Search Climate Insights Directory

Burkina Faso is highly vulnerable to climate change due to its heavy reliance on rain-fed agriculture and livestock, which employ approximately 80-90% of its workforce. The country faces risks from rising temperatures, rainfall variability, and extreme events like floods and droughts. While the government has established a National Adaptation Plan (2015) and a coordinating body (CONEDD), adaptation efforts remain heavily concentrated in the agricultural sector, with limited integration into health or urban planning. Adaptation is largely driven by international funding and regional projects, with a significant gap in subnational guidance and local government capacity.

The document argues that while affordability and aspirational appeal drive the initial purchase of advanced cookstoves, long-term adoption depends on the stove's performance and the availability of ongoing user support. Based on case studies in Kenya and Zambia, it highlights that shifting cooking habits is a complex behaviour change process requiring hands-on trials, clear manuals, and personal follow-up to prevent users from abandoning new technology in frustration.

The document highlights that 76% of Kenyans rely on traditional biomass for cooking, leading to significant public health crises and economic losses. It argues that while Kenya is a leader in clean cookstove distribution, large-scale transformation requires removing market barriers, such as high import duties, and regulating the charcoal sector. The brief recommends a shift from end-user subsidies to upstream value chain support and the adoption of human-centered design to ensure long-term stove usage.

The document analyzes the charcoal value chain in Kenya, highlighting the tension between high biomass energy demand and forest loss. It evaluates the role of Charcoal Producer Associations (CPAs) and the potential for improved kiln and stove technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The brief advocates for a coordinated policy approach, including the implementation of a Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Action (NAMA), to transition the sector from an informal, inefficient state to a regulated, sustainable industry that contributes to Kenya's Paris Agreement commitments.

The Paris Agreement establishes a global mandate to hold warming well below 2C and reach net zero emissions in the second half of the century. For businesses, this creates a structural shift in energy, land use, and urban systems, offering trillions of dollars in investment opportunities in renewables and energy efficiency. The report emphasizes the importance of internal carbon pricing for risk management and highlights specific vulnerabilities in sectors like textiles in Bangladesh and agriculture in Ethiopia. It argues that the agreement provides long-term policy certainty, making the transition to a clean economy inevitable and irresistible for the private sector.

The 2016 Orinoco Basin Health Report evaluates the Colombian section of the Orinoco River basin, assigning an overall health score of 3.2 (moderately good) based on 11 indicators. The analysis reveals a clear west-to-east gradient: western sub-basins like Alto Meta (1.9) suffer from high degradation due to agro-industrial expansion and oil and gas extraction, while eastern sub-basins like Matavén (4.4) remain more intact. Key threats across the region include deforestation, illegal mining, and unsustainable land-use changes. The report emphasizes critical data gaps in water quality monitoring and biodiversity inventories and aligns its findings with the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

The document explains the mechanisms of Brazil's 2012 Forest Code, specifically the Rural Environmental Registry (CAR) and the Environmental Compliance Program (PRA). It argues that while the law provides tools for monitoring and restoration, effective implementation requires the active engagement of the private sector, financial institutions, and government agencies to move beyond mere legality toward zero net deforestation and degradation.

The 2016 Orinoco River Basin Report Card evaluates the health of various sub-basins in Colombia, assigning an overall grade of B- (63%). The assessment reveals a strong west-east gradient, with Andean headwaters in the west facing severe degradation from mining, oil and gas, and agro-industry, while eastern sub-basins like the Matavén (Grade A) remain more intact. Key concerns include poor human nutrition in the Inírida basin and significant data gaps in water quality monitoring and biodiversity surveys across several tributaries.

WWF and the University of Maryland’s Center for Environmental Science (UMCES) are implementing a standardized process to create freshwater basin report cards. These tools synthesize complex data into accessible grades to empower stakeholders and improve management. The process involves six steps: stakeholder engagement, indicator selection, threshold definition, scoring, communication, and score improvement. A 2016 case study of Colombia’s Orinoco River Basin, which received a B-minus grade, demonstrates the model's application in addressing threats like land-use change and extractive industries.

The Plowprint report by WWF International tracks the gross conversion of intact grasslands to cropland in the US and Canada from 2008/2009 to 2015. Unlike net conversion studies, the Plowprint counts land as converted even if it later reverts to grass, arguing that the initial plow-up causes significant, long-term ecological loss. The analysis uses federal satellite-derived data to identify conversion hotspots and emphasizes the loss of ecosystem services such as carbon sequestration and water filtration. While noting that nearly half of the Plowprint area had reverted to perennial cover by 2015, WWF maintains that such restoration may not fully recover biological diversity or soil capacity. The document also outlines WWF's broader efforts to reduce grassland and forest conversion globally, specifically targeting soy, beef, and palm oil supply chains in Latin America and Southeast Asia.

