Search Climate Insights Directory

The briefing reveals a systemic lack of rules and enforcement regarding benefit sharing arrangements (BSAs) in the voluntary carbon market. An analysis by Öko-Institut found that only two of five assessed carbon standards referenced BSAs, and only four of 47 reviewed projects provided clear evidence of benefit sharing with stakeholders beyond project implementers. The document argues that payments for results (such as payments for ecosystem services) are often incorrectly conflated with benefit sharing, which should instead be a distribution of revenues. It further notes that major standards like CAR, ACR, and VCS have opposed mandatory BSA rules from the ICVCM, citing confidentiality and capacity constraints.

The document examines the prevalence and quality of benefit-sharing agreements in the voluntary carbon market (VCM). Based on an Öko-Institut study, it finds that most carbon standards and projects lack clear, enforceable mechanisms to distribute financial and non-financial benefits to local communities. It highlights a critical confusion between 'benefit-sharing' and 'payment for results' (such as salaries or payments for ecosystem services), arguing that the former should be a separate share of profits. The brief concludes that the absence of uniform definitions and the opposition of major standards to mandatory rules hinder the equitable distribution of carbon credit revenues.

The document analyzes the lack of standardized rules for benefit-sharing agreements (BSAs) in the voluntary carbon market, finding that most carbon standards and projects fail to provide evidence of equitable benefit distribution to indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLCs).

The document reports on a study by the Öko-Institut commissioned by Carbon Market Watch, which found that benefit-sharing arrangements (BSAs) in the voluntary carbon market are largely insufficient and lack transparency. Analysis of five carbon standards and 47 projects revealed that most standards do not require BSAs, and very few projects provide evidence of distributing benefits beyond simple performance-based payments. The brief argues that performance payments (like salaries) should not be conflated with benefit-sharing and calls for the Integrity Council for Voluntary Carbon Markets (ICVCM) to mandate standardized, transparent BSA rules.

Black carbon (BC), or soot, is a potent short-lived climate pollutant resulting from incomplete combustion of fossil fuels and biomass. The report identifies the residential and transportation sectors as the primary sources, with China and India as the largest emitters. It highlights a 'triple win' of reducing BC: slowing global warming (particularly in the Arctic and Himalayas), preventing millions of premature deaths, and avoiding trillions in economic losses. Key recommendations include scaling clean cooking in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, retrofitting diesel engines with particulate filters, regulating shipping fuels, and incorporating BC into national climate plans (NDCs).

The document argues that the industrial agro-food model is a patriarchal capitalist system that causes systemic socio-environmental crises, disproportionately affecting women through land dispossession, health risks from toxic chemicals, and increased violence. It details how monocultures—such as palm oil, soy, and pineapple—lead to deforestation, water pollution, and the loss of food sovereignty. The report emphasizes that women are central to biodiversity conservation and calls for a transition toward a feminist economy and community-led land management to replace corporate-driven agro-extractivism.

The report argues that nature-based solutions (NBS) and carbon offset schemes often serve as 'escapes' for major polluters to continue emitting greenhouse gases while facilitating land grabbing and violating human rights. It provides numerous case studies across Africa, Asia-Pacific, Europe, and the Americas, highlighting systemic issues such as inflated carbon baselines, lack of free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC), and the failure of projects to deliver promised carbon reductions or community benefits. Specific examples include REDD+ projects in Gabon and Zimbabwe, soil carbon initiatives in Kenya and the US, and cookstove offsets in India.

The report finds that most National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) fail to meaningfully engage Indigenous Peoples (IPs) and local communities (LCs) or secure their land tenure and rights. While traditional knowledge is more frequently recognized, there is a critical absence of safeguards to prevent human rights violations during conservation efforts. The assessment recommends a rights-based approach that treats IPs and LCs as full and equal partners, ensures direct access to finance, and enshrines legal safeguards and land tenure security within national biodiversity strategies.

The 2023 Production Gap Report finds that governments plan to produce more than double the amount of fossil fuels in 2030 consistent with a 1.5°C warming limit. While many major producers have pledged net-zero emissions, most continue to expand production, with global coal production projected to increase until 2030 and oil and gas until at least 2050. The report argues for a managed, equitable phase-out of all fossil fuels, noting that reliance on carbon capture and storage (CCS) and carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is risky due to technical uncertainties and a poor track record of pilot project success.

The fact sheet advocates for a guaranteed universal basic income (UBIG) over targeted social grants in South Africa, arguing that targeting mechanisms are administratively complex, costly, and frequently exclude the most vulnerable populations. It highlights that universal systems reduce administrative burdens, avoid social stigma, and are more effective at reducing poverty because they allow households to pool resources. The document suggests a phased implementation starting with the most vulnerable and expanding to all working-age adults, funded through progressive taxation to ensure the wealthy contribute while the poor benefit.

