Search Climate Insights Directory

The document serves as a supplement to the UNFCCC Technical Guidelines for the NAP process, arguing that private sector involvement is essential for funding, implementation, and the overall sustainability of climate adaptation. It outlines a four-element framework—preparatory work, preparatory phase, implementation strategies, and monitoring/review—to integrate private companies and financiers into national strategies. The toolkit emphasizes the 'business case' for adaptation, highlighting risk management and new market opportunities as primary drivers for private sector participation, while stressing the need for gender-responsive approaches to ensure inclusive resilience.

The report examines the controlled environment agriculture (CEA) industry, comparing conventional farming with hydroponic and aquaponic systems in greenhouse and vertical formats. A life cycle analysis (LCA) reveals that while conventional agriculture currently has the lowest overall environmental impact, CEA excels in land and water efficiency. The document identifies energy and labor as primary cost hurdles but highlights innovations in LED lighting, AI, and renewable energy as potential solutions. It specifically evaluates St. Louis as a viable location for a pilot project due to its market demand, available stranded assets like caves and brownfields, and supportive local policies.

A joint letter from various environmental and climate organizations calling on global insurance associations to ensure COVID-19 stimulus packages support a low-carbon transition rather than fossil fuel industries, while urging the insurance sector to end coverage for coal and oil and gas expansion.

The document advocates for the issuance of common European debt to fund a sustainable recovery from the Covid-19 crisis. It proposes a 'Green Solidarity Fund' that would exclude fossil fuel activities and prioritize environmental protection and social equity. The author argues that a green recovery is only possible if it includes a rapid phase-out of coal, oil, and gas to meet Paris Agreement goals, suggesting that the debt could be reimbursed through a carbon frontier tax or financial transaction taxes.

The statement argues that the COVID-19 pandemic has created an urgent need for governments to focus all resources on public health, specifically the procurement of medical supplies, vaccines, and medicines. It calls for the immediate suspension of trade and investment negotiations at the WTO, bilateral, and regional levels, asserting that such activities divert critical resources and personnel. The authors highlight that intellectual property rules under the WTO's TRIPS agreement and free trade agreements may obstruct the affordability and accessibility of life-saving supplies. The document demands the removal of all trade barriers and unilateral sanctions that hinder medical procurement and urges a fundamental rethink of trade rules that encourage monopolies and limit healthcare access.

Friends of the Earth International and a broad coalition of global endorsers call for an immediate cessation of trade and investment treaty negotiations. They argue that governments, particularly in developing and least developed countries, lack the resources to engage in these negotiations while managing the COVID-19 health crisis. The statement demands that trade negotiators focus exclusively on removing obstacles, such as intellectual property rules and unilateral sanctions, that hinder access to affordable vaccines, medicines, and diagnostics.

The document highlights the shared origins of the Covid-19 pandemic and climate risks, both stemming from the degradation of the natural environment. It argues that traditional financial risk models cannot capture future climate risks and that delaying climate action while addressing the pandemic would be a 'double erreur'. The text advocates for green recovery plans, the integration of ESG criteria into central bank portfolios, and the exclusion of fossil fuels—specifically coal and unconventional oil and gas—from monetary and prudential crisis responses.

The report finds that 2019 EU ETS emissions fell by 7.8% to 1612 million tonnes of CO2. While coal power emissions have dropped 43% since 2013, the power sector still accounts for 52% of total ETS emissions. Notably, coal-fired blast furnaces in the steel sector have become the largest emitters in seven countries, including the UK, France, and Spain.

The author contends that the military-industrial complex operates with a level of impunity that allows it to bypass environmental regulations and the polluter-pays principle. While the military frames climate change as a 'threat multiplier' to justify budget increases, the document asserts that militarisation is fundamentally incompatible with a decarbonised economy. It calls for a 'manifesto for military degrowth,' including a moratorium on arms races and the suspension of energy-intensive 'force projection' to mitigate climatic disruption.

The document calls for financial institutions to stop supporting new metallurgical coal mines and to require steel companies to adopt decarbonization targets. It highlights that steel plants in several European countries were among the highest CO2 emitters in 2019 and suggests that hydrogen and electric arc furnaces powered by renewables are viable paths toward decarbonization.

