Search Climate Insights Directory

The document discusses the tension between aesthetic and functional choices in urban greening across Indian cities, noting that many commonly planted exotic species are prone to uprooting during extreme weather events like cyclones. It highlights a lack of scientific rigour in national guidelines and fragmented institutional management of urban greenery, while weighing the biodiversity benefits of native species against the perceived hardiness of non-native species in urban environments.

The briefing evaluates the pre-zero draft of the Post-2015 Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction, praising its commitment to quantified targets and inclusion of vulnerable groups, but criticising its structural logic and insufficient integration of climate change, finance, and conflict-affected states.

The document examines Durban's 'learning-by-doing' approach to climate adaptation through its Municipal Climate Protection Programme (MCPP). It highlights that sector-specific Municipal Adaptation Plans (MAPs) for water, waste, and disaster management were more effective at driving action than high-level integrated strategies. The city's efforts include making its 75,000 ha open space system 'climate smart', testing community-level food security and reforestation projects, and implementing urban management pilots like green roofs. The text emphasizes the need for direct adaptation funding for local governments, arguing that while climate causes are global, impacts and necessary actions are local.

The CDKN's Africa START research call provides £300,000 for 16 projects and £150,000 for management and a learning forum. The funded research addresses diverse climate risks across Africa, including forest degradation in Nigeria and Cameroon, water management in Benin and Ethiopia, and coastal lagoon sensitivity in North Africa, all aimed at enhancing food security and rural livelihoods.

The workshop brought together 35 participants from 21 global and regional web initiatives to map their niches, share challenges, and establish the Climate Knowledge Brokers Group. Key outcomes include a detailed knowledge map of existing platforms and the identification of four joint projects focusing on linked open data, a 'portal-of-portals' for signposting, shared search facilities, and metadata standards.

The document critiques the pre-zero draft of the Post-2015 Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction for lacking ambition and failing to sufficiently integrate with other global agendas. It argues that the draft relies too heavily on the previous Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) narrative and lacks a clear organising logic connecting its goals to its priorities for action. Key gaps identified include a poor articulation of financing requirements, insufficient detail on monitoring and accountability, and a passive approach to coordinating with climate change and sustainable development frameworks. The authors recommend a more explicit focus on conflict-affected states, a stronger integration of ecosystem services, and the establishment of an international science advisory mechanism for disaster risk reduction.

The document argues that Indonesia's economic growth is threatened by environmental degradation, specifically deforestation and peatland fires. While water security is prioritised across sectors, the energy and agriculture sectors focus on built infrastructure rather than forest conservation. The report highlights that ambitious food and bioenergy targets risk further deforestation unless productivity is increased or degraded land is prioritised. Governance is complicated by a complex legal framework and a disconnect between national plans and local government implementation. A case study in Aceh demonstrates that increasing oil palm yields to national averages could meet production targets without further land conversion, whereas 'business-as-usual' scenarios would require converting 220,000 hectares of land.

The document examines the economic risks of deforestation in Aceh, specifically linking palm oil expansion on peatlands to increased flooding and potential 'stranded assets'. It argues that increasing agricultural productivity for palm oil and rice can meet government production targets while reducing the need for land conversion and protecting the Leuser Ecosystem.

The document outlines a risk-based approach to mining in South Africa's most sensitive biodiversity areas, including critically endangered ecosystems, Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBAs), Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas (FEPAs), and Ramsar sites. It argues that because these areas are essential for ecosystem services and biodiversity targets, mining should be strongly avoided. The guideline proposes a sequential six-step filter—including requirements for national strategic interest, lack of alternative deposits, and full economic valuation—that must be satisfied before any mining authorisation is considered. It emphasizes a risk-averse approach where authorisations may be denied or strictly limited to specific methods, such as underground mining, to avoid fatal flaws in environmental authorisations.

The assessment concludes that the Yzermyn underground coal mine is 'fatally flawed' from a biodiversity perspective and recommends a 'NO GO' decision. The project is located in a highly sensitive area, including the Enkangala Grassland Important Bird Area (IBA) and several Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas (FEPAs). Key risks include the potential for extensive wetland loss or deterioration due to groundwater drawdown (cones of depression) and long-term groundwater contamination from acid mine drainage (AMD) post-closure. The report highlights a significant disconnect between the findings of independent specialists—who identify high-significance impacts and irreplaceable habitats—and the Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR), which downplays these risks by focusing narrowly on the surface infrastructure footprint. The assessment notes that the project threatens numerous 'Conservation Important' (CI) species of birds, mammals, reptiles, and amphibians.

The report outlines a stepwise process for EU Member States to develop National Restoration Plans (NRPs) to meet the legally binding targets of the Nature Restoration Law (NRL), which aims to restore 20% of land and sea areas by 2030 and all degraded ecosystems by 2050. It details legal requirements for monitoring, quantification, and stakeholder engagement, while emphasizing the need for policy coherence with the Renewable Energy Directive, Common Agricultural Policy, and Common Fisheries Policy. The document provides 14 specific recommendations to ensure NRPs are ambitious, evidence-based, and well-funded through a mix of public and private sources.

