Search Climate Insights Directory

The September 2021 Global Update by the Climate Action Tracker (CAT) finds that global climate action continues to lag behind the requirements for limiting warming to 1.5°C. While some countries have updated their NDCs, the 2030 emissions gap remains significant, estimated at 20 to 23 GtCO2e. The report introduces a new rating system that integrates targets, policies, and climate finance, revealing that only The Gambia is overall 1.5°C Paris Agreement compatible. Most net zero targets are rated as poor or incomplete, and developed countries are failing to provide sufficient international climate finance or implement policies that align with their fair share of global mitigation efforts.

The report identifies critical transboundary climate risks in global agricultural trade, noting that a few major exporters like the US, Brazil, and China disproportionately transmit risk to dependent importers. It argues that traditional risk management, such as diversification, is insufficient against systemic climate shifts and calls for multilateral cooperation and system-level adaptation finance.

The paper surveys 29 long-term climate strategies (LTSs) submitted to the UNFCCC, representing 42 countries and 28% of global emissions. It finds a growing trend toward net-zero targets, an increasing focus on the fundamental economic and societal shifts required for transition, and a reliance on both natural and technological carbon removals. The analysis highlights that while most strategies include midcentury goals and modeling, the level of detail regarding adaptation and just transition varies, and some parties acknowledge gaps between their most ambitious scenarios and their final targets.

The Global Climate and Health Alliance (GCHA) developed the HealthyNDCs Scorecard to analyze and rank 40 NDCs from 66 countries, assessing how health is incorporated into climate commitments and the level of climate ambition. The document serves as a guide for a Twitter campaign to pressure governments to set ambitious emissions targets and embed health protections into their national climate plans. GCHA identifies specific countries as failing to consider health or lacking ambition, while others are praised for leadership in this area.

The GCF's Independent Evaluation Unit (IEU) assessed four pilot RFP programmes: Enhanced Direct Access (EDA), Micro-, Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (MSME), Mobilizing Funds at Scale (MFS), and REDD+ Results-based Payments (REDD+). The assessment concludes that while the RFPs are relevant to the GCF mandate and country needs, they have not been used effectively as a modality. Key failures include a lack of incentives for proponents, an inability to attract new accredited entities, and a project cycle that remains as complex and lengthy as the regular Proposal Appraisal Process (PAP). The REDD+ RFP was the most successful due to its tailored process and specialized expertise. The IEU recommends establishing the RFP as a formal institutional modality with standardized processes, transparent topic selection based on portfolio gap analysis, and incentives such as simplified accreditation.

The analysis finds a growing trend of countries incorporating fossil fuel production into their national climate communications, with some establishing pathways for managed decline. However, a significant number of countries still plan for continued or expanded production, and many fail to address the equity and economic diversification needs of a just transition.

The IAI report for the 2020-2021 fiscal year indicates that only 57% of approved contributions were received by April 30, 2021, with 8 countries delayed by more than three years. Total expenditures from July 2020 to February 2021 were $777,655, which was 16.7% lower than the budgeted $933,333, primarily due to COVID-19 restrictions on travel and physical meetings. The report also notes that contributions remaining at $5,000 since 1992 have lost approximately 89% of their purchasing power.

Friends of the Earth International and 81 other organizations condemn the Colombian government's violent response to the 2021 National Strike. The statement links the social unrest to a tax reform proposal, rising poverty, and a development model that prioritizes extractive industries and monetary accumulation over human rights and nature. It calls for an immediate end to military repression, the protection of the right to protest, and the implementation of comprehensive agrarian reform and food sovereignty.

The GCF and GEF have established a Long-Term Vision (LTV) to move beyond their Pilot Coordinated Engagement (launched in 2018) toward a structured partnership. The LTV focuses on three pillars: collaborative programming for major initiatives (such as the Great Green Wall and Amazon initiatives), sharing knowledge and methodologies to maximize climate impact, and improving joint communication. The funds aim to leverage their unique strengths—GEF's focus on upstream enabling environments and multi-convention synergies, and GCF's ability to mobilize large-scale blended finance for climate-specific benefits—to reduce duplication and streamline support for developing countries.

The document assesses the global and regional shortfall in biodiversity finance, noting that the world failed to meet any Aichi Biodiversity Targets by 2020. It argues that conservation should be viewed as an investment with a financial return on investment (ROI) rather than a cost. The author explores several 'green' financial instruments—including debt-for-nature swaps, green bonds, 'blue' financing, payment for ecosystem services (PES), and biocredits—as viable options for Africa. It specifically highlights the opportunity provided by COVID-19 recovery packages to implement a 'build forward better' approach, urging African governments and the African Development Bank to lead in mobilising these resources and realigning harmful subsidies toward nature-positive outcomes.

