Search Climate Insights Directory

The document argues that climate change disproportionately affects women due to a synergy of biological and sociocultural factors, which can deepen existing social inequalities. It examines the 'state of the art' regarding gender and climate change through an intersectional lens and analyzes two national frameworks: Peru's Gender and Climate Change Action Plan (2016-2021) and Mexico's Special Climate Change Program (2014-2018). The author concludes that while international agreements have pushed Latin American states to create normative instruments, implementation is hindered by a lack of political will, insufficient budgeting, and a shortage of specialized technical capacity in both gender and environmental fields.

The document outlines the challenges and best practices for implementing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in Latin America, focusing on institutional harmonization, inter-sectoral cooperation, local ownership, and financing. It highlights the risk of political instability affecting long-term goals and the need for better data disaggregation and multi-stakeholder dialogue to move beyond central government control.

The document examines the role of gender in urban climate-compatible development in Peru, using the GRIDES networks in Cajamarca and Huaraz as case studies. It finds that while women's participation has led to implicit gender considerations in local government plans, gender is often narrowly viewed as a 'women's issue' rather than a structural power dynamic. The brief identifies significant political, socioeconomic, and cultural barriers—including a lack of political will and patriarchal beliefs—that hinder the implementation of transformative gender approaches. It recommends 'de-womenizing' the gender approach, strengthening institutional capacities, and aligning local actions with Peru's National Gender and Climate Change Action Plan.

The brief finds that while women's participation in GRIDES has led to an implicit gender approach in local government plans, gender is often narrowly perceived as a 'women's issue' rather than a transformative process. It identifies political, socioeconomic, and cultural barriers—including a lack of political will and patriarchal beliefs—that hinder the implementation of concrete measures to tackle gender inequality in climate adaptation. The document recommends 'de-womanising' the gender approach, strengthening civil servant capacity, and aligning local initiatives with Peru's National Gender and Climate Change Plan.

The policy brief examines the transition of the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) from initial 'base' reviews to 'second-generation' periodic reviews. It identifies systemic weaknesses in the first-generation process—including excessive costs, cumbersome reporting, and poor implementation of National Programmes of Action (NPoAs)—and recommends institutional reforms to regain momentum. Key suggestions include maintaining National Governing Councils (NGCs) for institutional memory, improving continental leadership at the Secretariat, and tailoring future reviews to emphasize specific issues identified in previous assessments to ensure greater accountability.

The report argues that while land use generates about a quarter of global greenhouse gas emissions and is highly vulnerable to climate change, current investments are predominantly 'business-as-usual'. It introduces three tools—a land-use finance landscape, a financial viability gap analysis, and a public finance mapping tool—to help governments identify funding gaps, assess the financial viability of green projects, and ensure policy coherence to unlock private and public investment in sustainable land management.

The document evaluates the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM), noting that while it has successfully provided a platform for citizen engagement and reviewed 17 countries, it is currently 'under stress'. The authors identify critical failures in leadership, funding, and political will, specifically noting that no Country Review Reports have been produced since early 2013. To remain relevant to Agenda 2063, the APRM must reform its administrative structure, establish a 'knowledge hub', and implement a more sustainable funding model based on GDP to ensure its autonomy and effectiveness.

The document examines the integration of ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) and community-based adaptation (CbA) through the EU-funded EcoAdapt project. By utilizing the Model Forests approach in Bolivia, Argentina, and Chile, the project sought to develop long-term climate adaptation strategies for water resources. The integration aims to combine the protection of biodiversity and ecosystem services with the empowerment of local communities to identify their own needs. Key benefits identified include increased community ownership, a better understanding of socio-ecological interconnections, and a more holistic view of large-scale environmental processes. However, the project faced challenges such as waning community motivation, inclusive participation gaps—specifically with cattle ranchers in Bolivia—and instabilities within the public sector. The briefing concludes that successful up-scaling requires a socio-ecological systems approach, secure finance, supportive public policies, and the development of accessible tools for local actors.

The document analyzes Nigeria's experience with the APRM, highlighting that while the peer review process is a valuable diagnostic tool, the subsequent implementation of the National Programme of Action (NPoA) faces severe hurdles. In Nigeria, these include poor monitoring and evaluation, limited technical capacity, funding constraints, and a lack of legal standing for NEPAD Nigeria. The brief also notes a decline in civil society engagement due to mistrust and lack of donor funding, concluding that success requires strong political will, better communication, and the integration of the NPoA into national development strategies.

The document argues that traditional food security monitoring focuses too heavily on outputs and outcomes, which are often difficult to attribute to specific actions. It proposes 'process-based indicators' as proxies to measure the quality of decision-making, institutional capacity, and inclusivity. Using the FIPAT tool in Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua, the authors identify key indicators across six areas: policy vulnerability, system resilience, decision-making transparency, multistakeholder participation, lessons learned, and decentralization. The briefing emphasizes that effective food security policies require inclusive participation of vulnerable groups, empowered local decision-makers, and a shift in institutional culture to view policy review as a dynamic, non-punitive process.

