Search Climate Insights Directory

The Institute for Economic Justice describes the 2023 National Budget as an 'anti-poor budget' that redistributes wealth from the poorest 80% to the richest 20%. The analysis highlights a R162 billion real decrease in non-interest expenditure over the medium term, with significant cuts to health, basic education, and social protection. It specifically criticizes the failure to protect the Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant from inflation and its removal from the budget for 2024/25 and 2025/26. The document also critiques the conditional debt relief for Eskom, arguing that restrictions on new capacity investment favor private sector profit over energy affordability, and condemns subsidies for rooftop solar as benefiting only the wealthy.

The Longship project is a Norwegian industrial-scale carbon capture and storage (CCS) network designed to decarbonize heavy industries where electrification is not feasible. The project consists of two initial capture sites—a cement plant in Brevik and a waste-to-energy plant in Oslo—and the Northern Lights transport and storage infrastructure. The Norwegian government is funding approximately two-thirds of the first phase, which exceeds 3.5 billion CAD, with the goal of creating a commercially viable cross-border storage service for European emitters. The document highlights the importance of holistic government support, including regulatory streamlining and increasing carbon pricing, while noting criticisms regarding the use of public funds to support the oil and gas sector.

Longship is a Norwegian megaproject designed to create a full-chain carbon capture and storage network, linking industrial capture sites to offshore storage in the North Sea. The Norwegian government is funding approximately two-thirds of the first phase, valued at over C$3.5 billion, to overcome high upfront costs and regulatory barriers. The project includes two initial capture sites—a cement factory in Brevik and a waste-to-energy plant in Oslo—and the Northern Lights transport and storage facility. While phase one is heavily subsidized, phase two aims for commercial viability by providing storage services to industrial emitters across Europe. The document highlights the importance of addressing non-financial barriers, such as regulatory red tape, and leveraging existing national expertise to jumpstart a regional CCS market.

The training, conducted by the Tanzania Coalition on Debt and Development (TCDD) and AFRODAD, addressed public debt sustainability, the role of Parliament in oversight, and the complexities of Public Private Partnerships (PPPs). Key recommendations included improving the business environment to reduce external borrowing, enhancing tax collection from online businesses, and urging Members of Parliament to exercise their powers under the Loans Act No.34 of 1974 to hold the government accountable.

The document outlines a 36-month readiness program implemented by the Global Green Growth Institute (GGGI) to address financial barriers in Mexico's rural and northern border regions. Key objectives include the GCF accreditation of the North American Development Bank (NADB) and Trust Funds Related to Agriculture (FIRA), the creation of a green finance transparency system, and the development of a National Carbon Policy. It specifically targets water and sanitation infrastructure in northern states and sustainable landscape management via REDD+ results-based payments. Additionally, the proposal aims to empower subnational governments to issue thematic bonds and integrate environmental and social criteria into public-private partnerships (PPPs).

The document analyzes the complexities of African sovereign debt contracts, highlighting power imbalances in negotiations, the risks of non-disclosure clauses, and the dangers of collateralizing public assets. It argues for the development of Africa-specific model contracts and the inclusion of flexible clauses to handle crises, such as climate-resilient debt clauses, to protect the interests of African citizens and governments.

The 2023 Water Market Intelligence Report highlights a critical state of wastewater treatment works (WWTWs) in South Africa, with 39% requiring urgent intervention. It identifies three primary investment areas: the restoration of municipal infrastructure (estimated at R8.14 billion), the circular economy potential of sludge beneficiation, and the deployment of renewable energy and energy efficiency (EE) technologies to reduce high operational costs. The report notes significant funding gaps and municipal capacity constraints but points to regulatory drivers, such as the 2019 liquid waste landfill ban, as catalysts for private sector involvement.

The project aims to reduce GHG emissions in Brazil's municipal solid waste (MSW) sector by supporting up to 30 municipalities or consortia in implementing low-emission treatment infrastructure. With a total indicative cost of USD 50 million (USD 15 million requested from the GCF), the initiative focuses on biogas recovery, anaerobic digestion, and the formalization of waste pickers. It seeks to transition from uncontrolled landfills to sustainable systems, targeting a mitigation impact of 45,352,640 tCO2e over a 15-year lifespan. The project will provide technical assistance for public-private partnerships (PPPs), develop legal roadmaps, and implement awareness campaigns to promote a circular economy.

The document outlines a readiness proposal for Ecuador to overcome barriers in climate finance, specifically targeting the limited capacity of local financial institutions to integrate ESG standards, the lack of climate-resilient mechanisms in Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs), and institutional gaps in accessing international finance. The proposed solution involves four workstreams: strengthening local financial institutions' ESG integration, building government capacity for green bonds and debt-for-climate swaps, developing a National Green Taxonomy, and creating a strategic framework for climate-smart PPPs. The project will be implemented by the Global Green Growth Institute (GGGI) over 18 months, focusing on the Ministry of Economy and Finance (MEF) and the Ministry of Environment, Water and Ecological Transition (MAATE).

