Search Climate Insights Directory

The We Mean Business coalition asserts that the Marrakech Partnership is a crucial platform for integrating business, city, and civil society innovation into the UNFCCC regime. As the partnership's mandate expires at the end of 2020, the coalition emphasizes that public-private collaboration is vital for countries to submit and implement revised nationally determined contributions (NDCs) aligned with the 1.5°C goal and a net-zero economy by 2050.

The National Adaptation Plan (NAP) process is a strategic framework established in 2010 under the Cancun Adaptation Framework to help countries identify and address medium- and long-term climate adaptation priorities. Unlike the earlier National Adaptation Programmes of Action (NAPAs) which focused on immediate needs, the NAP process aims to embed adaptation into standard development planning, budgeting, and decision-making. The process consists of three broad phases: planning, implementation, and monitoring and evaluation (M&E). It is designed to be country-driven, gender-responsive, and multi-sectoral, ensuring that adaptation is not treated as a separate environmental issue but as an integral part of national development. The document highlights the NAP process's central role in meeting the goals of the Paris Agreement, specifically Article 7 paragraph 9, and its synergy with Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction.

The document defines key terms related to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Paris Agreement, specifically in the context of the COP25 conference. It explains the roles of the Conference of the Parties (COP) and the CMA, the structure of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), and the goals of the Paris Agreement, including temperature thresholds and net-zero emissions. Additionally, it details technical negotiation points such as the Paris Rulebook, Article 6 carbon markets, the prevention of double-counting, and the $100 billion climate finance target involving the Green Climate Fund (GCF).

The NDC Update Report emphasizes the necessity of long-term low greenhouse gas emission development strategies (LTSs) to drive ambition in the 2020 NDC update cycle. Survey data indicates that while confidence in current NDC implementation remains high, over half of respondents are unclear if their governments will raise ambition in the next update, with discussions often focused on costs rather than social or environmental benefits. The report proposes eight key elements for robust LTS processes, noting that more than half of surveyed governments had not yet started the LTS process. It highlights that 13 LTSs had been submitted to the UNFCCC at the time of writing, often characterized as "living documents" with a focus on stakeholder engagement. Contributions from organizations such as the NDC Partnership, GIZ, UNDP, WRI, AFD/IDFC, LEDS-GP, and FAO underscore the need for whole-of-government scope, transparency, and sector-specific pathways—particularly in energy and agriculture—to align investments and ensure food security.

The report analyzes the potential for Brazil, Canada, China, Germany, India, Japan, and the United States to strengthen their mitigation targets to align with the Paris Agreement's temperature goals. It evaluates these potentials by examining socioeconomic data, historical emissions, current policy projections, global least-cost pathways using marginal abatement cost curves, and 'fair share' equity principles. The analysis also considers the political feasibility of deploying available low-carbon technologies and phasing out fossil fuel subsidies.

The document outlines two methodologies—fairness-based and cost-effectiveness-based—for determining national GHG emission reductions required to meet the Paris Agreement's goals of limiting warming to well below 2°C and ideally 1.5°C. It notes that current commitments, including those of Germany and the EU, are insufficient. The analysis focuses on major emitters including Brazil, Canada, China, the EU, India, Japan, the USA, and specifically Germany, to identify gaps between current Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and the levels of ambition suggested by mitigation potentials or fair shares.

Article 6 of the Paris Agreement establishes frameworks for international carbon markets, allowing countries to trade emissions reductions to meet their nationally determined contributions (NDCs). While it offers potential cost savings of $250 billion per year by 2030 and can catalyze private finance, poor design risks increasing global emissions through double-counting and a lack of additionality. Key points of contention for negotiators include the application of 'corresponding adjustments' to prevent double-counting, the implementation of 'overall mitigation in global emissions' (OMGE), the 'share of proceeds' for the Adaptation Fund, and the potential carryover of up to 4 billion pre-2020 Kyoto Protocol units.

The briefing identifies significant challenges in tracking adaptation finance, such as context dependency and lack of standardized reporting. It proposes a three-category framework to distinguish between asset-focused, system-focused, and sectoral benchmark investments. To capture missing data, the authors suggest four technical approaches: keyword searches, sales data analysis, policy matching, and geographic matching. Initial assessments of Climate Bonds Initiative and CDP data show potential for capturing private finance, while the document recommends integrating adaptation into national planning and collaborating with data providers to enhance transparency.

Carbon Market Watch argues that any agreement on Article 6 must prioritize environmental integrity over expediency, specifically calling for the elimination of double counting through corresponding adjustments and the prevention of 'hot air' credits. The briefing advocates for a partial cancellation rate for all credits to achieve an overall mitigation in global emissions (OMGE) and the total exclusion of pre-2020 Kyoto Protocol units. Additionally, it emphasizes the need for independent grievance mechanisms and mandatory local stakeholder consultations to address past failures in social and environmental safeguards.

