Search Climate Insights Directory

The report evaluates several major global climate pledges, finding that most are currently off-track. While there are isolated successes—such as the UK closing its last coal plant and growth in electric car sales—critical goals like tripling renewable energy by 2030 and halting deforestation are not being met. The document highlights a significant gap between high-level commitments and implementation, particularly in the financial sector where net-zero plans are deemed insufficient and fossil fuel subsidies have reached record highs. It calls for a shift from loose networks to platforms of accountability as countries develop their next round of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) for 2025.

The Saint-Louis Declaration, issued by the African Activists for Climate Justice (AACJ) Senegal consortium, calls for the integration of climate justice into Senegal's environmental policies. It highlights the extreme vulnerability of the Saint-Louis region and demands simplified access to green funds, the operationalization of the loss and damage fund at COP29, and increased support for climate-resilient agriculture and renewable energy in rural areas.

The briefing identifies a $700 billion annual biodiversity finance gap and argues that current corporate reporting frameworks are too complex and resource-intensive to scale private investment. It proposes complementing comprehensive standards with simplified, verifiable metrics—specifically hectare-based measurements—to lower barriers to entry, enable peer comparison, and unlock new financial incentives for companies to contribute positively to nature.

The report analyzes the hydrological impacts of forest fires and deforestation in the Chiquitania region of Bolivia, specifically focusing on the Curichi Grande and Tucavaca watersheds. It details the development of a multi-criteria prioritization tool using Google Earth Engine (GEE) and a hydrological model using WEAP to assess water availability and soil retention. Field findings from 2021-2022 highlight critical water scarcity and quality issues in local communities following the 2019 and 2020 fires, while the report argues that integrating fire risk into water management is essential for sustainable regional development.

The Structured Finance for Nature (SFN) instrument uses a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) in Singapore to aggregate a diversified portfolio of natural assets, combining equity, mezzanine finance, and green bonds. It aims to overcome barriers such as high upfront costs and small project sizes to protect and restore one million hectares of forest and wetlands. The pilot project in Agusan del Sur, Philippines, focuses on protecting 91,000 hectares of forest, with future expansions planned for Cambodia, Bhutan, and Indonesia. The model emphasizes high-integrity carbon credits, a 20% minimum benefit-sharing allocation for local and Indigenous communities, and real-time monitoring via a proprietary dashboard.

The policy brief examines the systemic failure of global financial systems to value nature, noting that nature-related risks worth $5 trillion are not priced into investment decisions. It advocates for a multi-pronged approach to bridge the nature finance gap, including meeting the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF) targets of $20 billion annually by 2025 and $200 billion by 2030. The author argues that while carbon markets are a necessary short-term tool, they are flawed for long-term nature finance due to issues with permanence and additionality. Instead, the brief promotes the scaling of the $4 trillion global bioeconomy, the use of debt-for-nature swaps, and the implementation of payments for ecosystem services (PES), such as levies on digital sequence information and Brazil's Tropical Forests Forever Facility. It emphasizes that these transitions must be led by global south governments and indigenous peoples to ensure equitable governance and avoid 'sub-prime' transactions.

The report estimates that approximately CAD 98.4 million in combined federal and provincial grant funding was directed toward natural infrastructure in the Canadian Prairies in 2022. Nationally, 16 analyzed funds provide an estimated CAD 346.6 million annually. The analysis highlights that ecosystem restoration receives the most funding, while the Natural Infrastructure Fund is the only program specifically dedicated to natural infrastructure.

The document assesses the current state of bioeconomy strategies across G20 nations, identifying three primary thematic axes: biotechnology (R&D&I), bioresources (sustainable use of biodiversity), and bio-ecology (sustainable development). It highlights the significant economic potential of the sector, citing estimates that its value could reach US$30 trillion by 2050. The report emphasizes the necessity of integrating indigenous and local knowledge, ensuring social equity, and aligning bioeconomy growth with biodiversity conservation and climate action. It further examines policy enablers such as Green Public Procurement and carbon pricing, and discusses financing mechanisms including nature markets and sustainability-linked bonds. The report concludes by proposing five key themes for the G20 Initiative on Bioeconomy's program of work: integration into growth plans, livelihoods and equity, enabling finance, facilitating biotrade, and measurement methodologies.

The document evaluates the Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), highlighting positive steps toward preventing species extinction and protecting indigenous rights, while warning that the framework's reliance on total area targets and 'Nature-based Solutions' may implicitly permit biodiversity offsetting. It argues that the lack of explicit prohibitions on destructive activities like deep-sea mining and Arctic hydrocarbon extraction allows ecosystem destruction to continue, and encourages civil society to use the GBF's quality and restoration targets to hold governments accountable.