The report provides a comprehensive overview of the climate finance landscape in Bangladesh, India, and Nepal, detailing the mechanisms used to fund climate action. It analyzes the roles of multilateral funds (such as the GCF and GEF), bilateral aid, national budgets, and emerging private sector instruments like green bonds and blended finance. The document highlights significant funding gaps, particularly for adaptation, and recommends strengthening institutional frameworks, adopting climate budget tagging, and improving technical capacity to develop bankable projects.

The document argues that urban climate adaptation is severely underfunded compared to mitigation, with only 9% of global urban climate investments flowing to adaptation projects as of 2017-2018. It highlights the extreme vulnerability of cities to flooding, heat, and water stress, noting that coastal cities could face annual costs of USD 1 trillion by 2050. To address this, the brief recommends that national governments declare climate emergencies, integrate local governments into national planning (NAPs and NDCs), boost technical project preparation, collaborate with development banks, mobilize private capital through PPPs and insurance, invest in early warning systems, and develop standardized adaptation metrics.

In 2019/20, Ethiopia's tracked climate finance averaged USD 1.7 billion, representing only 7% of its estimated annual needs of USD 25.3 billion. The landscape is heavily dominated by international public finance (92%), with a strong preference for adaptation projects (56%) over mitigation (38%). While the Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU) sector received the most sectoral finance (29%), it remains significantly underfunded relative to its 83% contribution to national GHG emissions. Key barriers to scaling finance include a highly regulated financial sector, lack of a stock market, unfavorable collateral policies for SMEs, and a heavy reliance on grants over private capital. The report recommends establishing a comprehensive climate budget tagging system, conducting bottom-up needs assessments, and developing capital markets to mobilize private investment.

In 2019/20, Ethiopia's tracked climate finance averaged USD 1.7 billion per year, representing only 7% of its estimated annual needs of USD 25.3 billion. The landscape is heavily dominated by international public finance (92%), with a strong preference for grants (70%) and a focus on adaptation (56%) over mitigation (38%). While the Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU) sector received the most sectoral finance (29%), it remains underfunded relative to its 83% contribution to national GHG emissions. Significant barriers to private investment include a highly regulated financial sector, lack of a stock market, and unfavorable collateral policies for SMEs and small-holder farmers.

The policy brief argues that the USD 8.5 billion Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP) in South Africa relies on a 'de-risking' model that prioritises private finance and Independent Power Producers (IPPs), shifting commercial risks to the state and consumers. This approach is criticised for potentially worsening South Africa's debt profile, increasing energy poverty through higher tariffs, and undermining local renewable energy manufacturing. The authors suggest alternatives including the regulation of PPPs, debt cancellation of 'odious debt' (such as World Bank loans for the Medupi plant), climate reparations, and the implementation of allocative green credit policies to direct investment toward productive, labour-intensive green industries.

The document critiques the South African JETP for prioritising blended finance and public-private partnerships (PPPs), which the authors argue shifts commercial risk to the state while privatising gains. It highlights how this model can increase energy poverty through higher tariffs and hinder local renewable energy manufacturing. The brief suggests alternatives such as regulating private finance, pursuing debt cancellation and climate reparations, and implementing allocative green credit policies.

The report identifies Geneva's high density of international expertise and neutrality as key strengths for SDG implementation, but notes that collaboration is hindered by bureaucratic processes, institutional silos, and a lack of accessible, informal gathering spaces. It recommends the establishment of a curated, inclusive, and inspiring physical space in the Nations area to facilitate networking, skills development, and the showcasing of innovations across the public, private, and academic sectors.

The report argues that current climate finance is woefully inadequate to meet Paris Agreement goals, with developing countries alone requiring $4.3 trillion for 2030 commitments. It outlines a three-stage framework—planning, implementation, and monitoring—and details a variety of fiscal and policy instruments to align public spending, increase public funding, and mobilize private capital.

The study examines renewable energy financing through public-private partnerships (PPP) in Southeast Asia and Central Asia. It notes that while hydropower has historically dominated PPPs in both regions, there is a rapid shift toward solar and wind projects. In Southeast Asia, the transition is driven by national commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions via Nationally Determined Contributions, while Central Asian energy profiles vary between fossil fuel reliance in Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan, and hydroelectric power in Tajikistan and the Kyrgyz Republic.

In 2019/2020, Burkina Faso received USD 567 million in climate finance, covering only 13% of the USD 4.1 billion needed by 2050 to meet its NDC targets. Public finance dominated the landscape, accounting for 80% of total flows, with a heavy reliance on international multilateral and bilateral DFIs. Energy systems and Agriculture, Forestry, and Other Land Use (AFOLU) were the primary recipients of funds, though significant gaps remain in water and wastewater sectors. The report highlights critical barriers, including political instability, a lack of domestic climate budget tagging, and the absence of a robust Monitoring, Reporting, and Verification (MRV) framework, which hinders the attraction of further donor funding and private investment.

Based on an ethnographic study of a desalination proposal in California, the author argues that the environmental justice frame is being co-opted to facilitate community division and support a luxury commodity, benefiting private sector interests and organized labor over grassroots community groups.