Search Climate Insights Directory

The document outlines five key conclusions for developing countries creating INDCs: treating them as political statements, establishing clear structures, leveraging existing policies, conducting broad consultations, and planning for implementation. It emphasizes the need to balance ambition with feasibility, often through a combination of unilateral and conditional contributions, while aligning climate actions with national development priorities and Sustainable Development Goals.

The document argues that a high-ambition climate agreement, limiting global warming to 2°C, is essential for achieving the SDGs, particularly those related to poverty, inequality, and energy. Using global analysis and case studies from Dominica, Jamaica, Pakistan, and Uganda, the research indicates that a low-ambition agreement would significantly increase poverty levels in Asia, sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, and the Caribbean by 2030.

The document outlines the importance of Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) as public outlines of national climate plans starting in 2020. It establishes a set of criteria for a 'strong' INDC—defined as fair, ambitious, feasible, and transparent—and provides a detailed six-question evaluation framework. This framework guides users to check for clear statements of intent (mitigation and adaptation), alignment with climate science (specifically the 2 degrees C goal), fairness based on national circumstances, the strength of the design process, implementation feasibility, and methodological transparency.

The document argues that climate change impacts will make the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) "almost impossibly challenging" for Least Developed Countries (LDCs) unless there is an urgent increase in the ambition of climate and development actions. The analysis is based primarily on evidence from the IPCC's Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) and aims to inform negotiations regarding the post-2015 agenda, development financing, and a new climate change agreement.

The document analyzes Turkey's G-20 presidency priorities—inclusiveness, investment, and implementation—and their application to Africa and LIDCs. It highlights a historical shift in Turkish foreign policy toward Africa, characterized by increased diplomatic missions and official development assistance. The authors argue that the G-20 suffers from a lack of African representation and a disconnect between its finance and development tracks. To address this, the brief suggests that Turkey align the G-20 agenda with UN sustainable development goals, facilitate private infrastructure investment through new asset classes, and include African policymakers in G-20 working groups.

Carbon Market Watch argues that international carbon markets must be supplementary to domestic action and governed by strict eligibility, accounting, and integrity rules to avoid the failures of previous mechanisms like the CDM and EU ETS. The organization recommends excluding REDD-plus and agriculture from carbon markets, implementing a 'negative list' of ineligible project types, and establishing a UN-led standard-setting body to prevent double-counting and ensure net atmospheric benefits.

The document identifies six clusters of trade-related commitments in the post-2015 agenda, ranging from subsidy reform to the strengthening of the multilateral trading system. It argues that because trade's contribution to sustainable development is diffuse, a coordinated review process is necessary to ensure policy coherence. The authors propose a three-tier review architecture consisting of national self-assessments, regional peer reviews, and global thematic assessments. A central role is assigned to the World Trade Organization's Trade Policy Review Mechanism (TPRM) and the High-level Political Forum (HLPF). To manage the complexity of data and reporting, the paper recommends the creation of an inter-agency task force to synthesize trade-related reports and provide analytical oversight of trade-offs between goals.

The briefing identifies three critical action areas for negotiators in Bonn: establishing predictable 'cycles of action' for climate plans, defining long-term mitigation and adaptation goals, and planning for post-2020 climate finance. It argues that negotiators must now prioritize core issues and remove redundancies from the negotiating text to remain on track for an ambitious outcome at COP 21 in December.

The document argues that a high-ambition global climate agreement, defined as limiting global warming to 2°C by 2100, is essential for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). It asserts that a low-ambition agreement would undermine efforts to eradicate extreme poverty, equalise gender relations, and provide access to water and energy over the next 15 years. The brief calls for the SDGs and their associated financing to support climate-compatible development, particularly in the poorest and most climate-vulnerable countries.

The report examines the relationship between the 2015 climate agreement and the post-2015 sustainable development goals (SDGs), arguing that a high-ambition agreement is essential for achieving the SDGs by 2030. It analyzes two scenarios—high-ambition and low-ambition—focusing on policies and investment in mitigation and adaptation, with the high-ambition scenario aligned with the UNFCCC goal of limiting global warming to 2°C above pre-industrial levels.

