Search Climate Insights Directory

The document outlines a comprehensive set of demands from Latin American civil society for COP30, focusing on the need for ambitious NDCs 3.0, a massive increase in adaptation and loss and damage funding, and a structured global roadmap for phasing out fossil fuels. It emphasizes the role of the Global South, the necessity of non-debt-generating public finance, and the integration of climate, biodiversity, and desertification goals.

The document outlines a comprehensive set of demands from Latin American and Caribbean civil society for the COP30 Presidency, focusing on increasing NDC ambition, scaling adaptation and loss and damage financing, reforming the global financial system, and ensuring a multidimensional just transition. It emphasizes the need for the 'Global Mutirão' to be informed by Southern perspectives and calls for a clear timeline for phasing out fossil fuels.

A coalition of 82 civil society organizations from Latin America and the Caribbean urges the COP30 Presidency to move beyond declarative statements toward an integrated framework of accountability. The letter demands ambitious NDC 3.0 submissions from G20 and major emitting nations, a roadmap to mobilize USD 1.3 trillion annually by 2035, and a precise phase-out date for fossil fuels. It emphasizes the need for a transformative adaptation agenda, the operationalization of the Loss and Damage Response Fund, and the integration of climate and biodiversity governance through the Rio Conventions.

As of June 2026, 140 out of 195 Paris Agreement parties have submitted emission reduction commitments for 2035. While 42 of 43 developed countries have published commitments, the document highlights a gap in global coverage, noting that the United States' withdrawal from the Paris Agreement and Argentina's lack of an updated NDC hinder the 1.5°C temperature goal. The G20 represents 75.05% of global emissions, but current NDCs from this group cover only 63.01% of those emissions.

The document details a bottom-up modeling exercise using the Energy Scope tool to project Colombia's energy transition. It outlines a path toward net-zero emissions by 2050, characterized by a massive scale-up of solar and wind capacity, the gradual phase-out of fossil fuels, and the integration of energy storage and green hydrogen. The modeling identifies specific capacity targets for renewable energy across three time horizons and highlights the role of natural gas as a transitional fuel for transport and industry before full electrification.

The report argues that Colombia's NDC 3.0 must move from implicit to explicit fossil fuel phase-out (FFPO) goals, aligning national targets with the COP28 Global Stocktake. It provides quantitative modeling for renewable energy capacity, energy storage, and the retirement of coal and gas plants, while emphasizing the need for social protection and economic diversification for affected communities.

The document identifies critical bottlenecks in Colombia's energy transition, specifically in transmission infrastructure and licensing, which cause project delays of three to six years. It argues that while capital is available, there is a shortage of bankable, large-scale projects. To bridge a projected annual investment gap of 27.7 billion COP (approximately 7.5 billion USD) in clean energy for 2026-2030, the report recommends utilizing blended finance, asset securitization, and a dedicated economic transition fund to support regions dependent on fossil fuels, where 448,000 jobs are at risk by 2035.

The document explains the mechanics of carbon credits, distinguishing between regulated markets under the Paris Agreement and voluntary markets. It highlights that while Latin America and the Caribbean accounted for 22% of global carbon credit sales in 2021, the region lacks the robust regulation needed to prevent environmental and social risks. The guide warns against over-reliance on the forestry sector, the risk of 'greenwashing' in voluntary markets, and the potential for 'double counting' of emission reductions. It recommends establishing transparent national registries, ensuring fair benefit-sharing with local communities, and prioritizing structural decarbonization over simple offsetting.

The document critiques the Indonesian Ministry of Forestry's plan to allocate 20 million hectares of forest for 'food and energy estates'. It argues that this plan constitutes a 'legalization of deforestation' that contradicts Indonesia's global climate commitments (NDC, CBD) and its own FoLU Net Sink 2030 target. The brief highlights the risk of corporate capture, the displacement of Indigenous peoples, and the potential for severe human rights abuses, particularly if the projects are designated as National Strategic Projects (PSN). It emphasizes that food and energy should be treated as human rights rather than business commodities, advocating for local food sovereignty and community-led energy solutions over large-scale industrial estates.

The document argues that the World Bank's Paris Alignment (WB PA) framework is scientifically flawed and provides loopholes for continued investment in high-carbon technologies. It specifically criticizes the classification of fossil gas as a transition fuel and the use of 'expert judgement' over science-based criteria to justify emissions-intensive projects. The coalition calls for an urgent revision to exclude all fossil fuels, prioritize renewable energy, and increase transparency and civil society consultation.

The We Mean Business Coalition calls on COP26 governments to commit to a 1.5°C trajectory, finalize robust Article 6 market rules, and ensure the delivery of $100 billion in climate finance for developing countries. The coalition emphasizes the need for a transparent Global Stocktake that includes private sector data and a clear process for establishing a Global Goal for Adaptation to build resilience across global supply chains.

