Search Climate Insights Directory

The Stakeholder Toolkit lists various frameworks and organizations designed to help industries reduce their impact on forests. For agriculture, it highlights the Accountability Framework Initiative and Commodity Roadmaps for palm oil, soy, beef, and paper. In mining, it references World Bank guidance on nature-based solutions and the ICMM Mining Principles. For infrastructure, it points to the SuRe standard and the Infrastructure and Nature Coalition. The toolkit serves as a directory of resources to align corporate and government operations with forest conservation and climate goals.

The Stakeholder Toolkit lists various guidelines and initiatives for reducing the environmental impact of industrial activities. It categorizes resources for agricultural supply chains (e.g., Commodity Roadmaps), mining (e.g., ICMM Mining Principles), and infrastructure (e.g., SuRe standard), while identifying key coalitions like the Forest-Positive Coalition of Action and the We Mean Business Coalition that drive systemic transitions toward net-zero and deforestation-free supply chains.

The document argues that the global biodiversity finance gap—estimated at an annual need of USD 536 billion by 2050—cannot be closed by grants alone. It proposes a blended finance approach that integrates information, regulatory, economic, institutional, and financial instruments to de-risk investments and catalyze private capital. Using the Green Climate Fund's (GCF) portfolio as a basis, the paper demonstrates how combining instruments (e.g., pairing carbon credits with parametric insurance), sequencing them along a maturity-concessionality gradient (e.g., the Amazon Bioeconomy Fund), and establishing long-term partnerships (e.g., Project Finance for Permanence) can create sustainable financial models for nature-based solutions.

The compendium outlines the technical requirements and eligible activities for the Green Climate Fund's Simplified Approval Process (SAP), which is designed to reduce the time and effort for preparing, reviewing, and approving small-scale projects (up to USD 25 million) with minimal environmental and social risks. It provides sectoral guidelines for agriculture, ecosystems, water security, cities, energy efficiency, land use, REDD+, renewable energy, and transport, detailing how to achieve a 'paradigm shift' and measure impact using the GCF's Integrated Results Management Framework (IRMF).

The report examines Sweden's maritime sectors—including blue food, offshore energy, tourism, and shipping—and argues for a shift from a sector-based approach to a multifunctional, ecosystem-based model. It identifies significant growth potential in offshore wind and sustainable aquaculture but warns that the current state of marine ecosystems is dire. The document recommends national coordination of marine spatial planning, the adoption of net-zero goals for maritime transport, and the modernization of regulatory frameworks to support circular and fossil-free technologies.

The Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) 2022 Annual Results Report details the organization's progress across three impact areas: reducing climate risk, promoting sustainable resource use and resilient ecosystems, and improving health and well-being. Key achievements include contributing to the COP27 decision to establish a loss and damage fund, developing the Global Environmental Impacts of Consumption (GEIC) indicator adopted at COP15, and implementing water management master plans in Bolivia. The report highlights the use of digital tools like LEAP, WEAP, and Trase to inform policy in various regions, including Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Organizationally, SEI reports an increase in scientific publications, a diversification of funding sources, and the implementation of a global monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL) procedure.

The GCF is the largest multilateral climate finance contributor to African states, but its portfolio is heavily weighted toward mitigation (59%) over adaptation (41%), despite urgent regional needs. While the GCF has effectively leveraged co-financing, particularly through Multilateral Development Banks, it faces significant challenges in direct access, with only 18 Direct Access Entities (DAEs) accredited across 13 countries. The evaluation highlights cumbersome and rigid procedural barriers, including an English-only policy and high transaction costs, which hinder access for Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Fragile, Conflict, and Violence (FCV) states. Gender-related co-benefits are growing, but engagement with indigenous peoples remains limited. The report recommends shifting the portfolio toward adaptation, streamlining accreditation and fee structures, and increasing regional presence in Africa.

The GCF Water Project Design Guidelines Part 1 establish a structured four-phase process—Scoping, Situation Analysis, Project Design, and Action Planning—to ensure water projects are climate-resilient and eligible for funding. The guide emphasizes an integrated systems approach, combining the Natural Resource System (NRS), Socio-Economic System (SES), and Administrative and Institutional System (AIS). A central requirement is the 'climate rationale,' which must use a 'climate science base' of historical and projected data to prove that projects address climate-induced risks rather than just general development needs. The guidelines advocate for adaptive management tools like Climate Risk Informed Decision Analysis (CRIDA) and Dynamic Adaptive Policy Pathways (DAPP) to handle uncertainty. Finally, the document links technical design steps to GCF's six investment criteria, including impact potential, paradigm shift potential, and country ownership, to ensure proposals are 'bankable' and aligned with National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) and Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).

The GCF Water Project Design Guidelines Part 2 outlines a structured approach to developing investment-oriented water projects that address climate change. It details the specific requirements and recommended measures for four key areas: Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM), Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH), Drought Risk Management, and Flood Risk Management. The guide emphasizes the need for a strong climate science basis, the use of specific analytical tools, and the implementation of both 'grey' and 'green' infrastructure. Special attention is given to Small Island Developing States (SIDS), highlighting their unique vulnerabilities to sea-level rise and freshwater scarcity. The document also provides a framework for assessing project impact, paradigm shift potential, and sustainable development co-benefits to align with GCF's strategic goals.

The document argues that the World Bank Group's (WBG) proposed evolution is an 'expansion of business as usual' that fails to address systemic harms. The signatories demand an end to fossil fuel and industrial animal agriculture financing, a shift away from 'de-risking' private capital, and a democratization of governance to better serve the Global South. They specifically criticize the lack of focus on biodiversity loss, the continued use of the ICSID tribunal to protect corporate profits over climate action, and the Bank's failure to participate meaningfully in sovereign debt relief for climate-vulnerable countries.

