Search Climate Insights Directory

The briefing reveals a systemic lack of rules and enforcement regarding benefit sharing arrangements (BSAs) in the voluntary carbon market. An analysis by Öko-Institut found that only two of five assessed carbon standards referenced BSAs, and only four of 47 reviewed projects provided clear evidence of benefit sharing with stakeholders beyond project implementers. The document argues that payments for results (such as payments for ecosystem services) are often incorrectly conflated with benefit sharing, which should instead be a distribution of revenues. It further notes that major standards like CAR, ACR, and VCS have opposed mandatory BSA rules from the ICVCM, citing confidentiality and capacity constraints.

The document examines the prevalence and quality of benefit-sharing agreements in the voluntary carbon market (VCM). Based on an Öko-Institut study, it finds that most carbon standards and projects lack clear, enforceable mechanisms to distribute financial and non-financial benefits to local communities. It highlights a critical confusion between 'benefit-sharing' and 'payment for results' (such as salaries or payments for ecosystem services), arguing that the former should be a separate share of profits. The brief concludes that the absence of uniform definitions and the opposition of major standards to mandatory rules hinder the equitable distribution of carbon credit revenues.

The document analyzes the lack of standardized rules for benefit-sharing agreements (BSAs) in the voluntary carbon market, finding that most carbon standards and projects fail to provide evidence of equitable benefit distribution to indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLCs).

The document reports on a study by the Öko-Institut commissioned by Carbon Market Watch, which found that benefit-sharing arrangements (BSAs) in the voluntary carbon market are largely insufficient and lack transparency. Analysis of five carbon standards and 47 projects revealed that most standards do not require BSAs, and very few projects provide evidence of distributing benefits beyond simple performance-based payments. The brief argues that performance payments (like salaries) should not be conflated with benefit-sharing and calls for the Integrity Council for Voluntary Carbon Markets (ICVCM) to mandate standardized, transparent BSA rules.

The report examines the pathways for a just energy transition in the Pacific, highlighting that while 14 Pacific Island Countries (PICs) contribute only 0.23% of global emissions, they are disproportionately affected by climate change. It estimates the upfront cost of replacing fossil fuel electricity generation in eight profiled PICs between $691 million and $1 billion USD. The document argues that a just transition must go beyond technology swaps to include economic diversification, poverty eradication, and the protection of workers, particularly in Papua New Guinea's fossil fuel sector. It also warns of a 'double exposure' where the region faces both climate impacts and potential environmental damage from increased mining of Energy Transition Metals (ETMs).

The report highlights that the true lifetime cost of plastic is 8 times higher in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) than in high-income countries (HICs), primarily due to higher waste mismanagement rates and subsequent marine ecosystem damage. It identifies three structural inequities: the lack of influence LMICs have over global production, their limited waste management capacity, and the absence of accountability mechanisms for producers. To address this, WWF calls for a global treaty with binding rules on production bans, circular design standards, and Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes.

The report examines 26 NAP progress reports from 20 countries to provide a framework for tracking climate adaptation. It identifies that while many countries commit to reporting, few do so due to capacity and resource constraints. The analysis proposes a four-step iterative cycle for reporting and details various methods for tracking implementation, evaluating effectiveness, and assessing the integration of adaptation into national budgeting.

The document categorizes plastics-related instruments into government legislation, voluntary multistakeholder standards, and non-governmental initiatives. It identifies significant gaps in standards for upstream production and reuse systems, while noting a concentration of existing efforts in waste management. The authors argue for enhanced international cooperation to reduce regulatory fragmentation and improve inclusivity for developing countries, suggesting that a future global plastics treaty could drive the development of harmonized design and transparency standards.

The document defines seafood jurisdictional initiatives (JIs) as place-based efforts combining policy and market-based approaches to achieve holistic sustainability. It argues that traditional certification, ratings, and improvement (CRI) efforts are insufficient for global scale and systemic issues. The handbook outlines a three-step implementation process: scoping, co-designing, and co-implementing, emphasizing the necessity of government leadership, multistakeholder collaboration, and long-term blended finance.

The document outlines the concept of seafood Jurisdictional Initiatives (JIs) as place-based, multistakeholder efforts that combine policy reform and market-based incentives to address systemic sustainability challenges. It contrasts JIs with traditional certification, ratings, and improvement (CRI) projects, arguing that JIs are better suited for tackling cumulative impacts, climate resilience, and social equity across entire production geographies. The guide details a three-step implementation process—scoping, co-designing, and co-implementing—and emphasizes the critical roles of government leadership, private-sector engagement, and the inclusion of Indigenous peoples and local communities. It also provides guidance on establishing monitoring, reporting, and verification frameworks to ensure the credibility of sustainability claims.

