Search Climate Insights Directory

The document identifies a gap in Indonesia's top-down climate finance approach, which often prioritizes financier requirements over the needs of marginalized communities. It argues for a shift from a reliance on philanthropic funding toward commercial and blended finance to increase the scale and coverage of support. To achieve this, the report emphasizes the need to address structural barriers such as inadequate capacity, low-quality project pipelines, and regulatory uncertainty.

France has integrated climate considerations into its annual budgetary process through a 'Green Budget' published in 2021, which rates all State expenditures on their environmental impact. This system uses a five-category scale and six environmental goals to ensure government agencies consider net-zero progress in their spending. A notable application was the 2021 COVID-19 recovery plan, which mandated that 30% of its funds be allocated to favorably rated green investments.

The workshop report details discussions on the progress of South Africa's recovery from state capture, highlighting systemic obstructions in law enforcement, the need for institutional independence, and proposals for a new Office of Public Integrity. It emphasizes the role of grassroots activism and the necessity of reforming public procurement and local government governance to prevent 'state capture 2.0'.

The IISD welcomes the launch of a new coalition for fossil fuel subsidy (FFS) reform at COP 28, which aims to increase transparency, evaluate barriers to reform, and develop national phase-out strategies. However, the IISD warns that public financial support for fossil fuels reached a record USD 1.7 trillion in 2022 and notes that only 16 countries have included FFS reform in their current nationally determined contributions (NDCs). To ensure success, the IISD recommends establishing a 2025 deadline for FFS removal in OECD countries and 2030 for non-OECD countries, reinvesting savings into just transition programs, and avoiding narrow definitions of subsidies that have historically delayed action.

The document reports that global public financial support for fossil fuels reached a record high of over USD 1.7 trillion in 2022, driven largely by USD 1.3 trillion in subsidies. It notes a discrepancy in G7 financing, where USD 20 billion was provided for fossil fuels compared to USD 10 billion for clean energy. The briefing argues that these flows contradict the Paris Agreement and COP 26 pledges, calling for a total phase-out of fossil fuel production and consumption and a shift of public finance toward clean energy and just transition measures.

The IEJ argues that South Africa's current fiscal strategy over-prioritizes stability and business confidence at the expense of poverty and inequality. The submission recommends replacing austerity with a developmental framework that includes increasing the Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant to the Food Poverty Line, implementing a wealth tax, and reducing reliance on private finance for growth.

The document argues that IFI loans, such as those from the World Bank and IMF, pose risks to South Africa's economic stability and human rights. It calls for parliamentary oversight, public disclosure of agreements, and gender-responsive budgeting to prevent austerity and protect vulnerable populations.

The document argues that planned budget cuts in South Africa are misguided and dangerous, potentially slowing economic growth and undermining social protection. The authors contend that the current 'fiscal crisis' is manageable through alternative measures, such as drawing on reserves, increasing short-term borrowing, and raising revenue from high earners and corporate tax adjustments, rather than indiscriminate spending cuts.

The document argues that planned budget cuts in South Africa are misguided and dangerous, potentially slowing economic growth and undermining social protections. The signatories contend that the current 'fiscal crisis' is exaggerated, noting that the projected R53 billion revenue shortfall is comparable to previous years. They propose alternative solutions to close budget mismatches, such as drawing on the SARB’s Gold and Foreign Exchange Contingency Reserve Account, reducing tax breaks for high earners, and implementing a wealth tax.

The Institute for Economic Justice argues that South Africa is not facing an unprecedented fiscal crisis, despite claims from the National Treasury. While revenue for 2023/24 is projected to grow by only 0.55% (missing targets by R54.2-billion) and spending is expected to exceed budgets by between R67.8-billion and R105.8-billion, the document asserts these deviations are consistent with historical norms. It contends that the overspend results from inadequate planning, specifically regarding public sector wages and essential social services. With a debt-to-GDP ratio of 71.4% in 2022/23, the document claims South Africa's debt levels are in line with emerging market averages, although debt service costs remain unusually high. The authors warn that austerity measures and budget cuts would hamper economic growth and increase long-term debt vulnerability, recommending instead a developmental fiscal policy focused on employment, poverty reduction, and productive capacity.

