Search Climate Insights Directory

The document outlines how developing countries can integrate climate adaptation into national budgeting and use domestic fiscal tools to fund resilience. It highlights the importance of coordinating between climate-sensitive sectors and finance ministries, using instruments like fuel taxes and green bonds, and implementing tracking systems to demonstrate country ownership and identify funding gaps.

The report identifies 15 'signals' indicating a global energy transition, including the rapid growth of renewable energy capacity, falling solar PV costs, and record investments in green energy. It highlights China's leading role in renewable investment and the decline of the coal industry. The document also notes the rise of city-level climate actions and the growth of the green bond market, while advocating for a 'just transition' that addresses energy poverty and social equity.

The document argues that Southern Africa remains largely excluded from global value chains due to poor infrastructure, weak manufacturing, and a lack of regional integration. It suggests that while governments should focus on enabling sectors like energy and transport, the region needs better data collection—noting that only South Africa participates in the OECD's TiVA database—and a strategic rebranding effort similar to Costa Rica's approach to attract lead firms. The text highlights agro-processing and services as key areas for competitive advantage and growth.

The report examines the Watershared model, which uses local negotiations and non-economic incentives to encourage upstream landowners to protect forests for the benefit of downstream water users. Unlike national PES schemes, Watershared relies on social norms and local consensus, allowing participation from those without formal land titles and reducing bureaucratic overhead. In Bolivia, the model expanded from six farmers in 2003 to 4,500 families conserving 210,000 hectares by 2016. The approach is presented as a tool for climate compatible development, integrating mitigation through forest protection and adaptation through secured water supplies.

The document is a participant list for the 42nd Executive Council Meeting of the Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research, held in Santiago, Chile, on June 17, 2016. It lists representatives from various national governments (including Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Panama, Paraguay, and the USA), observers from Ecuador and Colombia, and members of the IAI Directorate and advisory committees.

The document is a participant list for the 24th Conference of the Parties held in Santiago, Chile, from June 15-16, 2016. It identifies representatives from various national governments, including Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Uruguay, and the USA, as well as observers from FAPESP and Future Earth, and staff from the Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research (IAI).

The green bond market experienced substantial growth in 2016, with issuance on track to double from 2015 levels, driven largely by China and other emerging markets. While mitigation projects in clean energy and energy efficiency receive the majority of capital, adaptation financing is increasing, particularly through US municipalities. The private sector now accounts for 66% of issuance. To meet Paris Agreement targets, the report advocates for governments to develop green investment pipelines and implement five key actions: issuing demonstration bonds, applying green standards, enabling domestic verifiers, providing market infrastructure, and promoting international collaboration.

The Green Economy Barometer 2016 reports that while the transition to green economies is accelerating—marked by record investments in renewables and a maturing international policy architecture—it remains insufficient in depth and breadth. The report highlights a significant shift in investment toward developing countries and the emergence of ambitious national sectoral targets. However, it argues that structural reform is lacking, as most national plans ignore the informal economy and the needs of the poorest populations. The document concludes that the green economy remains politically fringe and requires a more inclusive narrative to achieve large-scale societal transformation.

The report examines diverse river protection strategies across several countries to balance energy needs with the conservation of free-flowing rivers. It highlights national legal designations in the United States and Norway, environmental water reserves in Mexico, species-specific reserves in China, national parks in Brazil, and biodiversity offsets in Costa Rica. The authors argue that system-scale planning is the most effective way to direct hydropower development away from high-value river systems.

The document reports on a COP21 side event regarding Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs). Speakers argued that NAMAs currently lack regulations on stakeholder engagement and environmental criteria, which undermines their potential for sustainable development. Case studies from Costa Rica and India illustrated how the dominance of the industrial sector and international agencies can marginalize civil society and informal workers, such as wastepickers. The event concluded that universal safeguards, including grievance mechanisms and transparent monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) systems, are essential to ensure NAMAs are community-led and effective.

The document defines key climate terminology used in COP21 negotiations, such as decarbonization, carbon neutrality, and carbon budgets, while explaining how these terms influence the global emissions trajectory. It argues that for long-term goals to be effective, they must be consistent with climate science, limit both long-term and cumulative emissions, and provide clear dates and plausible reduction pathways.

