Search Climate Insights Directory

The report analyzes 12 adaptation policy instruments from 11 countries to inform Canada's development of its first national adaptation strategy. It identifies global trends, such as increasing legislative backing and iterative planning, and proposes 13 considerations for Canada across four areas: the development process, federal action mobilization, implementation, and global leadership.

The Economics For Nature initiative argues that current economic recovery plans largely ignore the dependency of all economic activity on nature. It asserts that investing in nature to meet Sustainable Development Goals could generate $40-50 trillion in value and calls on G7 ministers to embed nature's values into economic decisions and reward nature-positive outcomes.

The research paper explores the concept of a restoration economy in Africa, focusing on the South African 'Working for Wetlands' programme. It identifies key enablers for success, such as linking restoration to poverty relief and vocational training, while noting constraints like bureaucratic rigidity and over-reliance on public funding. The author argues that for Africa to 'build back better' post-COVID-19, ecological restoration must be integrated into development planning and funded by the production sectors (mining, agriculture, forestry) that impact ecosystems, moving toward a circular economy model.

The authors call on G7 finance ministers to move from commitments to decisive action by establishing a financial framework that includes mandatory climate risk disclosure across supply chains, carbon pricing aligned with the 1.5°C goal, and the delivery of overdue climate finance to developing countries.

The GCF Secretariat report for the first trimester of 2021 highlights a record funding approval of USD 1.2 billion at a single Board meeting (B.28) and a portfolio implementation rate of 73%. Key priorities include the 'DAE Action Plan' to increase funding for Direct Access Entities, the development of a Private Sector Strategy to catalyze adaptation finance, and the implementation of the 'GCF People Plan' to enhance institutional capacity. The report also details a long-term vision for collaboration with the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and efforts to secure privileges and immunities through a potential relationship with the United Nations.

The document introduces a series of briefs examining nature-based solutions (NbS), arguing that while NbS offer alternatives to fossil fuel-based infrastructure and provide climate and biodiversity benefits, there is a lack of critical reflection on their social and economic sustainability. The series aims to address how NbS can be implemented without reinforcing existing inequalities or creating 'winners and losers'.

The document highlights the rapid degradation of Africa's natural resources and advocates for a financing strategy for the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Agenda that combines the mobilization of new resources with the removal of subsidies that drive biodiversity loss. It suggests that conservation targets should be linked to international climate goals via nature-based solutions and that 'green' finance mechanisms, such as debt-for-nature swaps, be integrated into post-pandemic economic stimulus packages for African nations.

The FAST-Infra Sustainable Infrastructure Label (SI Label) is a voluntary, globally applicable framework designed to certify infrastructure assets that demonstrate positive sustainability outcomes. To qualify, assets must meet baseline 'do no significant harm' requirements—primarily based on IFC Performance Standards—and demonstrate a positive contribution to at least one of 14 sustainability criteria across environmental, social, governance, and adaptation and resilience dimensions. The framework mandates minimum safeguards, including Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIA) and Climate Risk and Resilience Assessments, alongside rigorous disclosure and annual reporting. While self-declaration is permitted, the framework strongly encourages independent external reviews to ensure market trust. Governance is managed by a Secretariat, an Executive Committee, and a Steering Committee, with a broad membership of private investors, governments, and NGOs.

The report argues that India's post-pandemic recovery should prioritize 'building back better' by investing in natural capital and nature-based solutions (NbS). It examines the role of public and private finance, the need for a green finance taxonomy, and the importance of integrating biodiversity values into agriculture, infrastructure, and sub-national climate action plans. Key focus areas include land restoration targets, the conservation of wetlands within the Central Asian Flyway, and the mitigation of illegal wildlife trade.

Carbon Market Watch critiques the TSVCM's objective of scaling the voluntary carbon market (VCM), arguing that growth should not be the primary goal and that financial speculation through secondary markets and futures contracts does not benefit the climate. The organization emphasizes the need for a truly independent governance body, free from industry associations and conflicts of interest, and calls for more rigorous Core Carbon Principles (CCPs). Key recommendations include excluding ex-ante and retroactive crediting, requiring a minimum permanence timeframe of at least 100 years, and ensuring that credits used for offsetting include corresponding adjustments to national reporting to avoid double claiming.

The report characterizes "net zero" agendas as a "Great Cheat," asserting that they allow major polluters to continue emissions while relying on unproven technologies and flawed offsetting schemes. It details how these entities use lobbying, financial influence over academia, and corporate capture of international forums like the UNFCCC to displace real emission reductions. The document highlights specific failures in the plans of companies such as Shell, Total SA, and JBS, and calls for a transition to "Real Zero" by 2030 through systemic change and climate justice.

