Search Climate Insights Directory

The document discusses financing as a primary tool for green economy transitions, utilizing grants, loans, and public-private partnerships. It highlights Costa Rica's Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) and the PSA Solidario program as successful models for reducing deforestation and creating green jobs through fuel and water taxes and international agreements. For Manitoba, the text identifies the primary challenge as limited government budget capacity, suggesting recycled revenues, fossil fuel subsidy reform, and public-private partnerships as potential solutions.

The report finds that energy subsidies in Bangladesh increased sharply between FY2010 and FY2012, driven by rising import costs and increased reliance on liquid fuel for electricity generation. It identifies that poor agricultural households are particularly vulnerable to kerosene and electricity price changes, while the transport and power sectors are the most energy-intensive production areas. The authors argue that current universal subsidies are inefficient and recommend targeted support, improved tariff structures, and a transparent phase-out strategy to free up resources for essential services and renewable energy.

The speech emphasizes that climate change is no longer a specialized environmental issue but a cross-sectoral risk affecting national security, health, and infrastructure. It highlights the need to rethink worst-case scenarios as temperature increases may exceed previous estimates, and argues that Canada requires a national adaptation approach to move beyond piecemeal provincial efforts. The author calls for 'climate proofing' infrastructure and using tax policy lessons from the fossil fuel sector to attract private investment into resilience.

The document examines the structure and consequences of energy subsidies in Malaysia, noting that they disproportionately benefit high-income groups and create significant fiscal and environmental burdens. It details the mechanisms used to subsidize petroleum and electricity, the failures of the Subsidy Rationalisation Programme, and provides a framework for transitioning to market-based pricing while mitigating social impacts.

The report examines the challenges and mechanisms for attracting private capital to climate finance, noting that private funding is nearly three times larger than public funding but remains difficult to channel toward adaptation in developing countries. It identifies political, project-related, and financing barriers—particularly in Africa—and suggests a combination of policy reforms and financial instruments like loan guarantees and pledge funds to mitigate risk. The Green Climate Fund (GCF) is highlighted as a central vehicle for achieving the $100 billion annual target by 2020, though it must address the funding gap between mitigation and adaptation.

The FY 2014 budget proposal emphasizes investments in clean energy and energy efficiency, proposing a 30 percent increase in clean energy technology funding across all agencies to approximately $7.9 billion. Key initiatives include a $2 billion Energy Security Trust to reduce oil dependence, a $200 million 'Race to the Top' program for grid modernization and energy efficiency, and significant funding increases for the DOE's Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE). The budget also proposes $2 billion for a satellite system to improve climate modeling and calls for the elimination of $4 billion in fossil fuel subsidies.

The document is a letter to World Bank President Jim Yong Kim arguing that the Bank's continued support for fossil fuels contradicts its climate and poverty reduction priorities. The authors claim that fossil fuel investments fail to provide energy access to the poor and instead fuel overconsumption in wealthy nations. They advocate for a shift toward off-grid renewable energy and demand that the Bank stop financing fossil fuel projects unless they can be proven to be the best alternative for delivering energy services to the poor after a full cost-benefit analysis.

The report finds that while a majority of Americans believe clean energy and global warming should be priorities for the U.S. government, support for specific policies varies. High support exists for renewable energy research and tax rebates for energy-efficient products, while revenue-neutral carbon taxes see limited support. Partisan divides are significant, particularly regarding the Keystone XL pipeline and the priority level assigned to global warming.

The report finds that while a majority of Americans prioritize clean energy and global warming action, support for specific policies has declined since 2008. There is strong support for renewable energy research and tax rebates for energy-efficient products, but limited support for revenue-neutral carbon taxes. Significant partisan divides exist, particularly regarding the Keystone XL pipeline and the priority level of global warming.

The Obama Administration's FY 2014 budget proposal emphasizes investments in clean energy and energy efficiency, proposing a total of approximately $7.9 billion for clean energy technology programs across all agencies. Key highlights include a $2 billion Energy Security Trust to reduce oil dependence, a $200 million 'Race to the Top' program for grid modernization and energy efficiency, and significant funding increases for the Department of Energy's (DOE) renewable energy programs. The budget also proposes $2 billion for a satellite system to improve climate modeling and weather forecasts, while calling for the elimination of $4 billion in fossil fuel subsidies. Substantial allocations are directed toward vehicle technologies, building efficiency, and international climate resilience through the Department of State.

