Search Climate Insights Directory

The document advocates for a prioritized approach to repurposing approximately 1 million acres of irrigated farmland in California to meet Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) goals. It argues that 'extractive agriculture'—characterized as water-intensive and soil-degrading—imposes significant health and economic costs on rural disadvantaged communities that outweigh the revenues generated. The proposed framework prioritizes repurposing land inside these communities first, followed by land within a one-mile buffer, and finally other cropland through a transparent cost-benefit process. Proposed sustainable alternatives include renewable energy generation, habitat restoration, and regenerative agriculture.

The report identifies livestock fermentation, rice cultivation, and land-use changes as primary drivers of agri-food methane emissions. It argues that transitioning to plant-rich diets, improving livestock management, and adopting sustainable rice farming can reduce greenhouse gases while improving public health by reducing air pollution and non-communicable diseases.

The report identifies livestock production, rice cultivation, and land use as primary methane sources in agriculture, highlighting that the sector accounts for approximately 42 percent of anthropogenic methane emissions. It argues that mitigating these emissions provides significant health co-benefits, such as reducing tropospheric ozone and respiratory illnesses caused by biomass burning and manure management. Proposed solutions include transitioning to plant-rich diets, implementing alternate wetting and drying (AWD) in rice farming, and adopting regenerative agricultural practices. The document emphasizes the need for systemic policy changes, including the reform of agricultural subsidies and the implementation of mandatory emissions regulations, while noting that livestock remains a critical nutritional and economic resource in the Global South.

The Center for International Environmental Law argues that industrial food production is deeply linked to the fossil fuel industry through the use of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides, which release greenhouse gases and may impair soil carbon sequestration. The statement warns that geoengineering technologies, such as solar radiation modification and large-scale carbon removal, pose risks to weather patterns, ecosystems, and food security. It calls for a rapid end to fossil fuel reliance and a transition to regenerative agricultural models that protect the rights of land and environmental defenders, including Indigenous Peoples and local communities.

The Center for International Environmental Law highlights the symbiotic relationship between the fossil fuel industry and industrial agriculture, noting that agriculture accounts for approximately one-third of global greenhouse gas emissions. It emphasizes that reliance on synthetic fertilizers and pesticides creates vulnerability to fossil fuel price shocks, which increases food costs and insecurity. The statement calls for states to transition toward resilient and regenerative agricultural models to ensure food and energy sovereignty.

Climate finance for agrifood systems is critically low, representing only 4.3% of total project-level climate finance in 2019/20. The report highlights a massive investment gap, noting that current flows must increase at least sevenfold to meet conservative transition needs. While agriculture and forestry dominate project-level funding, essential mitigation areas like food loss and low-carbon diets are severely underfunded. The analysis reveals a heavy reliance on public funding (85%) and significant geographic disparities, with East Asia and the Pacific receiving the most finance, while South Asia and Latin America remain underserved relative to their emissions and vulnerability. The report advocates for repurposing harmful agricultural subsidies and leveraging private capital to scale climate-resilient and low-carbon food systems.

The document outlines a systemic framework for tracking climate finance in agrifood systems, expanding beyond traditional AFOLU (Agriculture, Forestry, Other Land Uses, and Fisheries) categories to include downstream agro-industries, food loss, waste, and diets. It details the methodology for estimating global annual investment needs—drawing from FOLU, UNEP, and Thornton et al.—and provides a granular breakdown of tracked project-level and company-level investments for 2019/2020. The annexes also include a corrigendum from February 2024 that significantly revises venture capital investment figures upward.

The Changing Markets Foundation asserts that Nestlé's net zero roadmap is a "green mirage" that fails to meet any of the UN's Integrity Matters recommendations. The analysis highlights a significant "methane blindspot," noting that Nestlé does not separately report methane emissions, which are estimated to be twice those of Switzerland's entire livestock sector. The author criticizes Nestlé's reliance on regenerative agriculture over proven solutions and its strategy to grow plant-based portfolios alongside dairy rather than using them as substitutes to reduce overall emissions. Furthermore, the document claims that Nestlé's actual emissions have reduced by only 1% over five years, contradicting the company's reported 6.4% reduction achieved through "creative accounting."

The Resilient Agriculture Innovations for Nature (RAIN) challenge, a partnership between the Global Resilience Partnership (GRP) and Munich Re Foundation, seeks nature-positive agricultural innovations in East Africa. Open to not-for-profit organisations, the challenge provides selected winners with tailored mentoring, a Leadership Academy, communications support, and potential next-stage funding for implementation and scaling. Applications are evaluated on a 100-point scale across criteria including innovativeness, impact, equity, scalability, viability, team composition, and risk.

