Search Climate Insights Directory

The South African Youth Climate Action Plan (SA YCAP) is a comprehensive framework developed by young people aged 13-30 to advocate for an intersectional and just transition to a decarbonised economy. It calls for the integration of youth in policymaking, the implementation of a national climate education plan, and a shift from fossil fuel dependency to decentralised renewable energy. The plan emphasizes the need for good governance to combat corruption in climate finance and proposes specific nature-based solutions and sustainable agricultural practices to protect South Africa's biodiversity and food security.

The document analyzes three case studies from the Global Innovation Lab for Climate Finance to demonstrate how linking financial instruments to policy tools—such as national land-use regulations, insurance subsidies, and subsidized rural credit—can stimulate demand, identify project pipelines, and attract private capital. It provides specific design considerations to mitigate risks like market distortion, political instability, and 'leakage' of deforestation.

Carbon Market Watch analyzed 18 "carbon neutral" fossil fuel claims, primarily involving liquefied natural gas (LNG), and found that every claim failed to meet basic criteria for environmental integrity and transparency. The report argues that fossil fuels cannot be carbon neutral because the firms involved are not aligned with 1.5°C pathways and rely on flawed "tonne-for-tonne" offsetting. Key failures include the omission of Scope 3 emissions in one-third of claims, a total lack of transparency regarding the price paid for carbon credits, and the use of impermanent nature-based sinks to offset long-term fossil carbon emissions. The report recommends that fossil fuel firms cease these claims, stop new exploration, and shift toward a "contribution" model for climate finance.

The fact sheet details how six major corporate players—BP, Microsoft, Drax, IETA, BlackRock, and Shell—employ 'net zero' agendas to maintain business-as-usual operations. It contends that these entities promote 'false solutions' such as carbon offsets, BECCS, and hydrogen to delay emissions cuts at the source. The document further highlights the influence of these corporations on COP26 through sponsorship, lobbying, and participation in industry-led initiatives like the Race to Zero and the Taskforce on Scaling Voluntary Carbon Markets.

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) rejects Nature-based Solutions (NbS), characterizing the term as a 'wolf in sheep's clothing.' The organization contends that NbS is too vague, allowing harmful practices like industrial monoculture plantations to be labeled as 'natural.' FoEI argues that NbS serves as a greenwashing tool for fossil fuel and agro-industrial companies to justify 'net zero' claims through carbon offsetting rather than actual emission reductions. The document warns that the scale of land required for these projects leads to land grabbing and violates the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities, particularly in the Global South. Instead of NbS, FoEI advocates for systemic change through agroecology, community forest management, and a coordinated phase-out of fossil fuels.

Friends of the Earth International (FOEI) rejects Nature Based Solutions (NBS), characterizing it as a 'wolf in sheep's clothing' that instrumentalizes nature to serve corporate profits and 'net-zero' offsetting schemes. The document contends that NBS promotes monoculture plantations, enables the financialization of nature, and threatens the sovereignty of Indigenous Peoples and local communities. FOEI argues that NBS distracts from the urgent need to phase out fossil fuels and instead advocates for systemic changes such as agroecology and Community Forest Management (CFM).

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) rejects Nature-based Solutions (NbS), characterizing the term as a "wolf in sheep's clothing" that masks neocolonialism and corporate greenwashing. The document contends that NbS promotes industrial monoculture plantations and the financialization of nature, which threatens the land rights of Indigenous peoples and local communities, particularly in the Global South. FoEI argues that NbS serves as a distraction from the urgent need to phase out fossil fuels and instead advocates for systemic changes through agroecology and community forest management.

The document critiques the 'net zero' framework promoted by the UK presidency and the 'Race to Zero' initiative for COP26. It asserts that net zero ignores historical responsibility, relies on physically impossible natural carbon sinks, and serves as a 'Trojan horse' for dangerous geoengineering. The author distinguishes between 'removals' and 'offsets', arguing that the latter maintain the status quo and divert investment from systemic transformation. Friends of the Earth International demands a shift toward 'real zero' (absolute emissions reductions), the exclusion of polluting companies from COP26, and the fulfillment of climate finance obligations by Northern countries to support the Global South.

The report evaluates India's post-pandemic economic recovery through the lens of natural capital, analyzing budgetary allocations in agriculture, MSMEs, power, mining, and the social sector. It finds that while the Union Budget 2021-22 showed more positive natural capital alignment than the initial COVID recovery package, significant gaps remain, particularly a lack of capital expenditure for green infrastructure and a heavy reliance on monetary rather than fiscal instruments to incentivize green practices.

The document argues that while Africa requires significant investment for climate mitigation and adaptation—including an estimated $3 trillion for NDC implementation by 2030—private sector investment remains low. It identifies key barriers such as political, regulatory, and project risks, as well as a lack of 'bankable' projects. To overcome these, the authors recommend creating supportive regulatory environments, utilizing credit enhancement mechanisms through blended finance, and providing technical grant-based funding to help borrowers reach the bankability stage. Special attention is given to the need for catalytic public finance to unlock private investment in adaptation and nature-based solutions.