The document identifies five primary drivers for adopting CCD: national awareness of climate adaptation needs, the pursuit of energy security and resource efficiency, the desire to capture new green economic opportunities, the goal of improving access to climate finance, and strong government leadership. Conversely, it outlines seven key challenges: high implementation and opportunity costs, opposition from vested interest groups, lack of reliable data on risks and trade-offs, political short-termism, limited state capacity, institutional constraints (such as inter-ministerial conflict), and technological uncertainties. The paper suggests solutions including the use of carbon markets, participatory dialogue processes, the integration of climate goals into long-term legislation, and the creation of inter-ministerial committees with direct accountability to the presidency.

The document identifies five key drivers for Climate Compatible Development (CCD)—national adaptation needs, energy security, new economic opportunities, access to climate finance, and strong government leadership—while detailing seven primary obstacles, including high opportunity costs, political resistance, and institutional constraints. It provides case studies from over 40 countries to illustrate how these factors interact and suggests solutions such as multi-stakeholder dialogue, legislative anchoring, and risk-sharing financial mechanisms.

The paper identifies five key drivers for CCD: national adaptation needs, energy security and resource efficiency, new economic opportunities, access to climate finance, and strong government leadership. It also outlines seven primary challenges, including high implementation and opportunity costs, opposition from vested interest groups, lack of trusted data, short-term political thinking, limited state capacity, institutional constraints, and technological uncertainties. The authors argue that managing the political economy of CCD is essential for overcoming these barriers.

The report finds broad public support across political affiliations for addressing global warming, with a majority of registered voters considering a candidate's position on the issue when voting. There is widespread support for renewable energy research and the regulation of carbon dioxide, while the political viability of a carbon tax depends on how the revenue is utilized.

The report identifies six audience segments in the US—the Alarmed, Concerned, Cautious, Disengaged, Doubtful, and Dismissive—and tracks their evolution from 2008 to 2012. It finds that 70% of the public (Alarmed, Concerned, and Cautious) believe global warming is a real threat. While there is broad support for increasing renewable energy and eliminating fossil fuel subsidies, perceptions of political influence are skewed, with most segments believing campaign contributors and fossil fuel companies have the most power over elected officials.

The report finds that a majority of US registered voters (58%) consider a candidate's position on global warming when voting. Support for climate action and renewable energy is high across party lines, with Independents closely resembling Democrats in their views. While carbon tax support depends on how revenue is used, there is broad support for regulating carbon dioxide and increasing renewable energy research.

The report finds that concern about global warming and support for renewable energy are high across Democratic, Independent, and Republican voters, suggesting a political opportunity for candidates to take pro-climate stands. A majority of registered voters consider a candidate's position on global warming when voting, and there is broad support for eliminating fossil fuel subsidies and increasing renewable energy research.

The report examines Indonesia's renewable energy landscape, focusing on the institutional and regulatory frameworks governing geothermal, hydro, biomass, and biofuels. It identifies a wide array of financial, fiscal, and market-based incentives, such as the Geothermal Fund Facility and feed-in tariffs, but notes that their impact is undermined by conflicting government policies, including heavy fossil fuel subsidies and inter-ministerial disagreements.

The guidebook outlines a holistic approach to fossil-fuel subsidy reform in Southeast Asia, emphasizing a gradual transition to market-based pricing. It details methods for projecting economic and social impacts, designing mitigation measures such as targeted cash transfers, and building political support through internal coordination and external communication. The guide highlights that while subsidies are often intended to protect the poor, they frequently benefit wealthier populations and create fiscal burdens and environmental damage.

The report analyzes how public resources and well-articulated policies can mitigate risks and costs to attract private capital for green investments. Using case studies from Tunisia, the UK, and Morocco, it demonstrates that targeted public interventions—such as credit guarantees, feed-in tariffs, and concessional lending—can overcome market inertia and perceived risks. It highlights the importance of emerging economies, particularly the role of National Development Banks in China and Brazil, and suggests innovative risk mitigation tools like policy risk insurance and first-loss protection to address gaps in the current financial landscape.