Search Climate Insights Directory

The report examines the green infrastructure landscape of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area (GBA), highlighting significant investment needs across sectors such as low-carbon transport, renewable energy, and green buildings. It details the role of green finance, specifically green bonds and asset-backed securities, in bridging the funding gap between public budgets and the capital required for climate-resilient infrastructure. The document provides a sample pipeline of 70 green and potentially green projects and offers six strategic recommendations to unlock private capital, including the harmonisation of green definitions and the promotion of local government green bonds.

The report highlights significant investment potential in the Greater Bay Area's green infrastructure, particularly in low-carbon transport, renewable energy, water management, waste management, green buildings, and new infrastructure. It emphasizes the need to move beyond public funding and PPPs by leveraging green bonds, green ABS, and international capital markets, while recommending the unification of green definitions across the region to attract global investors.

The North American GSS debt market reached USD 311bn by Q1 2021, dominated by the US and primarily driven by green-labelled instruments. While the US is the largest single-country source of GSS debt, the market is heavily concentrated in agency mortgage-backed securities (MBS) and municipal bonds, with limited participation from the real economy's heavy-emitting sectors. Canada's market is smaller but characterized by larger average deal sizes and a strong focus on hydropower. Both nations are seeing a shift toward more ambitious climate targets and enhanced disclosure requirements, though the US lags in post-issuance reporting quality compared to Canada.

The 2021 State of Cities Climate Finance report finds that annual urban climate finance averaged USD 384 billion in 2017/2018, which is significantly lower than the estimated annual need of USD 4.5 to 5.4 trillion. Investment is heavily concentrated in OECD countries and China, leaving developing regions like Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia severely underfunded. The report emphasizes a critical gap in adaptation and resilience finance, which accounts for less than 10% of urban climate finance. To bridge this gap, the report recommends strengthening municipal finance capacities, aligning city and national climate policies, and utilizing innovative financial instruments like blended finance and green procurement.

The 2021 report on the state of urban climate finance reveals a significant gap between current investments and the trillions of dollars needed for urban climate action. While global urban climate funding averaged 384 billion USD per year in 2017/2018, these flows are heavily concentrated in OECD countries and China, leaving rapidly urbanizing areas in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia severely underfunded. The report emphasizes that mitigation efforts, particularly in transport and buildings, dominate current spending, while adaptation and resilience receive less than 10% of funding. To bridge this gap, the document outlines 'enabling conditions' across national, city, and climate-specific levels, urging a systemic approach to align planning, budgeting, and policy to attract both public and private investment.

The report finds that while urban climate finance averaged 384 billion USD annually in 2017/18, this is far below the estimated annual need of 4.5 to 5.4 trillion USD. Funding is heavily concentrated in OECD countries and China, with severe deficits in developing regions like Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, and a critical lack of investment in adaptation and resilience, which accounts for less than 10% of tracked project data. The document argues that cities must act as both 'providers' of green infrastructure and 'guardians' of regulatory standards to attract private and public capital, requiring stronger alignment between municipal and national climate policies.

The 2021 report by the Cities Climate Finance Leadership Alliance (CCFLA) finds that annual urban climate finance averaged US$ 384 billion in 2017/2018, which is significantly lower than the estimated requirement of US$ 4.5 to 5.4 trillion. Investment is heavily concentrated in OECD countries and China, with severe underfunding in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. Mitigation efforts, particularly in sustainable transport and buildings, dominate the funding landscape, while adaptation and resilience receive less than 10% of project-level finance. The report emphasizes that cities act as both providers of infrastructure and administrators of regulations, and recommends strengthening municipal financial capacities, aligning local and national climate policies, and utilizing blended finance to bridge the investment gap.

The 2021 report on the state of cities climate finance reveals a significant gap between current investment levels and the trillions of dollars needed for urban climate action. While global urban climate finance averaged 384 billion USD annually in 2017/2018, funding is heavily concentrated in OECD countries and China, leaving developing regions like Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia severely underfunded. The report emphasizes a critical shortage in adaptation and resilience funding, which accounts for less than 10% of urban climate finance. It argues that mobilizing further investment requires 'enabling conditions' across national, city, and climate-specific levels, urging governments and international financial institutions to provide predictable funding and technical support to help cities transition to sustainable development paths.

The FAST-Infra Sustainable Infrastructure Label (SI Label) is a voluntary, globally applicable framework designed to certify infrastructure assets that demonstrate positive sustainability outcomes. To qualify, assets must meet baseline 'do no significant harm' requirements—primarily based on IFC Performance Standards—and demonstrate a positive contribution to at least one of 14 sustainability criteria across environmental, social, governance, and adaptation and resilience dimensions. The framework mandates minimum safeguards, including Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIA) and Climate Risk and Resilience Assessments, alongside rigorous disclosure and annual reporting. While self-declaration is permitted, the framework strongly encourages independent external reviews to ensure market trust. Governance is managed by a Secretariat, an Executive Committee, and a Steering Committee, with a broad membership of private investors, governments, and NGOs.

The report estimates that an average of USD 384 billion was invested annually in urban climate finance during 2017-2018, a figure significantly lower than the estimated annual need of USD 4.5 to 5.4 trillion for low-emission and resilient urban infrastructure. Mitigation efforts, particularly in sustainable transport and green buildings, dominate the landscape, while adaptation finance remains severely underfunded, representing only 9% of tracked project-level data. The analysis highlights a geographic imbalance, with the majority of finance flowing to China and developed economies, while regions like Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia remain critically underfunded. Key barriers to scaling this finance include low creditworthiness of city governments, a lack of bankable projects, and institutional restrictions on local borrowing.

