Search Climate Insights Directory

The IISD guide outlines a framework for negotiating agricultural investment contracts, emphasizing the primacy of national legislation over contracts and international treaties. It provides a comprehensive model contract covering land rights, financial obligations, social and environmental commitments, and dispute resolution, while advocating for transparency and community engagement to ensure sustainable rural development.

The IISD Guide to Negotiating Investment Contracts for Farmland and Water is a comprehensive tool designed for governments and communities to manage foreign investments in agricultural land. It emphasizes the primacy of domestic law over investment contracts and international treaties, while providing a model contract to fill gaps where domestic laws are weak. The guide outlines a preparatory phase involving investor screening, community engagement, and impact assessments, and proposes specific contractual provisions covering tenure, financial obligations, social development, and environmental protections. It strongly advocates for transparency, the avoidance of stabilization clauses, and the use of domestic courts for dispute resolution to protect the national interest and ensure long-term project viability.

The document provides a comprehensive review of empirical studies demonstrating that compact, transit-oriented, and walkable urban design leads to lower greenhouse gas emissions, reduced infrastructure costs, and increased labor productivity. It highlights specific findings from China, such as the negative energy impacts of 'superblocks' in Jinan and the property value premiums associated with Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) in Beijing and Guangzhou. The report also emphasizes the cost-effectiveness of BRT over light rail and the public health benefits of non-motorized transit, while identifying research gaps in developer-side profit data and the specific productivity effects of density in Chinese cities.

The report analyzes state-state dispute settlement (SSDS) in investment treaties as an alternative or complement to investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS). It details various mechanisms—including ad hoc arbitration, judicial bodies like the ICJ, and quasi-judicial systems like those in ASEAN—and categorizes claims into diplomatic protection, interpretive, and declaratory relief. Through case studies such as Italy v. Cuba and Ecuador v. United States, the document highlights the legal complexities of 'dispute' definitions and the interaction between parallel state-state and investor-state tracks. It concludes by recommending that states explicitly define the relationship between these mechanisms and clarify requirements such as the exhaustion of local remedies to increase predictability.

The guide analyzes state-to-state dispute settlement in investment treaties, detailing judicial, quasi-judicial, and arbitral forms. It explores three types of claims—diplomatic protection, interpretation, and declaratory judgments—using case studies like Italy v. Cuba and Ecuador v. United States. It also discusses the complex relationship between state-to-state and investor-state mechanisms, particularly under the ICSID Convention, and offers best practices for treaty drafting to increase predictability and state control over treaty interpretation.

The paper examines the fragmented nature of global energy governance, mapping institutions like OPEC, IEA, and the World Bank. It argues that while most international bodies provide weak or indirect incentives to limit fossil fuel extraction, the UNFCCC and WTO offer multilateral platforms to implement supply-side policies, such as extraction-based accounting, fossil fuel subsidy reform, and mechanisms for net avoided emissions.

The IAI Executive Committee has established an ad hoc committee to draft terms of reference for a new Advisory Committee on Science-Policy Liaison, aimed at integrating global change science into decision-making. The EC is also exploring strategies to increase member country involvement and funding, including reviewing the IAI Strategic Plan. Additionally, the IAI participated in the ENSOCIO-LA consortium to foster EU-Latin American cooperation on climate change and resource efficiency, and co-organized a World Climate Research Program (WCRP) conference in Montevideo to define a regional research agenda for climate services.

The IAI Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC) report for 2013-2014 details the implementation of the CRN3 project process, including 17 international teams and various integration projects. The SAC is promoting a shift toward interdisciplinarity between human and natural sciences in global change research, emphasizing co-designed research and capacity building. Key strategic activities include evaluating science impact beyond publishing, exploring roles within Future Earth and IPBES, and developing a framework for a Science-Policy Advisory Committee (SPAC). The report also highlights a need for the Conference of the Parties (CoP) to address SAC membership vacancies to maintain the required 10-member count.

The SAC report for 2013-2014 details the implementation of the CRN3 project, the promotion of interdisciplinary research between social and natural sciences, and the evaluation of scientific impact. It outlines strategic goals including the integration of Future Earth as an organizing theme, the development of capacity-building programs, and the need to involve indigenous peoples of the Americas in regional scientific efforts.

The paper examines the legal obligations of conservation actors regarding the rights of indigenous peoples, tribal peoples, and local communities. It argues that while states are the primary duty-bearers, international organizations, corporations, and NGOs also have responsibilities to respect human rights based on international customary law and 'social licenses'. The text specifically links these obligations to the implementation of Aichi Target 11 for biodiversity.

The report examines the high financial risks governments face in investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS), where average claims reach US$492 million. It details the disparity between claimed and awarded amounts, a growing trend toward compound interest, and the significant burden of legal and administrative costs, which often fall disproportionately on respondent states, particularly developing countries.

