Search Climate Insights Directory

The document explains that Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) are national plans submitted every five years by parties to the Paris Agreement to show their climate ambition and progress. It argues that human rights-based policies are the most effective form of climate action and an obligation for all parties. The guide urges civil society to contact governments, exercise their right to participate in the drafting process, evaluate NDCs using a provided scorecard, and hold governments accountable for implementing their promises through legal or public action.

The document serves as a toolkit for civil society to ensure that the next round of NDCs, due before COP30, are human rights-based. It argues that such policies are both a legal obligation for Parties to the Paris Agreement and the most effective form of climate action. The guide outlines four primary actions for citizens: contacting governments, participating in drafting processes, reviewing NDCs using a provided scorecard, and holding governments accountable for implementation.

The report identifies a systemic failure within the UNFCCC where justice efforts are fragmented across isolated mechanisms, allowing for symbolic recognition without the redistribution of power. It proposes an integrated justice framework—comprising distributive, procedural, recognitional, restorative, and transformative justice—to diagnose gaps and guide policy. The author argues that the JTWP risks becoming a 'talking shop' unless it is operationalised through binding commitments, a permanent coordination body, and sector-specific pathways beyond the energy sector. Key recommendations for COP30 include adopting ILO Guidelines as foundational principles and mandating integrated justice assessments in Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).

Climate finance in Brazil more than doubled between 2019 and 2023, reaching US$ 67.8 billion. The growth was primarily driven by solar energy and AFOLU (Agriculture, Forestry, and Other Land Use), with domestic sources accounting for 90% of total finance. While mitigation dominates the objective mix, finance for loss and damage saw an exponential increase in 2024, largely due to disaster relief following flooding in Rio Grande do Sul.

The document identifies 14 distinct tactics of climate obstruction used during UNFCCC negotiations, ranging from overt rejection to subtle procedural delays. It argues that obstruction is unevenly distributed, with wealthier and fossil-fuel-producing nations exercising disproportionate influence. The brief maps these tactics across negotiation stages and predicts their likely application at COP30 in areas such as the Global Goal on Adaptation, fossil fuel phase-outs, and climate finance.

African cities face extreme climate vulnerability, with 83% rated at 'extreme risk', yet they are largely bypassed by the global climate financial architecture. The document highlights that while cities generate 80% of global GDP and are first responders in disasters, they are not parties to international conventions like the UNFCCC. It urges cities to conduct comprehensive vulnerability assessments—including non-economic loss and damage—and to leverage city networks and multi-level governance to access the Fund for responding to Loss and Damage (FRLD), the Warsaw International Mechanism, and the Santiago Network. The brief recommends that national governments integrate urban loss and damage into Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) to improve funding access and implementation.

The document argues that the COP29 finance goal of US$300 billion is insufficient, covering less than 4.3% of projected global needs, and that Africa receives less than 3% of total global finance for developing countries. It highlights a critical imbalance where only 36% of Africa's climate finance is dedicated to adaptation. The brief calls for African nations to transition from passive actors to co-creators at COP30, advocating for the 'Baku to Belém Roadmap' to reach US$1.3 trillion and demanding that finance be grant-based, accessible, and channeled through African institutions. It also notes the negative impact of the US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement and the need for more inclusive participation for least developed countries in UN negotiations.

Natural Justice assesses South Africa's 2025 draft NDC, acknowledging progress in absolute emissions targets but warning that these are undermined by over-reliance on international conditionality and a lack of concrete implementation plans. The submission argues that the draft fails to meet the 'highest possible ambition' standard set by the ICJ, citing gaps in adaptation financing, the exclusion of natural disturbance emissions from accounting, and the absence of a clear fossil fuel phase-out schedule. It recommends integrating a Human Rights-Based Approach (HRBA), establishing a grant-based Loss and Damage facility funded partly by a tax on fossil fuel profits, and mandating Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) for all climate projects.

Kazakhstan's NDC 3.0 sets a target to reduce net greenhouse gas emissions by 17% below 1990 levels by 2035 unconditionally, and up to 25% with international support. The plan aligns with a long-term goal of carbon neutrality by 2060 and emphasizes a transition from coal-dependency toward renewable energy, nuclear power, and energy efficiency. The document details sectoral mitigation measures, adaptation strategies for water and agriculture, and a framework for addressing loss and damage. Implementation is supported by a revitalized Emissions Trading System (ETS) and a proposed Carbon Fund, with total indicative investment needs for 2026–2035 estimated at USD 175.6 billion.

