Search Climate Insights Directory

The manual outlines the GCF's Integrated Results Management Framework (IRMF), a system designed for accountability and learning across its investment portfolio. It details the processes for measuring paradigm shifts, mitigation, adaptation, and enabling environments using a combination of quantitative indicators and qualitative scorecards. The guide specifies the roles of Accredited Entities (AEs), the GCF Secretariat, and independent evaluators in implementing Theory of Change (ToC) and logical frameworks, as well as the requirements for annual reporting and mid-term and final evaluations.

The GCF's Integrated Results Management Framework (IRMF) establishes a standardized system for tracking climate mitigation and adaptation results. It requires projects to develop a Theory of Change and a logical framework (logframe) aligned with GCF result areas. Performance is measured through four core mitigation and adaptation indicators, four enabling environment indicators, and a qualitative assessment of paradigm shift across three dimensions: scale, replicability, and sustainability. Monitoring involves annual performance reports (APR) and mandatory mid-term and final evaluations conducted by independent evaluators to ensure accountability and facilitate organizational learning.

The Economics for Nature (E4N) partnership (2016-2022) worked to integrate natural capital into economic and business decision-making to protect and restore biodiversity. The report identifies that while the concept of natural capital helps make nature 'material' for policymakers and businesses, systemic change is hindered by a lack of a globally agreed definition of a successful economy and a divergence in capacity between the Global North and South. Key achievements include the development of the Green Economy Tracker, the '3-returns' investment framework, and the mainstreaming of natural capital into the EU Green Deal and African Development Bank programmes. The report concludes that future progress requires putting people and Indigenous Peoples at the heart of economic design, institutionalising natural capital accounting, pursuing systemic economic reform, and scaling nature-based solutions.

The briefing argues that the COVID-19 crisis exposed systemic fragilities and provides an opportunity to build resilience against climate change, biodiversity loss, and inequality. It outlines ten priority options, including the adoption of green economy principles, the use of 'Green Deals', the removal of fossil fuel subsidies, and the implementation of gender-responsive recovery plans. The authors emphasize that recovery spending must align with the Sustainable Development Goals and the Paris Agreement, particularly in the global South where public debt may limit fiscal space.

The Economics for Nature (E4N) partnership developed tools, networks, and best practices to embed the value of natural capital into government, business, and financial decision-making. Key achievements include the Green Economy Tracker, the '3-returns' investment framework, and the mainstreaming of natural capital into the EU Green Deal and African Development Bank programmes. The document identifies a divergence between OECD countries and debt-stressed nations in adopting these approaches and outlines four 'frontiers' for future progress: centering people and Indigenous knowledge, standardizing valuation frameworks, implementing systemic economic reform, and scaling nature-based solutions.

The COP30 Resilience Hub Report details the outcomes of the climate summit in Belém, Brazil, highlighting a mix of incremental progress and persistent gaps in adaptation finance and implementation. Key achievements include the adoption of 59 indicators for the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA), a political commitment to triple adaptation finance by 2035, and the establishment of a Global Just Transition Mechanism. The report also showcases Peru's national resilience model, which integrates Indigenous governance and a comprehensive 'Country Package for forests and nature'. However, it notes significant misalignments between short-term political/financial cycles and long-term climate risks, and emphasizes that less than 1% of climate finance currently reaches Indigenous peoples and local communities.

The HKH-Innovation Challenge for Entrepreneurs (ICE) is a competition targeting for-profit organisations in Bhutan, Bangladesh, India, and Nepal to develop scalable solutions for climate resilience, water security, and sustainable tourism. Selected winners will receive cash prizes between USD 5,000 and 25,000, alongside mentoring, leadership training, and investment mobilisation support to implement their projects over a nine-month period ending in December 2025.

The HKH-Innovation Challenge for Entrepreneurs (ICE) 2.0, led by the Global Resilience Partnership (GRP) and ICIMOD, seeks for-profit innovations to enhance climate resilience in the Hindu Kush Himalaya. The program targets 12-15 enterprises, with a priority on youth- and women-led businesses, offering prizes between US$5,000 and $25,000 for implementation from May 1, 2026, to April 31, 2027. Selected winners receive a comprehensive support package including tailored mentoring, a Leadership Academy in Kathmandu, investment mobilisation assistance, and monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL) support. Eligible applicants must be legally registered in Bhutan, Nepal, India (Himalayan region), or Bangladesh (Chittagong Hill Tracts) and demonstrate a viable business model that promotes biodiversity and social equity without causing harm.

The Global Resilience Partnership conducted a survey of 88 stakeholders to identify barriers to virtual engagement for grassroots and community-based organisations (CBOs). The findings highlight four primary challenges: lack of access to stable internet and hardware, platform unfamiliarity, language and time zone barriers, and inequitable power dynamics in agenda-setting. To address these, the report recommends financing data and equipment, using consistent platforms like Zoom, offering staggered meeting times, and co-creating agendas with local partners. It also identifies key best practices for successful engagement, including timely preparatory materials, inclusive agendas, and interactive formats.

