Search Climate Insights Directory

The Global Futures project uses a new integrated environment-economy model to quantify the economic risks of biodiversity loss. Under a 'Business-as-Usual' scenario, the loss of six key ecosystem services is projected to reduce annual global GDP by 0.67% by 2050, totaling a cumulative loss of US$ 9.87 trillion. Conversely, a 'Global Conservation' scenario could result in a net annual gain of US$ 490 billion compared to the BAU scenario. The report highlights that low-income countries and coastal infrastructure in high-income nations are most vulnerable, and recommends a 'New Deal for Nature and People' including the protection of 30% of land and oceans.

The IISD database serves as a tool for estimating the financial performance of infrastructure assets by accounting for systemic costs and benefits often omitted in conventional assessments. It contains 2,057 entries across five categories: environmental externalities (1,059), social externalities (291), governance externalities (4), direct costs (192), and climate risks (511). The database covers infrastructure types including transport, energy, water management, materials management, building, mining, and nature-based infrastructures, and is used to support the SAVi simulation service and SAVi Academy training.

The analysis of 19 NAPs reveals that while all reviewed documents integrate ecosystem considerations and vulnerabilities, the explicit link between ecosystem services and societal adaptation benefits remains generic. Latin American countries show the strongest integration of EbA and links to biodiversity strategies. Key gaps include limited monitoring of outcomes, insufficient private sector engagement, and under-representation of urban EbA and hybrid grey/green infrastructure. The report suggests that NAPs should move beyond business-as-usual conservation to explicitly address climate hazards and target specific vulnerable groups.

The analysis of 19 National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) reveals that while most countries recognize ecosystem vulnerability and include some EbA measures, these are often generic and lack explicit links to specific climate risks or measurable outcomes. Latin American countries show the strongest integration of EbA and biodiversity strategies. Significant gaps exist in urban EbA, private sector involvement, and the identification of financial resources, suggesting a need for more SMART objectives and intersectoral integration to enhance human and ecological resilience.

The SEI Asia Strategy 2020-24 establishes a framework to bridge science, policy, and practice to achieve environmental sustainability and inclusive development in Asia. The strategy is organized around three primary impact areas: reduced climate risk, sustainable resource use and resilient ecosystems, and improved health and well-being. To achieve these, SEI Asia focuses on five core research and policy clusters: Gender, Environment and Development; Water; Climate Change, Disasters and Development; Urban; and Policy. The document also highlights specialized programs for the Mekong Region and Myanmar, and identifies evolving areas of work including ecological economics, sustainable finance, and the environment-health nexus.

The Living Planet Report 2020 documents a severe global decline in wildlife populations and ecosystems, highlighting the interconnectedness of nature and human health. It identifies land-use change, overexploitation, and climate change as primary drivers of biodiversity loss and proposes a roadmap to 'bend the curve' of this decline through integrated conservation and food system reform.

The 2020 Plowprint Report finds that between 2014 and 2018, grasslands in the Great Plains were tilled at an average rate of four football fields per minute. In 2018, approximately 2.1 million acres were converted across the U.S. and Canada, though this was offset by a 2 million acre increase in perennial cover. Wheat is the primary driver of conversion in the Northern Great Plains, while corn and soy dominate conversion across the U.S. The report also introduces a new analysis of northern Mexico's grasslands and updates its tracking methodology to improve spatial resolution and accuracy.

The report details a widespread snaring crisis in Southeast Asia, particularly in Cambodia, Lao PDR, and Viet Nam, where an estimated 12.3 million snares exist in protected areas. These indiscriminate traps threaten over 700 mammal species and disrupt critical ecosystem services like seed dispersal and nutrient cycling. The document links snaring to increased zoonotic disease risk due to the handling of high-risk taxa and highlights the role of urban demand for wildlife meat. It argues that current legal frameworks are insufficient, often lacking clear definitions of snares or penalties for possession, and recommends strengthening legislation, increasing ranger densities, and partnering with indigenous peoples to combat the crisis.

The Umzimvubu Catchment Partnership (UCP), established in 2013, works to restore the Umzimvubu River system, a critical part of the Eastern Cape Drakensberg Strategic Water Source Area. The partnership addresses pressures from climate change, invasive species, and poor land management to ensure water security for over two million people and the preservation of biodiversity. Key achievements include the clearance of invasive wattle trees to restore spring flows, the creation of over 5,000 conservation and rehabilitation jobs, and the protection of 43 natural springs for human consumption.

