noting higher risks in Argentina and Mexico.

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.

The report identifies a severe underfunding of sustainable livestock systems in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC), where livestock accounts for approximately 28% of regional greenhouse gas emissions. It highlights a significant financing gap, estimating that annual flows need to increase up to 255 times to enable a transition. The analysis reveals that public investors are currently the most suitable for the sector due to higher risk tolerance, while private investment is hindered by governance risks, macroeconomic instability, and a mismatch between project scales and investor preferences. The document proposes three scenarios—Business-as-Usual, Improved Finance Strategies (IFS), and Improved Finance and Policy Strategies (IFPS)—to demonstrate how blended finance, risk-reduction tools, and regulatory reforms can attract private capital, particularly for large-scale farms in Brazil and Mexico.

The report argues that tropical forests should be central to climate strategies, moving from being viewed as a risk to a solution. It analyzes 91 countries, categorizing them by forest cover and deforestation rates, and concludes that forest protection and restoration are compatible with economic growth. To address the funding gap for restoration, the authors propose the Reversing Deforestation Mechanism (RDM), a jurisdictional, results-based payment system for net carbon removals. RDM is designed to complement existing tools like JREDD+ and the Tropical Forest Forever Facility (TFFF). Simulations suggest that at a carbon price of US$ 50 per ton, RDM could generate significant annual revenues and remove up to 2 GtCO2 per year globally in its early stages.

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) argues that the Tropical Forest Forever Facility (TFFF) promotes the 'financierization of nature' by treating forests as financial assets. FoEI criticizes the TFFF's structure for prioritizing private investor returns over conservation, creating a potential debt cycle for Global South countries, and maintaining colonial power asymmetries through the involvement of the World Bank and other international financial institutions. While acknowledging the TFFF's commitment to allocate 20% of payments to Indigenous Peoples and local communities (PICL), FoEI deems this insufficient and calls for a systemic shift toward community-led forest management, debt cancellation, and historical reparations.

The 2025 Forest Declaration Assessment reports that global forests remain in crisis, with 8.07 million hectares of deforestation in 2024, leaving the world 63% off track for 2030 goals. While some natural recovery and national reforms in countries like Brazil and Indonesia show promise, the report finds that corporate commitments are largely unimplemented and public finance for forests is dwarfed by environmentally harmful agricultural subsidies. It calls for a shift from voluntary pledges to mandatory regulations and inclusive governance that secures land rights for Indigenous Peoples and local communities.

The 2025 Forest Declaration Assessment reports that global forests remain in crisis, with 8.1 million hectares lost in 2024 and degradation increasing. Despite some success in natural regeneration and specific national policy reforms in Brazil, Colombia, and Indonesia, the report finds that corporate commitments are largely insufficient and financial flows remain misaligned with conservation goals. It calls for a shift from voluntary corporate pledges to mandatory regulations and inclusive governance that secures land tenure for indigenous peoples and local communities.

The 2025 Forest Declaration Assessment reports that global forests remain in crisis, with 8.07 million hectares lost in 2024 and a 63% gap relative to the 2030 zero-deforestation goal. While some national reforms in Brazil, Colombia, and Indonesia show promise, corporate action remains largely insufficient, and public finance for forests is dwarfed by harmful agricultural subsidies. The report emphasizes that current voluntary corporate commitments are inadequate and calls for mandatory regulations, inclusive governance for indigenous peoples, and a fundamental shift in the global financial system to prioritize forest stability over extractive production.

The 2025 Forest Declaration Assessment reports that global forests remain in crisis, with deforestation and degradation continuing at high rates. Despite some progress in natural regeneration and specific national reforms in Brazil, Colombia, and Indonesia, the report finds that corporate commitments are largely insufficient and public and private financing remains drastically misaligned with forest protection goals. It calls for systemic changes, including mandatory regulations and inclusive governance, to reverse these trends by 2030.

The 2025 Forest Declaration Assessment finds that global forests remain in crisis, with 8.1 million hectares lost in 2024 and the world 63% off track for zero deforestation by 2030. Deforestation is primarily driven by permanent agriculture (86%), while forest degradation is escalating rapidly, particularly in the Amazon Basin. Private sector action remains largely insufficient, with only 3% of Forest 500 companies meeting expectations for strong commitments. Public finance for forests (USD 5.7 billion) is dwarfed by environmentally harmful agricultural subsidies (USD 409 billion). Governance is hindered by power imbalances and insecure land rights, though protected areas now cover 17.5% of global land. The report calls for mandatory regulations, integrated landscape approaches, and inclusive decision-making involving Indigenous Peoples and local communities to meet 2030 goals.

The 2025 Forest Declaration Assessment finds that the world is significantly off track to achieve zero deforestation by 2030, with 8.1 million hectares lost in 2024. The report highlights a systemic failure where harmful agricultural subsidies (USD 409 billion annually) dwarf positive forest finance, and where corporate commitments remain largely voluntary and insufficient. While some countries like Brazil and Indonesia have shown that political will can reduce deforestation, these gains are threatened by geopolitical instability and regulatory rollbacks. The assessment emphasizes that forests are better managed when Indigenous Peoples and local communities have secure tenure rights, yet only 13 percent of customary lands in tropical forests are formally recognized. It calls for a shift from voluntary pledges to mandatory regulations and inclusive governance to prevent ecosystem collapse.

The document evaluates the role of bioenergy in the energy transition, specifically critiquing the International Energy Agency's (IEA) Net Zero Emissions (NZE) scenario for its heavy reliance on biomass. It argues that solid biomass creates a 'carbon debt' and threatens biodiversity, while biogas and biofuels often have greenhouse gas intensities comparable to fossil fuels due to land-use change and methane leaks. Reclaim Finance concludes that bioenergy should not be included in sustainable financing frameworks, as it competes with wind and solar power and risks prolonging the use of fossil gas infrastructure.

The 'Nature at COP30 Advocacy Toolkit for Business' outlines five priority areas for corporate advocacy to bridge the gap between climate and nature agendas. It urges governments to end deforestation by 2030, align the three Rio Conventions, scale nature-positive finance via the 'Baku to Belém Roadmap', prioritize ecosystem-based adaptation within the Global Goal on Adaptation, and ensure inclusive governance for Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IP&LC). The document provides specific evidence on the economic value of forests and the funding gaps for nature-based solutions to support these asks.

The CEO of Mighty Earth criticizes the European Commission for delaying the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) by one year, suggesting the official reason of IT failures may mask political capitulation. The author notes that while the EUDR has already encouraged some companies like Nestle and Carrefour to implement traceability systems, the delay emboldens non-compliant companies and undermines those who have already prepared. The note also highlights a lack of philanthropic investment in the political defense of the law and mentions a $1 billion commitment from Brazil to the Tropical Forest Forever Facility.