Search Climate Insights Directory

The report details two workshops held in 2018 focused on South-South and triangular cooperation for climate action. It highlights case studies of technological exchange in agriculture, water management, and urban resilience, while identifying systemic barriers such as funding gaps and a lack of institutional capacity at the subnational level.

The report details a workshop focused on aligning National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) with Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). It argues that while NDCs set high-level adaptation goals, the NAP process provides the technical and operational framework to implement, monitor, and translate these goals to local levels. Key findings indicate that most participating countries have not yet established direct links between the two processes, though all aspire to 'systematic alignment' where NDC adaptation content is derived directly from the NAP process. Challenges include institutional silos, differing timelines, and political economy factors, while opportunities include improved climate finance mobilization and reduced duplication of effort.

The report details a workshop focused on aligning National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) with Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). It argues that while NDCs set high-level goals, NAPs provide the technical and operational framework for implementation. Key findings highlight that most participating countries lack a direct link between these two processes and face challenges such as institutional silos, conflicting interests between mitigation and adaptation, and a lack of common monitoring and evaluation (M&E) frameworks. The document proposes a path toward 'systematic alignment' where NDC adaptation content is derived directly from the NAP process.

The report details a workshop focused on aligning National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) with Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). It argues that while NDCs set high-level goals, the NAP process serves as the operational mechanism to implement these goals at subnational and local levels. The document identifies significant institutional gaps, as many countries operate these processes in parallel without coordination. Key recommendations include establishing joint technical working groups, creating shared monitoring and evaluation frameworks, and developing technical guidelines to move from informal to systematic alignment.

The document argues that while there is significant global potential for policy coherence between the Paris Agreement and the 2030 Agenda, this must be translated into national-level implementation. Using the NDC-SDG Connections tool, the authors analyzed over 7,000 climate activities, finding strong synergies in energy, agriculture, and water. However, it warns that trade-offs—such as bioenergy competing with food security for land—are rarely documented in policy papers and must be proactively managed to avoid maladaptation.

The document examines the alignment between Vietnam's climate action framework and its 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda to identify opportunities for joint implementation and avoid duplication of effort, while also considering the role of NGOs.

The briefing identifies three central pillars for climate finance negotiations at COP24: the replenishment of dedicated funds, the creation of reporting guidelines for tracking financial flows, and the planning of a new collective quantified goal after 2025. It emphasizes the need for developed countries to scale up support, specifically through the Green Climate Fund, and to improve both ex-post reporting of past flows and ex-ante projections of future funding to build trust with developing nations.

The paper examines how the international linking of emissions trading systems (ETSs), which allows allowances to flow across borders and alter emission levels, should be accounted for under the Paris Agreement. Specifically, it focuses on the framework provided by Article 6.2 to ensure that such links are properly reflected in the achievement of nationally determined contributions (NDCs). The document notes that the European Union and Switzerland intend to use Article 6.2 to account for their ETS link.

The We Mean Business Coalition urges governments at COP24 to accelerate the transition to a low-carbon economy by setting bold targets and clear timelines. The coalition emphasizes the need for a just transition involving tripartite social dialogue and investment in worker retraining. Specifically, it calls for full government participation in the Talanoa Dialogue to update nationally determined contribution (NDC) targets and the creation of a strong Paris rulebook featuring a global stocktake, common NDC implementation periods, an enhanced transparency framework, and guidelines to protect carbon market integrity.

The report evaluates mechanisms to ensure that international carbon market credits under Article 6.4 of the Paris Agreement result in a net reduction of global emissions. It identifies 'automatic cancellation' and 'discounting' as the only options that meet the necessary criteria for overall mitigation, recommending 'automatic cancellation' due to its ease of implementation and precedent in the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). Analysis of 18 scenarios suggests that while costs for credit buyers may increase, the overall mitigation principle provides various benefits for transferring countries across a broad range of rates.

