Search Climate Insights Directory

The submission by Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR) criticises the UK's focus on military deployment and the arms trade, urging a shift toward 'human security'. SGR identifies rapid climate change, nuclear war, and biodiversity loss as high-priority security threats and calls for the reallocation of military funding toward the 'green' economy and social needs.

The document argues that the COVID-19 pandemic serves as a 'climate change parable,' presenting both risks and opportunities for global climate action. While the pandemic caused a temporary decrease in global emissions, the author warns that this is not a permanent decoupling of economic growth from emissions. The paper highlights a divide in national responses: some countries, like Rwanda and Canada, have integrated climate goals into recovery plans, while others, such as Australia and China, have shown tendencies toward industry protectionism or high-emissions stimulus. The author recommends that governments use stimulus packages to decarbonize the economy through fossil fuel tax reforms, renewable energy investments, and conditional state bailouts for carbon-intensive sectors to ensure the 1.5°C goal of the Paris Agreement remains attainable.

The paper examines how the COVID-19 pandemic exposed gaps in India's environmental governance, noting that while lockdowns temporarily improved air and water quality, the period also saw a rise in industrial disasters and the dilution of environmental impact assessment rules. It highlights the intersection of environmental degradation—such as deforestation and pollution—with increased vulnerability to pandemics and climate-driven extreme weather events. The author concludes that India's economic recovery packages lack long-term environmental vision and calls for the stringent implementation of environmental laws to build socio-ecological resilience.

The document argues that US cities require immediate federal aid to manage COVID-19 impacts, followed by strategic green stimulus investments. It proposes five specific areas for federal funding: streamlining cleantech permitting, building electric and affordable housing, supporting public transit and active transportation, enhancing infrastructure resilience, and greening urban spaces to create jobs and reduce pollution.

The GEC Steering Group reviewed four strategic priorities, all of which were downgraded to 'amber' status due to the challenges and increased expectations brought by the COVID-19 pandemic. The group evaluated two major programmes: 'Economics for Nature' and the 'EC dialogues programme', emphasizing the need for better governance and integration with the GEC's COVID-19 campaign. The Steering Group unanimously decided that the GEC must launch a COVID-19 intervention, focusing on structural economic reforms and societal demand for a green recovery, while noting the need for additional funding to avoid unrealistic expectations.

The Green Economy Coalition views the COVID-19 pandemic as a symptom of a broken economic system and a 'once-in-a-generation opportunity' to shift toward a green economy. They advocate for a recovery that goes beyond net-zero emissions to incorporate wellbeing, justice, and planetary boundaries. The Coalition is currently monitoring government stimulus packages to ensure they support small businesses and green job creation for the poorest, while connecting networks to develop long-term resilience reforms.

The GGT2030 plan targets the development of ten high-growth sectors in Gauteng through significant infrastructure investment, the establishment of Special Economic Zones (SEZs), and the digitalization of government services. Key goals include spending R60 billion on infrastructure by 2025 to create 100,000 jobs and investing R1.3 trillion by 2030 across water, energy, and transport sectors. The strategy emphasizes inclusive growth via township-based business support, the 'Welfare-to-Work' programme for 100,000 young women, and the creation of a 'silicon valley of Africa' through high-tech SEZs and universal broadband in townships.

The author contends that Indonesia's COVID-19 recovery stimulus should shift away from fossil fuel support toward renewable energy, sustainable agriculture, and decentralized energy systems to ensure long-term economic stability and climate resilience.

ClientEarth urges the UK government to mandate that companies receiving public recovery funds commit to TCFD reporting, net zero emissions by 2050, Paris-aligned business plans, linked executive remuneration, and restrictions on executive pay and capital distributions.

ClientEarth proposes that the UK Government mandate five legally enforceable conditions for companies listed in the UK or with an annual turnover exceeding £45 million receiving recovery support. These conditions include reporting according to TCFD recommendations, committing to net zero emissions by 2050 or earlier (covering scopes 1, 2, and 3), and disclosing a Paris-aligned business plan within 12 months. Additionally, the proposal suggests linking executive remuneration to these targets and restricting executive pay and capital distributions during the support period. ClientEarth emphasizes that the Government, as steward of public funds, must monitor compliance, impose sanctions for non-compliance, and maintain transparency by disclosing support and conditions on a company-by-company basis.

The report advocates for a transformative shift in Africa's development policies to address biodiversity loss and climate change. It proposes using COVID-19 economic recovery packages as a 'green stimulus' to invest in ecological infrastructure and full-cost accounting of natural capital, aligning with the AU's Agenda 2063 and the post-2020 global biodiversity agenda.

