Search Climate Insights Directory

The report argues that while Nigeria has comprehensive national adaptation frameworks, there is a significant gap between high-level policy and local implementation. It highlights that locally led adaptation (LLA) is already occurring through community-driven initiatives in biogas production, aquaculture, and erosion control, but these efforts are hindered by a lack of finance, technical capacity, and political will. The authors advocate for a shift from 'top-down' approaches to those that empower frontline communities to lead the design and monitoring of adaptation actions.

The report documents diverse community-led climate adaptation efforts across Africa, Asia, and Latin America, emphasizing the role of ecosystem restoration, circular economies, and gender equality. It highlights that while local actors are innovative and entrepreneurial, they are often hindered by rigid top-down funding requirements, lack of land tenure, and systemic inequalities. The document advocates for a paradigm shift in climate finance toward patient, predictable, and accessible funding that recognizes the holistic needs of vulnerable populations, including their psychosocial well-being and human rights.

The document proposes a systematic classification framework to identify and screen climate resilience investments, aiming to bridge the gap between high-level resilience goals and capital market flows. It defines eligibility based on 'Substantial Contribution' to resilience while avoiding maladaptation and significant harm, categorizing investments into a white list, standardized checks, and further assessment. The framework is organized around seven themes: Resilient Agrifood Systems, Resilient Industry & Commerce, Resilient Cities, Resilient Nature & Biodiversity, Resilient Health, Resilient Societies, and Resilient Infrastructure.

The report argues that nature-based solutions (NbS) and carbon offsetting schemes often serve as a facade for corporate polluters to continue emitting while facilitating land grabbing and violating human rights. It provides numerous case studies across Africa, Asia-Pacific, Europe, and the Americas, highlighting systemic issues such as inflated carbon baselines, lack of free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC), and the failure of projects to deliver promised climate or social benefits. The document specifically critiques REDD+ projects, industrial tree plantations, and soil carbon programs for their lack of 'additionality' and their role in undermining food sovereignty and indigenous land rights.

The document argues that nature-based solutions (NBS) and carbon offsets often serve as a distraction for 'Big Polluters' to continue emitting while facilitating land grabs and violating Indigenous rights. It provides detailed evidence of inflated carbon baselines, lack of additionality, and social harms across Africa, Asia Pacific, Europe, Latin America, and North America. Key examples include REDD+ projects in Zimbabwe and Gabon that overestimated carbon savings, and soil carbon initiatives in the US and Kenya that threaten food sovereignty and traditional livelihoods. The report also critiques improved cookstove offsets for using flawed accounting to generate 'fake emission cuts'.

The document argues that carbon markets and offsets are 'false climate solutions' that fail to reduce emissions, allow major polluters to continue emitting, and facilitate land grabs and human rights violations, particularly in the Global South. It details the mechanisms of the UNFCCC's Article 6, various voluntary and regional trading schemes, and provides a strategic framework for civil society to oppose these markets through policy advocacy, legal tactics, and community solidarity.

The document critiques soil carbon offset programs, asserting they do not reduce global emissions but instead serve as a mechanism for agribusinesses to maintain industrial models. It highlights risks such as the erosion of traditional agricultural knowledge, the promotion of patented seeds and chemicals, and the unreliability of soil carbon measurement. The text specifically identifies companies like Yara and Boomitra as drivers of these markets, expanding from industrial farms in the US, Australia, and Brazil into small-scale farming in Africa, India, and South America.

The document argues that carbon markets and offsetting mechanisms are ineffective 'false solutions' that allow major polluters to continue emitting while causing harm to ecosystems and communities, particularly in the Global South. It details the mechanisms of the UNFCCC's Article 6, various regional and national carbon pricing initiatives, and provides strategies for civil society to resist these systems through advocacy, legal action, and community mobilization.

The document argues that carbon markets and emission offsets are ineffective at reducing emissions and instead serve as a distraction for major polluters while enabling extractivism and neocolonialism, particularly in the Global South. It details the mechanisms of the UNFCCC's Article 6, including the cooperative approaches of 6.2 and the UN-managed market of 6.4, as well as various regional and national systems in Europe, Africa, Asia, and the Americas. The guide concludes by offering strategies for opposition, such as policy advocacy, community awareness, and legal challenges, while providing resources for tracking carbon projects.

The 2023 Forest Declaration Assessment argues that a radical transformation of development pathways and finance is necessary to stop forest loss. It calls for a shift from 'business-as-usual' extraction to rights-based governance, urging signatories of the Glasgow Leaders’ Declaration to increase transparency and data collection. Key recommendations include redirecting 'gray' finance toward 'green' finance, securing land tenure for Indigenous Peoples and local communities, and implementing mandatory corporate disclosures to eliminate deforestation from supply chains.

The 2023 Forest Declaration Assessment finds that global finance for forests is severely inadequate, with 'gray' finance (subsidies driving deforestation) vastly outweighing 'green' finance. Public green finance averages USD 2.2 billion annually, less than 1% of estimated needs. Private financial institutions continue to provide trillions in financing to high-risk companies, while the voluntary carbon market faces declining demand and pricing due to integrity concerns. The report highlights a critical funding gap for Indigenous Peoples and local communities, who receive only 3% of the finance needed for tenure reform.

