Search Climate Insights Directory

Alberta faces significant economic risks due to its high concentration of workers and GDP tied to transition-vulnerable sectors, particularly oil and gas. While the province has established a foothold in low-carbon electricity, hydrogen, and CCUS, growth is hindered by mixed policy signals and a geographic mismatch between new opportunity companies in cities and vulnerable workers in rural areas.

The document analyzes Alberta's position in the global energy transition, highlighting a tension between emerging low-carbon investments and a continued reliance on the oil and gas sector. While the province shows strength in carbon-free electricity and industrial transition technologies, it faces significant risks due to workforce concentration in vulnerable sectors and contradictory political signals that may hinder large-scale decarbonization.

The report identifies Atlantic Canada as a leader in decoupling GDP growth from greenhouse gas emissions, though it faces significant fiscal risks due to a reliance on oil, gas, and coal. While Nova Scotia is a hub for transition-related innovation in batteries, smart grids, and low-carbon shipping, regional companies generally remain small and undercapitalized. Vulnerabilities are concentrated in rural areas and specific provinces, notably Newfoundland and Labrador, where oil and gas sectors are critical to government revenue.

British Columbia is positioning itself for the low-carbon transition by leveraging a low-emissions electricity grid and a growing clean technology sector, though it faces risks from its reliance on metallurgical coal and natural gas exports. While the province has 175 transition-opportunity companies, primarily concentrated in Metro Vancouver, challenges remain regarding the domestic adoption of these technologies and the alignment of provincial policy to support small and medium-sized domestic firms. Vulnerable workers are concentrated in rural communities and among Indigenous populations, necessitating a shift in support toward new growth areas to ensure economic resilience.

Manitoba is well-positioned for the energy transition due to its low-cost clean electricity, critical mineral deposits, and established ag-tech sector. However, the province lags behind other jurisdictions in public and private R&D investment and lacks a comprehensive government strategy to attract innovative companies. Economic risks include a high debt-to-GDP ratio and a workforce in vulnerable sectors, particularly affecting visible minorities and Indigenous peoples. While some companies are electrifying operations, the province's overall adoption of electric vehicles and heat pumps remains below national and provincial averages.

Manitoba possesses significant competitive advantages for the low-carbon transition, including low-cost clean electricity, critical mineral deposits, and a strong agricultural sector. However, the province faces fiscal risks due to a high debt-to-GDP ratio and a lack of supportive policy frameworks, resulting in a low number of transition-opportunity companies compared to other provinces. While some sectors like agricultural technology and alternative proteins are growing, Manitoba lags in clean hydrogen, batteries, and storage. Additionally, the report highlights the disproportionate exposure of visible minorities to transition-vulnerable sectors and the need to address historic harms to Indigenous communities to ensure equitable development in mining and energy.

Ontario is well-positioned for the carbon-neutral transition due to its financial hub status and concentration of clean energy and bio-product companies. However, it faces significant risks, including a high number of vulnerable workers in the manufacturing sector, high public debt, and policy instability. While major investments are occurring in electric vehicle production and steel electrification, the province lacks long-term sectoral policies and a clear carbon-neutral grid strategy, which may hinder large-scale technology adoption and competitiveness compared to other provinces.

Québec is well-positioned for the energy transition due to its low-cost, low-carbon electricity and a mature mining sector for critical minerals. However, the province faces significant challenges, including a high public debt-to-GDP ratio of 45% (2020-2021), a shortage of skilled labor in clean-tech SMEs, and the need to rebuild trust with Indigenous peoples for new large-scale projects. While the province has a strong ecosystem of transition-supporting companies—particularly in electric transport and industrial transition—it faces intense global competition from the US, EU, and China, and its firms often secure less capital at each funding stage compared to US counterparts.

Saskatchewan faces significant economic risks due to its reliance on oil and gas, with 6% of its workforce in transition-vulnerable sectors. While the province has strengths in agricultural technology, critical minerals, and renewable energy potential, it lags behind other Canadian provinces in attracting transition-consistent investment. Growth is concentrated in Saskatoon and Regina, primarily within ag-tech and alternative proteins. Barriers to scaling include a lack of early-stage policy support, low R&D funding, and continued subsidies for fossil fuels, which create uncertainty for clean-tech investors.

Saskatchewan faces significant economic risks due to its heavy reliance on the oil and gas sector, which generated 16% of its provincial GDP in 2019. While the province possesses strong competitive advantages in wind, solar, and critical minerals, it lags behind other Canadian provinces in attracting transition-related investments. Most current growth is concentrated in agtech and alternative proteins, while public and private funding for broader research and development remains limited. The report highlights a critical need for more ambitious climate policies and better support for workforce transition, particularly in small communities like Coronach, to avoid severe economic decline.

