Search Climate Insights Directory

The green bond market in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) is growing, with USD 12.6 billion issued since 2014. Brazil, Chile, and Mexico dominate the market, with Chile leading the region in sovereign green bond issuance. While energy is the most funded sector, LAC shows a higher proportion of funding for land use and industry compared to global trends. The report highlights significant opportunities for growth in sustainable agriculture and the 'blue economy' (ocean-based resources), while noting that public sector entities and financial institutions have substantial untapped potential for future green issuances.

The Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) green bond market experienced a strong recovery in 2019, largely driven by Chile's first sovereign green bonds. While Brazil, Chile, and Mexico dominate the market, the region shows significant potential for expansion in green infrastructure, sustainable agriculture, and ocean-based 'blue' finance. The report highlights a high prevalence of USD-denominated issuance and a strong reliance on external reviews, though post-issuance reporting varies by issuer size and type.

The green bond market in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) experienced a strong recovery in 2019, driven largely by Chile's first sovereign green bonds. While Brazil, Chile, and Mexico dominate the regional volume, the market is characterized by a high prevalence of US dollar-denominated debt and a significant reliance on private placements. Energy remains the most funded sector, though LAC shows a uniquely high allocation toward land use and industry compared to global trends. The report highlights substantial untapped potential in sustainable agriculture and the 'blue economy' (ocean resources), suggesting that sovereign issuance and multilateral development bank support are key to scaling these markets.

The Q4 2019 Risk Dashboard reports that the Green Climate Fund's portfolio concentration and liquidity remain within approved risk tolerance levels. As of December 31, 2019, the fund managed a portfolio of 124 approved funding proposals with a total value of USD 20.63 billion, including GCF's approved funding of USD 5.63 billion. The portfolio is distributed across Africa (39%), Asia-Pacific (34%), Latin America and the Caribbean (23%), and Eastern Europe (4%), with a funding balance of 42% mitigation and 21% adaptation (excluding cross-cutting projects). The fund reports no non-performing loans for the past eight quarters and maintains a foreign exchange commitment risk buffer of USD 86.9 million.

The report examines the global sugarcane market, noting that while demand is growing in Asia and Africa, it is stagnating in developed countries due to health concerns. It highlights the rise of voluntary sustainability standards (VSSs), which grew at a compound annual growth rate of about 52% from 2008 to 2016, though sales have not kept pace with production. The document identifies significant sustainability risks, including land grabbing, forced labor, and greenhouse gas emissions from field burning, and suggests that expanding VSSs in low human development countries like Sudan and Uganda could catalyze development benefits.

The report outlines a 'Target-Measure-Act' approach to reduce global food loss and waste, identifying regional hotspots—such as consumption in high-income regions and handling/storage in low-income regions—and proposing 10 scaling interventions to accelerate progress toward SDG 12.3.

The report assesses the adoption of electronic vessel tracking (ET), electronic monitoring (EM), electronic reporting (ER), and electronic traceability (ETr) across various countries and RFMOs. It finds that while vessel tracking has grown rapidly, fully integrated EFIS are rare due to proprietary systems, high upfront costs, and a lack of global standards. The authors recommend promoting 'Electronic Fishery and Seafood Information Systems' (EFSIS) to drive interoperability across the entire value chain.

The Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research (IAI) has announced the results of its Small Grant Program (SGP-HW) call for proposals. Following a multi-stage review process involving the IAI Directorate, the Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC), and external researchers, 10 proposals were shortlisted from an initial 92. Four projects were selected for immediate funding, three were approved subject to resource availability, and three were recommended for alternate funding. The program emphasizes transdisciplinary research and participatory approaches involving policy makers and stakeholders, with grants up to USD 200,000 to support research, capacity building, and data management.

The study finds that while most G20 members are implementing climate policies, only six are projected to meet their unconditional NDC targets with current measures, while eight require further action.

The report finds that 16 of the 25 analyzed major emitting countries and regions are not on track to meet their self-determined NDC targets. While some countries like China and India are likely to achieve their targets, others, including the United States and Japan, require additional measures. Furthermore, current policies are projected to fail in preventing emissions increases up to 2030 relative to 2010 levels in a majority of the analyzed nations, including both developing and OECD economies.