The COVID-19 pandemic created historic debt stresses for developing countries, characterized by increased borrowing needs and economic downturns. In sub-Saharan Africa, pre-existing vulnerabilities and limited fiscal space—with 16 countries already at high risk of or in debt distress—exacerbated these challenges. Debt management offices also faced unprecedented operational risks due to volatile market conditions and the shift to remote working arrangements.

The report outlines a framework for developing countries to bridge the adaptation finance gap through seven guiding principles. These are divided into process-related principles—emphasizing country-driven approaches, the engagement of finance ministries, and inclusivity—and content-related principles, which focus on the strategic use of diverse financial instruments, alignment with national development goals, improving the enabling environment, and establishing monitoring and evaluation processes. The report supports these principles with case studies from Kenya, Nepal, and Peru, highlighting that a financing strategy is a continuous process rather than a single document.

The International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) evaluates Canada's Fossil Fuel Subsidy Framework, noting its alignment with World Trade Organization definitions and its transparency regarding 'inefficiency'. However, the IISD warns that exemptions for 'abated' fossil fuel production, including carbon capture and storage and fossil-derived hydrogen, may allow public funds to continue flowing to the oil and gas sector, undermining climate targets.

The Canadian Climate Institute recommends a strategic approach to clean growth that leverages limited public funds to attract private investment. Key proposals include fixing market failures, releasing carbon price schedules beyond 2030, implementing clear exit strategies for public support, and ensuring the Canada Growth Fund maintains political independence and promotes Indigenous majority ownership.

The report recommends a strategic approach to clean growth in Canada, emphasizing the use of public funds to correct market failures rather than simply matching US subsidies. Key recommendations include extending the carbon pricing schedule beyond 2030, implementing carbon contracts for difference, and ensuring the Canada Growth Fund operates with political independence and a mandate for Indigenous-led projects.

The report finds that public financial flows have not aligned with Paris Agreement goals, with fossil fuel subsidies increasing significantly since 2015, reaching over USD 1 trillion in 2022. It argues that these subsidies incentivize emissions and hinder clean energy deployment, while recommending improved transparency, accountability, and national planning to transition these flows.

The document criticises the National Treasury for underfunding the Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant and implementing exclusionary regulations. It highlights a significant drop in approved applications from 10.9 million in March 2022 to 7.5 million in January 2023, attributing this to a low means-test threshold of R624 and complex application processes. The IEJ calls for the grant to be increased to the Food Poverty Line of R663 and for the government to honour the President's commitment to protect grants from inflation.

Between 2012 and 2021, the North Region of Brazil received R$ 30.6 billion (US$ 11.1 billion) for land transport infrastructure, representing 17% of the national total tracked. Public sources provided 78% of this funding, with the federal government as the primary source. The rail sector was the largest beneficiary in the North, receiving 55% of resources, heavily driven by the Carajás Railroad. In contrast, public budget funds in the North were overwhelmingly directed to highways (99%), primarily for maintenance and operation (79%). While private finance via incentivized debentures grew nationally, it accounted for 22% of the North's flows. Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) contributed R$ 3 billion, with the New Development Bank (NDB) being the most active in the region. The report emphasizes that without improved governance and rigorous socio-environmental analysis, these investments risk driving deforestation in the Amazon.

The report finds that LNG developments in Mozambique and Tanzania face significant transition risks, with asset values potentially dropping by 61% and 69% respectively in a 'Well Below Two Degrees Centigrade' (WB2C) scenario. In a 'Net Zero by 2050' (NZE) scenario, most projects would become uneconomic or 'value destructive' for investors. The authors argue that pursuing domestic gas-led industrialisation could further erode the viability of export projects and may require substantial government subsidies, potentially costing Tanzania approximately $5 billion over 30 years. Consequently, governments face material downside risks to public finances, as they intend to use gas revenues for public expenditure.

The report finds that while global climate finance almost doubled between 2011 and 2020, reaching a cumulative USD 4.8 trillion, current growth rates are insufficient to meet climate goals. Preliminary 2021 estimates show an all-time high of USD 850–940 billion, driven largely by electric vehicle demand. However, a significant gap remains in adaptation finance, and continued fossil fuel subsidies in 51 major countries exceeded total global climate finance investment for the 2011-2020 period. The report argues that annual flows must reach USD 4.3 trillion by 2030 to avoid the worst impacts of climate change.