Search Climate Insights Directory

The SEI Research Forum Book of Abstracts compiles 60 research summaries from the Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) staff. The research spans four primary themes: Managing Environmental Systems, Reducing Climate Risk, Transforming Governance, and Rethinking Development. Key areas of investigation include the 'planetary boundaries' framework, the socio-economic drivers of clean cooking and sanitation in India and Africa, the effectiveness of climate adaptation policies in the UK and Sweden, and the geopolitical dynamics of climate negotiations involving BASIC countries. The document highlights a mix of completed research, ongoing projects, and future research ideas aimed at bridging science and policy for sustainable development.

The document examines the rapid decline of Arctic sea ice and the potential for geoengineering, specifically solar radiation management, as a last-resort insurance policy. It critiques the 'business-as-usual' approach of Arctic nations that prioritize resource extraction over climate mitigation and proposes that the Arctic Council use its scientific legitimacy and inclusive structure to frame the geoengineering debate and conduct necessary research.

The document evaluates the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) as a pioneering multi-stakeholder mechanism for global Internet governance. It argues that the IGF should be maintained because it defuses tensions over the U.S. oversight of ICANN and provides an open space for developing countries to address issues like access, security, and open standards. The report suggests that the 'Internet model'—characterized by shared ownership and bottom-up collaboration—could provide valuable lessons for the governance of other critical technologies, including those related to climate change and geo-engineering. It concludes by recommending that a second mandate for the IGF should focus on better integrating developing country concerns and mainstreaming sustainable development goals.

The document identifies human activity—specifically the burning of fossil fuels and tropical deforestation—as the primary cause of global warming. It explains that carbon dioxide (CO2) is the most significant driver of climate change due to its high radiative forcing and abundance, outweighing other heat-trapping gases and natural climate drivers like solar intensity. The text clarifies that the ozone hole is not a cause of global warming, though both result from human atmospheric alterations. Observed impacts include a 1°C increase in global average surface temperature since the pre-industrial age, rising sea levels, and ecological shifts such as thawing permafrost and altered species ranges.

The document outlines the causes and consequences of global climate change, highlighting the role of greenhouse gas emissions and the influence of the fossil fuel lobby. It categorizes career paths for scientists and engineers into four areas of positive contribution: understanding the problem, technological solutions, economic solutions, and social/political solutions, while warning against the influence of vested interests.

SGR argues that human-induced greenhouse gas emissions are causing global warming and calls for the immediate ratification of the Kyoto Protocol. The statement condemns the US government's rejection of the protocol and warns against relying on 'global technofixing' or forest growth as primary mitigation strategies.

SGR recommends strict limits on the Kyoto Mechanisms to prevent 'hot air' loopholes and ensure industrialised nations prioritise domestic action. The statement calls for the total exclusion of nuclear fission and speculative 'climate-engineering' projects from Joint Implementation (JI) and the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), while demanding tight restrictions on forestry projects and a rigorous definition of 'sustainable development'.

SGR argues that the UK government's approach to climate change is too cautious and fails to challenge the unsustainable nature of economic growth. The organization advocates for a 'Contraction and Convergence' model for global emissions, a shift in taxation from labour to resource use, and the complete replacement of fossil fuels and nuclear power with renewables. SGR specifically criticizes the government's reliance on 'accounting tricks' for non-CO2 gases, the lack of restrictions on air travel, and the potential dangers of climate engineering technologies.

Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR) advocates for a minimum 20% reduction in CO2 emissions by industrialised countries by 2010, based on IPCC evidence of human influence on the climate. The document warns of catastrophic consequences, including sea-level rise affecting small island states and the potential disruption of the North Atlantic Current. SGR rejects geo-engineering and cost-benefit analysis as inappropriate tools for climate assessment, instead proposing ecological tax reform, renewable energy investment, and a long-term global goal of equal per capita emissions.

The document outlines a fictional 2030 scenario where a public-private consortium led by Canada and the United Kingdom proposes deploying stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) over the Arctic to preserve sea ice and slow the Greenland ice sheet melt. The simulation tasks participants representing various nations and blocs—including Russia, China, Norway, the EU, Mexico, and the African Union—with deciding whether to join, oppose, or remain neutral toward the consortium, and determining their preferred SAI deployment levels based on security, economic, and geopolitical interests.

