Search Climate Insights Directory

The report argues that current multilateral governance frameworks—including WTO rules, Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) clauses, and biased financial risk models—systematically restrict the 'policy space' for developing countries to pursue sustainable industrialization. It highlights that while advanced economies historically used industrial policy to develop, current global norms 'kick away the ladder' for the Global South. The authors call for a 'transformational multilateralism' that reasserts the legitimacy of state-led industrial strategies, reforms restrictive trade and investment treaties, expands access to technology through a 'Global Technology Commons,' and addresses the 'penalisation of poverty' in global finance to enable a just and green transition.

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 document examines the challenges of Indonesia's transition away from coal, highlighting the severe economic risks to coal-dependent provinces and vulnerable groups. It advocates for a mixed-method approach to planning that combines quantitative economic modelling with qualitative social analysis to ensure that women, youth, and informal workers are not marginalized. Key recommendations include strategic investment in labour-intensive green sectors, tailored social protection, and the empowerment of local governments to manage the transition.

The report argues that traditional top-down consultations for South Africa's just energy transition (JET) often exclude marginalized groups and fail to address local realities. By applying ethnographic research and a co-production pilot in Mpumalanga, the study identifies critical gaps in information, trust, and service delivery following the closure of the Komati Power Station. It recommends institutionalizing co-production and ethnographic methods to ensure that women, youth, and informal workers are meaningfully included in policy design.

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 report analyzes the potential economic shocks of phasing out coal in Indonesia, identifying East Kalimantan as the most vulnerable province. Using a mixed-methods approach, it demonstrates that while mine closures cause significant losses in output and employment, targeted stimulus in the food and beverage and green sectors can drive recovery. The study emphasizes the disproportionate impact on informal workers and women, recommending a transition roadmap that integrates gender equality, disability, and social inclusion (GEDSI) principles and expands social safety nets.

The IISD response asserts that Equinor's application for the Rosebank field development ignores critical Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) guidance regarding downstream Scope 3 emissions. The document argues that the project is incompatible with the Paris Agreement's 1.5°C target, as no new oil and gas fields are needed or permissible in such scenarios. Furthermore, the IISD claims the project offers minimal economic benefit, potentially resulting in a net loss to the UK Treasury and providing negligible contributions to energy security.

The document argues that Colombia's previous renewable energy auctions, which focused exclusively on price, led to social conflicts and project cancellations, particularly in La Guajira. It proposes a new framework incorporating non-price criteria—such as local employment, community benefit-sharing, and gender perspectives—into qualification and award processes. Additionally, it suggests creating a dedicated support agency and a 'joining process' (proceso de adhesión) to enable small-scale community energy projects (up to 5 MW) to access the market without competing directly with large developers.

The document outlines the economic and environmental necessity for South Africa to raise its climate ambition in its second NDC. It emphasizes that transitioning from a coal-dependent economy to one powered by renewables is an economic imperative to avoid trade risks from Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanisms (CBAMs) and to unlock new industries like green hydrogen and electric vehicles. The briefing provides sector-specific recommendations for power, transport, and heavy industry, while stressing the need for deep public-private collaboration and the inclusion of SMEs to achieve a net-zero target by 2050.

The document argues that while North-South just energy transition partnerships are innovative, they are limited by issues of financing, local ownership, and equity. South-South cooperation (SSC) is presented as a complementary approach that can foster peer learning and context-specific, justice-centred solutions focusing on energy access, job creation, and socio-political inclusion. The brief highlights South Africa and Colombia as examples of countries facing transition challenges with untapped potential for cooperation in mine closure, green industrialization, and community benefit-sharing.

The We Mean Business Coalition and BSR propose five key policy areas—governance, workforce skills, stakeholder engagement, financing, and monitoring—to reduce investment risk and provide the clarity needed for multinational businesses to implement fair and inclusive climate action.