The report argues that the 'Sustainable Agriculture Initiative' (SAI), 'New Vision for Agriculture' (NVA), and 'Food and Land Use Coalition' (FOLU) promote a version of 'junk agroecology' (agroecología chatarra). This approach selectively adopts agroecological techniques to mitigate environmental damage while preserving the industrial, profit-driven corporate model. The authors contrast this with a transformative agroecology rooted in food sovereignty and social justice, which requires shifting power from corporations to small-scale producers.

The report critiques the 'corporate capture' of agroecology by three major global initiatives: the Sustainable Agriculture Initiative (SAI), the New Vision for Agriculture (NVA), and the Coalition for a New Economy of Food and Land Use (FOLU). It argues that these entities promote a restricted, 'junk' version of agroecology that focuses on productivity and technological innovation (such as precision agriculture and gene editing) rather than the social justice, redistribution of power, and food sovereignty central to genuine agroecology. The document concludes that these corporate-led models aim to 'change everything so that nothing changes,' preserving the dominance of transnational agribusiness while adopting a 'green' veneer.

The report argues that big agrifood capital is developing 'junk agroecology'—a selective appropriation of agroecological techniques integrated into a productivist, market-driven framework. Through an analysis of three major initiatives—the Sustainable Agriculture Initiative (SAI), the New Vision for Agriculture (NVA), and the Food and Land Use Economy Coalition (FOLU)—the authors demonstrate how corporations use 'sustainable intensification' to greenwash the industrial food system. These initiatives prioritize technological determinism (such as gene editing and big data), the integration of smallholders into global value chains, and multi-stakeholder governance models that shift power from public institutions to private entities. The report concludes that a true agroecological transition requires participatory public policies rooted in food sovereignty and social justice, rather than corporate-led reforms.

The report argues that multinational corporations are promoting a 'fake agroecology' (agroécologie bidon) through initiatives like the Sustainable Agriculture Initiative (SAI), the New Vision for Agriculture (NVA), and the Food and Land Use Coalition (FOLU). These initiatives are characterized as 'sustainable intensification' rather than true agroecology, as they prioritize technological productivism, market-driven value chains, and public-private governance over social justice and structural transformation. The authors contend that this approach allows industrial giants to 'greenwash' their image while maintaining the existing power structures of the global food system.

The statement asserts that environmental degradation and climate change amplify existing gender inequalities due to unequal power relations. It highlights that women produce over half the world's food but own less than 15% of the land, and that their unpaid care work, valued at over $10.8 trillion annually, remains systematically undervalued. The author calls for a 'gender just transition' that moves beyond technical solutions like renewable energy to include the revaluation of the care economy, social protection, and the elimination of intersecting discriminations based on race, class, and gender.

The statement highlights that micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs) in India contribute 37% of GDP and create 80% of new jobs, positioning 'Local Green Enterprises' as essential for achieving Sustainable Development Goals. It calls for targeted policy interventions, including affordable credit, streamlined public procurement, and triple bottom line impact assessments, to support the transition from 'brown' to green business practices.

The Delhi Declaration on Local Green Enterprise asserts that micro, medium, and small enterprises (MSMEs) are essential for India's transition to a green economy, as they create 80% of new jobs and contribute 37% to the GDP. The declaration defines Local Green Enterprises (LGEs) as those demonstrating environmental consciousness in resource and waste management and inclusiveness in wages and revenue distribution. To scale these enterprises, the signatories call for affordable credit through blended finance, streamlined public procurement processes, and government-led triple bottom line impact assessments to incentivize the shift from 'brown' to green business practices.

The Green Economy Coalition (GEC) has established a 10-year action plan (2020–2030) to drive structural economic reform globally. The strategy identifies five systemic flaws in current economic models—including outdated metrics like GDP and short-termism in finance—and proposes five key interventions: reforming governance, financial systems, economic sectors, inequality, and the valuation of nature. To achieve these, GEC will pursue four pathways: telling new narratives, building critical mass through citizen dialogue, influencing policy via tools like the Green Economy Tracker, and transitioning to a decentralized 'network of networks' structure. The goal is to ensure that by 2030, inclusive green economy principles are central to decisions made by policymakers, business leaders, and citizens.

The document examines the GreenPitch Innovation Challenge 2019 as a mechanism to strengthen Cape Town's economic resilience by supporting green Small, Medium and Micro-Sized Enterprises (SMMEs). It argues that multi-stakeholder collaboration and pitching events help fragmented cleantech start-ups overcome resource gaps—such as lack of financial assets and networks—to better address climate-related stresses. The challenge attracted 40 nationwide entries, resulting in five finalists and providing the winner, Nubrix, with R 30,000 in business development support.