The briefing warns that up to 40 billion carbon credits lacking environmental integrity could undermine the Paris Agreement. These include legacy units from the Kyoto Protocol's CDM, JI, and IET mechanisms, as well as projected 'hot air' from NDCs set above business-as-usual levels. The author advocates for strict rules on the timing of reductions, the transferability of credits from weak targets, and the use of old credits to ensure the 1.5°C goal is not compromised.

The document examines the transition from Kyoto-era carbon credits to ITMOs under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, detailing the two primary cooperation avenues (Article 6.2 and 6.4) and the remaining challenges in establishing a rulebook. It categorizes potential project types, analyzes Canada's preparations—including waste sector partnerships in Chile and LNG exports—and highlights the economic potential of Article 6 to reduce NDC implementation costs by half by 2030 if properly regulated to avoid double counting and 'hot air'.

The report assesses Tanzania's vulnerability to climate change, specifically sea-level rise and storm surges, and evaluates the role of ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) in mitigating these risks. It finds that while Tanzania possesses critical ecosystems like mangroves and coral reefs, these are threatened by population growth and industrial development. The document highlights a gap in policy architecture, noting that EbA is not explicitly included in the current Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC). It identifies institutional fragmentation and a lack of spatial data as key challenges, while suggesting opportunities in blue carbon, sustainable ecotourism, and community-led co-management models.

The We Mean Business Coalition asserts that a transition to a zero-carbon economy is achievable but requires stronger government intervention to accelerate. The document highlights corporate commitments across power, transport, the built environment, heavy industry, and land use, while calling for policies such as carbon pricing, the removal of fossil fuel subsidies by 2025, and the implementation of robust Article 6 rules under the Paris Agreement to drive systemic change.

The document argues that 20th-century infrastructure paradigms are ill-suited for 21st-century climate extremes and that current 'sustainable' infrastructure efforts focus too heavily on low-carbon goals while neglecting nature-based resilience. It highlights a critical gap in 'upstream' strategic planning, where natural capital is often ignored until the project approval stage. Through case studies in Mozambique, Mexico, Myanmar, and South Africa, the report demonstrates the value of integrating ecosystem services and climate scenarios into land-use planning. It introduces the 'Visioning Futures' framework, which emphasizes defining spatial scope, identifying future objectives, and performing sensitivity testing under various climate scenarios to avoid environmental risks and optimize infrastructure siting.

The statement advocates for a non-market platform connecting the UNFCCC Paris Agreement and the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) to collectively account for carbon stocks in the Southern Ocean. It highlights that Antarctic blue carbon sites, which are expanding as ice melts, could store up to 160 million tonnes of carbon annually and act as a major natural negative feedback on climate change. By utilizing the ATS's existing framework where sovereignty claims are suspended, the authors suggest a way to bypass diplomatic obstacles to conservation and avoid conflicts over individual Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).

The document identifies critical knowledge gaps in the official Global Stocktake (GST) process, particularly regarding the definitions of equitable implementation, Paris-consistent financial flows, and adequate adaptation responses. It recommends that an independent Global Stocktake (iGST) focus on synthesizing existing data, fostering a common understanding of these ill-defined concepts, and providing forward-looking, country-specific recommendations to raise climate ambition.

The document argues that as countries set long-term decarbonisation targets, the use of international offsets must shift from offsetting continued emissions to supplementing rapid domestic reductions. It warns that misuse of offsets could allow developed countries to maintain 'business as usual' emissions patterns while claiming net-zero targets.

The We Mean Business coalition asserts that a transition to a zero-carbon economy by 2050 is achievable and offers significant economic and health benefits. While over 1,060 companies with a combined market capitalization of over US$20.1 trillion have committed to climate action, the document emphasizes that government policy must match this ambition. It calls on COP25 leaders to commit to economy-wide net-zero emissions by 2050, strengthen Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) in line with a 1.5C trajectory, and integrate decarbonization across all government departments, including finance, energy, agriculture, health, industry, and transport.

The global stocktake is a five-year review process under the Paris Agreement designed to assess collective progress in reducing emissions, building resilience, and aligning financial support. Agreed upon at COP24, the process consists of three phases: information collection (2022), technical assessment, and the communication of findings by the end of 2023. While intended to spur increased ambition for 2025 Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), the document notes a lack of clarity regarding the integration of 'loss and damage' and the definition of 'equity' in evaluations. Non-state actors and initiatives like the independent global stocktake (iGST) are highlighted as critical for providing the data and accountability necessary to enhance the process.

The briefing identifies four key priorities for COP25: increasing national climate ambition (NDCs), finalizing rules for international carbon markets and common time frames, reviewing the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage, and advancing climate finance and capacity-building. It emphasizes the need for environmentally sound rules for carbon trading and the importance of integrating social equity into climate policy to ensure a just transition.