Search Climate Insights Directory

The report details the IAI's core budget status as of September 30, 2008, noting that collected funds represent 58% of approved contributions. While year-to-date expenses were 16.0% lower than the 3-month budget, the institute faced low collection rates from member countries. Administratively, the IAI completed audits for the CRN II program and implemented staffing and cash management changes in Brazil to reduce costs and improve security.

The document analyzes the Brazilian transportation sector's shift toward low-carbon pathways, focusing on two key policies: the National Plan on Logistics and Transport (PNLT) and the Pro-Transport programme. While these policies were primarily designed for economic competitiveness and urban mobility rather than climate change, they offer significant greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation co-benefits. The author argues that while national-level logistics infrastructure is easier to fund due to its impact on economic competitiveness, local-level public transport funding remains a challenge. The paper suggests that international cooperation, including the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and UNFCCC frameworks, could catalyze these efforts, particularly in electrifying rail and improving urban transit.

Friends of the Earth has released a report titled “Voices from Communities Affected by Climate Change,” documenting first-hand experiences of climate impacts from diverse groups including indigenous peoples and small-scale fisherfolk across multiple continents. The organization uses these testimonies to call for a roadmap toward a post-Kyoto agreement in 2012, emphasizing that wealthy nations must lead in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and financing adaptation for poorer communities. The document highlights the need for climate justice through a moratorium on fossil fuel extraction, the promotion of energy sovereignty, and the fulfillment of UNFCCC obligations for wealthy countries to fund adaptation in developing nations, which may require an additional $50–100 billion annually.

The document argues that existing gender mainstreaming guidelines for mine action, such as those from UNMAS, are primarily designed for stable post-conflict settings and fail to address the dynamics of active conflict. It examines how conflict-specific risks—such as gendered reprisals from insurgents, changes in the division of labor, and barriers to healthcare—impact mine clearance, mine risk education (MRE), and victim assistance. Using Colombia as a case study, the authors emphasize that mine action must be integrated with broader conflict-relief efforts and based on a gender-sensitive analysis of local security risks to avoid endangering the populations it intends to help.

The report argues that the drive for agrofuels in Latin America is based on a cash-crop model of intensive monocultures that benefits large landowners and international agribusiness while causing widespread deforestation, water shortages, and human rights abuses. In Brazil, sugarcane expansion is linked to slave-like working conditions and the displacement of family farms. Argentina's soy-based biodiesel industry has led to significant deforestation and the concentration of land ownership, with 46% of production controlled by 2.2% of producers. In Colombia, oil palm expansion is associated with paramilitary violence and the forced displacement of Afro-descendant and indigenous communities. Central American countries, including Costa Rica, Guatemala, and El Salvador, are increasing production to meet US and EU demand, which the report warns will exacerbate child labour and food insecurity. The document highlights the influence of multilateral banks like the IADB and the World Bank, and corporations such as Cargill and Bunge, in financing and driving this transition.

The report analyzes the 'agrofuel offensive' in Latin America, focusing on Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Colombia, and Central American nations (Costa Rica, El Salvador, and Guatemala). It argues that the rapid expansion of monocultures for biofuels is driven by Northern demand and supported by government subsidies and international finance, leading to widespread deforestation, land concentration, and human rights abuses. Key findings include the use of slave-like labor in Brazilian sugarcane fields, the displacement of indigenous and Afro-descendant communities in Colombia for palm oil, and the loss of food security as food crops are replaced by energy crops. The document highlights the role of transnational corporations and international financial institutions in funding these developments while local populations face increased poverty and environmental degradation.

The report criticizes the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) for promoting a 'flawed model' of large-scale, export-oriented agrofuels in Latin America and the Caribbean. It argues that these projects, driven by demand from the US and Europe, lead to deforestation, biodiversity loss, and human rights abuses, such as violent land grabs in Colombia. The document asserts that agrofuels are not a viable climate solution due to land-use emissions and calls for the IDB to shift funding toward small-scale, local energy projects and truly clean renewables like wind and solar.

The document critiques the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) for promoting large-scale biofuel monocultures as a 'clean energy' solution. It argues that these projects, particularly in Brazil and Colombia, lead to deforestation, biodiversity loss, and rural displacement while failing to provide significant greenhouse gas reductions. The report calls for a shift toward small-scale, decentralized energy systems that support local food security and rural development.

This document is a participant list for the 26th Executive Council (EC) Meeting of the Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research (IAI), which took place in Buenos Aires, Argentina, on June 17-18, 2008.

