Search Climate Insights Directory

The report finds that the dairy and coffee sectors are failing to address methane emissions, with 18 out of 20 analyzed companies scoring less than 50% on a comprehensive performance scale. While some companies acknowledge the climate impact of methane, there is a widespread reluctance to reduce dairy production, and most lack specific methane targets or transparent reporting practices.

The document is a training guide designed to move beyond a simple replacement of fossil fuels with renewables, advocating instead for a systemic change based on energy justice. It structures learning into three phases: 'Discover' (focusing on energy sufficiency and extractivism), 'Define' (conceptualizing just transitions), and 'Develop' (exploring circular systems and community-owned energy). The manual highlights the risks of 'green extractivism' and 'narrative injustice,' where climate goals are used to justify the expropriation of land and resources in the Global South. It provides case studies of community energy projects in Gambia, Denmark, Brazil, and the UK to illustrate scalable models of popular power and energy sovereignty.

The 2025/26 Women, Peace and Security (WPS) Index ranks 181 countries, with Denmark scoring highest (.939) and Afghanistan lowest (.279). The report highlights a global stagnation or decline in women's status, coinciding with a historic peak in armed conflict. In 2024, 676 million women lived within 50 kilometers of armed conflict, a 74 percent increase since 2010. While developed countries generally lead the rankings, significant improvements were noted in fragile states like Congo and South Sudan. The report emphasizes the disproportionate impact of conflict on women, citing severe humanitarian crises in Ukraine, Palestine, Sudan, Myanmar, and Ethiopia, and calls for urgent investment in women to foster peaceful and resilient societies.

South Africa's carbon-intensive export model is increasingly vulnerable as 78% of its exports are sold to countries with net zero targets. The report highlights acute risks in the basic metals, automotive, and agricultural sectors due to high embodied CO2 emissions compared to global competitors. While the EU's CBAM and shifting US trade policies pose immediate threats, South Africa's reserves of critical minerals and renewable energy potential offer a strategic path toward 'carbon competitiveness'. The report argues that success depends on decarbonising the national electricity grid, implementing the Climate Change Act 2024, and securing international support through the Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP).

The policy brief outlines how Poland can use its 2025 EU Council presidency to influence the EU's energy and climate agenda. It emphasizes the need for a technology-inclusive approach to industrial decarbonisation—including CCS and clean hydrogen—to address regional cost disparities and ensure energy security. The brief also highlights the importance of mitigating socioeconomic impacts through retraining and equitable state aid, while promoting diverse energy solutions such as small modular reactors (SMRs) and geothermal energy.

The document examines the transition of South Africa to a coalition-based national government following the May 2024 elections, where the ANC lost its majority. It argues that for the GNU to be effective, partners must prioritize accountability and service delivery over the retention of power. By analyzing the instability of local coalitions in South Africa and comparing them with experiences in Kenya, Lesotho, Malawi, and Western Europe, the brief advocates for the adoption of formal, written coalition agreements to manage ideological tensions and improve governmental stability.

The report evaluates the integration of permanent carbon removals—specifically BioCCS and DACCS—into the EU ETS. It identifies a critical tension: while direct integration can drive deployment and maintain market liquidity as the emissions cap approaches zero, it risks 'abatement deterrence' where removals substitute for necessary emissions reductions. The authors warn that without supply controls, BioCCS deployment could exceed sustainable biomass limits, potentially harming biodiversity and LULUCF carbon sinks. To mitigate these risks, the report recommends a gradual integration strategy that maintains the gross emissions cap, implements technology-specific supply controls, and introduces differentiated allowances. It also emphasizes that the EU ETS alone is likely insufficient to incentivize high-cost technologies like DACCS or to achieve net-negative emissions post-2050, necessitating additional public funding tools and long-term policy frameworks.

Analysis by Climate Central indicates that Denmark experienced an average of three additional weeks of winter days above freezing annually between 2014 and 2023 due to climate change. Denmark ranks fourth globally among 123 analyzed countries for the most additional winter days above freezing. In Copenhagen, climate change added at least 25 winter days above freezing each year compared to a scenario without climate change.

Climate change is significantly increasing the number of winter days with minimum temperatures above 0°C across the Northern Hemisphere. Analysis of the decade 2014-2023 shows that over one-third of analyzed countries and 44% of analyzed cities experienced at least one additional week of above-freezing days annually. Europe is the most affected region, with some countries like Lithuania and Latvia seeing over 20 additional above-freezing days per year. These shifts impact snowfall, the USD 12.5 billion winter sports industry, water supplies, and ecosystem health.

The CCPI 2025 reports that while 61 of 64 assessed countries increased their renewable energy share over five years, the top three ranks remain vacant as no country performs well enough to meet Paris Agreement goals. Denmark ranks 4th, while oil and gas producers like Iran, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Russia are the lowest performers. The G20, responsible for over 75% of global emissions, shows poor overall performance with only the UK and India ranking as high performers.

