Search Climate Insights Directory

The brief argues that agrochemical use and misuse are increasing across Africa due to corporate profit motives, weak regulation, and climate change, posing severe risks to human health and the environment. It recommends strengthening governance, increasing investment in agroecology, and leveraging financial tools to reduce synthetic chemical dependence.

The document highlights the potential for small-scale African farmers to meet a growing demand for processed foods—projected to be 75% of staple food demand—by adding value to indigenous crops. However, processors face significant hurdles, including limited access to modern storage (such as cold rooms), poor packaging that reduces consumer trust, and difficulties in meeting food safety certifications. The brief emphasizes the role of traditional methods like fermentation and drying in enhancing nutrition and shelf-life, while warning that unchecked processing waste can cause environmental pollution. It recommends that philanthropies fund capacity building, research into sustainable packaging, and the development of regional labelling standards to boost the marketability of local processed foods.

The document examines 'territorial markets' in Africa—informal retail spaces where 70–90% of agricultural products are traded. It argues that while these markets are essential for food security, nutrition, and the livelihoods of smallholder farmers and women, they are frequently neglected or criminalized by governments. Through case studies in Benin, Ghana, Kenya, and South Africa, the brief highlights systemic failures in infrastructure and legal protections, advocating for philanthropic and government investment to align these markets with agroecological principles.

The document advocates for Silvopastoral Systems (SPS)—the integration of trees, forage, and livestock—to restore degraded African rangelands and mitigate resource-driven conflicts. It highlights successful models like Herding for Health and Farmer-Managed Natural Regeneration (FMNR), while urging philanthropic investment to overcome barriers such as insecure land tenure, knowledge gaps, and government subsidies for chemical-intensive farming.

The report examines the intersection of trade and climate sustainability from an African perspective, focusing on the economic impacts of energy transitions, the risks and opportunities of voluntary carbon markets, and the challenges of transition mineral value chains. It critically analyzes the role of the WTO in green trade and provides specific policy recommendations to ensure that climate-related trade measures, such as Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanisms (CBAM), do not disproportionately harm developing nations.

The African Climate Foundation outlines a strategic framework for Africa's sustainable transformation by 2030, emphasizing regional integration, green industrialization, localization, domestic capital mobilization, and governance strengthening to avoid extractive economic patterns.

The Sevilla Commitment outlines a comprehensive global strategy to mobilize resources for the 2030 Agenda, focusing on domestic resource mobilization, private capital, international cooperation, and debt sustainability. It calls for systemic reforms to the international financial architecture to increase the representation of developing countries and lower the cost of capital. Key initiatives include the creation of a global central debt data registry, the operationalization of the Africa Credit Rating Agency, and the expansion of blended finance to catalyze sustainable investments.

The document details how climate change is manifesting in African mountains through rising temperatures and erratic precipitation, leading to decreased crop yields and livestock production. It highlights that while farmers are adapting by changing planting dates and adopting new crop varieties, they face significant barriers such as limited access to credit and land, and the destabilizing effects of violent conflict.

The Just Transition Planning Masterclass provided practitioners from Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania, Mozambique, Malawi, Zambia, and Namibia with frameworks to ensure nature-based solutions (NbS) are equitable. The program highlighted that while NbS are often seen as 'win-win', they can cause socio-economic disruptions, such as loss of employment in extractive industries or displacement of communities without formal land tenure. Participants explored the Climate Investment Fund’s Just Transition Planning Toolbox and identified strategies to mitigate negative impacts, including livelihood diversification, re-skilling, and social protection measures. The report also notes barriers to implementation, such as limited institutional capacity, financial constraints, and community mistrust.

The briefing identifies opportunities for DFIs and MDBs to align gender-lens investing (GLI) with nature finance, specifically by leveraging frameworks like the 2X Criteria and the World Bank Nature Finance Tracking Methodology. It proposes four primary pathways: mainstreaming dual lenses across the investment lifecycle, pioneering innovative financial instruments such as impact-linked structures, expanding integrated technical assistance for investees, and utilizing communities of practice to share knowledge. The document highlights specific examples of such integration, including blue loans in Ecuador and climate resilience debt swaps in Barbados.

The South African Climate Finance Landscape 2025 reports an annual average of ZAR 188.3 billion in climate finance for 2022–2023, though this remains well below the estimated annual need of up to ZAR 499 billion. Investment is heavily skewed toward the energy sector, which receives 74.1% of total flows, primarily for renewable electricity generation. In contrast, adaptation finance is lagging, accounting for only 11.3% of tracked flows. While domestic sources provide nearly 60% of funding, international flows are dominated by public development finance institutions, particularly from Western Europe. The report highlights significant barriers, including grid bottlenecks, policy uncertainty, and a lack of concessional capital for high-risk or non-revenue-generating adaptation and just transition projects.