The Climate Social Science Network has listed a group of scholars available for media consultation during COP 26. These experts, some attending in Glasgow and others available remotely, provide expertise across several key climate themes including climate finance, loss and damage, carbon markets, and the political dynamics of climate obstruction.

The document details the third pillar of the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative, focusing on a global just transition. It advocates for decentralized, people-centered renewable energy systems and the economic diversification of fossil-fuel-dependent nations. The text emphasizes that a successful transition requires wealthy nations to provide financial support and a 'fair share' of effort, while rejecting 'dangerous distractions' like carbon offsets and geoengineering. It calls for a fundamental shift from GDP-driven growth to 'well-being economies' to address the systemic root causes of the climate crisis.

The Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative submits that fossil fuel production is the primary driver of the climate emergency and therefore falls under the jurisdiction of human rights law. The brief contends that States have a duty of prevention to regulate, monitor, and phase out fossil fuels to protect fundamental rights, including the rights to life, health, and a healthy environment. It emphasizes differentiated obligations, arguing that wealthy, developed States must act first and provide support to less-developed nations. The document also advocates for a 'just transition' and increased transparency regarding fossil fuel reserves and production.

The Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative submits that fossil fuel production is the primary driver of the climate emergency and directly violates numerous human rights, including the rights to life, health, and a healthy environment. The document argues that states have a legal duty under the American Convention on Human Rights to regulate, monitor, and ultimately phase out fossil fuel production. It emphasizes differentiated responsibilities, asserting that wealthy, developed nations must lead the phase-out and provide financial and technical support to less developed states. The brief further advocates for a 'just transition' that protects vulnerable populations and ensures transparency through active disclosure of fossil fuel production data.

This briefing from Friends of the Earth International identifies 'false climate solutions' promoted by high-emissions industries at COP27 in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, and proposes alternatives focused on just transitions and corporate accountability.

Friends of the Earth International calls for a transition away from a neoliberal economic model and the rejection of market-based climate solutions. The report emphasizes the moral and legal obligation of rich nations to lead emission cuts and provide public funding for adaptation and mitigation in the Global South, while warning against the risks of carbon markets and the 'Green Economy' framework if it ignores social justice.

The document asserts that the climate crisis is exacerbated by 'corporate and elite capture' of political processes, where narrow interests from polluting industries influence governments to resist urgent economic transformation. It highlights how this influence manifests through lobbying, funding, and 'revolving doors,' and argues that underlying power imbalances created by neoliberal trade and investment liberalisation prioritise short-term corporate profits over environmental protection and human well-being. The briefing specifically critiques the trajectory of the UNFCCC and the promotion of 'false solutions' like carbon capture and storage and nuclear energy.

The document outlines the dangers of BECCS, highlighting its potential to cause massive deforestation, land grabbing, and food insecurity. It argues that the technology is inefficient, carries risks of CO2 leakage, and serves as a justification for continued fossil fuel use through carbon offsetting. The authors advocate for a systemic shift toward agroecology, community-managed ecosystems, and a just energy transition based on renewable sources like wind and solar.

The document provides a comprehensive list of requirements for a successful Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF). It advocates for a rights-based approach, the adoption of a 'Whole Government Approach' to mainstreaming, and the prohibition of destructive activities like deep-sea mining and fracking. It argues against voluntary commitments, biodiversity offsetting, and the use of high-risk technologies such as geoengineering and synthetic biology, while calling for public finance from developed countries to support biodiversity conservation in developing nations.

The document argues that the Global Biodiversity Framework must be based on binding norms rather than voluntary commitments and must address the structural economic drivers of biodiversity loss. It advocates for a rights-based approach that protects indigenous peoples and environmental defenders, the elimination of harmful subsidies, and the prohibition of high-impact industrial activities like deep-sea mining and Arctic oil extraction. The text explicitly rejects the commodification of nature, biodiversity offsets, and the use of geoengineering or synthetic biology as solutions to the environmental crisis.