Search Climate Insights Directory

The IAI and CLARA have entered into a non-binding agreement to promote regional scientific capacities through the use of advanced networks, focusing on data management, open publications, and technological infrastructure for global change research in Latin America.

The report argues that the 'Sustainable Agriculture Initiative' (SAI), 'New Vision for Agriculture' (NVA), and 'Food and Land Use Coalition' (FOLU) promote a version of 'junk agroecology' (agroecología chatarra). This approach selectively adopts agroecological techniques to mitigate environmental damage while preserving the industrial, profit-driven corporate model. The authors contrast this with a transformative agroecology rooted in food sovereignty and social justice, which requires shifting power from corporations to small-scale producers.

The report argues that big agrifood capital is developing 'junk agroecology'—a selective appropriation of agroecological techniques integrated into a productivist, market-driven framework. Through an analysis of three major initiatives—the Sustainable Agriculture Initiative (SAI), the New Vision for Agriculture (NVA), and the Food and Land Use Economy Coalition (FOLU)—the authors demonstrate how corporations use 'sustainable intensification' to greenwash the industrial food system. These initiatives prioritize technological determinism (such as gene editing and big data), the integration of smallholders into global value chains, and multi-stakeholder governance models that shift power from public institutions to private entities. The report concludes that a true agroecological transition requires participatory public policies rooted in food sovereignty and social justice, rather than corporate-led reforms.

The report argues that multinational corporations are promoting a 'fake agroecology' (agroécologie bidon) through initiatives like the Sustainable Agriculture Initiative (SAI), the New Vision for Agriculture (NVA), and the Food and Land Use Coalition (FOLU). These initiatives are characterized as 'sustainable intensification' rather than true agroecology, as they prioritize technological productivism, market-driven value chains, and public-private governance over social justice and structural transformation. The authors contend that this approach allows industrial giants to 'greenwash' their image while maintaining the existing power structures of the global food system.

The report details how the Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) integrates climate change into its monitoring of the International Convention on the Rights of the Child (ICRC). It analyzes the CRC's use of General Comments, State reporting procedures, and the communications procedure to hold States accountable for protecting children from climate harms. Key findings highlight a growing trend of climate-related recommendations, particularly for Small Island Developing States (SIDS) and Least Developed Countries (LDCs), and a strong emphasis on children's procedural rights to participation and education. The document also notes a landmark 2019 Joint Statement by five human rights treaty bodies asserting that failure to prevent foreseeable climate-related human rights harm could constitute a violation of State obligations.

The report finds that donors must double their current annual contributions to food security, adding 14 billion USD per year, while low- and middle-income countries must provide an additional 19 billion USD annually through taxes. These combined investments of 33 billion USD per year would prevent 490 million people from hunger and double the incomes of 545 million smallholders. The analysis emphasizes that Africa has the highest need for these funds and recommends a balanced investment strategy across three categories: enabling inclusion, on-farm productivity, and post-harvest food systems.

The report finds that achieving Sustainable Development Goal 2 (Zero Hunger) targets by 2030 requires an additional 33 billion USD per year in public spending. This total is split between an additional 14 billion USD from international donors and 19 billion USD from low- and middle-income countries through increased taxation. These investments, focused heavily on Africa, would prevent 490 million people from suffering from hunger and double the incomes of 545 million small-scale producers while adhering to Paris Agreement climate commitments. The proposed funding is distributed across three intervention categories: empowering the excluded, on-farm productivity, and food movement.

The report finds that donors must provide an additional USD 14 billion per year, and low- and middle-income countries must provide USD 19 billion per year, to achieve SDG 2 targets by 2030 while respecting climate commitments. This investment would prevent 490 million people from experiencing hunger and double the incomes of 545 million small-scale producers. The authors emphasize that Africa has the greatest need for these resources and that a balanced portfolio of interventions—spanning social protection, on-farm productivity, and market access—is essential for success.

The analysis of 19 NAPs reveals that while all reviewed documents integrate ecosystem considerations and vulnerabilities, the explicit link between ecosystem services and societal adaptation benefits remains generic. Latin American countries show the strongest integration of EbA and links to biodiversity strategies. Key gaps include limited monitoring of outcomes, insufficient private sector engagement, and under-representation of urban EbA and hybrid grey/green infrastructure. The report suggests that NAPs should move beyond business-as-usual conservation to explicitly address climate hazards and target specific vulnerable groups.