The report finds that G20 countries are not on track to meet Paris Agreement goals, with energy-related CO2 emissions increasing again in 2017 and 82% of energy supply still coming from fossil fuels. It highlights significant gaps in sectoral actions—particularly in power, transport, and industry—and notes that fossil fuel subsidies in the G20 nearly doubled between 2007 and 2016. While some countries are implementing 'just transition' initiatives for workers, others lack dialogue or action.

The document explores how green bonds can support Brazil's agricultural sector, noting that while the forestry sector has successfully used these instruments, sustainable agriculture remains underfunded. It highlights the underutilization of government programs like the ABC Program and suggests that securitizing small loans via Certificados de Recebíveis do Agronegócio (CRA) and leveraging bank-issued green bonds could bridge the financing gap for sustainable practices.

The report argues that Brazil can align its economic growth with climate commitments by increasing agricultural productivity on degraded lands, diversifying its energy matrix with renewables, and improving transport infrastructure. It concludes that the financial returns of climate-friendly investments will outweigh the costs, with specific opportunities to double agricultural production without further deforestation and reduce total energy system costs through decarbonization.

The report analyzes Indonesia's public finance levers for clean energy, finding that while IDR 12.4 trillion was provided between 2012 and 2016, this is insufficient to meet the 2025 target of 23% renewable energy in the primary energy mix. It identifies key barriers to private investment, including high financing costs and a lack of long-term debt, and argues that capital injections into local development financial institutions (DFIs) like SMI and the use of guarantees are more effective at leveraging private capital than direct budget appropriations. The report recommends adjusting tariff structures to ensure project viability and expanding the role of DFIs to bridge financing gaps.

The document argues for a fundamental shift from 'zero-sum offsetting' to a 'results based climate finance' (RBCF) model for the Article 6.4 mechanism. It recommends strict environmental integrity criteria, including a partial cancellation rate for credits and the exclusion of emission removals. To prevent the carry-over of failures from the Kyoto Protocol, it proposes a full re-assessment of existing Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) projects and prohibits the use of pre-2020 units for post-2020 targets. The brief also emphasizes the need for independent governance, a formal grievance mechanism to protect human rights, and mandatory local stakeholder consultations.

The document argues that while individual CVF countries have low emissions, their collective impact is significant, equivalent to the world's fifth largest emitter. It provides a 'menu of options' for updating NDCs across key sectors—energy, transport, forests, and agriculture—while emphasizing the need for enhanced international finance, technology transfer, and robust national legal frameworks to implement these ambitions.

This report examines the expansion of geothermal power in Kenya, highlighting its role in the country's climate mitigation goals and the challenges of attracting private investment due to social, political, and environmental risks.

The 2017 National Framework for Air Quality Management serves as the operational blueprint for the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act (AQA) in South Africa. It defines the roles of national, provincial, and municipal governments in managing atmospheric emissions and outlines a governance cycle comprising information management, problem identification, strategy development, standard setting, and enforcement. Key tools introduced include the South African Air Quality Information System (SAAQIS) and the South African Atmospheric Emission Licence and Inventory Portal (SAAELIP). The framework also details the process for declaring priority areas, managing listed activities through Atmospheric Emission Licences (AELs), and fulfilling international obligations regarding greenhouse gases, ozone-depleting substances, and persistent organic pollutants.

The document identifies four primary areas of negotiation for COP24: resolving the impasse on climate finance, standardizing the communication of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), establishing a timetable for the Enhanced Transparency Framework, and defining the outcomes of the Talanoa Dialogue in light of the IPCC Special Report on 1.5°C.

The We Mean Business Coalition argues that vague NDCs hinder the ability of the private sector to invest in a clean energy economy. The coalition calls for the standardization of data—including base years, target years, and IPCC methodologies—and requests clarity on the domestic legislation and financial measures intended to implement these targets to ensure a just transition and a predictable regulatory environment.