Search Climate Insights Directory

The Strategic Framework for Water Security and Climate Resilient Development, developed by AMCOW and GWP, outlines a four-phase approach to identify and implement 'no/low regrets' investments in Africa. It emphasizes the critical link between water security and macroeconomic stability, noting that hydrological variability can significantly reduce GDP growth in several African nations. The framework advocates for a shift from isolated adaptation projects toward mainstreaming climate resilience within national budgeting and planning systems, such as Medium-Term Expenditure Frameworks. It highlights the importance of Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) and the use of Robust Decision Making (RDM) to ensure investments perform well across multiple climate scenarios. The document also addresses the need for diverse financing strategies, leveraging both traditional development funds and specialized climate finance like the Green Climate Fund, while promoting a transition toward a Green Economy and the inclusion of gender equality in water management.

The report estimates that ensuring climate-resilient infrastructure in Uganda will cost between US$52-66 million (2015-2020) and US$638-1,157 million (2045-2050), with total costs by 2050 reaching up to US$3 billion under the RCP 8.5 scenario. Residential buildings are identified as the most affected sector, accounting for approximately half of all resilience costs. Regarding extreme events, the report projects that a doubling of event frequency every 25 years could lead to damages of US$738-3,294 million by 2050, representing 0.1-0.3% of GDP. Key adaptation priorities include climate-proofing public buildings and integrating resilient standards into infrastructure planning and risk assessment guidelines.

The document estimates that ensuring climate-resilient infrastructure in Uganda will cost between US$60-76 million in 2025 and US$347-621 million by 2050, with buildings accounting for 96% of these costs. Under a less favorable climate scenario (RCP 8.5), total costs to 2050 could reach US$4.4 billion. Additionally, the report warns that a doubling of the frequency of extreme events every 25 years could lead to damages of US$938-3,236 million by 2050, representing 0.1-0.4% of GDP. Key adaptation priorities include climate-proofing public buildings and integrating resilient standards into infrastructure planning.

The document advocates for Robust Decision Making (RDM) to manage climate uncertainty in water sector investments. It proposes a screening process to categorize investments into no/low regret, climate change risky, and climate change justified options, prioritizing those that provide benefits regardless of the climate scenario. It emphasizes addressing the 'adaptation deficit'—the backlog of investments needed to protect against existing climatic fluctuations—and suggests using sensitivity analysis and benefit-cost appraisals to refine development portfolios.

The report investigates how local multi-stakeholder platforms can catalyze the integration of Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) and Climate Change Adaptation (CCA) in India. Focusing on the arid regions of Leh and Barmer, the project utilized household surveys, resource mapping, and the installation of an Automatic Weather Station to identify climate-induced risks and policy gaps. Key findings indicate that while local communities perceive clear trends in rising temperatures and erratic precipitation, government policies remain fragmented and compartmentalized. The project successfully implemented community-led initiatives, such as a radio program in Barmer and a climate school in Leh, to amplify local voices and provide scientific weather data for agricultural adaptation. The report concludes that the district level is the most optimal point for the convergence of DRR and CCA to drive upward policy transformation.

The document argues that persons with disabilities are disproportionately vulnerable to climate change and are frequently overlooked in policy-making. It provides a reference guide of human rights obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) and the Sendai Framework, alongside a compilation of UNFCCC decisions—including the Paris Agreement—that recognize the need to engage persons with disabilities in mitigation, adaptation, and capacity-building efforts.

The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) issued climate-related recommendations or questions to 35 out of 43 States considered in 2023. The Committee primarily focused on the differentiated impact of climate change on women, emphasizing the need for gender-responsive strategies in adaptation and disaster risk reduction, as well as the increased vulnerability of rural, Indigenous, migrant, and refugee women. While less frequent than adaptation, the Committee also addressed mitigation policies, fossil fuel extraction—specifically criticizing Norway's expansion of oil and gas permits in the Arctic—and the necessity of women's participation in the UNFCCC loss and damage fund.

The document synthesizes the work of UN human rights treaty bodies (HRTBs) in addressing climate change, specifically focusing on Concluding Observations issued to States. It highlights that while climate change is not explicitly in key human rights treaties, HRTBs increasingly use their monitoring roles to argue that protecting human rights requires specific climate action. The report details recommendations across several themes, including the disproportionate impacts on women, children, and indigenous peoples, the need for gender-sensitive and child-sensitive climate strategies, and the obligation of some States to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and fossil fuel extraction to meet human rights standards. It provides detailed analysis of the three most active bodies: CEDAW, CESCR, and CRC.

The report outlines how the CEDAW Committee interprets States' obligations to ensure gender-responsive climate action, emphasizing the particular vulnerabilities of rural and older women and the necessity of women's participation in decision-making.

The report outlines how the Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) interprets the 1989 CRC Convention to protect children from climate change. It highlights that while the Convention implicitly protects rights to life, health, and education, the Committee has explicitly urged States to place children's health at the center of climate strategies and to ensure children's participation in decision-making. The document analyzes 24 Concluding Observations from the past decade, noting a trend of recommendations directed toward climate-vulnerable developing countries, focusing on adaptation, disaster risk reduction, and the integration of child-sensitive strategies into national plans.