This report details the institutional frameworks used by the United States, United Kingdom, British Columbia, France, Germany, Australia, Denmark, and Singapore to implement a whole-of-government approach to climate change. It catalogs specific committees, task forces, and legislative mechanisms designed to integrate climate priorities across different government departments and agencies.

The document assesses the challenges of the EU's proposed CBAM based on incurred emissions, noting that it fails to fully address carbon leakage for exports and value chains. It proposes an alternative 'climate contribution' based on standardised carbon intensity factors, which would act as an excise charge that can be passed along the supply chain and waived for exports. This model, combined with Carbon Contracts for Difference (CCfDs) funded by CBAM revenues, is presented as a way to create immediate investment incentives for climate-neutral production of materials like steel, cement, and aluminium.

Climate Strategies argues that climate adaptation must move beyond a technical exercise to a justice-centered approach that addresses the structural drivers of vulnerability. Drawing on its South to South Just Transitions (S2S) programme, the submission highlights that adaptation actions can create winners and losers, risking the further marginalization of vulnerable populations if not managed through a Just Transition lens. The document identifies best practices in countries like South Africa, Australia, and the EU, while noting significant barriers in the Global South, such as data gaps on lived experiences and the disconnection between mitigation and adaptation policies. It calls for the JTWP to facilitate shared frameworks for operationalizing equity, tracking social outcomes, and mapping transboundary risks.

Climate Strategies proposes five operational avenues for the first 2025 JTWP dialogue, including a non-prescriptive governance framework, a case study repository, a resource database, justice-focused metrics, and a global governance architecture. For the second 2025 dialogue, it recommends addressing climate resilience, restorative justice, transition minerals, and deep dives into neglected sectors like food and health systems. The submission also suggests reforming the dialogue format to combine workshops with discussions to better facilitate the sharing of real-world practitioner experiences.

The document argues that the 2026 JTWP dialogues should be structured around international cooperation, technical assistance, capacity-building, and knowledge sharing to inform the design of the Just Transition Mechanism. Drawing on research from the Global South, it highlights critical gaps in financing for social protection, the risks of extractive dynamics in critical mineral supply chains, and the need for technology co-development rather than simple transfer. It specifically identifies needs for better disaggregated data in countries like Uganda and Kenya, and the risk of 'greening elsewhere' in Indonesia due to coal-powered nickel smelting.

Climate Strategies argues that the upcoming Just Transition mechanism must overcome the current fragmentation of the UNFCCC architecture by integrating finance, technology, and stakeholder engagement. The submission recommends grounding the mechanism in real-world implementation evidence from the Global South, adopting multi-level and multi-sector governance, and ensuring that participation for marginalized groups translates into meaningful policy influence rather than mere procedural consultation.

The document identifies systemic barriers to transitioning away from fossil fuels, particularly for countries heavily reliant on oil and gas revenues, such as Canada, Nigeria, and Malaysia. It argues that a successful transition requires multilateral coordination between importers and exporters, collaborative governance frameworks, and a commitment to Just Transition principles to avoid exacerbating global inequalities. Key recommendations include strategic economic diversification, the use of multi-model evidence for planning, and the implementation of restorative justice to address historical harms.

The document argues that because the energy transition is already underway due to technological shifts, countries must proactively plan for a Just Transition to avoid economic dislocation. It highlights opportunities for economic diversification, such as Ghana's investment plan to generate 400,000 net jobs by 2060, and best practices like Brazil's reallocation of petroleum revenues to reforestation. However, it identifies critical barriers, including fiscal dependence on fossil fuels in countries like Azerbaijan (where oil and gas constitute 90% of exports) and a lack of granular data on workforce impacts in Indonesia. The author proposes actionable solutions including the repurposing of coal infrastructure, the expansion of local financing mechanisms, and the anchoring of transition policies in legal frameworks to ensure long-term stability.

The document examines how carbon pricing affects different household income levels across developed and developing countries. It argues that while carbon pricing can be regressive—disproportionately impacting low-income households who spend more of their income on energy—these effects can be neutralized or turned into net benefits through strategic revenue recycling, such as lump-sum rebates or targeted subsidies. The briefing highlights that in very low-income countries, carbon pricing can actually be progressive due to limited fossil fuel access among the poorest. It provides case studies from the EU ETS, the US Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), South Africa, and Iran to illustrate various implementation and mitigation strategies.

The report argues that traditional economic tools, such as cost-benefit analysis and equilibrium models, are inadequate for the structural changes required by the energy transition. It proposes a shift toward 'Risk-Opportunity Analysis' and dynamic modelling that accounts for induced innovation and learning-by-doing. Based on successes in solar PV, LED lighting, and wind power, the authors outline ten principles for policymaking, emphasizing targeted investment, risk management, and adaptive policy packages. National case studies in Brazil, China, and India suggest that while decarbonisation has a negligible impact on overall system costs and GDP, the transition requires significant up-front investment and careful management of distributional impacts, particularly in coal-dependent regions.