Search Climate Insights Directory

The document examines the operationalisation of the Paris Agreement's Enhanced Transparency Framework (ETF), which mandates that all countries submit biennial transparency reports by December 31, 2024. It highlights the shift toward standardised reporting and review processes to increase accountability for Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). While the ETF aims to build trust and facilitate ambitious climate commitments, the author notes that developing countries face significant barriers in technical capacity, particularly in greenhouse gas accounting and measurement, reporting, and verification (MRV). The brief advocates for integrating climate tracking into national budgets, enhancing stakeholder engagement, and increasing capacity building for adaptation and loss and damage reporting, particularly in Africa.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) urges the Special Rapporteur on human rights and climate change to prioritize the voices of frontline communities and investigate human rights harms related to loss and damage, intergenerational justice, and the risks of geoengineering. CIEL specifically calls for a systematic examination of human rights violations linked to the fossil fuel industry and the impact of climate policies on land and tenure rights.

A collection of statements from global civil society organisations criticizing the Bonn climate conference for the failure of developed nations to provide loss and damage finance, their continued reliance on fossil fuels, and the promotion of 'false solutions' like geoengineering and carbon markets.

The briefing outlines the complexities of establishing the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) for climate finance, emphasizing the need for a science- and equity-based approach over purely political targets. It highlights the lack of a common definition for climate finance and the necessity of aligning the NCQG with the Paris Agreement's articles and the actual needs of developing countries. The text argues for a more balanced allocation between mitigation and adaptation, the inclusion of loss and damage, and a focus on fair access to finance that avoids increasing the debt burden of vulnerable nations.

The document outlines how climate-induced loss and damage (L&D) violates fundamental human rights and calls for the establishment of a Loss and Damage Finance Facility (LDFF) and the operationalization of the Santiago Network (SNLD) based on human rights standards. It highlights specific examples of L&D in South Africa, India, Pakistan, and the Arctic, arguing that wealthy nations have an extraterritorial obligation to provide compensation and support. The authors advocate for inclusive Loss and Damage Needs Assessments (LDNAs), universal social protection schemes, and legal protections for climate-induced displacement.

The report finds that implementing Africa's NDCs will cost approximately USD 2.8 trillion between 2020 and 2030, with a 'climate finance need' of USD 2.5 trillion after accounting for USD 264 billion in domestic public commitments. Current annual flows of USD 30 billion cover only about 12% of the required USD 250 billion per year. Mitigation accounts for 66% of needs, dominated by the transport sector (largely due to South Africa), while adaptation represents 24%, likely underestimated due to data gaps. The report highlights a heavy reliance on public finance (87%) and recommends that the UNFCCC provide standardized guidance and capacity support to improve the robustness of national needs assessments.

The report finds that implementing Africa's NDCs will cost approximately USD 2.8 trillion between 2020 and 2030, with a 'climate finance need' of USD 2.5 trillion after accounting for domestic public commitments. Current annual flows of USD 30 billion cover only about 12% of the required USD 250 billion per year. Mitigation accounts for 66% of needs, heavily skewed toward South Africa's transport sector, while adaptation represents 24%, likely underestimated due to data gaps. The report highlights a significant reliance on public funding (87%) and recommends that the UNFCCC develop standardized guidance and that countries adopt more participatory, bottom-up needs assessments to mobilize private capital.

The document analyzes the African perspective on 'loss and damage'—climate impacts that cannot be avoided through mitigation or adaptation. It highlights the failure of existing mechanisms like the Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM) and the Santiago Network to provide sufficient financial support, noting that developed countries resist dedicated funding due to concerns over legal liability. The authors recommend that African nations establish a transparent, inclusive position on the mandate of a potential Finance Facility, explore climate litigation against 'carbon majors', and integrate loss and damage assessments into their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).

The document examines the failure of existing multilateral systems to address global-scale chronic risks, such as the climate crisis and the Covid-19 pandemic. It highlights the stark disparity in climate-related deaths and GDP losses between high-income and low-income groups, noting that the Global North bears significant historical responsibility for emissions while the Global South suffers the most severe consequences. The authors propose 'de minimis multilateralism'—focusing on common aversions—and the creation of a Global Resilience Reserve Fund and a Climate Risk Atlas for Developing Countries to enhance human security and financial resilience.

The Global Stocktake (GST) is a five-year iterative cycle under the Paris Agreement designed to assess collective global progress in mitigation, adaptation, and finance. The process consists of three phases: Information Collection and Preparation, Technical Assessment, and Consideration of Outputs. For adaptation, the GST aims to establish a collective monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL) system to define adequate responses and recognize the efforts of developing countries. The document highlights that National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) and Adaptation Communications (AdComs) are primary data sources, but encourages the use of Voluntary Submissions to ensure sub-national actions and specific priorities are not lost during the Secretariat's synthesis process.

