Search Climate Insights Directory

The document outlines three primary models for initiating sectoral integration of climate adaptation: sector-driven, national-driven, and mixed approaches. It emphasizes that while paths vary by national context, a strong coordination function is essential across all models to ensure coherence and avoid duplication of efforts.

The document outlines a spectrum of approaches for integrating climate adaptation into sectoral planning, ranging from sector-driven initiatives to nationally-led strategies, using examples from several developing countries to illustrate how these paths lead to the common goal of sectoral integration.

The document describes a spectrum of strategies for sectoral integration of climate adaptation, ranging from sector-driven initiatives to national-led coordination. It emphasizes that while paths vary—such as the national-led approach in the Philippines or the sector-driven approach in Grenada—the goal is to improve coherence between adaptation and development planning to avoid duplicating efforts.

The NAP Global Network is a practitioner-oriented group established in December 2014 to coordinate bilateral official development assistance (ODA) for National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) in developing countries. It focuses on bridging the gap between bilateral donors and in-country actors to ensure climate adaptation support aligns with national development priorities. The Network provides peer learning through Targeted Topics Forums (TTFs) and acts as a liaison to avoid duplication of efforts among donors. It distinguishes itself from other initiatives by specifically targeting bilateral support, which the document notes constituted USD 11.28 billion in adaptation-related ODA in 2013, significantly more than multilateral support.

South Africa's INDC proposes a 'peak, plateau and decline' emissions trajectory, with GHG emissions expected to peak between 2020 and 2025 and decline in absolute terms after 2036. The plan integrates climate action with the National Development Plan's goal to eliminate poverty by 2030. Adaptation efforts focus on six goals, including the development of a National Adaptation Plan by 2020, while mitigation emphasizes a transition to a low-carbon economy through renewable energy and efficiency. The document emphasizes that these commitments are premised on a fair multilateral agreement and the provision of international finance, technology, and capacity-building support.

The report details strategies for achieving political commitment to National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) and explores various pathways for integrating adaptation into sectoral policies. It emphasizes the necessity of strong in-country coordination, the use of clear narratives to engage powerful ministries, and the role of south-south cooperation in building technical capacity.

The report details strategies for achieving political commitment and sectoral integration in National Adaptation Plan (NAP) processes, based on a workshop with representatives from 14 countries. It identifies three dimensions of political support—expressed, institutional, and budgetary—and proposes framing adaptation as complementary to existing development goals to avoid 'initiative overload'. The document outlines a spectrum of integration approaches, ranging from sector-driven to nationally-driven, and emphasizes the necessity of strong in-country coordination and south-south cooperation to ensure climate-resilient development.

The document outlines the importance of Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) as public outlines of national climate plans starting in 2020. It establishes a set of criteria for a 'strong' INDC—defined as fair, ambitious, feasible, and transparent—and provides a detailed six-question evaluation framework. This framework guides users to check for clear statements of intent (mitigation and adaptation), alignment with climate science (specifically the 2 degrees C goal), fairness based on national circumstances, the strength of the design process, implementation feasibility, and methodological transparency.

The GCF Secretariat report for mid-March to mid-June 2015 details progress in accreditation, readiness support, and the development of a project pipeline. It highlights the achievement of the Fund's effectiveness threshold with approximately US$ 5.47 billion in contributions and the review of 76 public sector concept notes requesting US$ 3.4 billion. The report also outlines the activities of the Private Sector Facility (PSF), including the review of 48 potential project ideas totaling US$ 3.1 billion, and the Secretariat's engagement with UNFCCC thematic bodies and other climate funds to ensure policy coherence.

The document offers a comprehensive framework for LDCs and SIDS to develop INDCs, emphasizing that these countries may communicate strategies and plans for low greenhouse gas emission development reflecting their special circumstances. It provides detailed templates for national context, mitigation contributions (both action-based and outcome-based), adaptation plans, planning processes, and means of implementation. The guide highlights the importance of identifying conditional contributions dependent on international finance, technology transfer, and capacity-building, while encouraging the capture of synergies between mitigation and adaptation to build political momentum and attract international support.

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) is positioned to become the largest multilateral institution for climate adaptation finance, with donor governments committing US$10.2 billion by the end of 2014. To ensure effectiveness, the document argues that the GCF must prioritize country ownership through direct access modalities, develop robust investment and accountability frameworks that avoid maladaptation, and clarify the role of its Private Sector Facility. It specifically suggests piloting small grants facilities under 'enhanced direct access' to reach local organizations and leveraging the experience of existing National Implementing Entities already accredited by the Adaptation Fund.

