Search Climate Insights Directory

The report documents the risks faced by 'Defenders of Territories' in the Asia Pacific, linking violence and impunity to resource extraction, infrastructure projects, and weak rule of law. Through case studies in Bangladesh, Indonesia, Malaysia, Palestine, Russia, Sri Lanka, and the Philippines, it illustrates how corporate and state actors displace communities and suppress dissent. The document advocates for a systemic shift away from neoliberalism toward agroecology and renewable energy, while calling for a binding UN Treaty on transnational corporations to ensure accountability for human rights violations.

The report documents the systemic persecution of environmental and land defenders in the Asia-Pacific region, linking this violence to a neoliberal economic model that prioritizes corporate profit and resource extraction over human rights. It provides case studies from Bangladesh, Indonesia, Malaysia, Palestine, Russia, Sri Lanka, and the Philippines to illustrate how large-scale infrastructure, energy, and agribusiness projects lead to land grabbing, environmental degradation, and the criminalization of activists. The document calls for a transition to community-led renewable energy, agroecology, and a legally binding UN treaty on transnational corporations to ensure corporate accountability and the protection of defenders.

The document highlights a global trend of violence against land defenders, particularly indigenous peoples, who face attacks from state and non-state actors to facilitate extractive projects. It provides case studies from Bangladesh, Indonesia, Malaysia, Palestine, Russia, Sri Lanka, and the Philippines to illustrate how infrastructure, energy, and agribusiness projects lead to land grabbing and environmental degradation. The report argues that the current economic system prioritizes corporate profit over human rights and recommends the establishment of a binding UN treaty on transnational corporations, the transformation of the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights into a judicial body, and a transition to renewable energy and agroecology.

A call for action on adaptation and resilience, co-led by Egypt and the UK and supported by the UNDP, was endorsed by 117 countries and 86 organisations by October 17, 2019. It is based on initiatives profiled at the UN Secretary General's Climate Action Summit, including the Coalition for Climate Resilient Investment (CCRI), the InsuResilience Global Partnership, and the LDC Initiative for Effective Adaptation and Resilience (LIFE AR).

The report identifies significant funding gaps for universal energy access, noting that 2017 electricity access finance for new households reached only a quarter of the required annual investment. It highlights critically low investment in Sub-Saharan Africa and a severe shortfall in clean cooking finance, which represents less than 1% of the needed amount. Additionally, it argues that continued investment in fossil fuel power plants is incompatible with the Paris Agreement and the SDGs.

The paper argues that ignoring gender and power inequalities in climate change adaptation is maladaptive and leads to further exclusion. It advocates for 'gender-transformative adaptation'—which seeks to change the fundamental attributes of a system and address the root causes of vulnerability—across the natural environment, food security, sustainable cities, infrastructure, industry, and finance. The authors highlight how intersecting inequalities (income, ethnicity, age, etc.) compound vulnerability and recommend rigorous, participatory gender analyses to inform policy and project design. Key findings include the risk of 'elite capture' in the green economy and the critical need for women's land and resource rights to enable nature-based solutions.

The paper argues that ignoring gender and power inequalities in climate adaptation is maladaptive and recommends transforming social structures to ensure equitable resilience. It analyzes six key systems—natural environment, food security, sustainable cities, infrastructure, industry, and finance—demonstrating how patriarchal norms and intersecting inequalities (such as class, ethnicity, and age) disproportionately burden women and marginalized groups. The authors advocate for rigorous gender analyses, the redistribution of care work, and the inclusion of diverse voices in decision-making to move beyond tokenistic gender mainstreaming toward systemic, gender-transformative change.

The document argues that while governments hold primary responsibility for climate policy, central banks and financial regulators (CBFRs) should actively use their powers to 'green' the financial system. It identifies systemic risks from 'brown' assets and the 'tragedy of the horizons,' where short-term financial metrics undervalue long-term climate risks. The briefing proposes a comprehensive toolkit for CBFRs, including the creation of a 'brown taxonomy,' mandatory climate disclosures, and the adjustment of risk-weightings and collateral haircuts to penalize carbon-intensive assets and reward green ones. It also suggests reforming quantitative easing (QE) and reserve management to move away from 'market neutrality' toward a model that supports sustainable investment.

The document argues that while the world faces unprecedented security risks from climate change, it also possesses unprecedented foresight through predictive modeling. However, a 'governance gap' exists because this information is not effectively translated for security decision-makers or aligned with security policy timelines. To address this, the authors propose the R2P2 framework, which consists of three principles: Assessment & Anticipation (creating a global climate security assessment hub), Elevation & Translation (establishing leadership by security practitioners to brief decision-makers), and Coordination & Alignment (bridging climate and security policy windows).

The GCF's Private Sector Facility (PSF) aims to green the financial systems of developing countries by addressing capacity, market, and policy barriers. The GCF utilizes three primary pillars: providing concessional financing and project preparation grants, implementing policy-level interventions through its Readiness Programme, and conducting outreach through partnerships with global networks. The document highlights the critical role of central banks as regulators and the importance of local financial institutions (LFIs) in reaching micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs) and households. Case studies from Mongolia, Ghana, and West Africa demonstrate the use of on-lending models and risk-sharing instruments to scale up renewable energy and climate-resilient agriculture.