The document is a bibliography listing reports, academic papers, and legal documents used to analyze climate change impacts in the Maldives. It categorizes sources into sections covering physical and human impacts—including sea level rise, coral bleaching, and health risks—as well as the implications for human rights and the responsibilities of the international community.

The report identifies a significant gap in Canada's climate adaptation efforts, characterized by fragmented governance and insufficient funding. It proposes that a new National Adaptation Strategy must move beyond previous frameworks by establishing risk-based national priorities, concrete short-term implementation plans, coordinated multi-level governance, and a transparent monitoring and evaluation system to ensure accountability and measurable results.

Public adaptation finance grew by at least 12% to $25 billion between 2012 and 2013, though it remains insufficient for a warming trajectory exceeding 2 °C. Development Finance Institutions (DFIs) were the primary source of funding, with low-cost loans accounting for 52% ($12.9 billion) of total finance and grants representing 16% ($3.9 billion). Approximately 90% of captured adaptation finance ($22 billion) was invested in non-OECD developing countries, with the East Asia and Pacific region being the primary destination for total and DFI financing, while Sub-Saharan Africa received the most funding from governments and Climate Funds.

Ghana faces a significant climate finance gap, with an annual average of USD 830 million tracked in 2019 and 2020, representing only 5-9% of its estimated needs of USD 9.3-15.5 billion. Public finance dominates at 87% of total flows, while private finance accounts for only 13%, heavily concentrated in energy systems. Funding is split nearly equally between adaptation (49%) and mitigation (47%), with the agriculture, forestry, and land use (AFOLU) and energy sectors receiving the most investment. The brief recommends implementing a national climate finance taxonomy, deploying innovative instruments like green bonds and blended finance, and improving the granularity of tracking to attract more private capital.

The document outlines how grants function as direct fund transfers to support climate projects with low commercial potential, acting as a tool to de-risk investments and build institutional capacity. It categorizes grants into development, technical assistance, and project preparation facilities, and identifies key providers ranging from philanthropic foundations and multilateral development banks to vertical climate funds like the Green Climate Fund. The guide details the capacity requirements for recipients, the pathways for financial market readiness across shallow, emerging, and mature markets, and the specific challenges—such as complex reporting and donor fragmentation—that hinder effective uptake.

Risk pooling aggregates risks across geographies or portfolios to lower volatility and reduce reinsurance costs, providing rapid, rules-based liquidity after disasters. These mechanisms, including parametric pools and catastrophe (CAT) bonds, address credit, liquidity, and market risks by combining exposures and transferring high-risk layers to global capital markets. Examples include the Caribbean Catastrophe Risk Insurance Facility (CCRIF), African Risk Capacity (ARC), and the Pacific Catastrophe Risk Insurance Company (PCRIC), which have provided millions in payouts for cyclones, droughts, and floods. Implementation requires specific internal and regulatory capacities, ranging from basic budgeting for premiums to the legal ability to issue sovereign CAT bonds. While risk pools can reduce costs by 40–50% compared to standalone insurance, challenges such as basis risk, data gaps, and budget trade-offs persist.

International public adaptation finance for Small Island Developing States (SIDS) averaged just over $2 billion annually in 2021–2022, representing only 0.2% of global climate finance. This is significantly below the estimated annual need of $11.7 billion required between 2023 and 2035. The report highlights a critical reliance on debt, which accounted for 44% of flows, and a lack of correlation between finance volumes and climate vulnerability. It advocates for replacing ODA eligibility criteria with a multidimensional vulnerability index to improve access to concessional funding.

The PREPARE Act proposes a strategic approach to manage the financial and systemic risks posed by extreme weather to the US federal government. It seeks to establish an interagency oversight council, improve coordination with state and local planners, and create regional coordination plans to enhance resilience and risk management without increasing costs to taxpayers.

The project aims to benefit 102,000 direct beneficiaries in Honduras' coastal and insular zones, focusing on indigenous and Afro-Honduran populations. It addresses vulnerabilities to sea level rise, increasing sea surface temperatures, and tropical storms. The proposal outlines three main components: improving livelihood resilience through new fishing technologies and climate-resilient aquaculture; creating a multi-level climate adaptation and disaster risk management mechanism; and strengthening natural barriers like mangroves while adapting housing infrastructure. With a total indicative cost of USD 17 million, the project seeks USD 12 million in GCF grants to shift the paradigm from centralized management to participatory, multi-actor integrated management.

The Green Climate Fund's Accreditation Panel recommends the accreditation of Applicant 011 (APL011) for large-scale projects and high environmental and social risk categories. APL011, a regional financial institution in Latin America and the Caribbean, met basic and specialized fiduciary standards, including on-lending and grant allocation. While it substantially meets environmental and social safeguard (ESS) requirements, accreditation is conditional upon the finalization of its consolidated blueprint for E&S management and alignment of its performance standard 2 with the Fund's ESS. The applicant also demonstrated consistency with the Fund's gender policy, despite lacking a track record in gender and climate change.