The document provides a comprehensive analysis of carbon pricing mechanisms, specifically carbon taxes and emissions trading systems (ETS), within the Brazilian context. It evaluates international experiences, such as the EU ETS, to demonstrate that while short-term costs increase, long-term benefits include fostered innovation and business growth. The report details various macroeconomic studies on Brazil, suggesting that the negative impacts of emission restrictions can be minimized through revenue recycling and technological progress. It emphasizes the importance of Monitoring, Reporting, and Verification (MRV) and recommends that the Brazilian government establish a transparent climate governance structure. For companies, it suggests incorporating climate change into corporate strategy and adopting internal carbon pricing as a risk management tool.

The document outlines the role of business in achieving Indonesia's 2035 NDC, highlighting a USD 3.8 trillion investment opportunity. It identifies critical barriers such as regulatory uncertainty and fragmented institutional responsibilities, while proposing solutions across the power, industry, and transport sectors to align national policy with private sector readiness.

The document analyzes Japan's second NDC, submitted in February 2025, which targets greenhouse gas emission reductions of 60% by 2035 and 73% by 2040 relative to 2013 levels. The authors argue these targets are insufficient for a developed nation and fall below the global average required for the 1.5°C goal. The briefing emphasizes that Japan is currently off track for its 2030 goals and risks economic disadvantage by maintaining a reliance on fossil fuels. It calls for a rapid phase-out of coal by 2035, a significant increase in renewable energy capacity—potentially reaching 65-80% of electricity supply by 2035—and the implementation of a robust carbon pricing system via the GX-ETS with a binding emissions cap. The report also highlights the role of electrification, particularly through heat pumps and electric vehicles, and the strong support for more ambitious action from the Japanese business community.

The document argues that a just transition—maximizing economic and social benefits of climate action while minimizing risks—is essential for business productivity and community wellbeing. It presents 12 policy asks for governments, organized into five pillars: Governance and Frameworks, Skills and Workforce Transition, Stakeholder Engagement and Protection, Financing Just Transition, and Monitoring and Metrics. Key recommendations include integrating just transition frameworks into national climate strategies, investing in green job creation and reskilling, protecting marginalized groups and informal workers, providing government-backed financing to derisk private investment, and harmonizing sustainability disclosure standards.

The We Mean Business coalition outlines eight key policy asks for the COP21 Paris Agreement to ensure the transition to a low carbon economy is "inevitable, irreversible and irresistible." The brief argues that a clear, ambitious legal framework is essential to provide the policy certainty businesses and investors need to allocate capital toward decarbonization. Key recommendations include a long-term goal of net zero emissions well before the end of the century, five-year cycles for strengthening national commitments, the adoption of meaningful carbon pricing, and the scaling of climate finance beyond the USD$100 billion annual pledge. The document also emphasizes the need for transparency, high-ambition national commitments, political parity between mitigation and adaptation, and enhanced private sector engagement in pre-2020 ambition through Workstream 2.

The We Mean Business coalition seeks to align the private sector with the Paris Agreement's goal of keeping global warming well below 2°C. The coalition focuses on three pillars: demonstrating business implementation of climate commitments, encouraging new corporate commitments, and advocating for government policies—such as carbon pricing and domestic legislation for Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs)—that enable business leadership. It emphasizes the need for a 'virtuous circle' where NDCs drive business action, which in turn informs more ambitious NDCs. The document also calls for scaling up climate finance from billions to trillions and integrating the private sector into national adaptation plans and resilience strategies.

The document is a formal statement signed by a broad coalition of individuals, businesses, and civil society organizations calling for urgent government action to limit global warming to 1.5°C. It emphasizes that 1.5°C is a critical limit rather than a target and argues that current national pledges are insufficient to meet this goal. The signatories commit to a just transition and call for global emissions to be halved by 2030, highlighting the immediate impacts of climate change already visible in regions such as Pakistan, California, Europe, and Somalia.

The We Mean Business Coalition presents a series of policy asks across key sectors—including energy, transport, industry, and the built environment—to align global economies with a 1.5°C trajectory. The document highlights existing corporate commitments, such as the 900+ companies aligning with 1.5°C targets, and calls for government action on carbon pricing, the elimination of fossil fuel subsidies, and the implementation of just transition plans. It emphasizes that a green recovery from COVID-19 can boost GDP and employment while addressing the climate and biodiversity crises.

The document argues that current corporate GHG accounting often conflates physical inventories with market-based performance accounting, leading to opacity and lackluster climate finance. By analyzing the Paris Agreement's architecture—which strictly separates national physical inventories from market-based 'emissions balances'—the authors propose a more robust corporate framework. Key recommendations include adopting dual-ledger reporting, establishing governance bodies for accreditation of market instruments, and implementing standardized biennial reporting to track annual progress toward net-zero targets rather than focusing solely on a single target year.