The document identifies a critical legal gap in Ghana: while the Environmental Protection Act, 2025 (Act 1124) regulates carbon market operations, it does not define who owns forest carbon. Consequently, ownership is currently inferred from a complex mix of land tenure, tree tenure, and customary law. The briefing analyzes two competing legal classifications—treating carbon as an ecosystem service versus a natural resource—and argues that the chosen model significantly impacts whether local farmers and communities receive direct benefits. It recommends a hybrid approach that maintains State regulatory oversight while statutorily guaranteeing benefit entitlements for those who steward the forests, utilizing Community Resource Management Areas (CREMAs) as a practical delivery mechanism.

The fact sheet highlights four key Brazilian policy innovations that reduced deforestation in the Amazon between 2004 and 2018 while agricultural GDP continued to grow. These include satellite monitoring (DETER), the identification of priority municipalities, conditional rural credit, and the creation of Conservation Units. The document asserts that these measures protect ecosystem services, combat crime, and facilitate access to international markets.

The report argues that the Amazon rainforest is a strategic national asset because its evapotranspiration creates 'flying rivers' that distribute rainfall across Brazil. Deforestation, which has already affected about 20% of the biome, reduces this moisture transport, leading to significant economic losses. The document provides evidence of billion-real losses in hydroelectric power generation and highlights vulnerabilities in the rain-dependent agricultural sector, urban water systems like São Paulo's Cantareira, and the navigability of key waterways. It concludes that protecting the Amazon is a strategic imperative for national economic security.

The document outlines how biodiversity loss in forests undermines societal stability and global security. It identifies five key mechanisms: the role of pollinators and seed dispersers in food security, the capacity of diverse forests for carbon storage to mitigate climate change, the function of healthy forests in flood prevention, the reduction of zoonotic disease spillover through intact ecosystems, and the overall resilience of biodiverse systems against disturbances.

The report critiques the extension of market economies to ecosystems, specifically targeting carbon markets, biodiversity offsets, and water trading. It argues that these mechanisms allow corporations to avoid genuine emission reductions and environmental protection by paying for compensation certificates. The text highlights the role of financial institutions like the World Bank and Caisse des dépôts et consignations in structuring these markets, and warns that such financialization leads to land grabbing, the marginalization of indigenous populations, and the deregulation of environmental laws.

The document argues that the financialization of nature allows companies to bypass strict environmental regulations through biodiversity offsets and carbon credits. It details the emergence of a 'conservation industry' comprising specialized NGOs, think tanks, and financial institutions that create the standards and accounting methods necessary for this system. The report highlights how extractive industries, aviation, and agribusiness use these mechanisms to access protected areas and 'greenwash' their activities, while noting that actual private investment in conservation remains a small fraction of global financial flows.

The report argues that the financialization of nature—transforming ecological functions into tradable units—serves corporate interests by facilitating greenwashing, easing regulatory compliance, and opening protected areas to extractive industries. It details the emergence of a new conservation industry comprising specialized NGOs, think tanks, and financial instruments like green bonds. The document contends that while these mechanisms are presented as solutions to the biodiversity crisis, they often act as a "mirage" of private investment, primarily benefiting corporations through improved credit ratings and a "social license to operate" while continuing environmental destruction.

The report 'Regulated Destruction' by Friends of the Earth International critiques biodiversity offsetting as a mechanism that enables corporate pollution and habitat destruction. It argues that by framing nature as 'natural capital' or 'ecosystem services', these instruments allow companies to circumvent environmental protections through promises of restoration or protection elsewhere. The document examines national implementations in India, Uganda, Canada, Colombia, Brazil, and Costa Rica, and highlights the role of the World Bank's IFC Performance Standard 6 in driving these practices. It further contends that offsetting leads to 'double land grabs' and is used by the aviation and agro-industry to maintain a social license to operate despite ongoing deforestation and emissions.

The document critiques biodiversity offsetting as a mechanism of 'regulated destruction' that allows companies to destroy nature in one location by promising to protect or restore it elsewhere. It argues that this approach redefines nature as 'natural capital' or 'ecosystem services,' reducing complex ecological systems to tradable units. The report examines national implementations in India, Uganda, Canada, Colombia, Brazil, and Costa Rica, highlighting how these schemes often lead to 'double land grabbing,' the displacement of local communities, and the failure to provide long-term protection. It specifically criticizes the World Bank's IFC Performance Standard 6 for enabling the financing of destruction in 'critical habitats.' Furthermore, it analyzes how the aviation and agribusiness sectors use carbon offsets and REDD+ to greenwash their operations while continuing destructive activities.