The IAI is requesting a core budget of US$1,163,462 for FY 2008/2009, a 14.6% increase over the previous year, primarily driven by the devaluation of the US dollar against the Brazilian real and increased operational costs. The budget supports the management of the CRN II and SGP-HD programs, capacity building through training institutes, and strategic planning to strengthen links between science and policy. Key initiatives include a project on the hydroclimate of the La Plata Basin and a MacArthur Foundation-funded study on Andean biodiversity. Funding is sourced from member country contributions, with the United States providing the largest share.

The report argues that agricultural and marine resources, often dismissed as secondary in conflict analysis, can fuel violence through the taxation of trade, the destabilizing effect of price volatility, and competition over essential inputs like land and water. Through case studies in Côte d’Ivoire, Somalia, and Central Asia, it demonstrates how rebel groups and warlords extract funds from cocoa, bananas, and fisheries. It also highlights how commodity dependence and price shocks undermine political stability and how the pursuit of thirsty crops like cotton exacerbates interstate tensions over water sharing. The authors provide fourteen policy recommendations, including the use of UN sanctions on agricultural resources and increased transparency in trade.

The report argues that genetically modified (GM) crops provide no substantive environmental, social, or economic benefits. It highlights a significant increase in pesticide use, particularly glyphosate, due to the emergence of herbicide-resistant weeds in the US, Brazil, and Argentina. The document further contends that GM crops do not increase yields—citing evidence that Roundup Ready soy may actually suffer yield losses—and that they do not address global hunger, as most are used for animal feed or biofuels in wealthy nations. Additionally, it criticizes the concentration of seed control by a few multinational corporations, which increases costs and restricts farmers' ability to save seeds.

The report argues that GM crops provide no ecological, social, or economic benefits. It highlights that herbicide-tolerant (HT) varieties promote the development of resistant weeds, leading to increased pesticide application in the US, Brazil, and Argentina. The document further asserts that GM crops do not increase yields or food security, as most are used for animal feed or biofuels rather than human consumption, and that seed monopolies increase costs for farmers.

The report argues that GM crops, particularly herbicide-tolerant varieties, have not increased yields and have instead led to an increase in pesticide use due to the emergence of resistant 'superweeds'. It highlights the monopolization of the seed market by a few agrochemical giants, specifically Monsanto, and documents negative socio-economic impacts on small farmers in India, South Africa, and South America, including increased debt and land displacement.

The report argues that GM crops, primarily herbicide-tolerant and insect-resistant varieties of soya, maize, cotton, and canola, have not increased yields and have instead driven a rise in pesticide use due to the emergence of resistant weeds. It highlights the monopolization of the seed supply by a few corporations, specifically Monsanto, and documents the negative socio-economic impacts on small farmers in the US, India, and South America, including increased debt and rural poverty.

The document presents peace journalism as an ethical framework for reporting that seeks to create opportunities for non-violent responses to conflict by avoiding sensationalism and zero-sum framing. It details the 'Ten Commandments' for peace journalism, the importance of gender perspectives in conflict reporting, and provides a case study of the 'Naya Nepal' radio programmes in Nepal. The text also addresses criticisms regarding journalistic objectivity and suggests structural strategies for reforming the media field to better support peace-building.

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 request argues that 2D seismic exploration by Petroleum del Perú S.A.C. in Lot 107 poses an imminent threat of irreparable harm to the life, health, and integrity of isolated Cacataibo groups. The document highlights that the exploration area overlaps significantly with proposed Cacataibo territorial reserves and that the use of explosives and the influx of workers increase the risk of forced contact, which historically leads to mass death from disease and violence. It further claims that the Peruvian state approved the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) without proper consultation with settled Cacataibo communities and that the EIA's safety measures are insufficient to prevent forced contact or environmental contamination.

The document examines how specific trading practices can address the economic vulnerabilities of coffee producers, such as declining prices and market instability. It argues that while standard-based systems often focus on production, economic sustainability requires a focus on the trading relationship. The report details various instruments—including long-term contracts, minimum price arrangements, and shared hedging—that can redistribute risk and revenue more equitably. It concludes that trust and information transparency are the essential foundations for these practices to succeed, providing a set of recommendations for stakeholders to improve producer bankability and bargaining power.

The 2003 EU Biofuels Directive, intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and support rural economies, has instead driven tropical deforestation, increased global CO2 emissions through peatland destruction, and exacerbated food insecurity. The report argues that current life-cycle analyses are inadequate for predicting these indirect market and land-use effects.