A pilot study in Malawi reveals that while short-term weather and seasonal forecasts are used, medium- to long-term climate projections (5–40 years) are not currently integrated into national policy or planning. Barriers include inappropriate spatial and temporal scales of data, technical jargon, and policy cycles that are too short to accommodate long-term climate horizons. However, there is significant opportunity to incorporate climate projections into Malawi's long-term development visions and economic modelling to prioritise resilient investments.

The Green Climate Fund reached operational effectiveness in May 2015 after securing signed contribution agreements totaling US$ 5.47 billion, exceeding the 50 per cent threshold of its US$ 10 billion in pledges. The Fund has accredited seven initial entities and is implementing a Readiness and Preparatory Support Programme to assist over 120 developing countries in nominating national designated authorities and developing climate strategies. It has also established initial investment, risk management, and results management frameworks to begin funding mitigation and adaptation projects by its third meeting in 2015.

The Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) provides several specialized tools for climate action: LEAP for integrated energy planning and GHG mitigation; WEAP for integrated water resources planning and 'climate-proofing'; REAP and REAP Petite for consumption-based environmental impact accounting; and weADAPT, a collaborative web-based platform for sharing adaptation knowledge. SEI also leads the PROVIA Guidance project to provide technical guidance for National Adaptation Plans (NAPs). The institute's current strategy focuses on expanding capacity-building, creating 'toolkits' to address resource trade-offs, and making these technical tools more accessible to non-experts through visualization and cloud-based platforms.

The briefing outlines three key recommendations for COP 20 negotiators to strengthen climate adaptation in the upcoming 2015 agreement: establishing a qualitative global goal for adaptation, creating a five-year 'adaptation cycle' for continuous improvement and review, and integrating the existing National Adaptation Plan (NAP) process into this cycle to maintain national flexibility.

Carbon Market Watch opposes expanding LULUCF activities within the CDM, citing risks to climate adaptation, a lack of market demand for offsets, and the non-permanent nature of land-based carbon sequestration compared to permanent fossil fuel emissions. The organization suggests that LULUCF activities are better suited for Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs), National Adaptation Plans (NAPs), and REDD+, emphasizing a rights-based approach to food security and land rights.

The document outlines the three primary areas of MRV—greenhouse gas emissions, mitigation actions, and support—and highlights the specific challenges LDCs face, particularly regarding the lack of common definitions for climate finance and the capacity burdens of reporting requirements.

The document outlines the transition from short-term National Adaptation Programmes of Action (NAPAs) to medium- and long-term National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) for Least Developed Countries (LDCs). It emphasizes the need for iterative planning, the use of 'no-regret' strategies to manage data uncertainty, and the integration of climate adaptation into national development strategies. The briefing highlights significant funding gaps, noting that LDCF resources fall short of demand and that LDCs require approximately US$ 5 billion to implement NAPAs alone. It also discusses the role of the Green Climate Fund (GCF) and the importance of establishing robust monitoring and evaluation (M&E) frameworks to track adaptation effectiveness and climate finance.

The document serves as a mapping tool between the NAP Technical Guidelines (NAP-TG) and the PROVIA Guidance, providing policy-makers in Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and other developing nations with specific methods and tools for climate adaptation planning. It aligns the NAP-TG's four elements—laying groundwork, preparatory elements, implementation strategies, and monitoring/evaluation—with the PROVIA adaptation learning cycle. Key guidance includes using stakeholder and network analysis for gap assessments, employing scenario analysis for future risk characterization, and applying multi-criteria analysis for appraising adaptation options. The document emphasizes that neither the NAP-TG nor the PROVIA Guidance is prescriptive, allowing countries to define activities based on their unique circumstances.

The document argues that adaptation planning has historically focused on local, direct impacts, neglecting the interconnected nature of global trade, finance, and migration. It proposes a framework to identify 'transboundary' and 'teleconnected' indirect impacts, categorizing them into four risk pathways: people, bio-physical, trade, and finance. The brief provides specific diagnostic questions for each pathway and recommends that NAPs include dedicated sections on international dimensions of vulnerability to improve regional and global resilience.