Search Climate Insights Directory

The EcoSanRes Programme, managed by the Stockholm Environment Institute from 2001 to 2010, focuses on developing sustainable sanitation systems that recycle organic waste for crop production. The programme operates through a network of regional knowledge nodes and international collaborations, such as the Sustainable Sanitation Alliance, to build capacity, conduct evidence-based research, and promote pro-poor sanitation solutions in Asia, Africa, and Latin America.

The document outlines a partnership between the International Organization for Migration (IOM) and the Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) to explore how environmental stressors drive international labour migration in Asia and increase vulnerability to forced labour. It highlights that sectors such as agriculture, forestry, fisheries, and construction are both drivers of environmental destruction and sites of migrant exploitation. The project's second phase focuses on agricultural labour supply chains in specific corridors—Cambodia and Myanmar to Thailand, and Bangladesh and Indonesia to Malaysia—to inform policymakers and businesses on protecting migrant workers and maximizing migration as an adaptation strategy.

The report investigates the ambiguity surrounding the terms 'climate finance' and 'fair share,' concluding that there is no objective way to calculate a country's fair contribution. It finds that Sweden's reported climate finance is largely integrated into its Official Development Assistance (ODA), meaning it provides very little that is 'new and additional' by international standards. The document suggests Sweden could lead by improving reporting transparency and defining its own ambitious fair share target.

The report evaluates how SEI and ten peer organizations engage the public on climate change, combining an internal staff survey, a peer desk study, and case studies. It finds that while SEI uses a wide range of methods—from information extraction to participatory action research—there is a need for better internal knowledge sharing and more systematic impact measurement. Peer analysis highlights the value of targeted audience segmentation, the integration of web-based tools with face-to-face relationship building, and the use of diverse media to influence policy processes.

The analysis estimates that by 2100, the cost of ocean damage under a high-emissions scenario (RCP6) would reach US$ 1,980 billion, compared to US$ 612.2 billion under a low-emissions scenario (RCP2.6). The avoidable damage—the difference between these two pathways—is estimated at US$ 1,367.4 billion per year by 2100, representing 0.25 percent of global GDP. The study focuses on five priceable categories: fisheries, sea-level rise, storms, tourism, and the ocean carbon sink, while explicitly excluding 'priceless' values such as biodiversity. It notes that the poorest countries, including those in Africa, East Asia, the Caribbean, and Pacific island nations, are most vulnerable to these impacts.

Côte d’Ivoire is utilizing the SNAP initiative to identify and mitigate short-lived climate pollutants (SLCPs) to improve public health, agriculture, and climate. Priority areas for action include the transportation sector, waste management, industrial processes, oil refineries, and the use of traditional cookstoves. The country is employing the LEAP-IBC tool for emission inventories and planning, with the goal of informing its air quality strategy and the implementation of the Paris Agreement.

The guidelines propose a dual approach to planning for disaster resilience: examining trade-offs and implementing equitable resilience. The first approach identifies five dimensions of trade-offs—aggregation, participation, equity, time, and risk—that can inadvertently create new vulnerabilities if not addressed. The second approach, equitable resilience, focuses on four elements: recognizing subjectivities, ensuring inclusion and representation, working across multiple scales, and allowing for systemic transformation. The document emphasizes that sustainable development requires confronting power imbalances and prioritizing the needs of marginalized groups to avoid the cycle where development efforts exacerbate disaster risk.

The Strategic Collaborative Fund Phase 2 (SCF2), implemented by SEI Asia and funded by Sida, operated from 2018 to 2023 to advance the 2030 Agenda in Asia. The programme focused on four components: inter-regional cooperation (ASEAN, China, and Europe), regional cooperation in Asia on transboundary issues, learning and capacity development via MOOCs, and programme management. Key achievements include the support of the China-ASEAN Environment Cooperation Forum and the Asia-Europe Environment Forum, the development of courses on human rights and gender equality, and the promotion of inclusive climate finance and nature-based solutions in South and Southeast Asian cities.

The report argues that the ocean is a victim of global market failure, where the true value of its ecosystems and services is ignored. It identifies six primary threats—ocean acidification, warming, hypoxia, sea level rise, pollution, and overexploitation of resources—and emphasizes that these stressors often interact synergistically. The authors quantify the 'cost of inaction' by comparing low and high emission scenarios, estimating that avoidable damages could exceed US$ 1 trillion per year by 2100. The document advocates for a shift from traditional cost-benefit analysis to a precautionary, insurance-based risk model and calls for integrated, cross-scale ocean governance to build ecosystem resilience.

The report examines the relationship between water productivity, water flows, and ecosystem services, emphasizing that narrow agricultural efficiency often creates trade-offs with broader landscape health. It advocates for an integrated approach to water resource management that values regulating and supporting services alongside provisioning ones.

