Search Climate Insights Directory

The document outlines the progress toward establishing a regional monitoring, evaluation and learning (MEL) framework for the Framework for Resilient Development in the Pacific (FRDP). It highlights the goal to finalize this framework by the end of 2021, supported by a 2019 needs assessment and a subsequent M&E Strategy. The strategy emphasizes the need for strengthened national M&E systems, integrated reporting, and stakeholder cooperation. Current efforts include the development of Pacific Resilience Standards (PRS) and the creation of national best practice case studies through the PACRES project to inform the final regional framework.

The European Central Bank (ECB) is accused of fueling a 'fossil gas frenzy' through its asset purchase programs. Reclaim Finance identifies 24 companies benefiting from ECB quantitative easing that are actively operating or planning gas infrastructure globally and in Europe. The document highlights that 11 of these companies plan 62 new fossil gas projects, with Total, Shell, Engie, and Enel being major developers. It argues that natural gas is not a low-carbon alternative due to high life-cycle emissions and methane leaks, and is more expensive than wind or solar energy. The briefing calls for the ECB to immediately exclude corporations developing new fossil fuel projects from its asset purchases.

The briefing asserts that the European Central Bank (ECB) is fueling a 'gas frenzy' by purchasing assets from companies heavily invested in fossil fuel infrastructure. It highlights that 24 companies benefiting from ECB asset purchases are active in gas expansion, with 11 companies developing 6,215 new gas projects. The document challenges the narrative of natural gas as a 'transition energy,' citing its carbon emissions, methane leaks, and higher costs compared to renewables. It specifically names Total, Shell, Engie, and Enel as major developers of gas projects, including liquefied natural gas (LNG), and urges the ECB to integrate ethical and environmental criteria into its asset purchases to align with the Paris Agreement.

The document argues that individual African countries often lack the resources to transition to green energy, but regional integration via the AfCFTA can create a larger market to attract investment and skilled labor. It highlights the role of regional power pools and suggests that a strategic shift in EU development assistance toward regional rather than bilateral support, combined with knowledge and technology sharing, could further fast-track the transition.

The document argues that public funds alone cannot meet Africa's growing energy demands, which require an estimated $120 billion annual investment until 2040. It advocates for 'green financing'—blending public and private capital—to overcome high infrastructure costs and investment risks. Using Kenya's experience, the brief details how instruments like Partial Risk Guarantees, concessional loans, and Feed-in Tariffs have attracted private investment for wind, solar, and geothermal projects. It specifically recommends that the EU and development partners provide technical assistance and risk-mitigation products to create enabling environments for private sector energy investments across the continent.

The document argues for a comprehensive AU-EU partnership that integrates the green transition with Africa's broader developmental goals, such as industrialisation and employment. It highlights the critical gap in energy access—with 600 million Africans lacking electricity as of 2018—and the underutilisation of Africa's solar resources. The authors recommend using public finance to de-risk private investment in renewables and addressing 'nexus issues' linking energy to agriculture, the digital economy, and trade. It also notes the tension in countries like Kenya, South Africa, Uganda, Tanzania, and Mozambique, which are pursuing renewable energy while continuing to develop fossil fuel reserves.

The analysis finds that the full implementation of 17 major international cooperative initiatives (ICIs) could reduce global emissions in 2030 by 18 to 21 GtCO2e/year beyond current national policies. This would help align the global emissions trajectory with a 2°C-consistent pathway, although a gap remains for a 1.5°C-consistent pathway. The most significant contributions come from cities, regions, businesses, and forestry initiatives.

The document argues that meaningful global greenhouse gas emissions reductions are increasingly unlikely due to political instability and the COVID-19 pandemic. It recommends that South Africa shift its focus from the UNFCCC process toward strengthening domestic and regional adaptive capacity and resilience. The authors suggest leveraging South Africa's soft power and its role as AU chair to champion a 'green' recovery agenda at the Forum on China–Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) and the EU–AU Summit, while urging the country to move away from its dependence on the Mineral-Energy Complex.

The authors contend that because urgent global emission reductions are required, the focus must shift from whether a national pathway is 'fair' to how quickly emissions can be reduced in all countries. They propose a framework where developed countries, whose domestic potential may be lower than their fair share responsibility, provide financial and non-financial support to developing countries to implement high-ambition reductions and avoid sectoral lock-ins. This support should target difficult-to-decarbonize sectors such as energy supply, industry, buildings, and transport, utilizing instruments like international climate finance and Article 6.4 market mechanisms.

The 'Recover Better with Sustainable Energy Guide for Caribbean Countries' outlines how sustainable energy investments can drive long-term development, economic resilience, and adherence to the Paris Agreement in the Caribbean region.

