Search Climate Insights Directory

The Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) Strategy 2020–24 focuses on bridging science, policy, and practice to address global sustainability challenges. The institute identifies three primary impact areas: reducing climate risk, promoting sustainable resource use and resilient ecosystems, and improving health and well-being. To achieve these, SEI employs a theory of change centered on changing agendas, enhancing capacities, and improving decisions. The strategy emphasizes the use of data science, the development of decision-support tools, and the implementation of programmatic hubs called 'Initiatives' to tackle specific issues like carbon lock-in and bioeconomy pathways. Operationally, SEI utilizes a distributed network of centres across five continents to ensure regional relevance and North-South/South-South knowledge exchange. The institute also commits to an environmental policy aiming to reduce its per capita carbon travel footprint by at least 25% between 2017 and 2024.

The document argues that scientific stations cannot be 100% financially self-sufficient and must combine 'Investigative Scientific Tourism' with 'Amateur Scientific Tourism' to achieve holistic sustainability. Using the OET stations in Costa Rica (La Selva and Las Cruces), it proposes a target visitor mix of 40% researchers and 60% high-paying amateurs to maximize revenue and reduce seasonality. Key recommendations include territorial zoning to separate researchers from tourists, implementing differentiated pricing, and establishing university consortia to ensure a steady flow of students and institutional funding.

The document argues that current NDCs insufficiently address the transport sector, which accounts for approximately one-quarter of energy-related CO2 emissions. It advocates for a comprehensive approach based on the "Avoid-Shift-Improve" framework: avoiding unnecessary travel through land-use planning, shifting to low-carbon modes like public transit and cycling, and improving vehicle technology via electrification and fuel efficiency. The authors identify three primary opportunities for NDC enhancement: accelerating electrification and fuel economy, amplifying avoid-and-shift measures, and addressing freight emissions through clean fuels and information technology.

The document argues that forest sector solutions—including conservation, restoration, and improved management—are cost-effective tools for large-scale GHG emission reductions and carbon removal. It identifies a significant gap in current NDCs, where forest-specific quantitative targets are rare and carbon-rich ecosystems like mangroves and peatlands are underrepresented. The authors propose a six-step process for NDC enhancement: establishing institutional arrangements, taking stock of progress, reviewing long-term benchmarks, identifying policy measures, assessing costs and benefits, and determining specific NDC reflections. Key recommendations include aligning financial flows away from deforestation drivers, implementing REDD+, and leveraging satellite monitoring technologies.

The proposal outlines an 18-month project to enhance Colombia's climate finance management. Key objectives include updating the Country Programme to better reflect national priorities, establishing a regular participatory review process, and refining the 'no-objection' procedure for funding proposals. The project also aims to develop a Gender Action Plan for climate finance, align Direct Access Entities with the Country Programme, and update the National Climate Finance Strategy. Implementation will be led by Fondo Acción, with a steering committee comprising the National Planning Department, Ministry of Finance and Public Credit, and Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development.

The document highlights Colombia's progress in aligning its Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC), National Adaptation Plan (NAP) process, and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) strategy. It notes that these policy processes reference one another to provide coherent adaptation messaging and suggests further alignment through improved information-sharing tools, sub-national capacity building, and enhanced monitoring and evaluation (M&E) systems.

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.

Colombia has made significant progress in aligning its Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC), National Adaptation Plan (NAP), and Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) strategy. The National Planning Department (DNP) plays a central role in coordinating these agendas, particularly by using the SDG agenda as the entry point for the 2018–2022 National Development Plan. While synergies exist—such as the NAP serving as the basis for the NDC's adaptation component—the document identifies a lack of formal coordination mechanisms between the national climate change system (SISCLIMA) and the High-Level Commission for the SDGs, as well as between the National Disaster Risk Management System and the NAP process.

The document examines the institutional coordination and policy alignment in Colombia regarding climate change adaptation, disaster risk reduction, and sustainable development goals. It highlights the central role of the Departamento Nacional de Planeación (DNP) and identifies synergies between the National Adaptation Plan (PNAD), Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC), and the Sendai Framework. The study proposes strengthening formal coordination between the National Climate Change System (SISCLIMA) and the High-Level Commission for the SDGs, as well as improving vertical integration between national and subnational governments.