The report argues that climate-smart agriculture (CSA) is only effective when it addresses gender inequalities that make women more vulnerable to climate change and hinder their adoption of sustainable practices. It highlights that women often face barriers such as insecure land tenure, limited capital, and restrictive social norms. Through case studies in countries like Kenya, Ghana, and Uganda, the document demonstrates that successful interventions require a combination of enhancing women's agency (through training and knowledge networks), reforming institutional structures (securing land and credit rights), and transforming gender relations (encouraging male support and shared decision-making). Specific examples include the use of biogas digesters to reduce women's domestic workloads and the implementation of 'climate analogue' visits to share adaptation strategies.

The report examines the critical but marginalised role of informal waste workers (IWWs) in Asian cities, highlighting their contribution to resource recovery and the circular economy. Through a multi-stakeholder dialogue called the 'Waste Hero Alliance,' youth activists and IWWs identified systemic challenges—including poverty, health risks, and gender-based exclusion—and proposed five key policy visions: standardised waste disposal, official recognition of workers, access to education, affordable healthcare, and cross-sector collaboration. The document argues that a just transition to a circular economy requires integrating these workers into formal municipal systems to ensure decent work and poverty reduction.

The policy brief argues that Colombia's current climate-financial governance is limited to acute physical risks and the redirection of capital, leaving a gap in the management of chronic physical and transition risks. It proposes a roadmap based on the Helsinki Principles and international best practices from countries like China and Chile to integrate climate risks into the mandates of the Ministry of Finance and Credit and the Financial Superintendence of Colombia. The proposed roadmap consists of four components: institutional coordination, climate risk management, financial instruments and markets, and monitoring mechanisms.

The report critiques the Indonesian government's strategy of using natural gas as a 'bridge' fuel, specifically focusing on planned gas infrastructure in Bali, including a Floating Storage Regasification Unit (FSRU) and several gas power plants (PLTG). It argues that gas is not a clean energy source due to methane leaks and carbon emissions, which contribute to the extreme weather and water crises already affecting Bali. The document highlights social and environmental damages from existing gas projects, such as the PLTGU Pemaron, and argues that Bali's significant renewable energy potential—estimated up to 26 GW—should be prioritized over fossil fuels to achieve true energy independence and climate resilience.

The report argues that MDBs fail to deliver genuine climate finance due to flawed accounting methodologies that allow fossil fuel-related projects, such as liquefied natural gas (LNG) and waste-to-energy incineration, to be counted as climate action. It highlights a systemic bias toward mitigation over adaptation and a preference for loans over grants, which exacerbates debt in the Global South. Specific analysis of the AIIB and ADB reveals transparency gaps, the inclusion of high-emitting projects in climate portfolios, and a failure to integrate gender equality and human rights into climate finance principles.

Bangladesh faces frequent natural hazards that affect approximately 10 million citizens annually, a situation worsened by high poverty levels and projected climate change impacts. The Comprehensive Disaster Management Programme (CDMP) represents an ambitious effort to address these risks, supported by collaborative networks and government leadership. However, the programme has faced obstacles including political unrest, official turnover, and difficulties in institutionalising disaster risk reduction across government ministries.

The document argues that local communities are often marginalized from national climate adaptation planning and financing, leading to ineffective investments. It positions civil society organizations as essential intermediaries that can facilitate community participation and monitor finance flows. To achieve this, the paper proposes a four-step capacity-building process for CSOs: conducting political economy assessments, analyzing finance allocation and reporting, developing engagement strategies, and pursuing peer-to-peer learning and training.

The paper identifies key factors and recommendations for achieving 'transformational' change in low-carbon energy, defined by large magnitude impact, non-linear growth, and long-term sustainability. Through the analysis of 20 case studies, the authors categorize experiences into transformational, potentially transformational, and missed opportunities, highlighting the roles of regulatory frameworks, financial incentives, and national ownership.

The research identifies a systemic 'siloed approach' where Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are managed by separate institutions, typically environment ministries for NDCs and central cabinet-level offices for SDGs. To overcome this, the paper proposes five core elements for joined-up implementation: coordinating institutions, aligning targets, joint mainstreaming into policy planning, optimizing financial resources, and creating mutually reinforcing monitoring frameworks. The study argues that integrating these agendas reduces transaction costs, fosters 'win-win solutions', and helps ensure a just transition by applying the 'leaving no one behind' principle to climate action. It highlights that while some countries have begun linking these frameworks, a fully integrated approach requires significant shifts in institutional and financial structures to avoid the 'cherry-picking' of targets by line ministries.

The policy brief emphasizes that for the rural poor, lack of resource rights and market access are often greater drivers of vulnerability than climate change itself. It advocates for a shift in adaptation funding toward creating an enabling environment through national-level tenure and regulatory reforms, the strengthening of local governance institutions, and the establishment of governance metrics.