The document analyzes the South African food system as a site of deep social inequality and climate vulnerability. It highlights a dualistic production structure where a small number of large-scale commercial farms dominate, while millions of smallholder farmers lack resources. The paper details the system's vulnerability to climate change—specifically heatwaves, droughts, and rainfall variability—and its contribution to greenhouse gas emissions, primarily through livestock and synthetic fertilizers. It critiques 'market-centred' and 'technofix' approaches to sustainability, advocating instead for a 'deep just transition' based on agroecology, food sovereignty, and the redistribution of power and resources to ensure the right to food and decent work for all.

The briefing finds that Nestlé's net-zero plan fails to meet any of the nine relevant recommendations from the UN Integrity Matters report, primarily due to a lack of specific methane targets and an over-reliance on regenerative agriculture. While Nestlé targets a 42% reduction in dairy and livestock emissions against a business-as-usual scenario, this represents only a 14% reduction from its 2018 baseline. The analysis estimates that Nestlé's methane emissions from cattle are roughly 8.7 million tonnes of CO2e, and notes that between 2018 and 2022, targeted GHG emissions dropped by only 1%.

The report finds that Nestlé's net-zero plan fails to meet any of the nine relevant UN Integrity Matters recommendations. It highlights a critical 'methane blindspot,' where the company avoids setting specific methane targets despite dairy and livestock being its largest emission sources. The analysis argues that Nestlé uses 'creative accounting' via business-as-usual scenarios to mask minimal absolute emission reductions and relies on unverified regenerative agriculture and insetting to meet goals. Furthermore, the report identifies greenwashing in the carbon-neutral claims of flagship brands like Nespresso and KitKat, which rely heavily on unreliable offsets.

An investigation by Mighty Earth, Repórter Brasil, and Ecostorm found that Tesco's UK meat products are linked to illegal deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. The report traces soy from the Santa Ana farm in Mato Grosso, which used illegal fires to clear 400 hectares of forest in 2022, through Cargill's logistics network to UK suppliers Avara and Pilgrim's UK. The authors argue that Cargill's monitoring systems are flawed, allowing 'grain laundering' where illegal soy is mixed with legal crops. Despite public pledges to be deforestation-free by 2025, Tesco continues to source heavily from Cargill, which has a 2030 target. The report also criticizes proposed UK due diligence legislation for failing to cover 'legal' deforestation, potentially making the UK a leakage market for soy that does not meet EU standards.

CAPE argues that Canada's Sustainable Agriculture Strategy must move beyond climate change to include a 'planetary health' lens, specifically addressing the health risks of conventional agriculture, the need for pesticide reduction, and the integration of environmental justice and Indigenous rights.

Mountain Harvest works with 850 farmers in Mount Elgon, Uganda, to bypass commodity pricing through organic certification and premium coffee production. To combat climate-driven threats like droughts and mudslides, the organisation promotes regenerative agriculture and income diversification via macadamia, avocados, and rabbit rearing. Additionally, Mountain Harvest is addressing the poverty of female hand sorters by providing more stable employment and exploring micro-loan opportunities.

The report argues that transitioning from a "take, make, waste" economy to a circular one is essential for Canada to meet its climate targets, as energy transitions alone cannot address emissions from resource extraction and material use. It identifies significant emissions-reduction opportunities in the metals, construction, plastics, and food sectors, while noting that Canada is currently at a nascent stage of implementation compared to leaders like Japan and the European Union. The document emphasizes that 'upstream' measures—such as demand suppression, product life extension, and smarter design—offer greater climate benefits than downstream recycling. It highlights critical barriers in Canada, including opaque material flow data, regulatory hurdles for recycled aggregates, and a lack of comprehensive national circularity goals. The report recommends that Canada develop a formal roadmap, integrate circularity into its Nationally Determined Contributions, and utilize tools like carbon pricing and green public procurement to incentivize the shift.

The document outlines the interconnectedness of the climate crisis, biodiversity loss, water scarcity, air pollution, and unsustainable food systems. It argues that these issues are driven by fossil-fuel-based economic systems and excessive consumption, disproportionately affecting the poor. The guide advocates for a fundamental shift toward circular economies, regenerative agriculture, and a 'just transition' to protect the planet and ensure human rights to clean air and water.

The document outlines the interconnected crises of climate change, biodiversity loss, water scarcity, air pollution, and unsustainable consumption, arguing that these are driven by fossil-fuel-based economic systems and excessive consumption. It calls for a fundamental shift toward circular economies, regenerative agriculture, and social justice to protect the planet and its most vulnerable populations.

The document outlines the interconnected nature of the climate crisis, biodiversity loss, and social injustice, arguing that current economic systems based on fossil fuels and mass consumption are unsustainable. It provides specific data on water scarcity, air pollution, and ecosystem collapse while advocating for a transition to clean energy, regenerative agriculture, and circular economies to protect the planet and its most vulnerable populations.

The document argues that the current ecological crisis—characterized by climate change, biodiversity loss, and pollution—is rooted in overconsumption and fossil-fuel-based economic systems. It calls for a transition toward circular economies, regenerative agriculture, and a 'just transition' that prioritizes the rights of the poor, indigenous peoples, and future generations.