Search Climate Insights Directory

The report examines the challenges and opportunities of implementing just transition (JT) frameworks in developing nations, highlighting the critical role of the informal economy and the need for context-specific definitions. Through case studies in Colombia, Ghana, and Indonesia, it finds that while some governments are beginning to incorporate JT into climate plans—most notably Colombia in its revised NDCs—awareness remains low and inter-ministerial coordination is often lacking. The document emphasizes that COVID-19 recovery packages have generally not been linked to climate mitigation or adaptation strategies. It provides guidelines for national governments to foster inclusive decision-making, build institutional capacity, and engage marginalized groups, including informal workers and traditional leaders.

The report examines the application of just transition principles in developing countries, highlighting the need for context-specific definitions and the inclusion of the informal economy. Through case studies in Indonesia, Ghana, and Colombia, it finds that while awareness of just transition varies—with Colombia being the only one to explicitly include it in its revised NDC—there is a general lack of practical application and cross-ministerial coordination. The document emphasizes that Covid-19 responses have not yet been linked to climate strategies and recommends a participatory, co-produced approach to policy development to ensure marginalized groups are not left behind.

The document details the 'externalities' of fossil fuels—costs not reflected in market prices—across climate, environmental, and health dimensions. It highlights significant U.S. impacts, including $606.9 billion in extreme weather costs (2016-2020) and 350,000 premature deaths in 2018. It also emphasizes the disproportionate burden on communities of color and low-income areas, such as 'Cancer Alley' in Louisiana. Proposed policy solutions include eliminating subsidies, increasing the social cost of carbon, implementing a federal clean electricity standard, and establishing carbon pricing.

The Green Economy Coalition (GEC) held a five-day global meeting in November 2021 to identify interventions for a green and fair COVID-19 recovery. The event focused on four primary themes: the 'Code Red' status of nature and climate, the role of a new social contract in addressing inequality, the need for a nature-positive economy, and the alignment of recovery packages with the energy transition. Key outcomes include the finalization of a 'Declaration on a Green COVID-19 Recovery' and a strategic decision to prioritize green recovery advocacy leading up to Stockholm+50 in June 2022. The GEC also agreed to restructure its growth around three working groups: policy, funding, and communications.

The document serves as an FAQ for an open letter initiative by the We Mean Business Coalition, targeting G20 nations. It outlines the necessity for G20 countries to increase their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to halve global emissions by 2030 and reach net-zero by 2050. The letter calls for specific policy shifts, including an immediate end to new coal projects, the removal of fossil fuel subsidies by 2025, and mandatory climate-related financial disclosures. It emphasizes the G20's unique responsibility given they represent approximately 90% of global GDP and nearly 80% of global greenhouse gas emissions.

The document is a FAQ for businesses on an open letter to G20 leaders, calling for strengthened Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to halve global emissions by 2030 and reach net-zero by 2050. It outlines key policy demands, including ending coal financing, removing fossil fuel subsidies by 2025, and implementing climate-related financial reporting.

The document asserts that the Paris Agreement's success is hindered by a failure to recognize that a public mandate is essential for reducing emissions and transforming personal behaviors. It highlights the neglect of Article 12 and Article 11 of the Paris Agreement, which mandate climate education and public participation. The author notes that while the UK's Committee on Climate Change now acknowledges that net zero is impossible without engaging people, central government ministries still lack a dedicated strategy or budget. The document calls for a 'step change' in public engagement leading up to COP26 in Glasgow, proposing the launch of a Climate Engagement Initiative to ensure citizens' rights to understand climate impacts are upheld.

Five years after the Paris Agreement, there has been a significant increase in net-zero commitments from major economies and businesses, though current pledges only limit temperature rise to 2.1ºC. The author argues that green recovery plans provide better economic and employment benefits than traditional stimulus and calls for mandatory climate-related financial disclosures and the removal of fossil fuel subsidies to unlock further private investment.

ClientEarth welcomes the 8th Environment Action Programme's goals for a climate-neutral and circular economy but argues that the proposal lacks concrete targets and explicit commitments to phase out fossil fuel subsidies. The organization highlights discrepancies between the EAP's ambitions and existing policies like the Common Agricultural Policy and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund. It calls for stronger monitoring based on scientific evidence, increased resources for DG Environment, and the integration of the rule of law and access to justice to ensure effective implementation.