The report argues that Norway's 'energy culture' is heavily skewed by the petroleum industry, creating a 'petroculture' that marginalizes climate-critical perspectives. It highlights the contrast between the Norwegian Directorate of Culture's focus on internal emission reductions and Arts Council England's systemic approach. The document details how the oil industry uses 'petroganda'—including STEM sponsorships for children and academic agreements—to maintain legitimacy and delay the energy transition. It also notes a trend of Norwegian cultural organizations taking stances against oil exploration and discusses the criminalization of climate activists in Norway.

The document analyzes the global distribution of agricultural methane emissions, highlighting that while low- and middle-income countries produce the most, high-income countries have higher per capita emissions due to consumption patterns. It proposes a transition toward climate-smart agriculture through technology, policy reform, and targeted finance, particularly for smallholder farmers in Africa, to meet global reduction targets by 2030.

The briefing examines the climate impact of 22 global meat and dairy corporations, finding that their combined emissions are comparable to those of entire countries or major oil companies. It argues that the industry uses 'green smokescreens'—such as weak net-zero targets, unproven techno-fixes, and regenerative agriculture—to distract from the need to reduce livestock production. The document further highlights a lack of mandatory agricultural methane targets in the 11 countries where these companies are headquartered, attributing this to 'agricultural exceptionalism' and industry political influence.

The report examines 22 of the world's largest meat and dairy companies, finding that their combined emissions are comparable to those of major oil companies and entire nations. It argues that corporate net-zero targets are largely non-aligned with the 1.5°C warming limit and that the industry relies on 'techno-fixes'—such as feed additives and biogas—and 'regenerative agriculture' to distract from the need to reduce livestock production. The analysis further highlights a lack of mandatory agricultural methane targets in the 11 countries where these companies are headquartered, attributing this to 'agricultural exceptionalism' and industry political influence.

The document examines how ISDS allows foreign investors, particularly in the fossil fuel industry, to sue governments over climate regulations, leading to a 'chilling effect' where states delay or weaken policies to avoid costly awards. It argues that these protections act as a subsidy for GHG-intensive industries, contradicting Article 2.1(c) of the Paris Agreement. The brief concludes that fragmented procedural reforms are insufficient and advocates for a unified global approach, including the use of COP29 and Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to coordinate ISDS withdrawals or carve-outs.

The report details how Koch, Inc. and its executives had access to scientific warnings about global warming as early as 1972 but spent decades financing a network of nonprofits and think tanks to obstruct climate action. This was achieved by contesting climate science, running public relations campaigns to shift cultural understanding, and lobbying political elites. The document tracks this effort from early API and National Petroleum Council reports through the funding of the Competitive Enterprise Institute's 'global warming project' and the activities of Americans for Prosperity, culminating in significant policy victories during the Trump administration and continued opposition to Biden-era climate legislation.

The document examines the transition of South Africa to a national coalition government following the May 2024 elections, where the ANC lost its majority. It contrasts the 2024 GNU—born of political necessity—with the 1994 GNU, which was mandatory for reconciliation. The authors analyze the instability of local-level coalitions in South Africa and review coalition models in Kenya, Lesotho, Malawi, and Western Europe. The brief concludes that South Africa should adopt formal, written coalition agreements to prioritize governmental accountability and service delivery over the retention of political power.

The document is a detailed reference guide defining the organizational structures, legal agreements, and technical terminology of the UNFCCC. It covers key treaties such as the Paris Agreement and Kyoto Protocol, explains the roles of various bodies like the COP and its subsidiary bodies, and defines critical climate concepts including Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), the Global Stocktake, and the Enhanced Transparency Framework. It also details the roles of non-state actors through the nine recognized NGO constituencies and describes the financial mechanisms, such as the Green Climate Fund, used to support developing countries.

The report identifies a strategic window for the EU and UK to reset their climate and energy relationship following recent elections. It argues that the current Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) is too limited and suggests a comprehensive new agreement covering industrial decarbonisation, methane, carbon capture, hydrogen, and nuclear energy. The document advocates for an 'options-based strategy' that includes clean firm power to complement renewables, and recommends aligning regulatory frameworks—such as the Emissions Trading Systems (ETS) and carbon removal certifications—to facilitate cross-border trade and infrastructure sharing.

The report finds a positive trend in European pension funds' commitment to sustainable investing, with significant growth in the adoption of mitigation targets and climate risk management. However, a persistent gap remains between these commitments and actual real-economy impact, as pension funds rarely invest directly in projects and often hold fragmented indirect ownership. The analysis highlights that larger funds, those in net-zero coalitions, and funds in countries with strong regulatory frameworks—such as the Nordic countries, the Netherlands, and France—are leading the transition. Key challenges include the gap between asset ownership and management, the difficulty of transitioning passive investments, and limited capital flow to emerging markets and developing economies (EMDEs).