The report examines four high-emitting sectors—steel, cement, agriculture, and oil and gas—concluding that none have seriously initiated the disruptive changes required to align with the Paris Agreement. It emphasizes that while long-term transitions will take decades due to investment cycles and systemic complexity, immediate action is required to avoid locking in polluting assets. The authors argue that investors can drive impact through active engagement with value chains and by pressuring companies to commit to fundamental business model shifts rather than simple portfolio reallocation.

Ember argues that the assumption that biomass burning is carbon neutral is problematic and that the resulting reliance on BECCS for negative emissions in National Grid's FES scenarios is subject to high uncertainty. The organization advocates for BECCS to be treated as a 'technology of last resort' and requests that FES2022 include at least one net-zero scenario with very low or no BECCS deployment to better quantify trade-offs with nature-based solutions and behavior changes.

The document examines how Multistakeholder Initiatives (MSIs) and corporate entities influence the UN Food Systems Summit (UNFSS). It argues that the transition from state-led multilateralism to multistakeholderism allows transnational corporations and private foundations to direct policy and promote 'technofixes' and 'nature-based solutions' that maintain corporate dominance while ignoring structural inequalities and food sovereignty.

Earthjustice calls for the conservation of all mature and old-growth trees within the U.S. National Forest System and Bureau of Land Management lands. The organization argues that protecting these carbon sinks is a cost-effective climate solution, essential for meeting Paris Agreement commitments, and vital for preserving Indigenous cultural heritage and endangered species habitats.

The South Asia Regional Resilience Dialogue emphasizes the need to reposition local actors, particularly women and youth, as agents of change rather than victims. It identifies systemic barriers such as top-down interventions, limited recognition of women's efforts, and inflexible financial architectures. The document advocates for decentralized finance delivery, the co-creation of knowledge, and the mobilization of diverse funding sources, including private sector investment and microfinance, to ensure climate resources reach the most vulnerable populations.

The Subnational Climate Fund (SnCF), approved by the GCF in 2020 and running through 2028, aims to mobilize USD 750 million to support approximately 40 subnational projects with deal sizes between USD 5 million and 75 million. The fund utilizes a Technical Assistance Facility and USD 150 million in concessional equity from the GCF to attract USD 600 million in commercial equity, targeting subnational governments that lack fiscal autonomy or the ability to borrow from international capital markets. The fund involves 42 countries, including 16 in Africa, and focuses on projects aligned with NDCs that incorporate Nature-based Solutions.

The WACA program aims to strengthen coastal resilience in Benin, Côte d’Ivoire, Mauritania, São Tomé and Príncipe, Senegal, and Togo by mainstreaming climate risks into national policies and investing in transport, urban, and natural resource sectors. Supported by a USD 222 million package approved by the World Bank in 2018, the initiative utilizes a 'WACA Marketplace' to match investment demand with partner financing. As of June 2021, 17% of committed funds were disbursed, with specific outcomes in Benin including the securing of 3,500 households from erosion and flooding. The document highlights that the success of such regional instruments depends on strong regional cooperation, political stability, a pipeline of bankable projects, and currency stability.

The Restoration Insurance Service Company (RISCO) is a social enterprise piloting a model in the Philippines and Vietnam to protect mangroves by monetizing their flood reduction and carbon sequestration values. RISCO generates revenue through annual fees paid by insurance companies for reduced risk exposure and the sale of blue carbon credits. The model aims to benefit coastal communities, asset owners, and insurance companies, with Kenya identified as a potential site for replication in Africa due to its mangrove cover and growing non-life insurance market.

The report examines the systemic biases, colonial legacies, and representational risks associated with depicting Indigenous peoples and forests in the context of climate change. It proposes a shift toward 'Indigenous Media Presence,' characterised by self-presentation, 'deep ethics' rooted in territory, and the recognition of Indigenous science and spirituality. The document highlights the risks of 'scenification,' 'audio-visual extractivism,' and the invisibility of Afro-descendant forest communities, while showcasing the work of Indigenous photographers and independent media as tools for resistance and planetary healing.

The report argues that insurance is an underutilized tool for urban climate resilience, providing not only financial recovery but also risk awareness and incentives for mitigation. It details various insurance mechanisms—micro, meso, and macro—and the roles municipal governments can play as consumers, stewards, and conveners. The document highlights a significant 'protection gap,' noting that 76% of natural catastrophe losses were uninsured in 2020. Key barriers to scaling include a lack of technical capacity in city governments, behavioral biases among urban dwellers, and the difficulty of incorporating long-term climate projections into short-term insurance products. It recommends increased investment in risk assessment, the development of integrated resilience plans with the insurance sector, and the use of concessional finance from development finance institutions to support vulnerable cities.