Rwanda's NDC 3.0 sets an ambitious target to reduce net greenhouse gas emissions by 53% by 2035 compared to a business-as-usual scenario, integrating Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) for the first time. The plan prioritizes adaptation across eight sectors, including agriculture and water resources, and establishes a dedicated loss and damage response mechanism. Implementing these goals requires an estimated USD 12 billion, with USD 5 billion for mitigation and USD 7 billion for adaptation.

The document analyzes the synergy between NAPs and NDCs, finding that while most countries show partial alignment, the 2025 NDC update offers a strategic opportunity to better integrate adaptation priorities, improve data quality, and attract international finance.

The report argues that COP29 failed to advance human rights-based climate action, citing a weak new climate finance goal, the operationalization of flawed carbon markets, and a restrictive civic environment in the host country. It highlights the removal of references to the right to a healthy environment and the lack of progress on just transition and gender justice, calling for stronger legal obligations and human rights safeguards in future UNFCCC processes.

The compendium details the legal arguments presented from December 2 to December 13, 2024, at the ICJ. It highlights a fundamental divide between climate-vulnerable nations and several high-emitting States. Vulnerable nations, including many Small Island Developing States (SIDS), argue for a 'harmonious interpretation' of international law, asserting that obligations to prevent transboundary harm and protect human rights exist independently of and complement the Paris Agreement. They demand accountability for historical emissions and full reparations, including debt cancellation. Conversely, a minority of high-emitting States, such as the United States, Russia, and Saudi Arabia, argue that the UN climate treaty regime (UNFCCC, Kyoto Protocol, and Paris Agreement) is the exclusive source of State obligations, seeking to limit liability and reject the applicability of customary international law or human rights law to climate mitigation.

The document analyzes the synergy between NAPs and NDCs, proposing a continuum of alignment from 'no alignment' to 'full alignment'. It finds that while most countries exhibit partial alignment, the timing of document submission significantly impacts coherence. It urges countries to use the 2025 NDC update to integrate detailed NAP findings, including costs and capacity gaps, to improve adaptation ambition and attract international finance.

The document analyzes the degree of alignment between NAPs and NDCs, categorizing countries into 'no alignment', 'partial alignment', and 'full alignment'. It finds that while 82% of countries with multisectoral NAPs reference the NAP process in their NDCs, most (68%) only achieve partial alignment. The briefing argues that the 2025 NDC update is a critical opportunity to use NAPs as operational vehicles to implement high-level NDC goals, improve the quality of adaptation data, and communicate financial and capacity needs to the international community.

The document outlines the key priorities for COP29, emphasizing the establishment of the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) for climate finance and the operationalization of the Loss and Damage Fund. It highlights the need for intensified Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) before the 2025 deadline and the advancement of the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) and Biennial Transparency Reports (BTRs). Additionally, it identifies the importance of nature-based solutions, the operationalization of Article 6 regarding carbon markets, and the need to address transboundary climate risks and socioeconomic disparities in adaptation, all within a complex geopolitical landscape influenced by Azerbaijan's fossil fuel economy.

The document examines the governance gaps surrounding solar radiation modification (SRM), warning that the current dominance of Global North institutions and private entities creates a risk of unilateral deployment. It advocates for the UNFCCC to formally engage with SRM to democratize decision-making and prevent the exacerbation of global inequalities.

This report analyzes the landscape of climate finance for agricultural risk management in Brazil between 2021 and 2023, focusing on public and private instruments used to protect rural production from extreme weather events. It details the financial flows of key programs like PROAGRO and PSR, highlighting a shift toward increased spending on loss and damages due to intensifying climate events, and discusses the role of Agricultural Climate Risk Zoning (ZARC) in improving resilience and sustainability.

A coalition of climate, environmental, and faith-based organizations is calling on the Biden Administration to support a New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) of at least $1 trillion USD per year for developing countries. The group argues that this funding should be primarily grant-based to avoid increasing debt in low-income nations and should cover mitigation, adaptation, and loss and damage. They suggest funding these goals through innovative sources like taxes on polluting companies' excess profits and reforming the international multilateral finance architecture, including the use of IMF Special Drawing Rights.

This report describes the methodology used by the Climate Policy Initiative (CPI) to quantify and compare financial flows for land use with climate action components in Brazil for the period 2021-2023. It details the criteria for classifying finance into mitigation, adaptation, dual benefits, and loss and damage, while outlining the data sources and the 'Climate Finance Ecosystem' used to track public and private resources.