The document examines Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs) as tools for developing countries to achieve mitigation and sustainable development goals. It highlights a significant gap between the high interest in NAMA development and the actual financial support provided, noting that less than 2% of requested support has been offered. The brief argues that the lack of official UNFCCC guidelines for stakeholder consultation and the absence of sector-specific environmental criteria—such as 'negative lists' to exclude harmful technologies—risk promoting 'greenwashing' and locking countries into high-carbon infrastructure. It recommends adopting universal safeguards, harmonized sustainable development assessments, and mandatory guidelines for effective stakeholder engagement, including indigenous peoples, to ensure NAMAs drive true transformational change.

The document is a call to action by cleantech entrepreneurs and supporting organisations directed at COP21. It argues that viable solutions for decarbonisation already exist but are hindered by policy influence and capital allocation favouring the fossil fuel industry. The signatories demand a global shift to 100% renewable energy by 2050, the redirection of finance away from fossil fuels, and the implementation of science-based targets and carbon pricing.

The briefing advocates for Community Forest Management (CFM) as a superior model for protecting biodiversity and mitigating climate change compared to industrial forestry and absolute protection regimes. It highlights that CFM can reduce deforestation rates and enhance carbon storage while securing the rights and livelihoods of Indigenous Peoples and local communities. The document warns against 'false solutions' like REDD+ and the 'financialization of nature,' which it claims risk land grabbing and the erosion of traditional governance. It recommends that governments recognize collective land tenure and that international frameworks, such as the Convention on Biological Diversity, prioritize CFM over traditional Protected Areas to meet conservation goals.

The document advocates for community forest management (CFM) as a superior alternative to industrial logging and strict protection regimes. It asserts that CFM effectively reduces deforestation, protects biodiversity, and supports climate mitigation and adaptation by empowering indigenous peoples and local communities. The text identifies key success factors such as land tenure security and warns against 'false solutions' like REDD+ and the financialization of nature, which it claims risk land grabbing and the erosion of community control.

The document advocates for Community Forest Management (CFM) as a critical tool for biodiversity conservation and climate mitigation. It presents evidence that CFM often outperforms strict protection regimes in reducing deforestation, particularly when supported by secure land tenure and local autonomy. The briefing highlights the role of CFM in carbon sequestration and climate adaptation, while warning against 'false solutions' like REDD+ and the financialisation of nature, which it claims threaten community rights and traditional governance.

The report advocates for community forest management (CFM) as a superior strategy for environmental conservation and social justice. It provides evidence that forests managed by indigenous peoples and local communities often have lower deforestation rates and higher carbon storage than state-protected areas. The document identifies secure land tenure, local autonomy in decision-making, and strong social capital as critical success factors. It also warns against 'false solutions' like REDD+ and the financialization of nature, which it claims can lead to land grabbing and the erosion of traditional knowledge. The report concludes by recommending that governments prioritize collective land rights and traditional knowledge over market-based conservation mechanisms.

The document presents community forest management (CFM) as a superior alternative to industrial logging and strict protected areas for preserving biodiversity and mitigating climate change. It highlights that CFM can be more effective at reducing deforestation, as evidenced by data from Brazil and Costa Rica, and provides critical livelihood support to approximately 1.6 billion people. The text identifies key success factors for CFM, including secure land tenure, local decision-making autonomy, and strong social capital. Conversely, it warns against 'false solutions' such as REDD+ and the financialization of nature, which it claims risk land grabbing and the erosion of traditional governance. The document concludes by recommending the prioritization of decentralized, authentic CFM and the legal protection of indigenous and local community rights to ensure ecological and social justice.

The briefing advocates for Community Forest Management (CFM) as a superior model for forest conservation and climate action compared to industrial logging and state-led protected areas. It highlights CFM's role in carbon storage and biodiversity protection, while warning against market-based mechanisms like REDD+ that may lead to land grabbing. The document recommends that governments recognize communal land tenure and prioritize CFM to meet international biodiversity targets.

The document evaluates five indicators of financial support for reducing forest emissions: international public climate finance, domestic public spending, private sector investment, indigenous peoples' investments, and civil society investments. It finds that while international public finance from OECD countries has increased, there is a critical lack of harmonized global data for domestic and private sector spending. The report highlights the role of payment for ecosystem services (PES) in developing countries and the emerging potential of South-South cooperation, notably China's commitment of US$3.1 billion in climate finance.