Search Climate Insights Directory

The document outlines the processes for accessing WTO documents, distinguishing between those that are automatically derestricted and those requiring Member intervention. It argues that current transparency levels are insufficient for meaningful public participation in sustainable development and recommends that the WTO adopt a case-by-case restriction policy based on specific criteria. The guide provides practical steps for NGOs to influence policy through national governments and lists specific WTO contact personnel for document requests.

The document argues that meaningful participation from diverse, affected groups is essential for a just transition to ensure procedural justice, improve policy efficiency, and increase ownership of climate policies. It identifies barriers to engagement, such as time constraints, costs, and low trust, and suggests a people-centered design approach to overcome them. The text highlights the necessity of coordination bodies to manage state and non-state actors across different political levels. Examples include Costa Rica's Just Transition Governance Scheme and South Africa's Presidential Climate Commission, both of which serve as platforms for multi-stakeholder collaboration and policy co-creation.

The report evaluates the South African Green Finance Taxonomy (SA GFT) across three pillars: Make Substantial Contribution (MSC), Do No Significant Harm (DNSH), and Minimum Social Safeguards (MSS). While the SA GFT shows high international alignment in its environmental objectives and sectoral coverage, it faces significant usability challenges regarding the DNSH and MSS pillars. Key recommendations include introducing more flexible alignment classifications (e.g., 'eligible' vs 'aligned'), increasing the use of quantitative thresholds, and integrating national regulations like the B-BBEE Act into the social safeguards framework. The report also suggests establishing a dedicated working group and an integrated disclosure framework to reduce the compliance burden on reporting entities.

This report by Friends of the Earth International examines how the UN Food Systems Summit (UNFSS) facilitates 'corporate capture' by shifting from state-led multilateralism to a multistakeholder governance model.

This report by Friends of the Earth International examines how the United Nations Food Systems Summit (UNFSS) facilitates a shift from state-led multilateralism to 'multi-partnership' governance, which the authors argue allows multinational corporations to influence food system policies and promote corporate-friendly solutions.

This report critiques the UN Food Systems Summit for replacing state-led multilateralism with a multi-stakeholder approach, which the authors argue enables transnational corporations to dominate food systems governance and promote corporate-friendly solutions.

The report identifies eight key lessons from NYDF endorsers, highlighting that slow implementation of deforestation-free commitments is driven by barriers requiring multi-sectoral solutions. It emphasizes the necessity of strong governance, land tenure, and multi-stakeholder partnerships, while noting that current financial investments are insufficient. The document calls for renewed ambition and accountability to reverse deforestation trends, noting that nearly two-thirds of consulted endorsers have post-2020 action plans.

This document outlines the institutional and technical gaps in Togo's climate change governance and proposes a Readiness program to strengthen the National Designated Authority (NDA) and other national institutions to improve access to Green Climate Fund (GCF) financing.

The Green Climate Fund Board has formally noted the findings of the 'Independent Evaluation of the Green Climate Fund’s Approach to and Protection of Whistleblowers and Witnesses' and the Secretariat's subsequent management response. The Board has tasked the Ethics and Audit Committee with reviewing these findings alongside the Independent Integrity Unit's policy review to provide further recommendations. Additionally, the Independent Evaluation Unit is required to submit a management action report within one year of the Board considering those recommendations.

The GCF Whistleblower Protection and Witness Policy outlines the mechanisms for reporting misconduct, the protections afforded to those who report in good faith, and the remedies available in cases of retaliation. It designates the Independent Integrity Unit (IIU) as the primary body for handling reports and investigations, while providing specific channels for reports against high-level officials via the Ethics and Audit Committee (EAC). The policy covers GCF staff, board members, and external counterparties, emphasizing confidentiality, anonymity, and a zero-tolerance approach to retaliation.