Carbon Market Watch argues that the EU's proposed Carbon Removal Certification Framework (CRCF) must be strictly limited to permanent carbon removals to avoid 'mitigation deterrence'. The organization recommends prohibiting the use of certified removals for offsetting emissions in the EU ETS or ESR, excluding carbon farming and carbon storage in products due to their lack of permanence, and implementing stricter quality criteria for quantification and liability. It suggests that nature-based solutions should be funded via activity-based finance for biodiversity and soil health rather than through carbon removal metrics.

The 2023 Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor evaluates 24 multinational companies, finding that 15 of them have climate strategies of low or very low integrity. Key issues include ambiguous net-zero pledges, insufficient 2030 targets that fall short of 1.5°C pathways, and a heavy reliance on non-permanent biological carbon offsets. While emission disclosure transparency is moderate, the report highlights a critical '2030 blind spot' where corporate commitments do not match the required global reductions of 43-48% by 2030. The authors advocate for a shift from offsetting to a 'climate contribution' approach and call for tighter regulatory oversight to ensure corporate accountability.

The Mekong Thought Leadership and Think Tanks Network is a three-year initiative supported by the Australian Government's Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT). It aims to improve water and energy security and climate resilience in the Mekong Subregion by strengthening the capacity of knowledge-based policy influence organisations (KBPIOs). The program focuses on inclusive knowledge co-production and the engagement of vulnerable and marginalised groups. It is managed by a consortium of eight organisations led by the Stockholm Environment Institute - Asia Centre. The program funds flagship studies (up to AUD 250,000) and rapid response projects (up to AUD 50,000) addressing specific issues such as transboundary water disaster risks, urban heat resilience, and gender-sensitizing infrastructure in the Mekong Delta.

The report identifies 41 federal laws enacted since 2017 that support climate adaptation, noting a shift from disaster recovery toward pre-disaster mitigation. It highlights the role of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the National Defense Authorization Act in integrating resilience, while also noting the use of nature-based solutions through conservation laws. The author argues that despite these bipartisan advancements, the U.S. still lacks a cohesive, coordinated federal strategy to address the increasing frequency and cost of climate-related disasters.

The report assesses gender gaps in Colombia, specifically within rural and indigenous communities, to inform the Heritage Colombia (HECO) program's efforts in climate-responsive planning and forest management. It identifies significant disparities in land tenure, labor participation, and the burden of unpaid care work, while highlighting the risks of gender-based violence against environmental leaders. The document outlines a Gender Action Plan across three project components: strengthening governance, establishing participatory monitoring systems, and improving land and forest management, with specific targets for women's participation and the integration of gender-responsive indicators.

The Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre (CCCCC) is seeking USD 199,966 from the Green Climate Fund (GCF) to align its project development processes with the new Integrated Results Management Framework (IRMF). The proposal aims to address human resource constraints within the CCCCC's Project Development and Management Unit (PDMU) to accelerate the flow of climate finance to the Caribbean. Key activities include updating the CCCCC's Project Formulation and Monitoring manuals, delivering capacity-building workshops for 15 PDMU staff, and providing technical support to finalize two critical funding proposals: the Dominica Community Resilience Enhancement Project (DOMCREP) and the Climate Actions for Building Resilience in Coastal communities in the Caribbean (CABRIC Caribbean). The project is slated for a 12-month implementation period.

The report argues that current global economic responses to COVID-19, the war in Ukraine, and the climate crisis have been too focused on short-term stabilisation and stimulus rather than long-term structural reform. It highlights that only 18% of the USD 14.6tn allocated to COVID-19 recovery in 2020 was green spending, and that such investments have been concentrated in wealthier nations and focused primarily on decarbonisation. The authors advocate for a 'systems mind-set' that integrates circular economy principles, nature-based solutions, and just transition policies. Key recommendations include the use of debt-for-nature swaps, increased multilateral funding for the Global South, and the implementation of a 'Green Structural Recovery Menu' featuring fiscal reforms and the phasing out of fossil fuel subsidies.

The report finds that while 92% of surveyed business leaders view reducing carbon emissions as an urgent priority, many struggle with the 'how' of decarbonization due to budget and technological constraints. Businesses increasingly view the voluntary carbon market (VCM) as a critical tool for immediate action, though concerns over greenwashing and market transparency persist. While science-based targets are widely supported, there is a significant demand for clearer, more realistic guidance to help organizations meet their 2030 and 2050 goals.

The report assesses Senegal's climate adaptation landscape, highlighting a disconnect between top-down national policies and effective, endogenous community-led actions. While case studies in agriculture, coastal zones, and health demonstrate that local initiatives are well-aligned with NDC goals, they suffer from a lack of direct funding and institutional recognition. The document argues for a paradigm shift toward Locally Led Adaptation (LLA) to enhance the sustainability and efficiency of the country's climate resilience efforts.

The report assesses Ghana's climate adaptation landscape, highlighting a gap between national policy frameworks and local implementation. While Ghana has established comprehensive strategies like the updated NDCs and the National Climate Change Policy, funding is heavily skewed toward mitigation (87.4%) over adaptation (3.4%). Through three case studies in the Savannah, Upper East, and coastal regions, the study demonstrates that locally led adaptation (LLA)—such as organic shea processing, climate-smart agriculture, and community-based disaster risk reduction—effectively reduces vulnerability and improves livelihoods. However, LLA is hindered by limited financial resources, weak institutional coordination, and a top-down decision-making approach. The report recommends devolving financial resources, integrating traditional knowledge into policy, and fostering participatory decision-making to enhance climate resilience.