The document outlines a proposed African-led financial architecture to move from crisis resolution to prevention. The first pillar, the African Financial Stability Mechanism (AFSM), is a proposed regional financing arrangement (RFA) providing concessional liquidity, including a specific climate shock liquidity facility, to manage exogenous shocks. The second pillar, the African Stability and Growth Pact (ASGP), is a flexible fiscal governance framework that uses peer accountability and nationally tailored fiscal rules rather than uniform targets. The two are integrated such that access to AFSM liquidity is linked to a country's commitment to and performance under the ASGP. The framework is designed to be hosted by the African Development Bank (AfDB) with oversight from the African Union (AU), and capitalised through a blend of member contributions, Special Drawing Rights (SDRs), and development finance.

The report outlines a strategic framework to strengthen Africa's financial stability by combining a regional liquidity facility (MASF) with a flexible budgetary governance pact (PASC). The MASF is designed to provide rapid, concessional liquidity to counter exogenous shocks, including climate-related disruptions, while the PASC encourages national budgetary discipline through peer accountability and tailored rules. Together, they aim to reduce dependence on external donors and improve market credibility through a phased implementation starting with a pilot phase between 2025 and 2027.

The GCF Accreditation Framework outlines the requirements and processes for national, regional, and international organizations to become Accredited Entities (AEs). It defines two primary access paths—Direct Access Entities (DAEs) and International Access Entities (IAEs)—and details a five-step institutional accreditation process: nomination, pre-screening, application, screening, and Board approval. The framework emphasizes national ownership, fiduciary standards, and environmental and social safeguards (ESS), while providing capacity-building support through the Readiness Programme to help developing countries and their local organizations meet these standards.

The document assesses the effects of US Executive Order 14257, which introduced a 10% universal tariff and higher country-specific tariffs (11% to 50%) on imports from 190 countries. While mineral-exporting nations like Angola and South Africa may find relief through exemptions for oil and critical minerals, countries like Lesotho and Madagascar face severe economic risks, particularly in the textile sector. The analysis highlights a strategic divide: some nations seek bilateral deals, others aim for self-sufficiency, and a group of African WTO members are coordinating through the 'Friends of the System'. The authors argue that African nations should negotiate collectively under the African Union to protect regional integration and the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) as the AGOA program faces expiration on September 30, 2025.

The paper analyzes the economic consequences of US Executive Order 14257, which introduced universal and country-specific tariffs on imports from 190 territories. While many African nations face a 10% universal tariff, 20 countries face higher rates ranging from 11% to 50%, with Lesotho most affected. The authors highlight the vulnerability of textile industries in Lesotho and Madagascar and the uncertainty surrounding the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), which expires on September 30, 2025. The document advocates for a coordinated regional response via the African Union and the African Continental Free Trade Area to mitigate economic risks and negotiate bilateral or sectoral agreements.

The report examines the prevalence and impact of mining tax incentives in Africa, concluding that they are largely ineffective at attracting foreign direct investment (FDI) and instead facilitate revenue loss and illicit financial flows. It highlights that factors such as mineral quality and political stability are more critical to investors than tax breaks. The document argues for a shift toward performance-based incentives, the adoption of the OECD/G20 global minimum tax, and regional tax harmonization to prevent a 'race to the bottom' and support the goals of the Africa Mining Vision.

The report analyzes the prevalence and effects of tax incentives in Africa's mining sector, concluding that these measures frequently result in substantial public revenue losses and encourage aggressive tax avoidance. It argues that mining investments are driven more by resource quality and political stability than by tax breaks. The document recommends that African nations move away from generous, contract-based incentives and instead adopt regional tax harmonization and targeted, time-limited incentives linked to specific development goals, such as mineral processing and the energy transition.

The document defines ring-fencing as a limitation on the consolidation of income and deductions across different projects or activities for tax purposes. It argues that while ring-fencing can discourage investment in marginal ore bodies and increase compliance costs, it is essential for capturing economic rents, preventing permanent revenue loss from unsuccessful exploration, and mitigating BEPS practices. The guide recommends ring-fencing by mining licence area and suggests that profit-based taxes like Resource Rent Tax (RRT) and Additional Profit Tax (APT) must be ring-fenced to be effective. It also provides technical recommendations on apportioning indirect and general expenditures, suggesting that capital expenditure (CapEx) is a more effective allocation key than production volumes to avoid tax deferral.

The document examines the use of ring-fencing—the limitation of consolidating income and deductions across different mining projects or activities—as a tool for governments to ensure timely tax collection and protect the tax base. It analyzes the trade-offs between accelerating state revenue and potentially disincentivizing investment, particularly in marginal deposits. The guide provides detailed design options, such as ring-fencing by mining license area, activity type (upstream vs. downstream), or specific project, and offers recommendations on allocating indirect costs and managing transfer pricing risks. It also discusses exceptions for unsuccessful exploration costs to balance revenue goals with the need to attract exploration investment.