The report details two workshops held in 2018 focused on South-South and triangular cooperation for climate action. It highlights case studies of technological exchange in agriculture, water management, and urban resilience, while identifying systemic barriers such as funding gaps and a lack of institutional capacity at the subnational level.

The report identifies storage/cold storage, decentralized renewable energy, feeder roads, and irrigation as critical rural infrastructure for ending hunger. It argues that while these assets are essential for increasing agricultural productivity and farmer income, they face significant financing barriers due to high perceived risks and low population densities in rural areas. The authors propose a mix of donor aid, public spending, and private capital, utilizing innovative instruments such as availability payments, shadow tolls, blended finance, and viability gap funding to make these projects commercially viable and sustainable.

The Draft IAI Strategic Plan (2019–2044) establishes a 25-year roadmap to support sustainable policies in the Americas through interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research. The plan is organized into three themes: meeting the needs of member Parties, advancing a science agenda for regional sustainability, and ensuring the organizational sustainability of the IAI. Key priorities include climate action, water and food security, biodiversity conservation, and the promotion of open science and data. The IAI aims to act as a bridge between scientific research and policy-making, targeting the co-creation of knowledge and the enhancement of institutional capacities across the region.

The draft Strategic Plan (2019–2044) outlines the IAI's vision to create a sustainable and informed American continent through science-based policy. It focuses on three main themes: meeting the needs of member states regarding global environmental change, advancing science for sustainability (covering food, water, energy, and biodiversity), and ensuring the IAI's own institutional sustainability through improved communication and funding. The plan emphasizes transdisciplinary research, open data, and the inclusion of underrepresented groups such as indigenous peoples and women.

The Allianz Climate and Energy Monitor 2018 evaluates G20 nations on their investment attractiveness for renewable energy and their long-term decarbonization strategies. France is ranked as the most attractive destination, while Russia ranks last. The report finds that most G20 countries lack binding long-term strategies and sufficient renewable energy targets to meet the Paris Agreement goals, although some previous stragglers like Saudi Arabia and Turkey are improving their policy environments.

The report examines the gap between strategic planning and implementation in the public sector, with a focus on South Africa. It argues that successful prioritisation and alignment are not merely technical achievements but are dependent on the socio-political environment, including the concentration of state power and the stability of the political-administrative interface. Through case studies of Chile, Malaysia, and Uganda, the document highlights the importance of iterative planning, strong central coordination, and the integration of monitoring and evaluation (M&E) into budgetary decisions. It specifically critiques the South African context, noting that its constitutional structure of three independent spheres of government and the prevalence of factional politics hinder top-down alignment. The report suggests that South Africa could benefit from 'lab'-style planning, nested monitoring hierarchies, and genuine participatory governance to bridge the planning-implementation gap.

The document outlines various mechanisms through which G20 nations can redirect public money—including subsidies, tax revenues, state-owned enterprise investments, and credit support—away from fossil fuels. It highlights specific national and regional successes, such as Indonesia's subsidy reforms and the EU's phase-out of coal mining subsidies, while emphasizing the need for a faster transition that protects vulnerable groups and ensures a just transition for workers.

The document outlines requirements for the post-2020 biodiversity goals following the Aichi Biodiversity Targets. It advocates for the inclusion of Indigenous Peoples, local communities, women, and youth in the decision-making process. The authors argue that unlimited economic growth is incompatible with environmental preservation and call for the removal of corporate control over public policy and financial instruments. Furthermore, the statement rejects the use of biodiversity offsets and single biodiversity metrics, suggesting that goals must include qualitative aspects and divestment from destructive projects.

The document calls for a post-2020 biodiversity framework that prioritizes planetary boundaries over economic growth and incorporates the leadership of indigenous peoples and local communities. It explicitly rejects the 'voluntary commitments' model used in the Paris Agreement and argues against biodiversity offsets, claiming they are ineffective due to the complexity of ecosystems.

The document calls for the Convention on Biological Diversity to replace the Aichi Biodiversity Targets with a framework based on planetary limits, emphasizing the need for full participation from indigenous peoples, local communities, and civil society. It argues against the use of voluntary pledges, biodiversity metrics, and offsetting, while advocating for the limitation of corporate influence and the divestment from destructive activities.