Search Climate Insights Directory

The author argues that the term 'climate refugee' is legally inaccurate and oversimplifies the multi-causal nature of migration, where climate change acts as a 'threat multiplier'. The text disputes the narrative of mass migration from the Global South to Europe, noting that most climate-induced movement is internal. It suggests that planned, voluntary migration can be a 'triple win' for migrants, origin communities, and destination areas. The document calls for integrated governance and the use of tools like the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration to address displacement.

A coalition of U.S.-based businesses and investors calls on the Biden administration to set a 2030 greenhouse gas emissions reduction target of at least 50% below 2005 levels. The signatories argue that such a target is necessary to catalyze a zero-emissions future, drive economic recovery, and restore U.S. global leadership in climate action.

The author contends that the Biden administration should implement strong methane standards in its new NDC, noting that the U.S. could reduce oil and gas sector methane emissions by up to 65 percent using existing technology. Such a move would provide immediate climate benefits, improve health for millions living near facilities, and encourage similar actions from major emitters like China, India, and Russia.

The briefing examines the risks and requirements for corporate financing of Nature Based Solutions (NBS) in the context of net-zero commitments. It proposes a shift from traditional offsetting—where companies might choose to pay for reductions elsewhere rather than reducing their own emissions—to a 'counterbalancing' approach. Under this model, companies must first comply with the Science Based Targets Initiative (SBTi) to ensure they are on a 1.5°C trajectory across Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions before using NBS credits. On the supply side, the document advocates for the 'jurisdictional approach' over project-based credits to better manage risks like leakage, permanence, and additionality, highlighting the ART/TREES standard as a robust framework for ensuring environmental and social integrity.

The Philippines has adopted a comprehensive national strategy for a just transition, primarily through the 2016 Green Jobs Act (RA 10771), which provides financial incentives for businesses to create decent, environmentally beneficial employment. Supported by the International Labour Organization (ILO), the country piloted just transition guidelines from 2016 to 2017, establishing inter-agency cooperation and social dialogue mechanisms. While the framework is strong, challenges remain regarding worker protections, barriers to green business technology, and low public awareness of climate change.

Canada established a National Task Force in 2018 to manage the social and economic impacts of its 2030 coal power phase-out, which is expected to eliminate 42,000 jobs despite providing CAD 4.7 billion in economic benefits. The Task Force provided 10 recommendations covering governance, funding, and worker support, leading to the 2019 budget allocation of CAD 35 million for worker transition centers and CAD 150 million for a community infrastructure fund. While the initiative is noted for strong federal support and effective social dialogue, it faces challenges regarding the need for sustained, larger-scale funding over the next decade.

The global sustainable debt market reached USD 1.7 trillion by the end of 2020, with USD 700 billion issued during the year. While green bonds remain the largest segment, social and sustainability bonds saw dramatic growth in 2020, largely driven by pandemic-related funding. The European Union has emerged as a global leader, integrating GSS bonds into its climate neutrality goals for 2050 and developing comprehensive taxonomies and standards to ensure market integrity.

ClientEarth argues that the BEIS proposals for climate-related financial disclosures are inadequate and recommends a mandatory approach aligned with the full TCFD framework and Paris Agreement goals, supported by stronger regulatory enforcement and auditor assurance.

The document outlines the legal case Friends of the Earth Netherlands v Royal Dutch Shell plc, arguing that Shell's current net-zero strategy is insufficient compared to IPCC standards. It details the legal basis of the claim—centered on Dutch civil law and human rights—and warns investors of the reputational and financial risks associated with climate litigation and emerging EU due diligence legislation.

In 2020, a significant increase in coal plant development in China offset a global retreat from coal, leading to the first increase in global coal capacity since 2015. While China commissioned 38.4 GW of new capacity, the rest of the world saw a decline of 17.2 GW, driven by record retirements in the U.S. and EU27. South and Southeast Asian nations, including Indonesia, Bangladesh, the Philippines, and Vietnam, announced plans to cut up to 62 GW of planned coal power due to falling renewable costs and financing difficulties. Despite these regional shifts, the report finds that global coal capacity remains far above the levels required to meet the IPCC 1.5 degree pathway, with an estimated 1,350 GW needing to be cancelled or retired.