A joint letter from several NGOs calling for the activation of the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) to support EU Member States during the Covid-19 crisis without imposing austerity measures, instead aligning recovery funds with the European Green Deal and climate objectives.

The author examines the EU's transition to renewable energy as a geopolitical shift that offers benefits like reduced import dependence and increased 'soft power', but introduces risks such as industrial rivalry with China and the US, and internal disparities between Western and Eastern Europe. The text argues that the EU currently lacks a clear technical vision for its future integrated energy system, which could lead to inefficient investments and vulnerability to external 'divide and conquer' tactics. It suggests that the EU must combine energy goals with industrial policy and infrastructure standards to maintain global competitiveness, while utilizing mechanisms like the Just Transition Fund to mitigate internal socio-economic frictions.

A coalition of organizations criticizes the French government's failure to strictly condition state aid on the non-payment of dividends, arguing that companies benefiting from public funds, such as partial unemployment schemes, should not privatize profits while socializing losses. The authors demand a mandatory suspension of dividends and bonuses to prioritize employee remuneration and investment in a more resilient, ecological economic model.

The report finds that global adaptation finance is dominated by public development finance, with a heavy concentration in water and wastewater management. While finance often aligns with the most vulnerable sectors in specific countries like Pakistan, Zambia, and Niger, significant funding gaps remain relative to Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) targets. The authors highlight critical data gaps in private sector and domestic public finance and recommend the use of new datasets from the Climate Bonds Initiative and CDP to improve tracking accuracy.

A group of over 75 South African economists and analysts argues that current government responses to the COVID-19 pandemic are insufficient in scale. They propose a comprehensive set of measures including income transfers, payment holidays, expanded emergency loans, and increased health system funding to protect vulnerable populations and sustain businesses during the crisis.

The document criticizes the European Central Bank (ECB) for implementing coronavirus relief measures that primarily benefit large, polluting companies and banks rather than small businesses and households. It highlights that quantitative easing and loan facilities lack criteria to target the most vulnerable and fail to account for carbon impacts or climate risks in collateral. Additionally, the author argues that the relaxation of prudential rules and the postponement of European stress tests weaken financial risk prevention and increase the systemic risk posed by carbon assets.

Since 2015, the Law and Justice (PiS) party has led Poland toward Euroscepticism and the erosion of the rule of law. The author argues that PiS's worldview creates critical contradictions: while seeking to reduce dependence on Russian gas and oil, the government has increased imports of cheaper Russian coal and lacks a strategic plan for renewable energy, leading to a rise in carbon emissions. Simultaneously, while opening the labor market to Ukrainian workers for economic reasons, PiS has overseen a deterioration in bilateral relations with Ukraine and tightened citizenship laws, potentially priming the country for a nationalistic backlash.

Reclaim Finance argues that the ECB's emergency measures to combat the coronavirus crisis—specifically quantitative easing, targeted loans, and the easing of prudential rules—primarily benefit large, polluting companies and banks. The organization contends that these measures lack mechanisms to support small businesses and households and fail to account for carbon risks in collateral or capital requirements, thereby increasing the risk of a systemic financial crisis linked to climate change.

The document argues that central banks, particularly the European Central Bank (ECB), are failing to address the climate emergency despite their power to influence the financing of polluting versus green activities. It claims the ECB actively supports polluters through collateral frameworks and Quantitative Easing, which benefit fossil fuel and coal companies. While noting a growing awareness within the NGFS and the Banque de France, the text demands an immediate end to the financing of climate-destructive assets to ensure financial stability and meet European climate goals.

The analysis argues that the European Union has experienced a period of 'regulatory fatigue' and 'backsliding' in financial oversight since 2014. It highlights five specific failures: the abandonment of structural banking reforms to separate high-risk activities, the adoption of dysfunctional prudential rules (such as an inoperative 3% leverage ratio), the failure to effectively limit food speculation through high technical thresholds, the lack of supervision for the growing shadow banking system, and the 'resurrection' of risky securitisation practices. The author concludes that these failures, combined with the shift of risk to under-regulated entities and the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic, leave the EU ill-equipped to handle a new financial crisis.