The document analyzes how 'Big Polluters' across various sectors use 'net zero' targets as a form of greenwashing to delay real emission reductions. It identifies critical conceptual flaws in these plans, such as reliance on unproven geoengineering and carbon offsets, and details how these corporations influence political and academic institutions to validate their agendas. Case studies on companies like Shell, Total SA, and JBS illustrate the gap between public commitments and actual business operations, while the report calls for a transition to 'Real Zero' by 2030.

The report claims that "net zero" agendas are a form of greenwashing used by "Big Polluters" to avoid reducing emissions. It identifies these entities as industries responsible for the majority of historical emissions, including fossil fuels, agribusiness, and aviation. The document details how these actors use risky technologies like BECCS and carbon offsets as "dangerous distractions" and employ lobbying, financial contributions, and academic partnerships to shape climate policy in their favor. Case studies on JBS, Shell, and Total SA are used to illustrate how these plans often mask continued pollution and lead to land grabbing in the Global South.

The report contends that "net zero" pledges from "Big Polluters"—including fossil fuel, agribusiness, and tech giants—are deceptive strategies to avoid responsibility for climate change. It identifies "dangerous distractions" such as carbon capture and storage (CCS), bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), and carbon offsets, arguing these schemes often lead to human rights abuses and "carbon colonialism." The document details how these corporations influence policy through lobbying, financial contributions to politicians, and the funding of academic research at institutions like Stanford and MIT to validate "net zero" narratives. Case studies of Shell, Total SA, and JBS are used to illustrate how these plans often mask continued production of high-emissions products.

The report outlines a framework for Canada's first National Adaptation Strategy (NAS), drawing on a review of 12 policy instruments from 11 countries. It identifies a global trend where adaptation planning is increasing and regularly updated, but implementation and monitoring and evaluation (M&E) remain weak. For Canada, the authors recommend establishing clear institutional arrangements, a unified climate risk assessment approach, and a robust M&E system. The report emphasizes the need for deep engagement with Indigenous Peoples to advance reconciliation and the integration of gender equality and social inclusion through Gender-Based Analysis Plus (GBA+). It also suggests bridging the gap between climate adaptation and disaster risk reduction (DRR) and elevating nature-based solutions.

The document examines the impacts of Cyclone Idai, Tropical Storm Chalane, and Cyclone Eloise on Mozambique, specifically the city of Beira. It analyzes the role of green and grey infrastructure in disaster mitigation, evaluates the 'Building Beira Back Better' (BBBB) strategy, and highlights the critical need for improved early warning systems and sustainable waste management to maintain urban drainage functionality.

The document argues that while nature-based solutions (NbS) are increasingly integrated into global climate and biodiversity policies, there is a critical lack of research and reflection on their social and economic sustainability. It highlights risks such as 'green gentrification,' where market-driven NbS prioritize high-income groups and displace vulnerable populations. The authors note a significant geographic imbalance in NbS research, which is dominated by high-income countries despite the high vulnerability of Small Island Developing States and lower-income countries. Financially, NbS receive a small fraction of total climate finance, with challenges including the difficulty of comparing NbS costs to 'grey' infrastructure and a lack of private sector incentives for adaptation. Finally, the document addresses the complexities of 'scaling-up' NbS, noting that misinterpreting spatial, temporal, and institutional scales can lead to suboptimal outcomes for human-environmental systems.

The Kibera Public Space Project, led by the Kounkuey Design Initiative (KDI), transforms dumpsites and wastelands into a network of multifunctional public spaces to build flood resilience in Nairobi's largest informal settlement. By integrating drainage, gabions, and early-warning systems, the project protects vulnerable households from increasing rainfall risks exacerbated by climate change. The initiative emphasizes community co-design and has successfully advocated for the integration of Kibera into formal city planning through a Special Planning Area approved in 2020.

The 'Investment Readiness for the Landscape Resilience Fund' project aims to bridge the gap between private investors and SMEs implementing climate-resilient practices in sustainable agriculture, forestry, and nature-based solutions. By providing technical assistance, zero-interest loans, and matchmaking services, the project seeks to make at least nine SMEs 'investment-ready,' thereby unlocking private capital for climate adaptation in developing countries and Least Developed Countries (LDCs).

Friends of the Earth International criticizes the CBD's biodiversity integration proposal, claiming it promotes 'greenwashing' through voluntary corporate actions and biodiversity offsets rather than mandatory government regulations. The statement argues that the proposal fails to address the drivers of biodiversity loss—unsustainable production and overconsumption—and risks marginalizing indigenous peoples and civil society while increasing corporate power.