Levi Strauss & Co. has established science-based targets to reduce scope 1 and 2 emissions by 90% and global supply chain emissions by 40% by 2025. The company achieved a 3% reduction in operational emissions between 2016 and 2017 and is scaling a partnership with the International Finance Corporation to reduce GHG emissions across its top suppliers. Its energy strategy includes a goal of 100% renewable electricity in owned facilities by 2025, supported by green utility contracts, PPAs, and on-site solar. Additionally, the company advocates for federal climate legislation in the US, supports the Paris Climate Agreement, and is a signatory of the Fashion Industry Charter for Climate Action.

The document examines the challenges of measuring climate change adaptation, noting that most existing frameworks are designed for project-level monitoring rather than national or global assessment. It argues against a 'one-size-fits-all' metric, suggesting instead that metrics be tailored to specific purposes—such as identifying needs, tracking implementation, or assessing effectiveness. The paper highlights evolving practices in agriculture, urban planning (using the City of Melbourne as a case study), and multilateral development bank (MDB) financing, while recommending the integration of qualitative data, new technologies like earth observation, and alignment with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to improve the comparability and transparency of adaptation tracking.

The document analyzes the vulnerability of global economic infrastructure to climate hazards such as flooding, extreme temperatures, and permafrost melt. It argues for a comprehensive approach to adaptation that integrates climate risk analysis 'upstream' into the planning, design, and financing stages of the infrastructure lifecycle. Key findings highlight significant risks to road networks, thermoelectric and hydropower plants, and water supplies, while proposing solutions ranging from nature-based 'Sponge Cities' to performance-based engineering standards and programmatic financing.

The paper argues that government-led adaptation is insufficient and that individuals and households must be actively involved to reduce climate risks. It identifies six categories of adaptive behavior—information seeking, preparative measures, protective measures, evacuation/migration, insurance, and political action—and analyzes the psychological drivers of these actions. Key motivators include risk perception, negative emotions, self-efficacy, outcome efficacy, social norms, and perceived responsibility. The authors conclude that while communication campaigns are common, they are often ineffective if they only provide information; instead, they should target psychological antecedents. Furthermore, the paper advocates for genuine public participation in decision-making to empower citizens and improve policy effectiveness, while noting that individual action must be supported by systemic, large-scale governmental infrastructure.

The report evaluates the five-year progress of the New York Declaration on Forests (NYDF), concluding that while localized successes exist, global efforts are not on track to meet 2020 and 2030 goals. It identifies eight core lessons, emphasizing that political will, strong governance, and secure land tenure for indigenous peoples are critical for success. The document highlights a significant gap between high-level commitments and ground-level implementation, noting that deforestation has accelerated by up to 44% since 2014. It calls for a paradigm shift in financing, moving from 'grey' to 'green' finance, and a stronger integration of nature-based solutions into national climate agendas.

The report evaluates ten Global Resilience Partnership (GRP) Round 1 projects, which supported over 5 million people. Key findings highlight the effectiveness of 'layering' interventions, participatory design, and close government partnerships in increasing resilience. Successes include the deployment of early warning systems reaching 1.2 million people in Uganda, the empowerment of urban slum women in South Asia, and the implementation of road water harvesting benefiting 3 million people in Ethiopia. The synthesis emphasizes that combining traditional tools like microcredit with innovative digital technology and inclusive social strategies creates sustainable, transformational change.

The Global Resilience Partnership (GRP) Water Window Challenge supported over 500,000 people across eight countries through 12 projects focused on flood resilience. The synthesis identifies that success was driven by 'layering' interventions—combining livelihood support, early warning systems (EWS), and infrastructure—and by deep stakeholder engagement. Key achievements include the establishment of 347 women-led community-based organizations in Sri Lanka, the support of 265,000 individuals in Indonesia through transboundary coordination, and the deployment of EWS reaching over 84,000 households in the India-Nepal border region. The report emphasizes that flexible, adaptive management and strong partnerships are essential for innovating and scaling resilience efforts in volatile climatic contexts.

The report identifies five key intervention areas for building resilience: nature-based solutions, empowering marginalized groups, information and technology, inclusive financial services, and low-cost infrastructure. It argues that effective resilience programming must be systemic by design, utilize layered and linked interventions, create agile networks, promote equity and inclusion, and prioritize iterative learning and scaling. Evidence from GRP's USAID and Z Zurich Foundation challenges, as well as 42 partner programs, demonstrates that these approaches can protect development gains and improve well-being in the face of climate and economic shocks.

The document analyzes 44 resilience programs to determine which design elements contribute to success in helping vulnerable populations persist, adapt, and transform in the face of shocks. Key findings highlight the importance of community-led vulnerability assessments, the role of savings as a critical resilience buffer, and the necessity of integrating climate risk interventions into local governance and market systems.

The document analyzes the financial system's failure to integrate physical climate risks into investment decision-making, which creates a growing adaptation financing gap. It identifies twelve key barriers—including inadequate public support, moral hazard, and low technical capacity—and proposes six systemic recommendations for the Global Commission on Adaptation (GCA). These include accelerating climate-relevant financial policies, developing robust risk management practices, and utilizing public institutions to catalyze private investment through blended finance and innovative instruments like resilience bonds.