A February 2021 international survey of Facebook users across more than 30 countries and territories reveals overwhelming public support for the Paris Climate Agreement and a widespread desire for governments to prioritize climate action, with the strongest support found in Central and South America.

The report identifies significant opportunities for green finance in Central America and the Caribbean (CAC), noting that while the market is small with only six deals to date, there is high potential for expansion in renewable energy, low-carbon transport, sustainable water and waste management, sustainable agriculture, and the blue economy. It highlights the role of the Central American Bank for Economic Integration (CABEI) and regional stock exchanges in driving this growth, while providing a guide for issuers to align with international standards like the Climate Bonds Taxonomy.

The report analyzes the green finance landscape in Central America and the Caribbean (CAC), noting that while the market is small—with only six green bond issuances as of June 2020—there is significant potential for growth in renewable energy, low-carbon transport, sustainable water, and waste management. It highlights the role of the Central American Bank for Economic Integration (CABEI) and the leadership of Costa Rica in climate ambition. The document provides a step-by-step guide for green financing and explores emerging opportunities in sustainable agriculture and the blue economy, while discussing the economic disruptions caused by COVID-19 and the 2020 hurricane season.

The document establishes a two-component eligibility framework for hydropower certification: a Mitigation Component and an Adaptation & Resilience (A&R) Component. The Mitigation Component uses a 'predictive screen' based on power density to identify low-risk assets, while others must undergo a GHG assessment using the G-res tool or on-site studies to meet emissions intensity thresholds of 100g CO2e/kWh (pre-2020) or 50g CO2e/kWh (post-2020). The A&R Component requires assets to be assessed via the ESG Gap Analysis Tool, with strict limits on the number of 'significant gaps' allowed and a requirement for an Environmental and Social Action Plan (ESAP) to close those gaps within 24 months. Additionally, the criteria mandate Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) for indigenous peoples and public disclosure of compliance data.

The document identifies systemic barriers to nature-positive infrastructure, including a lack of decision-relevant biodiversity data, limited technical capacity among engineers, and financial models that prioritize short-term returns over long-term ecosystem benefits. It argues for a paradigm shift toward nature-based solutions (NbS) and ecological connectivity, recommending the adoption of standardized metrics like the European Taxonomy and the Task Force for Nature-Related Disclosure (TNFD). The report emphasizes that 'upstream' policy and spatial planning are the most effective levers for change, urging governments to redirect COVID-19 recovery stimulus packages away from fossil-fuel reliant sectors toward sustainable, decarbonized infrastructure.

The GCF Board's 27th meeting resulted in the adoption of the Updated Strategic Plan (2020–2023), which sets goals for the first replenishment period (GCF-1), including a 50:50 balance between mitigation and adaptation funding. The Board approved 15 funding proposals, including several REDD-plus and Simplified Approval Process (SAP) projects, and accredited four new entities. The meeting also covered the 2021 administrative budget, work plans for independent units, and discussions on the Integrated Results Management Framework (IRMF) and the MOPAN assessment.

The report finds that while health is a priority in National Adaptation Plans (NAPs), SRHR is largely overlooked in overarching documents, creating a gap between sector-specific health planning and national climate strategy. It argues that realizing SRHR is a foundation for climate resilience and recommends integrating SRHR into vulnerability assessments, gender analyses, and monitoring systems.

The report analyzes 19 general NAP documents, five health-sector NAPs, and five Green Climate Fund proposals to assess the integration of sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) in climate adaptation planning. It finds that while health is universally prioritized, specific SRHR issues are rarely addressed in general NAPs and often disconnected from sector-specific health plans. The document argues that SRHR is a fundamental basis for climate resilience, as its denial limits women's agency and participation in climate action. It provides eight recommendations to better integrate SRHR through gender-responsive vulnerability assessments, inter-agency collaboration, and systemic health sector adaptation.

The report analyzes 19 National Adaptation Plan (NAP) documents, sectoral health plans, and Green Climate Fund proposals to assess the integration of sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR). It finds that while health is universally prioritized as a sector for adaptation, specific SRHR issues are rarely addressed. The document argues that climate change negatively impacts SRHR and that the denial of these rights increases climate vulnerability. It recommends using existing gender and health guidelines, incorporating SRHR into vulnerability assessments, and fostering collaboration between government bodies responsible for climate, gender, and health to ensure inclusive and rights-based adaptation strategies.

The document analyzes the labor market crisis in Latin America exacerbated by COVID-19, highlighting the vulnerability of women, youth, and informal workers. It argues that the region's dependence on primary exports and low economic complexity increase its vulnerability to external shocks. To address this, the brief recommends transitioning toward 'green jobs' and a more complex productive matrix. Key proposals include investing in energy-efficient housing, nature-based solutions, female labor inclusion, digitalization to reduce informality, and aligning education with the requirements of a carbon-neutral economy.