The document explains the Global Stocktake (GST) as a collective assessment of progress toward the Paris Agreement's goals, detailing its iterative cycle of information gathering, technical evaluation, and outcome review. It emphasizes the role of adaptation, highlighting the need for a global Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) system and the importance of inputs from developing nations through National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) and voluntary communications to drive global adaptation ambition.

The document explains the Global Stocktake (GST) as an iterative process to assess collective progress toward the Paris Agreement's goals. It details the three-stage cycle—information collection, technical assessment, and outcome review—and emphasizes how adaptation efforts, including National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) and Adaptation Communications (AdComs), inform the process. The briefing highlights the importance of national monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL) systems in providing high-quality data to the GST and encourages developing countries to use voluntary communications to ensure their priorities and subnational actions are represented.

The document examines the IPCC Working Group II report, emphasizing that temperature overshoot beyond 1.5°C leads to permanent ecological and human loss. It critiques the reliance on carbon dioxide removal (CDR) and solar radiation modification (SRM) as ineffective and hazardous alternatives to immediate emissions reductions. Finally, it asserts that climate adaptation and mitigation must be grounded in social justice, equity, and Indigenous knowledge to be effective.

The document outlines the escalating impacts of human-induced climate change on humans and ecosystems, emphasizing that the most marginalized populations are hit hardest. It highlights the role of 'attribution literature' in linking extreme weather to human activity and discusses the critical need for transformative adaptation and nature-based solutions. The briefing warns that the costs of inaction far exceed those of mitigation and adaptation, noting significant GDP losses in vulnerable nations and the potential for mass migration and biodiversity loss.

The polluter-pays principle (PPP) requires those who produce pollution to bear the costs of managing it to prevent damage to human health and the environment. While established in the European Union and OECD, it is not yet a customary international norm due to ambiguities in defining 'the polluter' and varying national implementations. In climate change law, the PPP informs debates on loss and damage and is indirectly present in the Paris Agreement through nationally determined contributions and climate finance. The document suggests that combining the PPP with the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR) could help the Global North absorb costs for environmental harms caused in the Global South.

The report analyzes COP26 outcomes, noting that while some progress was made in referencing human rights within Article 6 rules and the CTCN Advisory Board, overall results were marred by exclusionary participation modalities and a failure to effectively confront the fossil fuel industry. It highlights significant gaps in loss and damage finance, the removal of human rights language from the Action for Climate Empowerment (ACE) work program, and superficial progress on gender-responsive climate action. The document concludes by outlining critical 2022 milestones, including the first Global Stocktake and the revision of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), as key opportunities to embed human rights and climate justice.

The document explains the Global Stocktake (GST) as the Paris Agreement's "ratchet mechanism" to assess collective progress on mitigation, adaptation, and finance. It argues that for climate action to be effective, it must be guided by human rights, including the rights of Indigenous Peoples, gender equality, and intergenerational equity. The briefing details the GST's three-phase structure—information collection, technical assessment, and consideration of outputs—concluding at COP28 in November 2023. It provides a framework for stakeholders to align their submissions with the GST's guiding questions to address critical gaps such as fossil fuel phase-out, land tenure rights, and loss and damage.

The Global Climate and Health Alliance and the Health and Climate Network submit that health is a prerequisite for the Paris Agreement's success and should be an explicit outcome of the Global Stocktake. They highlight that while 94% of countries include health in National Adaptation Plans, financing remains a critical barrier, with only 0.5% of some multilateral adaptation funding allocated to health projects. The submission emphasizes the significant health co-benefits of mitigation in energy, food, and transport sectors and calls for the quantification of health as a non-economic impact under loss and damage.

The Global Climate and Health Alliance (GCHA) and Health and Climate Network (HCN) submit that health is a prerequisite and critical indicator for the Paris Agreement's success. They highlight that mitigation in energy, food, and transport can prevent millions of deaths annually by 2040, yet only 28% of updated NDCs recognize these health co-benefits. While 94% of surveyed countries include health in National Adaptation Plans, funding remains a critical barrier, with only 0.5% of certain multilateral adaptation funds allocated to health-specific projects. The document urges the GST to quantify health impacts as non-economic losses and damages and to monitor the realization of the human right to a healthy environment.

The polluter-pays principle (PPP) requires that the costs of pollution be borne by those responsible for causing it. While established in the EU and OECD, it is not a customary international norm due to varying state definitions and implementation complexities. In climate law, the PPP is relevant to loss and damage and carbon pricing, though it is not explicitly mentioned in the UNFCCC, Kyoto Protocol, or Paris Agreement. The document suggests that combining the PPP with the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR) could ensure that Global North entities absorb the costs of environmental harms caused in the Global South.