The document analyzes why the APRM process in Zambia has lost momentum despite early innovative practices. It identifies a lack of funding, poor coordination within civil society, and the disbandment of the civil society APRM Secretariat in 2011 as key drivers of this decline. The authors argue that the APRM has become dominated by the government post-review and is not central to Zambia's broader governance discourse. Recommendations include integrating the APRM into national development plans, increasing media coverage, and improving budgeting guidance from the continental APRM Secretariat.

The document evaluates South Africa's third APRM implementation report (SAIR3), noting improvements in reporting quality and honesty compared to previous reports. However, it argues that the APRM remains largely a foreign policy tool with little domestic impact, as the NPoA is not integrated into national policies like the National Development Plan (NDP) and governance challenges identified in 2007 persist.

The report introduces 'governAbilities' as the nexus of sustainability, accountability, and adaptability, arguing that these three operational areas are essential for governments to maintain a 'social licence to operate' in a complex, uncertain century. It identifies four common principles—outcome-based, multistakeholder, forward-looking, and multi-dimensional—that link these abilities. To operationalize these, the authors propose a toolkit including Budgeting for Outcomes, Indicator Information Systems, Multistakeholder Councils, Scenario Planning, and Integrated Strategies. The report provides global case studies, such as Germany's sustainability reporting and Washington State's budgeting process, to demonstrate how these tools can be implemented to improve public management and policy resilience.

The guide argues that mainstreaming disaster risk management (DRM) is essential to prevent development policies from increasing vulnerability to climate-related disasters. It identifies six core requirements for effective mainstreaming: a supportive policy environment, leadership, risk knowledge, context-appropriate management techniques, consistent financing, and innovation. The document provides a framework for governments focusing on four areas: reforming institutional practices to reduce compartmentalisation, enhancing risk understanding through inclusive and non-data-intensive methods, managing the political nature of mainstreaming, and building vertical and private-sector partnerships.

This guide by the Climate and Development Knowledge Network (CDKN) examines the technical, operational, and institutional barriers that prevent disaster risk assessments from effectively informing public policy and investment decisions. Drawing on research from Latin America and the Caribbean, as well as case studies from Ghana, India, and Pakistan, the document provides a framework for improving the 'uptake' of risk information to support the successor to the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA2).

The ADAPTool is an Excel spreadsheet developed by the International Institute for Sustainable Development to assess the adaptability of public policies against seven key characteristics: integrated analysis, multistakeholder deliberation, automatic adjustment, self-organization, decentralized decision-making, promoting variation, and formal review. The tool evaluates whether policies support adaptation measures for specific stressors and whether the policies themselves are likely to respond well to future changes, including climate change and market volatility. The assessment process involves four worksheets, with data collected via online forms, interviews, and analyst research.

The document examines Brazil's shift from traditional state-led foreign policy to a 'public policy' approach, characterized by a plurality of actors including domestic ministries and subnational entities. It details Brazil's South–South co-operation (SSC) strategies, which emphasize horizontal relationships and solidarity over traditional donor-recipient models. The analysis highlights the strategic importance of Africa, noting significant growth in trade, technical co-operation through the Brazilian Cooperation Agency (ABC), and the role of state-owned enterprises like Vale and Petrobras. It argues that these strategies are part of Brazil's broader pursuit of political autonomy and global power status through coalitions like BRICS and IBSA.

The African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM), established in 2003 under NEPAD, is a voluntary governance assessment system where African states evaluate their own political, economic, and corporate governance. By 2013, 33 states had acceded, with 17 completing their first review. The mechanism utilizes a process of self-assessment, expert missions, and high-level peer review to identify deficiencies and implement National Programmes of Action (NPoAs). While the APRM has successfully expanded democratic space and fostered a common governance vocabulary, it faces challenges in integrating NPoAs into national budgets and ensuring consistent high-level oversight of implementation.

The ADAPTool Guidebook describes a structured process for evaluating whether public policies are 'adaptive'—meaning they can respond effectively to both anticipated and unanticipated shocks. The tool assesses policies against seven core characteristics: integrated and forward-looking analysis, multistakeholder deliberation, automatic policy adjustment, self-organization and social networking, decentralization of decision-making, promoting variation, and formal policy review and continuous learning. The process involves a scoping phase to define geographic scope and stressors, data collection via interviews or research, and a synthesis phase that ranks policies based on 'planned adaptability' (response to known stressors) and 'autonomous adaptability' (response to unforeseen changes).

The document examines the underutilisation of best practices within the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM), noting that while over 200 practices have been identified across 15 country review reports, they remain largely confined to those reports. It argues that best practices should serve as a central anchor for peer learning to drive governance reform. The author recommends that the APRM define best practices more clearly, integrate their identification into the initial country self-assessment phase to increase national ownership, and establish a central repository and dedicated learning forums to disseminate these home-grown solutions across the continent.