Search Climate Insights Directory

The document outlines three critical areas for action at COP 30 to ensure the global transition away from fossil fuels remains viable: phasing out fossil fuel subsidies and public finance, closing the ambition gap in Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), and evolving the Just Transition Work Programme (JTWP) into a practical support mechanism. It highlights a significant gap between current production plans and the 1.5°C target, noting that current plans would see fossil fuel extraction increase by over 120% by 2030. The briefing also emphasizes the need for gender-responsive approaches to ensure the energy transition is inclusive and equitable.

The July 2025 ICJ Advisory Opinion affirms that states have a legal obligation to prevent significant environmental damage and provide financial support to developing countries, a duty embedded in customary international law. The brief argues that this ruling provides a legal foundation for reparative justice—including restitution and compensation—and reinforces the principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDR-RC). It highlights that while the Baku to Belém (B2B) Roadmap aims for US$1.3 trillion annually by 2035, it currently lacks binding targets and transparency. The document urges that COP30 use the ruling to ensure developed countries lead in delivering at least US$300 billion per year by 2035, primarily through grants and concessional resources, to support ambitious Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and the Global Goal on Adaptation.

The G20 is assessed as an effective tool for short-term macroeconomic crisis response but a failure in delivering structural economic justice. While it mobilised trillions during the 2008 financial crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic, it has consistently prioritised creditor interests and market stability over the needs of the Global South. The report highlights systemic failures in international financial architecture reform, sovereign debt restructuring, and climate finance, where funding remains insufficient and skewed toward profitable mitigation. However, recent Global South presidencies (Indonesia, India, Brazil, and South Africa) have successfully introduced new priorities, such as taxing the super-rich and the care economy. The authors recommend that the G20 redefine 'crisis' to include social and ecological threats and adopt justice-based metrics for success.

The guide argues that fossil fuel subsidies (FFSs) are misaligned with climate and fiscal goals and proposes a three-step approach to phase them out: establishing a whole-of-government coordination mechanism, categorizing subsidies into three timelines based on risk and feasibility, and executing detailed implementation plans with clear accountability. It emphasizes that while developed countries should lead with faster reforms, developing countries may require longer timelines and more robust social protection measures to ensure a just transition.

The report argues that G20 countries have failed to meet their 2009 pledge to phase out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies, with spending reaching USD 665 billion in 2023. It introduces a categorization framework that divides subsidies into 'quick phase-out' (within 1 year), 'phase-out with a robust strategy' (2-4 years), and 'time-limited exemptions' (4+ years). Applying this to Brazil, Germany, Italy, Mexico, and South Africa, the authors find that while a significant number of measures (30-55%) can be removed quickly, the majority of fiscal value is tied to deeply embedded structural subsidies requiring sequenced reform and mitigation measures.

The document advocates for shifting the $1.1 trillion spent annually on fossil fuel subsidies toward clean energy technologies. It presents a business case where renewables-based power systems drive industrial competitiveness, attract private investment, and reduce exposure to volatile fuel markets. The report details how strategic incentives in China and India have accelerated EV adoption and suggests that power market reforms—such as decoupling electricity prices from natural gas—are essential to unlock the full potential of the energy transition.

The We Mean Business Coalition asserts that the Paris Agreement has created a shared global framework that made climate policy investible, leading to a surge in clean energy investment and the growth of renewables. Despite progress, such as renewables supplying nearly a third of global electricity and clean-energy investment surpassing $2 trillion in 2024, the document warns that overall ambition remains insufficient. It calls for governments to redirect fossil-fuel subsidies toward clean investment, reform energy markets, and deliver more credible Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) by COP30 to ensure a stable economic and climatic future.

The We Mean Business Coalition calls on governments to redirect public finance away from fossil fuels and toward clean energy to unlock business investment. The statement argues that current national climate plans are insufficient and that removing approximately $1 trillion in annual fossil fuel subsidies is a critical economic strategy to ensure energy security and market fairness.

ClientEarth argues that the GBER lacks effective environmental safeguards and continues to permit harmful subsidies, particularly for fossil gas. The organisation proposes introducing horizontal conditionalities, such as the 'Do No Significant Harm' principle and the 'Energy Efficiency First' principle, and calls for the removal of block exemptions for fossil gas activities and tax reductions on fossil gas-fired electricity. Additionally, it suggests creating a tailored block exemption to support small-scale coastal fishing.

The report argues that climate change threatens decades of global health progress and calls for the embedding of health priorities into all UNFCCC negotiations. It recommends operationalising the Global Goal on Adaptation with health indicators, phasing out fossil fuels to prevent millions of pollution-related deaths, and establishing a global mechanism for just transitions. The document highlights a severe finance gap, noting that current climate finance is insufficient to protect health, and suggests redirecting fossil fuel subsidies toward health-protective climate resilience. It also advocates for a transition to agroecology in food systems and the implementation of a robust Gender Action Plan to address gender-differentiated health impacts.

