Search Climate Insights Directory

The report examines the challenges of scaling up and replicating social and environmental enterprises, contrasting the 'large scale' goals of international donors with the modest growth ambitions of local entrepreneurs. It identifies a gap in recognition and reward programmes, which often act as catalysts but lack proactive strategies to create the enabling environments necessary for systemic transformation. Based on SEED award winners, the report warns that forced scaling can risk over-extension or environmental degradation and recommends tailored support, longer-term engagement, and peer learning to foster sustainable growth.

The report argues that while the SEED initiative focuses on partnerships for sustainable development, its award winners are more accurately defined as social and environmental entrepreneurs. The authors find that partnership typologies are often too ambiguous and lack specific, measurable success factors. In contrast, the field of social and environmental entrepreneurship provides detailed critical success factors (CSFs) tailored to specific enterprise types, such as 'green' products or community services. The report concludes that partnerships should be viewed as a tool for these entrepreneurs rather than their defining organizational model. It also identifies special attributes of SEED winners, including their potential for large-scale impact, complex relationship management, and the transition from overseas development assistance (ODA) to commercial revenue streams.

The report argues that humanity has depleted natural capital to achieve short-term gains, leading to a decline in 15 of 24 evaluated ecosystem services. It proposes a five-part action agenda: developing ecosystem service information, strengthening local community rights, managing across multiple scales, improving accountability, and aligning economic incentives. To implement this, the authors suggest creating new institutions such as Ecosystem Service Districts, Biome Stewardship Councils, a Commission on Macroeconomics and Ecosystem Services for Poverty Reduction, and a global Leaders' Forum.

The report details the financial status of the Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research (IAI) as of October 31, 2007. It highlights that 53% of approved country contributions for the 2007/2008 fiscal year had been collected, with a heavy reliance on the US, Brazil, Canada, and Mexico. The document outlines expenditures for the Collaborative Research Networks (CRN I and II), Training Institutes, and a new Small-Grants Program for Human Dimensions. It also notes in-kind contributions from Brazil totaling US$185,776.30 for the 2006/2007 fiscal year and reports a favorable external audit for the same period.

The IAI report for the period ending October 31, 2007, reveals a reliance on four major contributors (USA, Brazil, Canada, and Mexico) to maintain operations, with only 53% of approved contributions for FY 2007/2008 collected. While operating expenses were 9.4% below budget, the institute is diversifying its funding through new grants from the MacArthur Foundation and IDRC. Programmatic updates include the closure of Collaborative Research Network I (CRN I) and the implementation of CRN II and the Small Grant Program for the Human Dimensions (SGP-HD).

The document examines how international investment agreements (IIAs), particularly bilateral investment treaties (BITs), can undermine domestic public policy and state sovereignty by allowing foreign investors to bypass national courts through international arbitration. It highlights cases in South Africa, the US, and Canada where environmental, social, and human rights policies were challenged. The guide argues for stronger parliamentary scrutiny of these treaties to ensure they do not conflict with constitutional obligations or human rights.

The document lists the attendees of the 14th IAI Conference of the Parties (CoP) Meeting and the Science Symposium, both held in Manaus, Brazil, on June 14-15, 2007. Participants included representatives from national governments, research institutions, and international bodies from Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, the United States, and Venezuela, as well as IAI directorate staff and external review committee members.

The paper evaluates whether global adaptation funds are 'technically adequate' by measuring the adherence of the GEF and its Implementing Agencies (IAs) to guidance from the UNFCCC Conference of the Parties (COP). It concludes that the funds are technically inadequate due to complex design and poor implementation, which forces developing countries to 'adapt their projects' to fit available funding rather than the other way around.

The IAI Directorate report for 2006-2007 outlines the institute's efforts to integrate global change science with policy, specifically focusing on land-use change in the La Plata Basin and the impacts of biofuels. The report highlights the implementation of Collaborative Research Networks (CRN I and II), the success of Training Institute Seed Grants (TISG) in fostering multidisciplinary networks across 19 countries, and new strategic partnerships with organizations like IDRC, NCAR, and the Asia-Pacific Network. It also details capacity-building efforts through summer schools and internships, and fundraising initiatives targeting the MacArthur Foundation for biodiversity research in the Andes.

The IAI Executive Directorate report for 2006-2007 details the institute's efforts to integrate climate science with policy, specifically focusing on land-use change in the Plata Basin and urbanisation in Latin America. It highlights the transition from the CRN I to CRN II research networks, the success of the Training Institute Seed Grants (TISG) in fostering multidisciplinary networks across 19 countries, and new strategic partnerships with organizations like IDRC, SCOPE, and the MacArthur Foundation to address biodiversity in the Andes.

The Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research (IAI) requests a core budget of US$ 1,014,931 for fiscal year 2007/2008, a level consistent with the previous two years. The budget supports the Directorate's operations, including the management of the CRN II Program, the implementation of the Small Grants Program for the Human Dimensions (SGP-HD), and the development of a new IAI Strategic Plan. A significant portion of the budget is allocated to salaries and benefits, with proposed adjustments to compensate for the loss of purchasing power of the US dollar against the Brazilian Real. The budget is funded by contributions from member countries, with the United States providing the largest share at US$ 595,000.

The IAI's central budget request for 2007/2008 is US$1,014,931, maintaining a stable funding level compared to previous years. The budget supports the administration of the CRN II program, the implementation of the Small Grants Program for Human Dimensions (SGP-HD) with a US$800,000 budget, and the development of a new Strategic Plan to link science with policy. Key financial adjustments include proposed salary increases for international staff to offset the loss of purchasing power caused by inflation and exchange rate fluctuations in Brazil. Member contributions are led by the United States (US$595,000) and Canada (US$125,000).

The report presents a business case for Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC), arguing that failing to secure community approval creates significant financial, operational, and reputational risks. Through four case studies in the Philippines, Argentina, Thailand, and Peru, it demonstrates that while FPIC requires an iterative process of information sharing and negotiation, the costs are minimal compared to the potential losses from project delays, asset write-downs, and lost revenues. The authors recommend that project sponsors, financiers, and host governments integrate FPIC into their decision-making and permitting processes to avoid costly conflicts.

The document explains that international investment agreements (IIAs), including bilateral investment treaties (BITs) and preferential trade and investment agreements (PTIAs), often grant foreign investors legal protections that exceed domestic laws. These agreements allow investors to bypass national courts and seek financial compensation through international arbitration if government regulations—such as environmental protections or public health measures—are deemed to be 'expropriations' or discriminatory. The guide highlights a critical lack of transparency in these proceedings, particularly under UNCITRAL rules, and discusses ongoing tensions in EU-ACP negotiations regarding the inclusion of investment rules in economic partnership agreements.

The policy brief by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) and the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) proposes specific amendments to the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules to distinguish 'State arbitrations' from private commercial ones. The authors argue that because State arbitrations often involve public funds, governmental misconduct, and critical public policy issues—such as drinking water systems or hazardous waste bans—they require higher standards of transparency. The brief proposes revisions to four articles to ensure public notice of proceedings, open hearings, public access to awards and documents, and the explicit ability for tribunals to accept amicus curiae briefs.

The report examines the shift from traditional state-centric security to 'human security,' noting that modern conflicts are increasingly linked to poverty and occur within poor states. It argues that while trade and aid can theoretically promote stability, in practice, unfair trade rules and misused aid often exacerbate instability. The author proposes six objectives for the international community and the Commonwealth to ensure these policies 'do no harm' and support enduring peace.

The report analyzes the landscape of investor-state disputes in 2006, noting a shift toward non-ICSID arbitration venues and a lack of transparency in ad hoc proceedings. It examines specific cases involving land reform, intellectual property, and privatization, while highlighting legal contradictions in rulings against Argentina. The document also discusses the practice of 'treaty-shopping' and the ongoing debate over the distinction between legitimate government regulation and indirect expropriation.

The IAI report details the successful implementation of the CRN-II program and the closure of CRN-I, alongside new funding from the NSF for human dimensions research. It highlights expanded institutional cooperation with entities like RIOCC, CYTED, and IICA, and the organization of several workshops on climate-land use interfaces and disaster risk management. Administratively, the IAI appointed a new Financial and Administrative Officer and is transitioning its Data and Information System to open-source software. Financially, as of November 2006, only 6% of approved member contributions had been collected, though the institute expects to reach 90% for the 2006/2007 period.

The IAI Directorate report for May-November 2006 highlights the implementation of the CRN-II program, the closure of CRN-I, and the initiation of a new human dimensions program funded by the NSF. The period was marked by expanded regional cooperation with entities like RIOCC, CYTED, and IICA, as well as capacity-building efforts including a summer school in Germany and workshops on climate-land use interactions. Internally, the IAI appointed a new Financial and Administrative Officer and completed an independent audit. Financially, as of November 2006, only 6% of approved member nation contributions had been collected, though the Directorate estimated a final collection rate of 90% for the 2006/2007 period.

The document analyzes the role of the European Investment Bank (EIB) within the Initiative for the Integration of the Regional Infrastructure of South America (IIRSA). It argues that IIRSA's focus on transport, energy, and telecommunications infrastructure poses significant risks to biodiversity and indigenous communities. The report claims the EIB's involvement, formalized through a 2004 memorandum with the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), primarily benefits European corporations rather than local populations. It highlights a lack of environmental and social standards and criticizes the EIB for withholding project information. The report concludes that the alliance, supported by the European Parliament, promotes a developmentalist model that exacerbates social inequality and environmental degradation in Latin America.