Search Climate Insights Directory

The report finds a significant gap in methane action within the dairy and coffee sectors, with only three companies setting 2030 reduction targets and 15 failing to disclose emissions for 2024 or 2025. While members of the Dairy Methane Action Alliance (DMAA) generally outperform non-members, performance varies widely, and dairy co-operatives are noted as lagging. Danone is highlighted as a leader, having achieved a 29.8% reduction in methane emissions from fresh milk and dairy products by 2025. The report also notes that major global supermarkets are currently failing to disclose methane emissions or set targets, and warns that upcoming EU regulations like the CSRD and CSDDD will make such disclosures a legal obligation.

Methane is a potent greenhouse gas that contributes approximately 0.5°C to global temperature increases. Human-made sources—including the fossil fuel industry, landfills, livestock, and agriculture—account for about 55% of methane pollution, while natural sources like wetlands and permafrost account for 45%. Mitigation strategies focus on stopping leaks in the oil and gas supply chain, improving landfill waste management, and altering livestock diets. International efforts include the Global Methane Pledge, aiming for a 30% reduction from 2020 levels by 2030, and EU regulations banning venting and flaring. RMI supports these goals through data tools like the Oil Climate Index plus Gas (OCI+), WasteMAP, and the MiQ certification standard.

The document outlines a strategy to reduce livestock methane emissions, which account for up to 32% of human-caused methane, by focusing on three pillars: animal nutrition, genetics, and health. It emphasizes that increasing animal productivity reduces methane emissions per unit of food and can serve as an entry point for climate action in resistant markets. The brief calls for a 25% increase in productivity growth over historical rates to meet 2050 demand. It advocates for the scaling of breakthrough technologies like vaccines and feed additives, the development of more accurate measurement tools to reduce current error rates of 30–40%, and the implementation of farmer-led adoption strategies supported by innovative finance, such as the $360 million Dairy Interventions for Mitigation and Adaptation initiative in East Africa.

The document details the methodology used to evaluate investment risks and attributes for the livestock sector in Latin America and the Caribbean, categorizing risks into governance, financial, physical climate, market, infrastructure, and nature. It establishes a framework for matching these risks with the preferences of public and private investors and models three capital scenarios: business-as-usual (BAU), improved financial strategies (IFS), and improved financial and political strategies (IFPS). The analysis distinguishes between small-scale farms (2-10 hectares) and large-scale commercial operations, noting that small-scale systems are more dependent on public funding. Geographically, it segments the region into Brazil, Argentina, Mexico, and the 'rest of LAC', highlighting Brazil's role as the region's primary beef producer and the significant underreporting of private climate finance in the sector.

The document outlines a comprehensive methodology for evaluating investment risks and attributes in the livestock sector across Latin America and the Caribbean, specifically distinguishing between small-scale and large-scale commercial farms. It establishes a scoring system across six risk categories—governance, financing, physical climate, market, infrastructure, and nature—and compares these against the risk tolerances of public and private investors. The annexes also model three financial scenarios: Business-as-Usual (BAU), Enhanced Financial Strategies (IFS), and Enhanced Financial and Policy Strategies (IFPS), predicting how targeted interventions can shift capital composition from predominantly public to increased private investment. Geographic analysis highlights Brazil's relative stability and market dominance, while noting higher risks in Argentina and Mexico.

The report identifies a massive funding gap for sustainable livestock in Latin America and the Caribbean, where the sector is responsible for approximately 28% of regional emissions but receives minimal climate investment. It analyzes investment risks—including governance instability, physical climate threats like El Niño, and macroeconomic volatility—and evaluates the suitability of various public and private investors. The document proposes three scenarios: Business-as-Usual, Improved Finance Strategies (IFS), and Improved Finance and Policy Strategies (IFPS), arguing that a combination of blended finance, risk-reduction tools, and institutional reforms is necessary to transition from a heavy reliance on public funding to a diversified capital base. Specific recommendations include implementing first-loss capital, long-term loans, and natural capital accounting to unlock investment in practices such as silvopasture and sustainable feed production.

Albert Heijn, the largest retailer in The Netherlands, has disclosed that methane accounted for approximately 14% of its total climate pollution last year as part of its Scope 3 emissions. This marks a first for major supermarkets, contradicting previous industry claims that such calculations were too complex. The author calls for Ahold Delhaize to extend this disclosure to its US-based brands and urges retailers to implement concrete reduction strategies, such as promoting plant-based alternatives and requiring suppliers to set methane targets.

The document details the methodology used to quantify investment risks (governance, financing, physical climate, market, infrastructure, and nature) and attributes (horizon, ticket size, and return) for livestock in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). It establishes a scoring system to match these risks with the risk tolerances of various public and private investors, while modeling how different finance and policy strategies (IFS and IFPS) could improve investor suitability. The analysis distinguishes between small-scale farms (2-10 hectares) and large-scale commercial farms (10+ hectares) across Brazil, Argentina, Mexico, and the rest of LAC, noting that small farms are primarily served by public and concessional finance, whereas large farms have better access to commercial private finance.

The report identifies a massive funding gap for sustainable livestock in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC), where the sector is responsible for approximately 28% of total regional emissions but receives minimal climate investment. It analyzes six key risk categories—governance, financing, physical climate, market, infrastructure, and nature—and finds that public investors are currently the most suitable for the sector due to higher risk tolerance. The roadmap proposes a transition from a 'business-as-usual' reliance on public funds to a diversified capital mix through blended finance, derisking tools (such as first-loss capital and credit guarantees), and policy reforms like natural capital accounting and improved land tenure. It specifically highlights the vulnerability of smallholder farms and the potential for large-scale farms in Brazil and Mexico to attract private investment. The report concludes with recommendations for COP 30 in Brazil to elevate sustainable livestock on the global climate agenda.