The South African Climate Finance Landscape 2025 reports an annual average of ZAR 188.3 billion in climate finance for 2022-2023, dominated by energy mitigation (74.1%). While flows have increased since previous tracking periods, they remain below the estimated ZAR 499 billion per year needed to meet NDC and net-zero targets. Adaptation finance is significantly lagging at 11.3% of total flows, and just transition-aligned investment remains modest at ZAR 16.0 billion annually. The landscape is characterized by a strong domestic financial sector, with nearly 60% of flows originating domestically, while international finance is primarily driven by public sources and the Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP).

The paper examines the conceptual and political challenges of implementing Article 2.1(c) of the Paris Agreement, highlighting diverging interpretations of its scope and the systemic barriers facing developing countries. It proposes a working definition that encompasses all financial flows and integrates equity and national circumstances to support future progress assessments, starting with a framework to be applied in Germany.

Reclaim Finance asserts that France is failing to lead a global coal exit ten years after the Paris Agreement. Despite domestic plans to close coal plants by 2027, major French banks like BNP Paribas and Société Générale continue to finance thermal and metallurgical coal projects internationally. The document also highlights the failure of the Coal Transition Accelerator (CTA) and other diplomatic efforts to create binding international standards for coal phase-out.

The report details a workshop held in October 2025 to align various food system stakeholders—including farm workers, informal traders, and small-scale farmers—with the requirements of South Africa's Climate Change Act (CCA). It argues that current top-down climate responses, such as the Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation Plan (CCAMP), reinforce corporate agricultural models and fail to address structural inequalities. The workshop proposes an alternative paradigm based on agroecology, redistributive land reform, and a just transition that integrates labour rights and community agency. It outlines specific policy entry points within the CCA, such as the National Adaptation Strategy and Plan (NASP) and Sector Adaptation Plans, and provides a coordinated action plan for civil society engagement through 2026.

The document highlights a critical adaptation finance gap in Africa, noting that the continent requires between $187–359 billion annually but faces an 80% shortfall in adaptation investment. It identifies the South African G20 presidency as a strategic opportunity to shift climate finance from debt-creating loans to grants and concessional funding. Key recommendations include scaling locally led adaptation, implementing debt-for-climate swaps, and reforming Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) to ensure at least 50% of climate finance for African Least Developed Countries is provided as grants or highly concessional finance.

The document argues that social acceptance is a critical bottleneck for CCS deployment in Poland, where public awareness is low and skepticism is high. It highlights the risk of 'NIMBY' (Not In My Back Yard) and 'WIMBY' (Why In My Backyard?) attitudes, drawing parallels to the historical failure of onshore wind development in Poland. Through international case studies from Japan, Norway, and Australia, the brief demonstrates that transparency, early engagement, and tangible local benefits are essential for securing a 'social licence to operate.' It recommends that the Polish government implement mandatory early community engagement, public data sharing, and benefit-sharing mechanisms to ensure the technology is accepted as a tool for industrial decarbonisation and job retention.

The policy brief distinguishes between incremental and transformational adaptation, highlighting that the latter is necessary when climate impacts cross viability thresholds. It identifies significant barriers to transformational adaptation in Africa, including financial gaps, weak legal frameworks, and a lack of standardized metrics. The authors recommend that South Africa's G20 presidency champion the development of adaptation scenarios, the enactment of climate change laws, and the creation of an Africa-based framework for measuring systemic impact to move beyond reactive, short-term climate responses.

The EU's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) is designed to prevent carbon leakage and encourage global decarbonisation by imposing levies on high-emitting imports. While facing criticism from BRICS nations as a protectionist barrier, the CBAM's design allows for the deduction of carbon prices already paid in the country of origin. This has led several countries, including India, China, Brazil, and Vietnam, to strategically develop or expand domestic carbon markets or taxes to ensure that carbon revenues are retained domestically rather than paid to the EU. Modelling indicates that if domestic prices reach 50% of the EU's price, countries like India could retain EUR 676 million annually.