The document argues that 20th-century infrastructure paradigms are ill-suited for 21st-century climate extremes and that current 'sustainable' infrastructure efforts focus too heavily on low-carbon goals while neglecting nature-based resilience. It highlights a critical gap in 'upstream' strategic planning, where natural capital is often ignored until the project approval stage. Through case studies in Mozambique, Mexico, Myanmar, and South Africa, the report demonstrates the value of integrating ecosystem services and climate scenarios into land-use planning. It introduces the 'Visioning Futures' framework, which emphasizes defining spatial scope, identifying future objectives, and performing sensitivity testing under various climate scenarios to avoid environmental risks and optimize infrastructure siting.

The document highlights the success of Brazil's monitoring and enforcement strategy, specifically the DETER system, in reducing Amazon deforestation. It provides evidence that these measures avoided significant forest loss between 2007 and 2016 without harming agricultural productivity. The brief warns that proposed budget cuts to these systems could lead to a 45% increase in deforestation and urges the federal government to restore financial and institutional support.

The report examines over 90 cases of infrastructure planning, focusing on three case studies in developing economies and examples from the US and UK, to advocate for holistic approaches that preserve ecosystem services and mitigate climate change effects.

The 'Sustainable Infrastructure in the Amazon' project, running from July 2019 to December 2020, aims to improve the quality of infrastructure in Brazil by incorporating social and environmental risk assessments into the decision-making process. The initiative specifically targets the feasibility study phase as the optimal time to anticipate these risks to ensure more robust and sustainable project implementation. The project employs a dual approach consisting of economic analysis and regulatory/governance analysis to develop evidence-based proposals for the Brazilian government.

The document critiques biodiversity offsetting markets, asserting that they are conceptually flawed and practically ineffective. It argues that nature cannot be accurately priced or restored to its original state, and that such markets often lead to land grabbing and human rights violations. Instead, the author proposes a return to binding environmental regulations and sustainable practices like agroecology to protect ecosystems.

The briefing critiques the shift in biodiversity policy from conservation to 'restoration' through financial markets. It argues that biodiversity offsetting—where developers pay to recreate habitats to justify destroying existing ones—is based on the flawed premise that nature can be monetized and replaced. The author cites high failure rates in restoration projects, the inability of markets to price public goods or scarcity, and the risk of land grabbing. Instead of market tools, the document advocates for binding environmental laws and sustainable practices like agroecology to protect biodiversity.

The document critiques the shift from biodiversity conservation to 'restoration' via financial markets, arguing that biodiversity offsets are conceptually flawed and practically ineffective. It asserts that these mechanisms often lead to net habitat loss and human rights abuses. The author contends that nature cannot be accurately valued monetarily and that the core concepts of 'price signals' and 'additionality' are invalid in this context. As an alternative, the report proposes binding conservation laws to restrict unsustainable economic activities and foster sustainable practices like agroecology.

The document categorises natural capital tools into six technical groups: biodiversity footprint, mapping, qualitative/quantitative, monetary, absolute ecological performance, and integrated accounting. It distinguishes between tools oriented toward economic performance (utilitarian interests) and those oriented toward ecological performance (strong sustainability), advocating for the latter to ensure activities remain within planetary boundaries.

The research uses multiregional input-output tables and Computable General Equilibrium models to analyze how environmental change and extreme events impact supply chains and economic activities in delta regions. The analysis indicates that climate change could lead to a significant reduction in GDP per capita, specifically between 9% and 19.5% in the studied deltas, primarily through negative effects on fisheries, agriculture, and infrastructure.

The document argues that agroecology—combining science, practice, and social movements—provides a framework for transforming food systems to be more climate-resilient. It details how applying ecological principles (such as biodiversity and soil health) at various scales (field, farm, landscape, and food system) can mitigate climate risks. The paper provides evidence from Africa, India, and Europe, highlighting specific practices like agroforestry and Zero Budget Natural Farming. It concludes that scaling these approaches requires addressing market failures, reforming perverse policies, and shifting from a top-down technology transfer model to a co-creation of knowledge approach.

The report evaluates four scenarios for the restoration of South-West Beira Lake in Colombo: business-as-usual (BAU), wastewater treatment upgrades, dredging of lake deposits, and a combined approach. The analysis finds that while dredging alone provides limited benefits, upgrading wastewater treatment offers the highest benefit-to-cost ratio (39.67). The combined scenario of wastewater treatment and dredging produces the greatest absolute economic gains, increasing property values by over USD 43 million and recreational spending by USD 19.5 million by 2025. The document recommends recognizing the lake as a tangible capital asset to facilitate blended financing solutions involving public authorities and private investors.