The report examines the impact of COVID-19 on the energy sectors of South Korea and Indonesia and evaluates their fiscal recovery programs. South Korea's Green New Deal (GND) explicitly integrates climate goals with economic recovery, focusing on green infrastructure and low-carbon energy. In contrast, Indonesia's National Economic Recovery (PEN) program primarily targets short-term health and social stability, with only 0.9% of its budget allocated to energy transition. The study identifies structural barriers in both nations—such as South Korea's centralized market and Indonesia's high financing costs—and recommends that future stimulus include specific emission targets and incentives to attract private investment.

The ASEAN sustainable finance market reached a record high of USD 12.8bn in GSS bond and loan issuance in 2020. Singapore leads the region in volume, particularly through green loans for real estate, while Indonesia and Thailand show strong growth driven by sovereign issuances. The market is increasingly diversifying into sustainability-linked instruments and social bonds, although the latter remained less active in 2020. The report highlights the critical role of government support, the development of regional and national taxonomies, and the influence of Development Finance Institutions (DFIs) in scaling green infrastructure.

The report finds that while there is broad stakeholder interest and significant latent potential for green projects in Ghana—particularly in renewable energy, green housing, and water infrastructure—the green bond market is currently nascent with no prior issuances. Key barriers include a shallow debt capital market, a lack of formal issuance guidelines, limited technical capacity to identify eligible project pipelines, and a mismatch between issuer and investor expectations regarding pricing. The study suggests that government leadership, such as a sovereign green bond issuance planned for 2021/22, and the development of a dedicated green segment on the Ghana Stock Exchange are critical for catalyzing the market. It also emphasizes the need for credit enhancements and technical assistance to bridge the gap between speculative project ideas and bankable green bonds.

The report evaluates the Paterson Park Precinct's building infrastructure in Johannesburg, comparing a business-as-usual (BAU) scenario with a green building scenario across different climate pathways (RCP 2.6, 4.5, and 8.5). Using the SAVi tool and Copernicus Climate Change Service data, the analysis finds that green buildings significantly reduce life-cycle costs through lower energy and maintenance expenditures and reduced greenhouse gas emissions. Climate change primarily increases energy costs and GHG emissions for both scenarios, though the green design remains more cost-effective. Additionally, the report identifies solar PV installations as a highly profitable investment in South Africa, particularly when accounting for electricity price inflation.

The report highlights Malaysia's leadership in sustainable finance, particularly through the issuance of green sukuk, and identifies a significant pipeline of green infrastructure projects. It emphasizes the need for private capital to meet a cumulative infrastructure investment requirement of roughly USD 460bn from 2016-2040. Key opportunities are detailed in renewable energy (especially solar and biomass), low-carbon transport (rail and EVs), sustainable water management, and waste-to-energy projects.

Global climate finance reached USD 632 billion in 2019/2020, but growth has plateaued, with an increase of only 10% between 2017/2018 and 2019/2020. To meet 1.5 °C objectives by 2030, annual finance must increase by at least 590% to USD 4.35 trillion. Mitigation remains the primary recipient of funds, dominated by renewable energy, while adaptation finance is growing but remains almost exclusively public. Investment is heavily concentrated in East Asia and Pacific, Western Europe, and North America.

The Century City Urban Square (CCUS), a mixed-use development by Rabie Property Group, utilizes treated effluent (TE) from the Potsdam treatment works for irrigation, cooling tower consumption, and toilet and urinal flushing. This strategy, combined with water-efficient fittings and real-time monitoring, significantly reduces potable water demand and operating costs. In 2017, the CCUS consumed 0.18kl of potable water per annum per m2 of Gross Build Area (GBA), compared to 1.09kl per annum per m2 in a comparable development without these resilience measures. The use of TE offsets approximately 44,000 kl of potable water annually, resulting in R2.3-million in water and sanitation savings based on 2021 tariffs.

The South African energy services market is expanding, driven by rising electricity costs, energy insecurity, and falling technology prices. The market is divided into small-scale embedded generation (SSEG), energy storage, and energy efficiency, with a total available market estimated at R131 billion by 2035. While rooftop solar PV is the dominant SSEG technology, energy storage is emerging as a critical tool for resilience against load shedding. Energy efficiency faced contractions during COVID-19 lockdowns but retains significant untapped potential. The report identifies emerging opportunities such as Solar Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs), behind-the-meter battery storage, and smart metering, while highlighting the role of the Western Cape as a regional hub for green economy investment.

The report identifies a significant green investment gap in China, estimating an annual requirement of RMB3tn-RMB4tn (USD424bn-USD566bn) by 2030. It highlights the role of green bonds and the impact of local green finance pilot zones in bridging this gap. The document analyzes the regulatory framework, the potential for 'new infrastructure' projects post-COVID-19, and the need for global harmonization of green definitions to attract international capital.

The report assesses China's green investment potential, highlighting a need for 3 to 4 trillion RMB annually by 2030. It examines the role of green bonds as a primary financing tool, the impact of regional green finance pilot zones, and the necessity of aligning domestic green definitions with international standards to attract global capital. It also explores opportunities in 'new infrastructure' post-COVID-19 and the transition of high-emission 'brown' industries.