Search Climate Insights Directory

The SEI Gender and Social Equity Programme seeks to address knowledge and policy gaps by mainstreaming gender and social equity into the institute's research and technical tools. The programme is structured around three main tasks: developing new research projects with a gender and social equity lens, adapting modelling tools like WEAP and LEAP for social inclusion, and aligning these perspectives across all SEI research and operations. Current initiatives include studying the gender pay gap in Estonia's bioeconomy, analyzing social factors in SMEs' sustainability agendas, and using agent-based modelling to simulate inclusive sustainability pathways for the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

The report examines how stakeholders in Swedish forestry perceive climate change risks and opportunities. It finds that while some anticipate increased growth, others fear storm damage and pests. Adaptation is driven by personal experience of extreme weather and trust in advisers, but hindered by distrust of climate science and conflicting views on effective management strategies. The document emphasizes the need for user-oriented, interactive communication between researchers and practitioners to foster adaptation.

The SEI Initiative on Climate Services focuses on creating a Participatory Framework for Climate Services (PFCS) to better connect climate science with the practical needs of users, ranging from national governments to smallholder farmers. The initiative is structured around four work packages: understanding user needs, exploring collaborative co-generation processes, improving communication methodologies, and developing a community learning space via the weADAPT platform. It draws on interdisciplinary research and case studies from both industrialized and developing countries to ensure climate information is timely, relevant, and accessible.

The document criticizes the trend of transforming the VGGT from a human rights-based framework into a corporate tool for risk management and 'greenwashing'. It argues that guides produced by entities like USAID and the G7 New Alliance shift state responsibilities to the private sector, legitimize land grabbing, and falsely equate the power of corporations with that of local communities. The signatories call for states to implement the VGGT in line with human rights obligations, establish a robust monitoring mechanism within the Committee on World Food Security (CSA), and adopt a legally binding instrument for corporations regarding human rights.

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 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 evaluates five indicators of financial support for reducing forest emissions: international public climate finance, domestic public spending, private sector investment, indigenous peoples' investments, and civil society investments. It finds that while international public finance from OECD countries has increased, there is a critical lack of harmonized global data for domestic and private sector spending. The report highlights the role of payment for ecosystem services (PES) in developing countries and the emerging potential of South-South cooperation, notably China's commitment of US$3.1 billion in climate finance.

The CAMA project combined weADAPT's semantic tagging with Gephi visualization software to analyze the landscape of climate adaptation. By mapping relationships between organizations, keywords, and geography, the project identified 'hot topics', research gaps, and the role of bridging networks like SUMERNET in Southeast Asia. The analysis demonstrated how ICT tools can reveal patterns in complex datasets to inform strategic planning and identify potential collaborations for the Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) in Africa and Asia.

The document examines a case study of the Swedish forestry sector to assess the impact of participatory processes on climate change adaptation learning. It finds that such processes increase individual learning by shifting how stakeholders perceive climate effects and vulnerability, leading to calls for more multi-level, multi-stakeholder collaboration arenas.

This research paper by the Climate Policy Initiative describes three analytical tools designed to help low and middle-income countries and their partners redirect land-use finance toward climate mitigation and adaptation. The tools aim to address the gap between the hundreds of billions spent on business-as-usual land use and the relatively small amount of finance currently dedicated to green activities.

The report argues that while hundreds of billions are spent annually on land use, most are 'business-as-usual' (BAU) investments that may increase climate vulnerability. To shift this, the authors propose three tools: the Landscape of Land Use Finance to map current flows and gaps; the Financial Viability-Gap Analysis to identify where public incentives can make green projects financially feasible; and the Public Finance Mapping tool to ensure policy coherence and identify BAU subsidies. These tools aim to help low and middle-income countries scale up private investment in green agriculture, forestry, and land management.

The report argues that land use generates nearly a quarter of global greenhouse gas emissions and is highly vulnerable to climate change, yet most investment in the sector remains 'business as usual' (BAU). To address this, the authors propose three tools: a Land Use Sector Financing Landscape to map current financial flows and actors; a Financial Viability Gap analysis to identify the costs and risks preventing green investments; and a Public Financing Mapping analysis to ensure coherence among public financial instruments and incentives. These tools aim to help governments shift funding from BAU activities to green alternatives without compromising economic development.

The report argues that while land use generates about a quarter of global greenhouse gas emissions and is highly vulnerable to climate change, current investments are predominantly 'business-as-usual'. It introduces three tools—a land-use finance landscape, a financial viability gap analysis, and a public finance mapping tool—to help governments identify funding gaps, assess the financial viability of green projects, and ensure policy coherence to unlock private and public investment in sustainable land management.

The report addresses the challenge of transitioning to low-carbon, productive land use by identifying gaps in the understanding of current financial flows. It argues that while hundreds of billions are invested in agriculture and forestry, most support non-sustainable practices. To remedy this, the authors introduce three tools: a financial flow mapping tool to visualize investments and actors, a financial viability analysis tool to identify and bridge the gap between 'green' and business-as-usual costs, and a public incentive mapping tool to ensure policy coherence and maximize private investment.

The report argues that while land use generates approximately a quarter of global greenhouse gas emissions and is highly vulnerable to climate change, current financial flows are predominantly 'business-as-usual' (BAU). To address this, the authors introduce three tools: the Landscape of Land Use Finance, the Financial Viability Gap Analysis tool, and the Public Finance Mapping tool. These tools are designed to help low and middle-income countries identify financial blockages, assess the viability of green projects, and ensure policy coherence to scale up private sector investment in climate-resilient agriculture and forestry.

The document provides a comprehensive introduction to Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs), distinguishing them from carbon offsetting mechanisms like the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). It details the NAMA lifecycle—from concept to implementation—and examines the financial landscape, including the role of the NAMA Facility and the Green Climate Fund. The guide highlights the current state of NAMA deployment, noting that while many are in the design phase, few have reached implementation. It emphasizes the critical role of civil society in ensuring sustainable development and accountability through stakeholder engagement and Monitoring, Reporting, and Verification (MRV) processes.

The report proposes a 2030 target for California to reduce carbon emissions to 40% below 1990 levels, asserting that this is technically feasible and economically viable. It recommends maintaining a policy portfolio where a broad cap-and-trade program acts as an emissions ceiling over sector-specific policies. To manage costs and uncertainty, the author suggests extending current cost-containment tools, including a three-tiered allowance reserve and a forward-borrowing mechanism. The analysis incorporates both capped emissions and uncapped sectors—such as agriculture and waste—predicting that the state can reach the target through commercially available technology and induced innovation in clean tech industries.

The document details the vulnerability of agricultural and forest products to climate change, noting significant potential losses in cocoa, coffee, cotton, and wine production, as well as specific environmental pressures on flower exports from Kenya and silk production in India.

The report analyzes flood and nutrient risks in Kristianstad, Sweden, finding that current flood risk management is too narrowly focused on urban flood control via embankments and pumps, neglecting river basin-wide abatement and resilience. It identifies a lack of cross-sectoral integration between urban planning, agriculture, and forestry, and notes that governance structures for water quantity are fragmented compared to those for water quality. The author argues for a shift toward 'adaptive river management'—living with floods—to better address climate change and sea-level rise.

The research examines the role of transformative learning in engaging 24 Swedish forestry stakeholders with climate change adaptation. It identifies that social barriers, such as perceptions of scientific uncertainty, can impede the formation of opinions on adaptation. The study concludes that engagement improves when scientific knowledge is aligned with stakeholders' specific needs, aspirations, and personal experiences with extreme weather.