Search Climate Insights Directory

The briefing describes the effort at COP23 to develop the 'Paris rulebook', which establishes how governments implement Paris Agreement requirements. Key components include transparency frameworks for reporting emissions and adaptation, accounting rules for global impact, the global stocktake mechanism, and the communication of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). Major sticking points include balancing flexibility for developing countries without returning to a bifurcated approach, clarifying the scope of processes like loss and damage, and addressing the lack of data capacity in developing nations. The goal for COP23 is to produce a document of key decision points and a 2018 roadmap to finalize the guidelines in Poland.

Carbon Market Watch argues that international aviation and shipping emissions (bunkers emissions) must be accurately tracked within the Paris Agreement framework to prevent double counting of emission reductions. The organization recommends that Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) include a specific section for contributions outside their scope and that the UNFCCC formally cooperate with the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) regarding the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA). Furthermore, it proposes that the global stocktake incorporate data from ICAO and International Maritime Organization (IMO) reports to assess collective progress toward long-term temperature goals.

The document examines the lack of transparency in the ICAO's creation of the CORSIA offsetting scheme, highlighting risks to the Paris Agreement and the EU ETS. It argues that ICAO's current practice of closed meetings and non-disclosure agreements contradicts its own rules of procedure and the obligations of 13 member states under the Aarhus Convention. The brief recommends broadening observer diversity, opening meetings to the public, and providing access to key regulatory documents to ensure the environmental integrity of aviation carbon offsets.

The 2017 AdaptationWatch report argues that the Paris Agreement has shifted climate policy into an era of implementation, yet significant gaps remain in adaptation finance and transparency. It highlights that adaptation funding is overwhelmingly lower than mitigation funding and is often difficult for the most vulnerable nations to access due to complex accreditation processes and a lack of clear definitions distinguishing adaptation from general development. The report examines regional experiences, noting that while Latin American and Caribbean countries have made progress in institutional frameworks and GCF Readiness, Southeast Asia faces a disconnect between global finance scales and local needs. It also identifies a critical lack of compliance and standardized methodology in the Biennial Update Reports (BURs) of non-Annex I Parties, which obscures the actual amount of finance received. The document concludes with ten recommendations, emphasizing the need for increased adaptation finance, co-designing actions with local communities, and reorienting capacity building toward long-term, in-country ownership.

The Center for International Environmental Law criticizes the Green Climate Fund (GCF) for decreasing transparency and hindering civil society participation, specifically citing a proposed ethics policy that acts as a 'gag order' and the practice of holding crucial policy discussions in closed-door 'informal' meetings.

In remarks delivered at the UN General Assembly, Manish Bapna emphasizes that open government is essential for achieving the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Paris Agreement on climate change. He warns that trust in government is at a historic low and that civic space is under attack, citing specific instances of activists being targeted in India, Kenya, and Mexico. Bapna calls for the Open Government Partnership (OGP) to make civic space a central component of National Action Plans and highlights examples of successful citizen engagement and transparency efforts in Argentina, Spain, Nigeria, and Indonesia.

The Center for International Environmental Law and partners express concern over IDB loan HO-L1191, which supports the establishment of ZEDEs in Honduras. They argue that the ZEDE legal framework creates an undemocratic governance structure, allows for the imposition of zones without community consultation, and enables the use of foreign judges and private police. The authors claim this model undermines constitutional rights, labor protections, and environmental governance, while violating IDB policies on transparency, environmental safeguards, and involuntary resettlement.

The authors analyze the link between transparency and accountability in the context of the 2015 Paris Agreement's 'pledge-and-review' approach. They argue that the relationship is not straightforward and find that climate transparency practices often reflect existing conflicts over responsibility and burden sharing for climate action, rather than necessarily reducing them. Consequently, the authors suggest that the perceived transformative potential of transparency requires reconsideration.

The document examines the governance of Africa's extractive sectors, arguing that while the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) provides a valuable multi-stakeholder framework for revenue transparency, it must be complemented by national laws and regional cooperation to ensure true accountability. It highlights the gap between revenue disclosure and social spending, the challenges of beneficial ownership transparency, and the impact of political will on implementation. Case studies of Nigeria, Tanzania, and Zambia illustrate the varied success of institutionalising transparency and the persistent issues of reporting delays and exclusionary governance.

The document outlines the structural and methodological questions countries must address to implement the global stocktake, the five-year cycle designed to assess collective progress toward the Paris Agreement's goals. It emphasizes the need for common methodologies to aggregate diverse mitigation commitments, a framework for tracking context-specific adaptation progress, and clear modalities for accounting for public and private finance flows. The author argues that the stocktake must be both backward-looking (assessing progress) and forward-looking (identifying opportunities for enhanced action) to serve as the 'engine' of the Paris Agreement.