The document provides a comprehensive introduction to the ETS2, a 'cap and trade' system starting in 2027 to reduce emissions in buildings and road transport by 42% relative to 2005 levels by 2030. It details the market mechanisms, including the Linear Reduction Factor and the Market Stability Reserve (MSR2), and emphasizes that carbon pricing must be paired with complementary policies—such as building renovations and EV electrification—to prevent price volatility and ensure a just transition. The guide also describes the Social Climate Fund (SCF), a €65 billion mechanism designed to support vulnerable households facing energy and transport poverty, and analyzes the distribution and potential misuse of ETS2 revenues among member states.

The Netherlands is implementing a multi-level approach to phase out fossil fuel subsidies, focusing on international cooperation through the COFFIS coalition and EU-wide mechanisms like the EU ETS and CBAM. Nationally, the government uses an 'external costs approach' to identify price gaps, which amounted to a fossil subsidy of 18.0 billion euros in 2024. The plan includes raising energy taxes on natural gas through 2030, introducing a differentiated air passenger tax in 2027, and phasing out specific exemptions for greenhouse horticulture and coal use. However, several subsidies remain due to international treaties (e.g., the Energy Taxation Directive) or concerns over carbon leakage and social fairness.

The Netherlands is implementing a 'Whole of Government Approach' to phase out fossil fuel subsidies, focusing on international cooperation through the COFFIS coalition and EU-level mechanisms like the EU-ETS and CBAM. Nationally, the government uses an 'external costs approach' to identify pricing gaps, which amounted to a fossil subsidy of 18.0 billion euro in 2024. The plan details specific phase-out paths for various tax exemptions and subsidies, while identifying several others that remain unchanged due to international treaties or socio-economic considerations.

The report analyzes 32 Air Service Agreements (ASAs) among COFFIS member states to identify legal obstacles to taxing aviation fuel. It finds that while the Chicago Convention does not prohibit such taxes, many bilateral ASAs contain prohibitions or non-discrimination clauses that require reform. The authors propose a 'Joint Agreement' as a multilateral mechanism to bulk-amend these treaties. For EU states, the Energy Taxation Directive (ETD) remains a primary structural barrier, though international agreements can override it. The report also estimates that taxing three specific UK flight routes could generate up to USD 3.1 billion in revenue.

CAPE identifies a public health crisis linked to plastics and PFAS, noting that 98.5% of Canadians have detectable PFAS in their blood. The document highlights severe health risks including cancer and endocrine disruption, emphasizes the disproportionate burden on vulnerable populations and communities like Sarnia's Chemical Valley, and urges the Canadian federal government to phase out non-essential PFAS and stop fossil fuel subsidies.

The report estimates that public support for British Columbia's LNG sector will reach CAD 3.93 billion by 2031, including CAD 1.62 billion in federal public finance and CAD 2.16 billion from the BC government. It argues that these subsidies, provided through tax rules, preferential electricity rates, and infrastructure funding, de-risk private investment in projects that may become stranded assets due to global supply gluts and the energy transition. The document calls for the elimination of domestic fossil fuel finance, the enforcement of net-zero requirements by 2030, and increased transparency in reporting government funding.

The policy brief asserts that G20 nations, responsible for three-quarters of global greenhouse gas emissions, have stalled progress on phasing out oil and gas due to continued subsidies and economic dependence. It identifies South Africa's 2025 G20 presidency as a critical opportunity to champion subsidy reform and affordable finance for the Global South. The author proposes a framework for progress including clear phase-out targets, the redirection of fossil fuel subsidies toward renewables, and the establishment of a shared definition of a just transition.

The International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) argues that investment treaties must evolve from static instruments of investor protection into policy tools that address specific climate challenges. The submission outlines a three-step framework: assessing the realistic capabilities and limitations of treaties, identifying specific climate-related policy problems (such as energy sector bottlenecks and fossil fuel subsidies), and determining avenues for positive contributions, including enhancing transparency, requiring responsible business conduct, and facilitating cross-border cooperation.

The Production Gap Report 2025 finds that governments are collectively planning more fossil fuel production than in 2023, with 2030 projected levels exceeding 1.5°C-consistent pathways by over 120%. While some countries are developing net-zero aligned scenarios, most continue to expand production and provide substantial financial support for fossil fuels, undermining Paris Agreement commitments.

The report argues that G20 countries are locked into oil and gas systems due to economic, geopolitical, and institutional factors, despite climate commitments. It highlights a contradiction where G20 nations are on track to produce and consume more than twice the fossil fuels permitted under a 1.5°C pathway. The document analyzes the role of National Oil Companies (NOCs), the limitations of carbon capture and storage (CCS), and the regressive nature of fossil fuel subsidies. It proposes a 'Just Transition Taxonomy' to ensure the phase-out protects workers and marginalized communities, particularly in the Global South, and recommends legislating national phase-out plans and redirecting subsidies toward renewable energy.