The report finds that while renewable energy investment is growing, continued funding for fossil fuel power plants and the presence of 'locked-in' emissions from existing assets keep the global power sector on a temperature trajectory exceeding 3.2°C. It highlights a significant gap between actual 2018 investment carbon intensities and the negative thresholds required by 2030 to achieve Paris alignment. The analysis identifies specific misalignments among major economies like China, India, and Japan, and among financial actors such as commercial banks and export credit agencies. The document recommends halting new carbon-intensive investments, accelerating the retirement of existing fossil fuel plants, and harmonizing climate risk reporting.

The report highlights a significant lack of transparency in Canada's reporting of fossil fuel subsidies, particularly regarding foregone revenue. It advocates for the use of the WTO definition of subsidies and the 'revenue foregone' method to accurately quantify tax expenditures and royalty subsidies, which the authors argue are essential for informed policy-making and meeting international climate goals.

The report argues that current WTO subsidy rules are insufficient for addressing fossil fuel subsidies because they focus on trade implications rather than environmental concerns. It suggests that the WTO can better support subsidy reform by increasing transparency, improving the enforcement of existing rules, and negotiating new, stronger regulations.

ClientEarth contends that Belgium's proposed capacity remuneration mechanism (CRM) is legally non-compliant and unnecessary. The organization argues that the national resource adequacy assessment (NRAA) fails to follow ACER's methodology, ignores the absence of price caps, and overstates adequacy concerns. Furthermore, ClientEarth asserts that the CRM's support for new gas capacity contradicts the European Green Deal and Belgium's own climate neutrality goals for 2050, and that the scheme lacks a required phase-out provision.

ClientEarth identifies key legal and policy goals for 2017, including ending fossil fuel subsidies in the EU, implementing a new Clean Air Act in the UK, and pricing climate risk into financial markets.

ClientEarth argues that EU competition policy must be reshaped to internalise environmental externalities and support the Green Deal. The organization calls for an end to state aid for fossil fuels, a more holistic 'consumer welfare' test in antitrust and merger assessments that includes future generations, and increased transparency in state aid decision-making. It specifically recommends prohibiting aid to forestry biomass and fossil-based hydrogen, while introducing a 'green bonus' to incentivize truly sustainable innovation.

The methodology note describes a comprehensive framework for scoring G20 countries on their support for fossil fuels, covering direct budget transfers, tax expenditures, price support, public finance, and state-owned enterprise (SOE) investment. It details seven indicators—transparency, pledges, and the scale of support for coal, oil and gas, power, and end-use, plus overall progress—to assess whether governments are meeting climate commitments. The framework specifically includes an analysis of public money commitments made in response to the COVID-19 crisis up to August 12, 2020.

G20 governments provided an annual average of $584 billion in support for fossil fuels from 2017 to 2019, with oil and gas production receiving the largest share. While overall support dropped by 9% compared to 2014–2016, this decline was inconsistent across countries and partly driven by lower oil prices. The report finds that state-owned enterprise (SOE) investment is the only support mechanism that increased overall, and that COVID-19 recovery packages have introduced at least $170 billion in new commitments to fossil fuel-intensive sectors, threatening to undo previous progress.

The document highlights a significant misalignment between government energy production plans and Paris Agreement goals, noting that governments planned to extract 60% more oil, 70% more gas, and 280% more coal by 2030 than is consistent with a 1.5°C pathway. It suggests that NDCs and LT-LEDS can be used to communicate pathways, targets, and policy measures to manage the transition away from fossil fuels while ensuring a just transition for affected workers and communities.

The paper evaluates the 2008–09 green stimulus, finding that while it supported GDP and job creation in economies like the US, China, South Korea, and the EU, it failed to create a long-term low-carbon trajectory due to a lack of structural reforms and the persistence of fossil fuel subsidies.

The document examines subsidies for South Africa's coal-to-liquid (CTL) sector, dominated by Sasol. It identifies two primary support mechanisms: market price support via the Basic Fuel Price and exemptions from the Carbon Tax Act 15 of 2019. In 2019, these combined to a total value of ZAR 6.6 billion (USD 380 million). The brief argues that these subsidies increase costs for consumers, contribute to high coal use in transport, and conflict with South Africa's Paris Agreement commitments.