The document analyzes the 2022 Global Biodiversity Framework, highlighting its recognition of indigenous rights and agroecology while criticizing its reliance on corporate self-reporting, 'sustainable intensification' in agriculture, and the implicit acceptance of biodiversity offsets (compensation). It urges civil society to use the framework's targets to pressure governments for stronger legislation and accountability.

The document analyzes the Global Biodiversity Framework, noting that while Target 4 promotes urgent measures to prevent species extinction and Target 3 emphasizes effective protected area management, the framework is flawed by an implicit reliance on biodiversity offsetting. The author argues that offsetting is a harmful practice that fails to address root causes of biodiversity loss and may justify the destruction of nature. Key gaps include the lack of explicit bans on high-impact activities like deep-sea mining and Arctic drilling, and a failure to adequately link conservation to industrial agriculture and fossil fuel extraction.

The document evaluates the Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), noting that while Target 4 supports preventing species extinction and Target 3 emphasizes quality in conserved areas, the framework is undermined by the implicit enablement of offsetting. The author argues that the GBF lacks clear prohibitions on destructive activities like deep-sea mining and fails to adequately link conservation to industrial drivers of biodiversity loss. It suggests that civil society can use the GBF's targets on restoration and governance to hold governments accountable.

The report estimates that CAD 346.6 million is provided annually via national grants for natural infrastructure in Canada, with CAD 98.4 million reaching the Prairie provinces from combined federal and provincial sources. It finds that while conservation is a common objective in funding programs, the majority of actual spending is directed toward restored ecosystems (57%) and engineered systems (41.1%), with conserved ecosystems receiving only 1.7% of funding. The Natural Infrastructure Fund (NIF) is identified as the only fund explicitly targeting natural infrastructure projects.

The guide provides a structured approach based on the XLRM framework to assess investments in water supply systems. It emphasizes comparing 'environmental additional investments' (IAA) against traditional infrastructure and efficiency measures. Using two Colombian case studies (Río Chinchiná and Río Chicamocha), the document demonstrates how nature-based solutions like ecosystem restoration can improve water regulation and increase low-flow (Q95) availability, thereby reducing the gap between water supply and demand. It also analyzes the Colombian regulatory framework, specifically Resolution CRA 907 of 2019, which allows certain environmental costs to be recovered through tariffs.

The document argues that the conservation of biodiversity and forests is interdependent with the respect for the collective rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities (PICL). It focuses on the concept of Territories and Areas Conserved by PICL (TICCA) and Community Forest Management (MCB), asserting that these models are vital for climate justice and preventing biodiversity loss. The brief outlines specific policy recommendations across seven key areas: self-determination, decision-making participation, land and territory rights, PICL-led conservation, protection of traditional knowledge, the right to well-being, and gender justice. It specifically warns against 'fortress conservation' that expels communities and opposes the use of financial market-based mechanisms, such as carbon markets, for conservation funding.

The document details restoration monitoring efforts across four countries. In Brazil, the Brazilian Restoration and Reforestation Observatory (BRRO) tracks progress toward climate agreements using a multi-stakeholder platform and satellite data. Kenya has developed a monitoring framework with 30 indicators integrated into its 2024 National Ecosystem and Landscape Restoration Strategy. Burkina Faso utilizes the ONEDD platform for centralized data sharing among government and NGO partners. Vietnam employs the FORMIS system for forest status monitoring, though it faces challenges with data accessibility and consistency.

The document advocates for a shift from traditional gender mainstreaming to Gender Transformative Approaches (GTAs) in Southern Africa to address the root causes of inequality and improve resilience to climate change and food insecurity. It provides a series of policy recommendations, including the integration of GTAs into national development plans and disaster risk reduction strategies, and highlights existing legal frameworks at global, continental, and regional levels that can enable these shifts.

The fact sheet defines nature-based adaptation solutions (SafN) as actions to protect and manage ecosystems to improve community and nature resilience. It argues that for these solutions to be effective, they must be inclusive, accounting for how culture, customs, and social roles influence a person's ability to participate and benefit. The document provides a set of practical recommendations for inclusive planning, such as consulting high-risk groups, ensuring accessible meeting times and locations, and collaborating with local specialists to remove barriers to equitable benefit distribution. It highlights how climate impacts vary by identity, noting that women fishers, small-scale farmers, people with disabilities, and men in storm response face distinct risks based on their societal roles and resource access.

The document reports a growing trend of integrating NbS and EbA into National Adaptation Plans, noting that all NAPs now include at least one such action. It provides a breakdown of the specific ecosystems and management actions most frequently cited in these plans and offers action points for improving synergies with biodiversity planning and monitoring.

The document reports a growing trend of integrating nature-based solutions (NbS) and ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) into National Adaptation Plans (NAPs), noting that all analyzed NAPs include at least one such measure. While most NAPs identify biodiversity and ecosystems as priority sectors, only 53% reference a national biodiversity plan or strategy, suggesting a need for closer synergy between climate and biodiversity planning.