The Climate Action Tracker has established 'highest plausible ambition' benchmarks for four key sectors—Power, Transport, Industry, and Buildings—to guide the global transition to net-zero emissions by 2050. The report provides specific targets for 2030 and 2050, both globally and for seven major economies (Brazil, China, EU, India, Indonesia, South Africa, and the US), emphasizing that while starting points differ, all sectors must decarbonise by mid-century to meet the 1.5°C goal. Key priorities include the immediate phase-out of coal in developed nations by 2030, a rapid shift to zero-emission vehicles, and significant emissions intensity reductions in cement and steel production.

The document argues that the COVID-19 pandemic serves as a 'climate change parable,' presenting both risks and opportunities for global climate action. While the pandemic caused a temporary decrease in global emissions, the author warns that this is not a permanent decoupling of economic growth from emissions. The paper highlights a divide in national responses: some countries, like Rwanda and Canada, have integrated climate goals into recovery plans, while others, such as Australia and China, have shown tendencies toward industry protectionism or high-emissions stimulus. The author recommends that governments use stimulus packages to decarbonize the economy through fossil fuel tax reforms, renewable energy investments, and conditional state bailouts for carbon-intensive sectors to ensure the 1.5°C goal of the Paris Agreement remains attainable.

ClientEarth urges the European Commission to implement strict, mandatory regulations on methane emissions across the fossil fuel and agriculture sectors. The organization argues that the EU, as the world's largest importer of fossil gas, has the commercial power to mandate low-emission supply chains. Key recommendations include expanding the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) to cover methane, introducing a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) for methane-emitting imports, and reforming the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) to end subsidies for intensive livestock production. ClientEarth also highlights the health risks of indoor gas appliances and the need to counter industry misinformation by replacing the term 'natural gas' with 'fossil gas'.

ClientEarth argues that the FCA's proposals in CP20/3 are inadequate to protect consumers and ensure market integrity. The organization recommends making TCFD-aligned disclosures mandatory for all listed issuers by 2022, requiring a 'Paris-aligned' strategy for net zero by 2050, and clarifying materiality tests to align with investor expectations. It also calls for consistency with EU disclosure laws and stronger enforcement to close existing accountability gaps.

SEforALL's 2021-2023 business plan introduces 'SEforALL 3.0', an evolution from global agenda-setting to an implementation-focused model. The strategy centers on four thematic areas: Energy Diplomacy and Advocacy, Energy Access and Closing the Gap, Energy Transitions and Climate Change, and Intersection with Other SDGs. Key initiatives include the Universal Energy Facility for results-based financing, the 'Women at the Forefront' program, and the 'Powering Healthcare' agenda. To support these goals, SEforALL requires a three-year budget of USD 58.9 million and plans to establish regional staff presence in Africa and Southeast Asia to better support high-impact countries.

The report examines the evolving role of private financial institutions in the low-carbon transition, focusing on the alignment of portfolios with the Paris Agreement, the implementation of sustainable taxonomies, and the regulatory pressure to price climate risks effectively.

The Centre for Environmental Rights, on behalf of the Life After Coal campaign and 350Africa.org, provides commentary on the National Treasury's 2020 Draft Technical Paper 'Financing a Sustainable Economy'. The submission argues that the Draft Paper focuses too heavily on voluntary disclosure rather than binding commitments and fails to align with the urgency of the climate crisis or South Africa's international obligations under the Paris Agreement.

The document asserts that Australia's climate policies and continued reliance on fossil fuels violate human rights both domestically and internationally. It highlights the severe impacts of climate change on Australian health, ecosystems, and Indigenous communities, while criticizing the government's use of 'carryover credits' to artificially meet emissions targets. Furthermore, it denounces the use of anti-protest laws and attacks on the charitable status of NGOs to stifle climate activism.

The paper argues that the TSD Chapter of the EU-Mercosur Association Agreement is not fit for purpose, citing its inability to reinforce Paris Agreement commitments, a weak dispute settlement mechanism lacking sanctions, and insufficient monitoring of environmental and social impacts. It highlights gaps in the agreement's scope regarding human rights and supply chain responsibility, and recommends fundamental reforms to monitoring, enforcement, and the role of civil society.

The document distinguishes between cap-and-trade systems (ETS) and offsetting mechanisms, arguing that the latter often fail to provide real climate benefits. It critiques the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) for lack of additionality and local safeguards, and warns that Article 6 of the Paris Agreement must avoid 'hot air' and double counting. It also examines the limitations of CORSIA for aviation and the integrity issues surrounding REDD+ and voluntary markets, ultimately advocating for a shift from offsetting toward direct climate action financing.