The document outlines the challenges and opportunities in financing climate resilience, particularly in conflict-affected and fragile regions. It highlights the mismatch between private sector short-term return expectations and the long-term nature of resilience projects, suggesting de-risking tools like mega guarantees and parametric insurance. The report emphasizes the need for governments to address data scarcity in the Global South and the importance of supporting locally led, indigenous initiatives. Examples of successful interventions include resilience bonds in the Philippines and bundled insurance and seeds in Mozambique.

The Global Resilience Partnership (GRP) engaged in several high-level activities at COP24, including hosting sessions at the Development & Climate (D&C) Days, chairing a High Level Roundtable on Resilience under the Marrakesh Partnership for Global Climate Action, and co-hosting an event on Nature-based solutions with the Global Environmental Facility. These efforts focused on the narrative of "Leaving no-one behind," specifically targeting the needs of the global South, Least Developed Countries (LDCs), and urban informal settlement dwellers. Key themes included the intersection of climate volatility with peace and stability, urban resilience, and the scaling of investments in resilience for the most vulnerable.

Global Witness calls for the UK, US, EU, and China to end the 'money pipeline' driving deforestation by replacing voluntary initiatives with binding national laws. The organization warns that the Amazon is approaching a tipping point and criticizes the failure of previous pledges, such as the 2014 New York Declaration on Forests. It specifically urges the UK to implement its Environment Act, the EU to finalize laws stopping bank funding for deforestation, the US to include financiers in due diligence regimes, and China to prohibit illegal timber imports and regulate commercial banking risks.

The document urges the UK's new Prime Minister to use the Financial Services and Markets Bill to align financial flows with climate and nature goals. Global Witness claims the current draft prioritises 'international competitiveness' over climate targets and fails to meet COP26 pledges. The author proposes two amendments: a statutory objective for regulators to consider nature and climate, and a 'forest finance amendment' requiring due diligence on clients dealing with forest-risk commodities. The text highlights that over £300 billion of UK pension money is invested in high deforestation risk entities, with £200 billion in exposure specifically to Brazilian beef and soy and Indonesian palm oil supply chains.

The document outlines several deceptive strategies used by corporations at COP to appear environmentally friendly while continuing harmful practices. It specifically critiques the promotion of natural gas and 'blue' hydrogen as low-carbon solutions, the use of 'net zero' and 'nature-based solutions' to mask continued pollution, and the use of 'green finance' and voluntary anti-deforestation pledges by banks to hide ongoing investments in fossil fuels and deforestation.

Global Witness calls for COP16 to transition the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework into concrete plans, specifically by protecting environmental defenders, regulating financial flows to end deforestation, and establishing strict global standards for responsible mining of energy transition minerals.

The document argues that collective action between government, businesses, and citizens is essential to address South Africa's water availability and quality challenges. It showcases several successful water stewardship models, including nature-based solutions like invasive alien plant clearing, community-based rangeland and spring protection, and municipal water loss reduction through leak repairs and valve refurbishment. These projects are presented as cost-effective alternatives to traditional grey infrastructure, offering measurable returns in water yield, job creation, and social benefits.

The document provides a comprehensive analysis of nature-based solutions (NBS) as a means to address urban climate challenges. It evaluates the efficacy of various NBS—such as urban wetlands, green roofs, and sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS)—in regulating temperature, managing stormwater, and improving air quality. Beyond environmental benefits, the report examines the positive impacts of urban green spaces on public health and social cohesion, while critically addressing issues of environmental justice and the risk of 'green gentrification'. It also explores the governance and financial barriers to NBS implementation, proposing a 'mainstreaming' framework to integrate these solutions into municipal planning and policy.

The document highlights the intersection of climate change, urban heat islands, and public health in Chile, specifically within the municipality of Quilpué. It argues that while energy efficiency regulations have progressed since 2006, there is a critical need to incorporate health-focused criteria into building codes and housing policies to address energy poverty and the health impacts of extreme temperatures.

The document highlights the need to align building regulations, energy efficiency, and health responses to mitigate urban heat risks in Chile, specifically in Quilpué. It identifies a correlation between high temperatures and increased hospital admissions, noting that energy poverty exacerbates climate vulnerability. The brief advocates for a transdisciplinary approach combining green infrastructure, rigorous thermal standards, and early warning systems to protect public health.

The document outlines the impacts of anthropogenic climate change on water security across the Americas, highlighting increased variability in the water cycle, glacier loss in the Andes, and water scarcity in North America. It emphasizes that current adaptation practices are becoming insufficient and advocates for equitable, inclusive, and transformational policies that integrate indigenous knowledge and intersectoral coordination to reduce future risks.