The GCF's initial accreditation framework integrates fiduciary standards and environmental and social safeguards (SAS) into a three-stage process: no-objection and readiness, accreditation review and decision, and final arrangements. It distinguishes between basic fiduciary criteria (administrative and financial) and specialized criteria (project management, grant-making, and lending). Until its own SAS are developed, the GCF adopts the International Finance Corporation's (IFC) Performance Standards, applying a risk-based approach to categorize projects (Categories A, B, and C) and intermediaries (Levels I1, I2, and I3). The process is overseen by the GCF Board, supported by an Accreditation Committee, an independent Accreditation Panel, and the Secretariat.

The GCF's implementation standards for its Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorist Financing (AML/CFT) Policy outline a risk-based framework for managing financial integrity. The standards mandate rigorous counterparty due diligence, annual institutional risk assessments, and the monitoring of financial transactions. They define specific high-risk categories—such as politically exposed persons and shell banks—and prohibit relationships with unregulated money transfer agents or anonymous accounts. The Independent Integrity Unit (IIU) is tasked with overseeing the program, conducting investigations, and managing the reporting of suspicious activities to competent authorities. Additionally, the GCF provides capacity-building support to counterparties to strengthen their own AML/CFT controls.

The GCF's AML/CFT Standards define the framework for managing financial integrity risks, outlining roles for the Secretariat and Independent Integrity Unit, risk-based due diligence for counterparties, and mechanisms for reporting suspicious activities. It mandates annual institutional risk assessments and provides guidelines for capacity building and record-keeping to align with international best practices and FATF recommendations.

The document outlines the procedural rules for the Green Climate Fund Board to adopt decisions on a non-objection basis. It defines what constitutes an 'objection', the process for Co-Chairs to resolve such objections directly with Board members, and the conditions under which a decision is deemed approved or referred to the next formal Board meeting. It also specifies transparency requirements, including notification of active observers and publication on the GCF website.

The policy defines the professional and personal behavior expected of Active Observers of the Green Climate Fund, focusing on integrity, confidentiality, and the prevention of conflicts of interest. It mandates the signing of a Declaration of Confidentiality and Conflicts of Interest and outlines procedures for disclosing and managing conflicts, including recusal. The document also prohibits specific 'Prohibited Practices' such as corruption and fraud, restricts the acceptance of gifts, and imposes a one-and-a-half-year cooling-off period before Active Observers or their immediate family members can be employed by the Fund's Secretariat.

The Policy on Restructuring and Cancellation outlines the processes for modifying Green Climate Fund (GCF) projects before and after the execution of a funded activity agreement (FAA). It defines 'Major Changes' that require Board approval, such as those affecting climate outcomes or financial structures, and specifies the authority of the Executive Director (ED) to grant certain extensions and minor changes. The policy also details the consequences of failing to meet conditions, including the potential for project cancellation if a Major Change is not approved and the project is not otherwise progressed or withdrawn.

The document outlines the GCF Board's fallback mechanisms for decision-making when consensus fails. It details the process for determining when consensus efforts are exhausted, the specific types of decisions excluded from these procedures, and the distinct voting and balloting rules for general decisions and the appointment of officials.

The Standards for the Implementation of the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism Policy provide a framework for the Green Climate Fund (GCF) to manage money laundering and terrorist financing (ML/FT) risks. The document mandates a risk-based approach to counterparty due diligence, the establishment of an AML/CFT Program, and the implementation of monitoring and reporting mechanisms for suspicious activities. It defines the roles of the GCF Secretariat, the Independent Integrity Unit (IIU), and the Board in ensuring compliance with international best practices, specifically those set by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF).

The IAI is implementing its tripartite governance structure, with an operational office in Montevideo supported by the Uruguayan government and a newly hired director for the Science-Policy liaison office in Buenos Aires. In Brazil, staff are finalizing the closure of banking and taxation links and working with the government to refine a Host Country Agreement for the Science Development Office.

This briefing, prepared by the United States as Chair of the Implementation Committee for the Tripartite Structure of the IAI, evaluates the progress of a distributed governance model for the Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research (IAI) and recommends merging its directorates into a single entity based in Uruguay.