Carbon Market Watch argues for the integration of international aviation and shipping emissions into the Paris Agreement's transparency and review mechanisms. The organization recommends that NDCs include a specific section for contributions outside their scope and that states make corresponding adjustments to national inventories when emission reductions are used for international targets like CORSIA. Furthermore, it calls for the inclusion of bunker fuel burn and offset data in the global stocktake and the transparency framework to ensure environmental integrity and avoid double counting.

The document examines the gap between the high potential of 'civic tech' and its disappointing results in Africa. It identifies key failures, such as the tendency of non-technical organisations to build custom tools from scratch and a lack of understanding of the social and political contexts of users. Based on research in Kenya and South Africa, the author argues that innovation should be treated as an iterative process rather than a one-time product delivery, recommending that funders and practitioners move away from short-term pilots toward building long-term institutional capabilities and learning networks.

The authors criticize the UN climate secretariat for holding meetings behind closed doors in Bonn, Germany, where rules for transparency under the Paris Agreement were discussed. They argue that excluding non-state actors—including NGOs, academics, and local governments—erodes the trust and accountability necessary for the agreement's success and limits the technical quality of the resulting rules. The document calls for the inclusion of civil society in future thematic discussions, specifically those on adaptation scheduled for May.

The document provides a practical walkthrough of using the Promotion of Access to Information Act 2 of 2000 (PAIA) to access records from state and private entities. It details the role of PAIA Manuals, the request process using Form 02, timelines for responses, and the mechanisms for appeals and complaints via the Information Regulator. It also highlights that certain environmental and water-related records from specific government departments may be automatically available without a formal request.

ClientEarth argues that the European Commission has improperly withheld conformity checking studies by applying a general presumption of confidentiality to documents that do not meet the legal criteria for such an exception. The complaint asserts that the Commission failed to conduct individual assessments of requested documents, particularly those related to EU Pilot cases and preliminary assessments, in violation of case C-612/13 P and the Aarhus Regulation. Additionally, ClientEarth claims the Commission is neglecting its duty to actively and systematically disseminate environmental information to the public.

The Mauritius Convention on Transparency, adopted by the UN General Assembly on 10 December 2014, provides a mechanism for States to 'opt-in' to the UNCITRAL Rules on Transparency for arbitrations brought under investment treaties concluded before April 2014. The document highlights that investor-State arbitrations often involve public interests, including policies on nuclear or alternative energy, tobacco control, and the protection of drinking water, yet typically lack the openness of legal systems governed by the rule of law. By mandating the disclosure of documents and open hearings, the Convention aims to improve democratic participation, accountability, and the ability of governments to reform international economic governance. As of January 2017, Mauritius and Canada had ratified the Convention, while several other States had signed it.

The document argues that a lack of transparency and data mismatches hinder the ability of stakeholders to verify if EU fish quotas align with scientific advice and the legal requirements of the Common Fisheries Policy. It specifically highlights issues with spatial mismatches between management and advice units, the opacity of the Council of Ministers' decision-making, and the complexities introduced by the landing obligation's 'top-up' calculations. The author recommends that the European Commission publish its matching methodologies, create a centralised database for TACs shared with third countries, and improve the reporting of progress towards MSY.

The document explains that the Paris Agreement requires a detailed "rule book" to provide operational guidance on transparency, accountability, and the review of collective efforts to limit global warming to 1.5 - 2 degrees C. It identifies key challenges in designing these rules, including the need for "build-in flexibility" for countries with differing capabilities and the risk of double-counting emissions reductions. The briefing expects COP22 in Marrakech to establish a roadmap for finalizing these rules by 2018, operationalize capacity-building initiatives, and set the stage for more ambitious nationally determined contributions (NDCs) by 2020.

The paper examines the alignment between the African Group of Negotiators' (AGN) vision for a Global Goal for Adaptation (GGA) and the provisions of the Paris Agreement. It argues that while the Agreement establishes a GGA and recognizes the link between mitigation and adaptation, significant technical and political work is required to operationalise it. Key recommendations include establishing minimum information requirements for adaptation components of Nationally Determined Contributions (a-NDCs) to enable the aggregation of data for the global stocktake, and developing sector-specific risk metrics to track progress. The authors emphasize the need for 'material parity' between mitigation and adaptation, ensuring that adaptation support is adequate, transparent, and based on scientific temperature scenarios.

The report assesses Poland's compliance with the EU Control Regulation and IUU Regulation. While the 2014 Marine Fisheries Act established a necessary legal framework, the report finds that the system is overly complicated and lacks transparency. Data from 2016 indicates a surprisingly low rate of detected infringements compared to the number of inspections, suggesting a lack of effectiveness in detection or a lack of political will to implement sanctions. The report recommends improving inspection quality, providing guidance on administrative sanctions, increasing public access to the national register of infringements, and simplifying the legal framework.