Search Climate Insights Directory

The document defines the conceptual landscape of nature-based climate solutions, distinguishing between the broad umbrella of NbS and the adaptation-specific focus of EbA. It argues that for these measures to be legitimate and effective, they must be grounded in risk assessments and robust social and environmental safeguards to prevent rights violations and biodiversity loss. The text provides practical examples of EbA across various ecosystems and outlines a framework for future implementation based on gender responsiveness, social inclusion, and biodiversity benefits.

Natural Justice submitted comments on the draft Climate Change Bill (B9-2022) to the South African Portfolio Committee on Environment, Forestry and Fisheries on 27 May 2022. The organization argues that the Bill lacks the urgency required to address the climate crisis, fails to set ambitious emission reduction targets, and provides insufficient protections for constitutional rights and vulnerable communities.

The briefing outlines five core principles for implementing just and equitable nature-based solutions (NbS), emphasizing inclusivity, the addressing of root causes of inequality, the mitigation of losses, the prioritization of at-risk communities, and the use of social and political valuation tools. It references a case study in Nakuru, Kenya, to demonstrate how these principles can be applied to community-level socio-economic and environmental issues.

The document argues that the traditional separation of nature and culture limits how landscapes are managed and monitored, hindering the achievement of global biodiversity and well-being targets. It advocates for a multifunctional approach to reconcile social equity with environmental goals and improve adaptation to climate change.

The report evaluates wastewater treatment options for the Hartenbos estuary, finding that while a hybrid solution is most effective at reducing nutrient pollution, an artificial wetland offers the highest net benefits if ecological and tourism gains are included. It also highlights that reusing 50% of treated wastewater for irrigation by 2060 could support 330 additional hectares of agricultural land, enhancing water security and job creation.

The analysis examines how the expansion of built-up areas at the expense of natural heat sinks like green spaces and water bodies increases urban heat risks in major cities across the Critical 9 countries. Using Copernicus Land Monitoring Service data and the IPCC's SSP1-1.9 scenario, the report details specific land-use losses in cities such as Shanghai, Karachi, and Dhaka, linking these changes to increased vulnerability to dangerous heat days (above 35°C) and rising energy demands for active cooling.

The Managing Watersheds for Enhanced Resilience of Communities to Climate Change in Nepal (MaWRiN) project aims to reduce vulnerability to landslides, floods, and droughts in the Marin watershed, Sindhuli district. With a total cost of USD 36,657,417, the project focuses on mainstreaming climate change adaptation (CCA) into local policies, transferring climate-resilient agricultural and livestock technologies, and implementing nature-based solutions (NbS) across six critical catchment areas. The project specifically targets indigenous populations, who make up 68.5% of the area, and addresses systemic barriers such as high poverty (43%) and limited institutional coordination between municipalities.

The GCF Board's 31st meeting resulted in the approval of two funding proposals totaling approximately USD 187.6 million, the adoption of an updated accreditation framework, and the re-accreditation of several entities. The Board discussed the Second Performance Review (SPR) and the need for a more effective private sector strategy and simplified approval processes for Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Small Island Developing States (SIDS).

The document examines the critical role of forests in climate regulation and biodiversity, noting that 420 million hectares have been lost since 1990. It analyzes the shift from failed attempts at a global forests convention to a polycentric governance system involving the UN Forum on Forests, REDD, and private sector deforestation commitments. The brief highlights the risks of carbon offsets and monoculture plantations, arguing that successful forest protection requires holistic valuation, strong political will, and the alignment of financial incentives.

Reclaim Finance asserts that Shell's climate strategy is fundamentally flawed, predicting the company will overshoot its 1.5°C carbon budget by 40.9% by 2050 and exhaust it entirely by 2034. The organization criticizes Shell's reliance on carbon intensity metrics, nature-based offsets, and continued expansion into new oil and gas fields, including unconventional sectors like the Arctic and fracking. Consequently, it recommends that shareholders vote against the company's climate resolution, support a shareholder-led resolution for Paris-aligned targets, and vote against the reelection of 10 Board Directors.

The document outlines the synergies between climate mitigation and public health, arguing that immediate action to reduce emissions provides significant health co-benefits across energy, transport, urban planning, and agriculture. It emphasises that climate change is a justice issue, noting that wealthy nations and individuals are the primary polluters while vulnerable populations suffer most. The briefing advocates for systemic transformations, such as shifting to plant-based diets, decarbonising energy systems, and implementing sustainable urban design, to avoid breaching the 1.5°C warming threshold and to improve global health outcomes.