The report argues that a high-ambition climate agreement aiming to limit global warming to 2°C is essential for achieving the SDGs by 2030, particularly those related to poverty, inequality, and energy. Using Integrated Assessment Modelling (IAM), the study compares a high-ambition scenario (RCP4.5/SSP1) with a low-ambition scenario (RCP8.5/SSP3). Findings indicate that under a low-ambition agreement, poverty levels in 2030 could be 80–140% higher in Asia and sub-Saharan Africa compared to the high-ambition scenario. Case studies in Dominica, Jamaica, Pakistan, and Uganda highlight that while the specific sensitivity of SDGs varies by country, poverty and energy goals are consistently most at risk under low-ambition climate policies. The report emphasizes a reciprocal relationship: ambitious SDGs are necessary to implement a high-ambition climate deal, and a high-ambition deal is necessary to realize the SDGs.

null

The briefing outlines a proposed three-tier review system for the SDGs consisting of inclusive national conversations, regional peer reviews, and global assessments. It emphasizes a 'bottom-up' paradigm where national reviews serve as the foundation for regional aggregation and global thematic discussions within the HLPF. The authors argue that the HLPF should orchestrate the efforts of states and UN entities, focusing on learning and policy adaptation rather than sanctions, to ensure the universal mandate of the SDGs is met.

The report estimates the global ocean's total asset base at at least US$24 trillion, with an annual 'gross marine product' of US$2.5 trillion, making it the world's seventh largest economy. It warns that over two-thirds of this value depends on healthy ocean conditions, which are currently being eroded by overfishing, pollution, and climate change. The document proposes eight strategic actions, including expanding marine protected areas to 30% by 2030 and decarbonizing energy systems to prevent the projected disappearance of coral reefs by 2050.

The author critiques the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) for focusing on income poverty and development aid rather than structural inequality and the link between social and environmental dimensions. While noting progress in poverty reduction and water access, the text highlights that global inequality is rising and environmental degradation is accelerating due to the consumption patterns of an expanding global middle class. The author asserts that industrialised countries, particularly the European Union, must assume global responsibility by meeting the 0.7% GNI official development assistance target and drastically reducing their per capita CO2 emissions to allow the Global South scope for sustainable development.

The document examines the challenges European Green parties face in reconciling non-violence with the need to protect human rights in conflict zones. It argues for a shift in EU foreign policy from reactive crisis management to a proactive, multilateral approach that prioritizes ecological justice, nuclear disarmament, and the empowerment of civil society. Specific analyses cover the conflicts in Ukraine, Syria, and the Maghreb, as well as the strategic importance of South East Asia.

A group of organisations calls on the European Union to ensure that its external actions on climate change fully respect and promote human rights. The letter highlights the importance of maintaining human rights language in the 2015 international climate treaty and suggests that the EU's Strategic Framework and Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy should explicitly support these objectives.

Carbon Market Watch asserts that climate change and sustainable development are deeply interlinked and that the new Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) must incorporate stronger wording and a standalone climate goal. The author warns that the current separation between the SDG process and the UNFCCC process creates confusion and risks undermining development efforts, as the UNFCCC climate treaty will not enter into force until after 2020.

The authors contend that current 'business-as-usual' urbanization, characterized by car-oriented infrastructure, leads to high greenhouse gas emissions, economic losses from congestion, and safety risks. They advocate for 'smart urban mobility'—which combines technology with coordinated planning—to 'leapfrog' car-centric development. Examples of successful interventions include Mexico City's Metrobús BRT, Beijing's low emission zone, and Medellín's Metrocable. The document highlights 2015 as a pivotal year due to the finalization of the UN Sustainable Development Goals, upcoming climate negotiations, and the UN Decade of Action on Road Safety.

The briefing examines the concept of 'climate compatible development' as a means to achieve 'zero-zero'—the simultaneous eradication of poverty and the elimination of net CO2 emissions. It frames this as a 'wicked problem' requiring the integration of mitigation, adaptation, and economic transformation. The author emphasizes that success depends on policy leadership, careful design to manage winners and losers, and cross-government implementation beyond environmental ministries.