The analysis of 19 National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) reveals that while most countries recognize ecosystem vulnerability and include some EbA measures, these are often generic and lack explicit links to specific climate risks or measurable outcomes. Latin American countries show the strongest integration of EbA and biodiversity strategies. Significant gaps exist in urban EbA, private sector involvement, and the identification of financial resources, suggesting a need for more SMART objectives and intersectoral integration to enhance human and ecological resilience.

The report identifies 24 'deforestation fronts' across Latin America, sub-Saharan Africa, Southeast Asia, and Oceania where over 43 million hectares of forest were lost between 2004 and 2017. It argues that while commercial agriculture, tree plantations, and extractive activities are primary drivers, responses must be tailored to local contexts and integrated across area-based and sector-specific approaches to be effective.

The report analyzes how proposed WTO rules to prohibit subsidies for illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing, overcapacity, and overfishing would affect shrimp fisheries in Latin America. It highlights that fuel subsidies are the most common form of support, primarily benefiting the industrial sector. The document argues that while subsidy reform is crucial for ecological sustainability and economic efficiency, it must be accompanied by broader fisheries management policies and gradual implementation to protect vulnerable communities.

The document examines the challenges of measuring climate change adaptation, noting that most existing frameworks are designed for project-level monitoring rather than national or global assessment. It argues against a 'one-size-fits-all' metric, suggesting instead that metrics be tailored to specific purposes—such as identifying needs, tracking implementation, or assessing effectiveness. The paper highlights evolving practices in agriculture, urban planning (using the City of Melbourne as a case study), and multilateral development bank (MDB) financing, while recommending the integration of qualitative data, new technologies like earth observation, and alignment with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to improve the comparability and transparency of adaptation tracking.

The report finds that current efforts by companies and governments are insufficient to meet the 2020 goal of eliminating deforestation from agricultural supply chains. While some progress has been made in palm oil and timber, commitments for soy and cattle remain low, and reporting on implementation is often inadequate and self-reported. The document highlights a shift toward jurisdictional approaches in producer countries and the introduction of demand-side regulations in consumer regions like the EU and California.

The report examines the drivers of basic-needs deforestation, such as subsistence farming and woodfuel collection, and evaluates interventions like formalization, clean cooking technology, and REDD+ funding. It highlights the difficulty of measuring progress due to data gaps and emphasizes that successful interventions require social safeguards and good governance to protect livelihoods while reducing forest loss.

The assessment finds that green finance for forests is severely insufficient, totaling under USD 22 billion since 2010, and represents only 1.5% of total climate mitigation commitments from developed countries and multilateral institutions. While some domestic initiatives and Green Climate Fund projects show progress, private sector investment remains dominated by traditional 'grey finance' with few mandatory safeguards to prevent deforestation in commodity supply chains.

The document analyzes 44 resilience programs to determine which design elements contribute to success in helping vulnerable populations persist, adapt, and transform in the face of shocks. Key findings highlight the importance of community-led vulnerability assessments, the role of savings as a critical resilience buffer, and the necessity of integrating climate risk interventions into local governance and market systems.

The paper examines the risks climate change poses to rural livelihoods in Asia, Africa, and Central America, noting that current adaptation efforts are insufficient. It advocates for a systemic transformation involving policy reform, digital agriculture, innovative finance, and the scaling of climate-resilient technologies. The authors propose five distinct pathways for adaptation—ranging from market integration and farming system shifts to exiting agriculture—tailored to different household types such as those 'stepping up', 'stepping out', 'hanging in', or those who are 'food insecure'.

The Sustainable Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMA) Coffee of Honduras programme seeks to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and increase the resilience of 4,000 small coffee producers and 80 coffee mills. With a total indicative cost of USD 39,623,400, the initiative focuses on introducing agroforestry systems, improving fertilizer use, and implementing solar technologies for coffee drying. The programme proposes a dual financial mechanism consisting of a non-reimbursable Coffee Fund and a reimbursable Coffee Credit Line, managed by the Central American Bank for Economic Integration (CABEI). Key goals include a mitigation impact of 320 GgCO2e by 2023 and the establishment of a Measurement, Reporting and Verification (MRV) system to track emissions reductions.

The 48th meeting of the Executive Council (EC-48) of the Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research took place on 6 June 2019 in Brasilia, Brazil, held in conjunction with the 27th meeting of the Conference of the Parties (CoP-27).