Carbon Market Watch argues that Article 6.2 and 6.4 mechanisms lack a clear definition of "removals," leading to the risk of including "false solutions." The organization proposes four scientific principles for defining real removals: atmospheric GHG removal, permanent storage (at least 200-300 years), comprehensive accounting of process emissions, and a net-positive removal balance. Based on these, the document asserts that nature-based sequestration and point-source CCS do not qualify as permanent removals. It specifically critiques nature-based activities due to the impossibility of guaranteeing monitoring and liability for reversals over centuries, noting that buffer pools are inadequate. Instead, it suggests nature-based activities generate "Paris Agreement Support Units" to channel finance without allowing offset claims.

Carbon Market Watch argues that Parties should prioritize domestic mitigation over carbon credits and recommends strict transparency, science-based definitions for removals, and the establishment of an independent grievance body for Article 6 mechanisms.

The briefing concludes that ENI is not on track for the 1.5°C climate goal, as its cumulative greenhouse gas emissions are projected to exceed its allocated carbon budget by at least 13.6% by 2050. The analysis finds that ENI's short-to-medium term plans are incompatible with 1.5°C because the company continues to invest in oil and gas expansion, with production expected to grow until 2025. Furthermore, the report argues that ENI relies unsustainably on carbon offsets and Carbon Capture Use and Storage (CCUS) to meet its targets, while its capital expenditure remains heavily focused on fossil fuels despite claims of diversification.

The briefing concludes that Shell's strategy is not on track to meet the 1.5°C climate goal, predicting the company will exceed its allocated carbon budget by 2034. Despite a net-zero ambition for 2050, the analysis finds that Shell's short-term plans rely on unrealistic offsets and continued investment in oil and gas expansion. The report highlights that Shell remains a top global hydrocarbon developer, with approximately 90% of its 2022 CAPEX allocated to fossil fuels, which contradicts the deep emission cuts required for 1.5°C alignment.

The briefing argues that nature-based solutions (NbS) are often framed as apolitical, leading to the neglect of social equity and justice. It proposes five core principles: ensuring inclusive and transparent processes, tackling root causes of marginalization, limiting the unjust redistribution of risks and costs, prioritizing at-risk communities, and using valuation tools that assess social and political change. These principles are illustrated through a case study in Kaptembwa, Nakuru, Kenya, where participatory planning is used to address flooding and lack of green space in a semi-informal settlement.

The report evaluates the 'action gap' since the 1972 UN Conference on the Human Environment, noting that only about one-tenth of global environmental targets have been met. It argues that current economic systems drive planetary crises and extreme inequality, where the richest 10% of the population emitted more than half of total carbon emissions from 1990 to 2015. To unlock a better future, the authors propose redefining the human-nature relationship through biophilic urban design and indigenous knowledge, rethinking prosperity by moving beyond GDP and adopting 'function-over-product' business models, and reforming finance to bridge funding gaps in low-income countries. It calls for a new paradigm of 'technology co-development' and stronger accountability mechanisms to ensure that the coming decade leads to systemic transformation.

The report critiques the historical failure of technology transfer in clean energy, agriculture, and health, proposing a 'co-development' model to bridge the gap between developed and developing nations.

The report assesses the 50-year legacy of the 1972 Stockholm Conference, concluding that while scientific knowledge and goals have increased, an 'action gap' persists, with only about one-tenth of global environmental targets achieved. It argues that the world faces entwined planetary and human crises, where the richest 10% of the population emitted more than half of total carbon emissions from 1990-2015, while the poorest suffer the most. To unlock a better future, the authors propose three systemic shifts: redefining the human-nature relationship from extraction to care, rethinking prosperity beyond GDP to ensure it lasts for all, and redirecting financial flows toward sustainable innovation. The report emphasizes the need to move from 'technology transfer' to 'technology co-development' and to implement 'Rights of Nature' and biophilic urban design. It also calls for improving conditions for change by tackling policy incoherence, renewing multilateralism to manage chronic risks, and establishing a culture of accountable promises for both state and non-state actors.

The document proposes 'multifunctionality'—the simultaneous provision of multiple functions across natural and human traits—as a systemic approach to climate adaptation. It identifies roadblocks in current nature-based solutions (NbS), such as a lack of awareness regarding power relations, insufficient data on co-benefits and costs, and financing gaps. The authors advocate for 'hybrid solutions' that combine green, blue, and grey infrastructure and outline four leverage realms for action: defining beneficiaries, designing for interoperability, monitoring across scales, and governing for connectivity and justice.