The report details a rapid foresight exercise and backcasting analysis conducted with 18 practitioners from Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) to identify gaps in sustainable development planning. It emphasizes the need to transition from siloed, sector-based planning to integrated, multistakeholder processes that align national visions with subnational implementation. The document outlines a capacity-building agenda for 2014-2015 focusing on vertical and horizontal collaboration, cross-cutting policies for water, energy, and food security, and the shift from expenditure-based reporting to objective-based monitoring, evaluation, and reporting (MER). It also maps existing regional networks, such as REDEPLAN and CLAD, to coordinate knowledge sharing and avoid duplication of efforts.

The report identifies four core areas for improving sustainable development (SD) planning: multistakeholder participation, integrated vertical planning across government levels, cross-sectoral policy integration, and monitoring, evaluation, and reporting (MER). Across Africa, Asia-Pacific, and Latin America and the Caribbean, the report finds a prevalence of 'silo' sectoral planning and a lack of institutional frameworks for stakeholder engagement. It argues for the creation of national SD councils chaired by heads of state and the adoption of 'glocal' planning to align global goals with local implementation. Key capacity gaps include a lack of data for evidence-based policy, poor coordination between governmental and non-governmental agencies, and limited technical skills for information management at subnational levels.

The 'Water for Our Future' event, hosted by the World Water Council, WWF, and The Coca-Cola Company, focused on three themes: Green Growth, Water Stewardship and Industry; Water for Food; and Enough Safe Water for All. The forum emphasized the necessity of 'multisector partnerships' and a shift from short-term water projects to long-term water services. Key discussions highlighted the undervaluation of water in the US, the critical role of farmers in water stewardship, and the need for inclusive planning that incorporates local communities and women. The report also presents case studies on the 'golden triangle' partnership in the Rio Grande/Rio Bravo basin and a public-private partnership for wastewater treatment in Jordan.

CIEL argues that TTIP would allow the chemical industry to weaken safety regulations and limit access to critical health and safety data. The statement highlights the divergence between the U.S. risk-based approach and the EU's hazard-based REACH system, asserting that regulatory harmonization would likely result in lower standards. CIEL also warns that Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanisms would enable corporations to bypass domestic courts and challenge public interest laws, creating a 'regulatory chilling effect'.

The document argues that subnational governments are essential for implementing sustainable development policies because they are closest to citizens' needs and can foster grassroots innovation. It emphasizes the need for 'vertical coordination'—the linking of local, subnational, national, and supranational levels—to ensure policy coherence. Using empirical research, the author identifies good practice examples in Europe (such as Tyrol, Austria) and other regions (such as Bhutan), while noting that many regions lack systematic links to national strategies due to political independence or administrative bottlenecks. The briefing recommends a 'metagovernance' approach that mixes hierarchical, market, and network styles to better integrate sustainable development across all levels of government.

This guide by the Climate and Development Knowledge Network (CDKN) examines the technical, operational, and institutional barriers that prevent disaster risk assessments from effectively informing public policy and investment decisions. Drawing on research from Latin America and the Caribbean, as well as case studies from Ghana, India, and Pakistan, the document provides a framework for improving the 'uptake' of risk information to support the successor to the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA2).

The document argues that climate compatible development is won or lost at the subnational level, where local actors face intense pressure from climate extremes but possess unique advantages in local knowledge and cross-sectoral coordination. It identifies key barriers, such as scientific uncertainty at local scales and a gap between public expectations and available resources. To overcome these, the paper recommends strategies including the cultivation of local political 'champions', the creation of 'knowledge partnerships' to translate climate science for communities, and the use of participatory planning to mobilise in-kind resources. It emphasizes that for these local successes to contribute to global transformational change, they must be 'scaled out' to other localities and 'scaled up' into national policy frameworks.

The document identifies significant gaps between the production of disaster risk assessments and their application in policy, particularly in Latin America and the Caribbean. It argues that risk assessments often fail because they are treated as one-off projects rather than continuous processes, lack alignment with political timescales, and are presented in overly technical language. To improve uptake, the guide recommends engaging end-users in design, targeting sectoral agendas, and building local technical capacity.

The guidebook introduces a systems-based approach to the Water-Energy-Food (WEF) nexus, arguing that agricultural investments are most sustainable when they protect underlying environmental determinants and social capital. It proposes a four-stage operational process: assessing the current WEF security system, envisioning future landscape scenarios, developing a specific investment strategy, and transforming the system through implementation and adaptive management. The framework emphasizes the use of watershed-scale analysis, stakeholder engagement, and quantitative modeling to identify synergies and trade-offs, ensuring that investments do not harm tenure rights or ecosystem services.