The document explains that human activities, primarily the burning of fossil fuels, have increased average global temperatures by approximately one degree Celsius since 1880. It details the resulting impacts, including more frequent extreme weather, rising sea levels, and ocean acidification. The text outlines strategies for addressing these challenges through climate mitigation, adaptation, and resilience, while describing the roles of the U.S. government, corporations, and the United Nations in implementing these solutions.

The document explains that global warming, driven primarily by human-caused greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels and agriculture, has increased average global temperatures by approximately 1 degree Celsius since 1880. It details the resulting impacts, including more frequent extreme weather events, rising sea levels, and ocean acidification. The text outlines various responses, such as the transition to renewable energy, energy efficiency, and the roles of the United Nations and the U.S. government in international agreements like the Paris Agreement. It also defines key concepts such as climate adaptation, mitigation, and resilience, and discusses the role of climate finance in supporting these efforts.

The document outlines a methodological framework for gender mainstreaming within Senegal's climate adaptation planning. It identifies specific entry points across 14 process steps—from launch to notification—and provides seven key tools, including gender analysis and gender-responsive budgeting. It highlights the disproportionate impact of climate change on women in Senegal and offers a series of national and international best practices to ensure equitable benefits from adaptation measures.

The document examines the role of Canadian financial institutions in managing climate disclosures and target setting for the agriculture sector, highlighting specific sectoral challenges and available measurement tools.

The document argues that carbon markets can fill a critical funding gap for African smallholder farmers, who received only 0.8% of climate finance in 2023. It highlights that soil carbon interventions provide dual benefits of climate mitigation and adaptation by improving soil health, water retention, and crop yields. However, the briefing notes that African agriculture remains underrepresented in carbon markets, with only 12 identified projects across the continent. Barriers include high soil sampling costs, strict evidence requirements for baselines, and a lack of localised research. The author recommends that policymakers avoid 'one-size-fits-all' regulations and instead prioritise projects that deliver non-carbon co-benefits like food security and nutrition.

The document analyzes the global distribution of agricultural methane emissions, highlighting that while low- and middle-income countries produce the most, high-income countries have higher per capita emissions due to consumption patterns. It proposes a transition toward climate-smart agriculture through technology, policy reform, and targeted finance, particularly for smallholder farmers in Africa, to meet global reduction targets by 2030.

Agriculture is responsible for 40% of human-caused methane emissions, with livestock (enteric and manure emissions) accounting for 80% of that total. The document highlights a significant disparity in emissions intensity, noting that lowest-income countries have intensities 6-16 times higher than high-income countries due to differences in production efficiency. To limit global temperature rise to 1.5°C, the agriculture sector must reduce absolute methane emissions by 30-38 Mt/year, despite projected increases in animal protein demand, such as a 102% increase in Africa by 2050. Proposed solutions include improving animal health and breeding for efficiency, as well as deploying feed additives and anaerobic digestors. The brief emphasizes that policies must be regionally tailored, moving beyond voluntary incentives and the $600 billion in annual global agriculture subsidies that often lack environmental scopes.

The document argues that the FAO has been captured by the 'Big Livestock' sector, leading to the systematic downplaying of the environmental impacts of animal farming. It traces this shift from the 2006 'Livestock's Long Shadow' report, which highlighted livestock as a major climate driver, to more recent publications like 'Pathways towards Lower Emissions' and the 'Global Roadmap'. The author claims these later documents use flawed methodologies to lower emission estimates and prioritise industry-friendly technological fixes over necessary reductions in livestock numbers and meat consumption. The report details how industry lobbyists influence the FAO through national delegations and partnerships, resulting in a narrative that preserves the status quo of intensive livestock production.

The report critiques the GWP* (Global Warming Potential Star) metric, arguing that while it may be useful for specific climate modeling, its application to national or sectoral policy is unfair and scientifically misleading. Unlike the standard GWP, which uses a zero-emission baseline, GWP* evaluates current emissions relative to past levels, potentially rewarding countries with historically high emissions and penalizing developing nations. The authors contend that this approach can be used to justify continued methane pollution, particularly in the livestock sector, and advocate for a 'multi-basket' approach that sets separate targets for short-lived pollutants like methane and long-lived gases like CO2 to ensure equitable and effective climate action.

The report analyzes national and international sustainability taxonomies to propose criteria for the Brazilian Sustainable Taxonomy's land-use sector. It highlights the high sensitivity of sustainable finance measurements to the chosen classification, demonstrating through a rural credit case study that alignment varies from 1% to 44% depending on the reference used. The authors recommend a technical, science-based approach with granular application levels and a gradual implementation roadmap to prevent greenwashing and attract international investment.

The document describes the evolution of Brazil's agricultural climate policy, moving from the 2010 Low-Carbon Agriculture Plan (ABC Plan) to the 2021 Sectoral Plan for Adaptation to Climate Change and Low Carbon Emissions (ABC+). The ABC+ Plan, covering 2020 to 2030, integrates an 'Integrated Landscape Approach' to manage rural land and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. To refine these strategies, the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock (MAPA) developed the 'Conceptual Framework for Assessing the Adaptation Strategies of Agriculture and Livestock Systems to Climate Change' (CF) in 2021. The resulting Adaptation Strategy proposes specific Adaptation Initiatives (AIs) across the CF's axes, utilizing principles, criteria, and indicators to monitor progress and report outcomes at national and international levels.