The document describes REDD+ as a voluntary framework for developing countries to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation while enhancing forest carbon stocks. It details the five core activities, the three phases of implementation (readiness, implementation, and results-based finance), and the requirements for receiving results-based payments, including national strategies and monitoring systems. The report also outlines how the 2015 Paris Agreement integrates REDD+ into the global climate architecture, specifically regarding Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and transparency frameworks.

The author asserts that the Paris agreement's success is rooted in the collapsing cost gap between clean and fossil energy and the increasing profitability of low-carbon investments. The text highlights that private sector investment is driving climate finance, which grew 18% to $391 billion in the previous year. Specific examples are provided of economic opportunities in the U.S., Europe, India, China, Indonesia, and Brazil, suggesting that the transition to low-carbon energy and sustainable agriculture can unlock trillions in economic value.

The statement criticizes the Paris Agreement for abandoning people and the planet, citing a lack of political ambition and the undue influence of corporate lobbyists. It contrasts this political failure with the rise of a global movement of indigenous peoples, youth, and activists who demand climate justice, agroecology, and community-managed forests over 'false solutions' and corporate greenwashing.

The statement asserts that the Paris climate negotiations were a failure of political leadership, characterized by a lack of ambition and the undue influence of polluting corporations. It highlights the rise of a global movement demanding climate justice, food sovereignty through agroecology, and community-led forest management, contrasting these grassroots efforts with 'false solutions' and cynical deforestation offsets promoted within the UN framework.

The We Mean Business Coalition advocates for a 2020 deadline for the first review of global carbon reduction targets, asserting that waiting until 2025 would create excessive uncertainty for business planning and investment. The document highlights the rapid pace of technological change in solar PV, wind power, and electric vehicles as a primary reason for more frequent reviews. It further argues that a 2020 ratchet would signal ambition to investors, helping to leverage $100bn in public climate finance into trillions for climate-smart infrastructure. The text notes that over a hundred global companies have already adopted 'science-based targets' and over fifty influential companies have committed to 100% renewable energy by mid-century or sooner.

The document warns that including land use in climate targets can lead to 'cheating the climate' by allowing countries to replace necessary fossil fuel reductions with unreliable and non-permanent carbon offsets. It highlights specific risks in the US, EU, and Russia, where poor accounting rules or high uncertainty regarding LULUCF emissions could dilute overall mitigation efforts. The author advocates for treating carbon sequestration in forestry and agriculture as a complementary contribution to climate action, rather than a direct substitute for emissions cuts in other sectors.

The report finds that Indonesia's current tax system does not incentivize sustainable land use in the palm oil industry, characterized by low tax-to-GDP ratios and minimal revenue redistribution to local governments. It proposes six fiscal reforms, including increasing land taxes and tying revenue sharing to sustainability indicators, to reduce deforestation and improve land productivity.

The report analyzes Indonesia's land-use revenue systems, finding that 93.5% of revenue is based on production rather than land size, which fails to disincentivize land expansion. It identifies high-potential areas for reform, including the Land and Building Tax, Forestry Non-Tax Revenue, and the use of Adjustment Funds for earmarking sustainable land use activities. The analysis also highlights how current central-to-regional revenue sharing may perversely encourage local governments to grant more land permits to increase their budgets.

The document examines the risks of using agricultural soil carbon sequestration as carbon offsets. It highlights technical failures in measurement, reporting, and verification (MRV), the non-permanence of biological carbon compared to fossil carbon, and social risks such as land grabbing and the marginalization of small-scale farmers. The author argues that 'Climate Smart Agriculture' often serves as greenwashing for agribusiness corporations. Instead of carbon markets, the report recommends using National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) and Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs) to prioritize food security, tenure rights, and sustainable rural livelihoods.

The document critiques industrial agriculture as a primary driver of climate change and social inequality, while presenting agroecology as a viable, small-scale alternative. It specifically attacks 'Climate Smart Agriculture' (CSA) as a corporate-led 'false solution' designed to greenwash industrial practices. The text advocates for a transition toward food sovereignty and the relocalisation of food systems, highlighting the role of women and traditional knowledge in building climate resilience.