This fact sheet by the Institute for Economic Justice advocates for a Universal Basic Income Guarantee (UBIG) in South Africa over targeted grants. It contends that targeting often fails to reach the most needy due to administrative barriers and unreliable data, citing research where some targeted programs had exclusion errors exceeding 90%. The document asserts that a universal system is more efficient, prevents people from falling through the cracks, and allows households to pool resources more effectively. It suggests that a transition to a universal system could begin by targeting specific demographics before expanding to all adults.

The document advocates for the implementation of a Universal Basic Income Guarantee (UBIG) in South Africa, contrasting it with targeted grants. It argues that targeted systems often fail due to bureaucratic hurdles and inaccurate data, leading to high exclusion errors. In contrast, a UBIG is presented as a more efficient mechanism that promotes social cohesion, reduces administrative costs, and better addresses poverty by allowing households to pool resources. The text suggests a phased implementation starting with the most vulnerable adults of working age.

The document compares Universal Basic Income Guarantees (UBIG) with targeted social assistance, asserting that targeted systems often fail to reach the intended poor due to administrative complexity and high exclusion rates. It suggests that a UBIG, provided as a right to all adults of working age, reduces administrative burdens, promotes social cohesion, and is more effective at reducing poverty than high-value targeted grants. For South Africa, the author recommends a transition starting with those in greatest need and expanding to all working-age adults, supported by progressive taxation to ensure the wealthy contribute.

The report examines parental leave policies in the mining sector across 12 countries, comparing national laws with corporate policies. While many mining companies provide benefits that meet or exceed legal requirements, the report identifies a 'leaky pipeline' where women leave the industry between ages 35 and 44. This suggests that formal policies are undermined by workplace cultures that create anxiety around pregnancy disclosure and a lack of support for the transition back to work. The document advocates for normalizing paternity leave for men and improving awareness of reproductive rights to foster a more inclusive environment.

The document analyzes the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC), highlighting a significant misalignment between its aggressive production expansion plans and the 1.5°C global warming limit. It details how ADNOC is increasingly relying on international equity, bonds, and bank financing, thereby exposing global investors to transition and litigation risks. The brief maps these financial connections across upstream, midstream, and downstream operations and recommends that investors and banks push for greater transparency and a cessation of new fossil fuel infrastructure to mitigate these risks.

The report examines vertical integration in National Adaptation Plan (NAP) processes, finding that while most countries reference sub-national governments and non-governmental actors, there are varying levels of integration across planning, implementation, and monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL) stages.

The report examines vertical integration in National Adaptation Plans (NAPs), highlighting the roles of subnational governments and non-governmental actors. Based on an analysis of 45 multisectoral NAPs, it finds that while most countries recognize subnational roles in planning and implementation, gaps remain in monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL) and stable financial flows to local levels. It provides recommendations for national governments, subnational authorities, development partners, and funding bodies to strengthen multi-level coordination and capacity.

The paper examines how institutional carbon lock-in perpetuates fossil fuel use in Latin America, specifically through case studies of gas projects in Mexico and Colombia. It argues that state-owned enterprises and regulatory bodies often approve infrastructure based on the 'bridge fuel' narrative and perceived links between gas and economic development, despite a lack of robust demand analysis or alignment with climate targets.

The report examines Ecopetrol, Petrobras, YPF, and EP Petroecuador, finding that while some have stated ambitions for unrelated diversification, these efforts are not a priority compared to decarbonizing existing fossil fuel operations. The authors argue that these NOGCs face significant institutional, financial, and technical barriers that limit their capacity to transition away from their core hydrocarbon businesses.

The report argues that technical assistance (TA) from the World Bank Group (WBG) and Asian Development Bank (ADB) creates a 'paradox' by facilitating fossil gas dependency while the institutions claim to align with the Paris Agreement. Between 2016 and August 2023, the WBG allocated nearly $200 million in TA for gas-related sectors across 14 countries, while the ADB committed nearly $11 million from 2016 to 2021. The authors contend that TA has a disproportionate impact on national energy strategies, often locking countries into carbon-intensive infrastructure and creating stranded asset risks. Case studies in Bangladesh, Vietnam, and Pakistan illustrate how TA has been used to prepare LNG projects or gas storage systems rather than accelerating renewable energy transitions. The report recommends that all energy-sector TA be approved at the Board level and redirected toward enhancing Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and renewable energy infrastructure.