The GCF Risk Dashboard for Q2 2023 reports that portfolio-level risks remain within Board-approved tolerances, with no non-performing loans and liquid assets at approved levels. As of 30 June 2023, the portfolio consists of 216 approved funding proposals totaling USD 12.03 billion in equivalent terms. Funding is distributed across Africa (36%), Asia-Pacific (34%), and LATAM & Car. (26%), with a focus on mitigation (41%) and adaptation (23%), alongside cross-cutting projects. The fund's commitment authority increased significantly due to a USD 1 billion contribution from the United States. While concentration risks are within limits, the portfolio is skewed toward International Accredited Entities and the 'Energy access and power generation' sector. The report also tracks several projects facing implementation delays and identifies a projected 12-month forward liquid asset portfolio of USD 8.9 billion.

Fiji employs a multi-sectoral approach to climate adaptation, utilizing a National Adaptation Plan with 160 measures and a hybrid seawall strategy combining mangroves, boulders, and vetiver grass. The government coordinates these efforts through the Climate Change Division, utilizing GIS and the Adaptation Impact Analysis Tool to monitor village-level projects. For communities facing immediate risk of inundation, Fiji has established a Standard Operating Procedure for Planned Relocations and the Climate Relocation of Communities (CROC) Trust Fund to ensure voluntary, culturally-sensitive movement to higher ground, as seen in the relocation of the village of Cogea.

The document examines Long-Term Strategies (LTSs) as economy-wide planning instruments mandated by the Paris Agreement to guide countries toward net-zero emissions by mid-century. It highlights that while LTSs provide a vital link between short-term Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and long-term goals, global adoption is currently insufficient to limit warming to 1.5°C. For African nations, the author argues that LTSs must balance mitigation with adaptation and socio-economic development. The briefing outlines best practices for LTS development, including policy coherence, stakeholder engagement, high-level political leadership, and the use of strategic foresight tools, while citing specific examples from countries like South Africa, Nigeria, and Ethiopia.

The briefing proposes a Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty based on three pillars: preventing new exploration licenses, phasing out existing production equitably, and ensuring a just transition for workers and dependent communities. It outlines a strategy for 'precursor countries' to drive international cooperation, suggests specific diplomatic actions for national governments, and provides a menu of domestic policy options to reduce fossil fuel dependency.

The briefing asserts that current climate frameworks, including the Paris Agreement, are insufficient because they focus on emissions (demand) rather than production (supply). It proposes a new legal instrument—a Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty—to prevent the proliferation of fossil fuels, manage a fair phase-out where wealthy nations transition fastest, and ensure a global just transition for workers and communities. The document outlines building blocks for this cooperation, such as the Beyond Oil and Gas Alliance (BOGA) and a Global Registry of Fossil Fuels, and calls for governments to support the initiative and an ICJ Advisory opinion on climate change.

The briefing asserts that current global production plans for fossil fuels will lead to emissions more than double what is compatible with the 1.5 °C target. It argues that while the Paris Agreement focuses on emissions, a new international legal instrument is needed to specifically target the supply side by ending new exploration and managing the equitable decline of existing production. The proposed treaty framework emphasizes a 'just transition' where wealthy nations transition fastest and provide financial and technological support to poorer, dependent nations. The document suggests a path toward this treaty through new country coalitions, such as the Beyond Oil and Gas Alliance (BOGA), increased transparency via the Global Fossil Fuel Registry, and the potential creation of a Global Commission on Fossil Fuels.

The briefing advocates for a Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty to address the climate crisis by targeting the supply side of fossil fuels. It argues that existing frameworks like the Paris Agreement are insufficient because they focus on emissions rather than production. The proposed treaty would focus on three pillars: non-proliferation of new fuels, an equitable phase-out of existing production, and a global just transition. The document outlines necessary international cooperation, including new coalitions like the Beyond Oil and Gas Alliance (BOGA) and tools like the Global Fossil Fuel Register, while drawing parallels to successful treaties on nuclear weapons and landmines.

The Pacific Community (SPC), a regional Direct Access Entity, seeks USD 200,000 over 12 months to update its MEL systems to align with the GCF's Integrated Results Management Framework (IRMF). The project aims to replace manual, non-standardised reporting with a centralised MEL tool to improve data aggregation and portfolio-level management for its GCF projects in Pacific Small Island Developing States.

The document outlines a comprehensive framework of 101 sustainable finance policies categorized by three primary ambitions: speed, steer, and simplify. It provides specific recommendations across various government departments—including fiscal, trade, energy, and industrial policy—as well as for central banks and financial regulators. The guide emphasizes the need for science-based targets, the removal of fossil fuel subsidies, the use of green taxonomies, and the implementation of derisking mechanisms like blended finance to mobilize private capital for the 1.5°C transition.

The document outlines a 24-month project implemented by the Global Green Growth Institute (GGGI) to address technical and institutional barriers preventing Vanuatu from accessing direct climate finance. The project focuses on developing an NDA Project Development Handbook, a national accreditation strategy, and strengthening the capacity of the Ministry of Finance and Economic Management (MFEM) to meet GCF fiduciary, environmental, social, and gender standards. Additionally, it aims to develop two high-quality project concept notes and a pre-feasibility study to build a paradigm-shifting investment pipeline.