The document analyzes the institutional mechanisms and policy frameworks Colombia uses to integrate climate change adaptation, disaster risk reduction, and sustainable development goals. It identifies significant synergies between the National Adaptation Plan (NAP), Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC), and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) strategy, while highlighting the need for formal coordination mechanisms between key national commissions to avoid duplication and improve subnational implementation.

The research identifies 66 carbon pricing policies globally, categorising adopting polities into five clusters: early adopters, North-American states and provinces, Chinese pilot provinces, second-wave developed polities, and second-wave developing polities. The authors conclude that there is no 'one-size-fits-all' approach to promoting carbon pricing, as different economic, political, and policy variables drive adoption across different clusters. However, they identify general facilitators, including economic crises, UNFCCC commitments, regional learning, and a preference for emissions trading in carbon-intensive economies.

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 Changing Markets Foundation found that Unilever fails to fortify its basic Maizena Natural cornflour in Mexico despite claims that its cornflour products in Latin America are fortified. Furthermore, laboratory tests of 84 samples revealed that flavoured Maizena atole mixes often contain lower levels of iron and zinc than stated on their labels, suggesting a gap between the company's global nutrition commitments and its product reality.

The Changing Markets Foundation analyzed 84 samples of Unilever's Maizena products in Mexico, finding that the company's claims of regional fortification are not reflected in its products. While Unilever asserts that its cornstarch products in Latin America are fortified, the 'Maizena Natural' product in Mexico contains no micronutrients. Furthermore, laboratory tests of 'Maizena Sabores' (flavored mixes) revealed that levels of iron and zinc were consistently lower than those declared on the packaging, suggesting a gap between the company's global nutrition pledges and its commercial practices.

The report finds that the world is not on track to meet the Goal 1 target of halving natural forest loss by 2020. Between 2014 and 2018, average annual global gross tree cover loss increased by 43 percent compared to a 2001-13 baseline. Carbon emissions from tropical tree cover loss also rose, averaging 57 percent higher than before the declaration. While Indonesia saw a significant decline in primary forest loss in 2018, tropical Africa experienced the highest percent increase in loss. The report highlights that primary forests are particularly critical due to their carbon storage and the fact that they cannot be restored within the NYDF timeframe.

The assessment finds that green finance for forests is severely insufficient, totaling under USD 22 billion since 2010, and represents only 1.5% of total climate mitigation commitments from developed countries and multilateral institutions. While some domestic initiatives and Green Climate Fund projects show progress, private sector investment remains dominated by traditional 'grey finance' with few mandatory safeguards to prevent deforestation in commodity supply chains.

The report finds that while nearly USD 4.7 billion in results-based finance has been committed since 2010, only 35% has been disbursed as of April 2019. It highlights the slow pace of negotiating Emission Reductions Payment Agreements (ERPAs) and a critical funding gap in the implementation phase of REDD+ activities. While forest carbon markets show some growth in voluntary demand, they remain a small fraction of global deforestation emissions. The document also details domestic payment mechanisms in Brazil, Colombia, and Costa Rica, and outlines various forms of support for jurisdictional-sourcing initiatives.

The report analyzes agricultural transformation across 117 countries from 1970 to 2015, identifying six phases of transformation and five structural contexts based on land fertility, availability, and population dynamics. It argues that successful transformation requires a tailored mix of 'push' strategies (increasing agricultural productivity) or 'pull' strategies (growing non-agricultural sectors), depending on a country's endowments. Key drivers of success include removing 'anti-agricultural bias' in price policies, strategic public investment in R&D and extension services, and critical institutional reforms such as land redistribution. The report provides specific policy recommendations for 13 focus countries in Africa and Asia, matching them with historically successful 'analogue' countries based on their 2015 structural contexts.

The document examines how 'migration' and 'development' are defined and measured in quantitative research, highlighting a gap in evidence regarding migration aspirations, failed attempts, and involuntary immobility. It discusses the challenges of establishing causal links due to endogeneity—specifically reverse causality, self-selection, and omitted variables—and evaluates experimental and non-experimental methods to address these biases. The paper advocates for a holistic, multi-dimensional approach to development that moves beyond economic metrics to include social, institutional, and environmental outcomes.