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) Country Programme for the Solomon Islands outlines a strategic approach to scaling up climate finance for a Small Island Developing State highly vulnerable to natural disasters. It identifies key priorities across energy, agriculture, and coastal protection, while mapping a pipeline of national and regional projects for the GCF-1 and GCF-2 periods. The report emphasizes the need to strengthen institutional capacity, engage the private sector—particularly MSMEs—and establish a robust governance structure to ensure country ownership and sustainable development outcomes.

The analysis reveals that only 24% of the 67 sampled countries demonstrated a climate risk responsive recovery. A significant paradox was identified: a country's income level was a stronger determinant of whether it used COVID-19 funds for adaptation than its actual climate vulnerability. High-income countries were more likely to integrate physical climate risks into their recovery plans, while the most vulnerable countries were the least likely to do so, with only Kenya and Vanuatu among the 20 most vulnerable countries approving explicit adaptation actions. Most responsive measures focused on water resources management, disaster prevention, infrastructure, and nature-based solutions, primarily targeting drought and flooding.

The Resilience Evidence Forum 2023 Synthesis Report outlines a multi-scalar approach to building resilience, focusing on people, communities, urban systems, socio-ecological systems, and market systems. It emphasizes the transition from top-down measurement to co-produced evidence that integrates local and Indigenous knowledge with scientific data. The report identifies critical gaps in funding for climate resilience—noting that less than $50 billion is spent annually against needs of $160-340 billion—and advocates for gender-transformative approaches, integrated health and nutrition systems, and the use of mixed-methods to capture transformative, long-term outcomes rather than just short-term recovery.

The natural infrastructure sector in the Canadian Prairies contributed over CAD 4.1 billion to GDP and employed over 33,000 people directly in 2022. In Manitoba, the sector directly employed over 5,700 people and contributed over CAD 540 million to the provincial economy in 2022. Investment scenarios for Manitoba suggest that annual investments of CAD 10 million or CAD 25 million could increase direct jobs by 8% to 21% and direct GDP by 7% to 17%. Similar growth potentials are identified for Alberta and Saskatchewan, where natural infrastructure is viewed as a means to bridge water infrastructure gaps and increase resilience against floods, droughts, and wildfires.

The document highlights the economic value of natural infrastructure in the Canadian Prairies, noting that in 2022, the sector directly employed over 33,000 people and contributed over CAD 4.1 billion to the region's GDP. In Saskatchewan specifically, the sector directly employed over 5,800 people and contributed CAD 640 million to the provincial economy in 2022. The report argues that increased annual investments—such as CAD 10 million or CAD 25 million in Saskatchewan—could significantly boost direct jobs and GDP while addressing water infrastructure gaps and increasing resilience against climate impacts like floods, droughts, and wildfires.

The document examines the challenges and opportunities for establishing green jobs in Latin America and the Caribbean, particularly in rural areas affected by COVID-19. It highlights a significant gap between 'environmental jobs' and 'green jobs' due to high informality and the lack of decent work standards. Through case studies in Colombia (bioeconomy and nature tourism in Guaviare) and Chile (agroecology in La Serena), the brief argues for a territorial approach that combines public policy with community-led initiatives to foster resilience and a just transition. It concludes with recommendations for governments to institutionalize green job definitions, improve statistical tracking, and provide targeted financial and technical support to vulnerable populations, including women and youth.

The document examines the potential for creating approximately 15 million green jobs in Latin America and the Caribbean by 2030, particularly in the energy, forestry, transport, and ecosystem restoration sectors. It highlights the challenge of high labor informality, which hinders the establishment of 'decent' green employment. Through case studies in Colombia (Amazonian bioeconomy and tourism) and Chile (agroecology in Coquimbo), the brief argues for the need to institutionalize green job definitions, improve statistical data, and provide targeted financial and technical support to rural organizations and women entrepreneurs to ensure a just transition.

The WRI Europe Strategy (2023-2027) positions the Europe office as a strategic hub to accelerate the global energy and nature transition. It focuses on three primary roles: driving positive change through leadership in sectors like food and energy efficiency, reducing Europe's own ecological footprint as a consumer, and acting as a partner for funding and knowledge. Key priorities include implementing the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR), reducing the carbon footprint of meals via the Coolfood initiative, and developing a Distributional Impact Assessment Tool to ensure equitable transitions. The strategy also emphasizes leveraging Europe's circular economy leadership to improve mineral recycling for the clean energy transition and supporting sustainable ocean management through the Ocean Panel.

WRI's 2023-2027 Strategic Plan shifts the organization from a focus on commitments to delivering tangible impact on the ground. The strategy centers on three interconnected global goals: improving human well-being (People), protecting ecosystem health (Nature), and limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees C (Climate). To achieve these, WRI targets transitions in three 'Human-Centered Systems'—food, land and water; energy; and cities—supported by shifts in 'Enabling Systems' including economics, finance, and governance. The plan prioritizes 12 focus countries and a network of 25 priority cities, utilizing a new results framework based on theories of change to measure progress toward 2027 and 2030 targets.