In 2020, global coal-fired power capacity increased by 12.5 GW, driven primarily by China, which operated 38.4 GW of new capacity. This offset record closures in the US (11.3 GW) and EU27 (10.1 GW). While China's development grew as an economic stimulus during the pandemic, other Asian nations like Indonesia, Vietnam, Bangladesh, and the Philippines announced plans to cancel up to 62 GW of planned projects due to falling renewable costs and financing difficulties. The report concludes that current global trajectories remain far from the 1.5°C warming limit, with approximately 1,350 GW of capacity needing to be cancelled or closed to meet IPCC targets.

The report highlights a global divergence in coal power: while the US, EU, and parts of Asia are seeing record retirements and project cancellations, China's significant increase in new capacity in 2020 led to a net global growth of 12.5 GW. The document argues that current national trajectories remain far from the IPCC 1.5°C pathway, which would require the cancellation or retirement of 1,350 GW of capacity.

The report highlights a global divergence in coal power: while most of the world saw record closures and project cancellations, China experienced a significant boom in new capacity, offsetting global declines. In 2020, China's new coal capacity reached 38.4 GW, accounting for 76% of the global total. Conversely, the US and EU27 led in closures, with 11.3 GW and 10.1 GW retired respectively. In South and Southeast Asia, countries like Vietnam, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Bangladesh announced plans to cut up to 62 GW of planned coal capacity due to funding difficulties and the falling cost of renewables. The report also notes that global coal capacity is far exceeding the levels required to meet the IPCC's 1.5°C warming limit, with a projected 2,400 GW by 2030 compared to the required 1,100 GW.

The briefing argues that the Powering Past Coal Alliance (PPCA) has failed to trigger a meaningful global coal exit due to significant loopholes in its declaration and a lack of monitoring. It highlights that many financial institution members continue to invest in coal, and co-chairs Canada and the UK are not leading by example, with Canada developing new coal mines. The document calls for a reform of the PPCA to align with climate science, requiring an immediate stop to new coal projects and a full sector exit by 2030 in OECD/European countries and 2040 globally.

The report finds that most major asset managers maintain a gap between long-term net-zero commitments and short-term actions, with significant exposure to coal remaining in passive investment strategies. Only a small fraction of assets are covered by robust coal exclusion criteria, and passive funds are almost entirely excluded from such policies, creating a 'time bomb' for the climate.

The report finds a significant gap between the long-term net-zero commitments of major asset managers and their actual investment practices, particularly regarding coal. Most analyzed managers lack robust coal exclusion policies, and 'passive' index investments—which represent nearly half of the assets under management in the sample—are largely exempt from climate criteria, leaving them highly exposed to the coal sector.

The document urges investors to vote against Total's fourteenth and sixth resolutions at its May 2021 AGM, claiming the company's climate strategy is insufficient. It highlights a lack of precise global scope 3 emission targets, planned increases in gas production, and continued investment in new oil projects in East Africa. The authors argue that Total's reliance on carbon capture and storage (CCS) is unrealistic and that its capital expenditure remains heavily skewed toward fossil fuels, creating a risk of stranded assets.

The report finds that baseline projections for oil, gas, and coal production are significantly higher than the levels required to limit global warming to 1.5°C or 2°C. It highlights that the largest production increases are projected in the United States, Brazil, Iran, Canada, and Saudi Arabia. The analysis argues that a managed wind-down of production is necessary to avoid inequitable outcomes, as the projected production from high-income and low-dependence countries alone would exceed the 1.5°C-consistent global budget.

The report by Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR) examines the Institute of Physics' (IOP) investment portfolio and sponsorship ties. SGR identifies that while the IOP has a comprehensive environmental statement, it maintains investments in numerous fossil fuel and arms companies through funds like Vanguard and Invesco. The report highlights specific sponsorships from military entities such as the Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE) and Babcock International. SGR argues that these financial ties contradict the IOP's stated goals of promoting a sustainable society and acting with integrity, particularly in light of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons and the Paris Agreement.

The report finds that while IOM3 has transitioned its investment portfolio to a sustainable fund with specific exclusions for arms and certain fossil fuels, it lacks a formal ethical investment policy and maintains transparency gaps regarding its specific holdings. IOM3 continues to accept sponsorship from Tata Steel for educational materials, which SGR argues is incompatible with the Paris Agreement goals.