Search Climate Insights Directory

The NAP Global Network supported Benin, Côte d’Ivoire, Ethiopia, Guinea-Conakry, Madagascar, and Togo in conducting gender analyses to ensure climate adaptation is gender-responsive. The analyses revealed that while legal frameworks for gender equality exist, they are rarely linked to climate policies, and women remain under-represented in decision-making for climate-vulnerable sectors. The document argues that context-specific gender analysis is essential to avoid exacerbating inequalities and to unlock women's potential as agents of change in adaptation.

The NAP Global Network supported Benin, Côte d'Ivoire, Ethiopia, Guinea-Conakry, Madagascar, and Togo in conducting gender analyses to ensure climate adaptation investments are equitable and sustainable. The process involved institutional, normative, and technical analyses to identify how gender dynamics influence climate vulnerability and adaptation capacity. Key findings highlight a gap between existing general gender policies and their application in climate planning, as well as significant gender disparities in education, decision-making, and sectoral roles. The document recommends a participatory, multi-expert approach to gender analysis and emphasizes the role of the Green Climate Fund (GCF) in incentivizing gender-responsive NAPs.

The document describes a framework for integrating gender analysis into National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) across six African nations, highlighting the need to move beyond binary views of women's vulnerability toward a nuanced understanding of gender dynamics. It identifies systemic gaps in institutional coordination and capacity, while providing technical evidence on how gender disparities in education, labor roles, and decision-making affect climate adaptation outcomes.

The report analyzes the legal frameworks of 22 IGF member countries, identifying systemic weaknesses in how ESIAs and related plans (ESMPs, closure plans, and RAPs) are used as decision-making tools. Key issues include ambiguity over the rights of exploration permit holders during the transition to exploitation, inadequate sequencing of document submission, and weak monitoring mechanisms. It argues that ESIAs should be capable of leading to project rejection and recommends the use of Strategic Environmental Assessments (SEAs) to identify sensitive areas before exploration permits are granted. The document also highlights the risk of international arbitration arising from these legal ambiguities.

The report analyzes the legal frameworks of 22 IGF member countries to identify systemic gaps in the implementation of Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIAs) in mining. Key issues include ambiguity over the rights of exploration permit holders to transition to exploitation, inadequate timing for submitting closure plans and financial guarantees, and a lack of coordination between mining and environmental authorities. The document argues for a shift toward using ESIAs as genuine decision-making tools that can lead to project rejection, the adoption of Strategic Environmental Assessments (SEAs) to identify sensitive zones, and the strengthening of community participation and independent monitoring to ensure sustainable mine closure.

The report analyzes 104 mining projects across 21 countries, finding that while incentives are more common in primary law than in contracts, African countries rely more heavily on contract-based incentives. Tax stabilization and corporate income tax (CIT) incentives are the most frequent, with stability periods averaging 20 years and tax holidays averaging nine years. The analysis notes a correlation between the increase in incentives and the commodity price crash of 2014–2016, while highlighting that cost-based incentives remain uncommon despite being better suited for mining investments.

The report analyzes tax incentives across 104 mining projects in 21 developing countries, finding that while legislation is the primary source of incentives, African countries rely more heavily on discretionary contracts. The most common incentives are fiscal stabilization clauses and corporate income tax breaks, both of which pose significant revenue risks. The study notes that the use of these incentives peaked in the late 1990s and again during the 2014-2016 commodity price crash, suggesting a correlation between low commodity prices and more generous tax terms.

The global cocoa market is projected to grow at a CAGR of 7.3% from 2019 to 2025, driven by demand in Western Europe, North America, and emerging Asian economies. While VSS-compliant cocoa grew significantly between 2008 and 2016, the sector faces long-term supply risks from ageing trees, climate change, and systemic poverty. The report highlights the potential for VSS expansion in LHDCs, particularly in Côte d’Ivoire, Nigeria, and Togo, to improve farmer livelihoods and environmental outcomes.

The NAP Global Network's 2018-2019 progress report outlines its efforts to enhance national adaptation planning in developing countries through peer learning, technical assistance, and donor coordination. Key achievements include supporting Fiji's first NAP launch, facilitating gender-responsive planning in Africa, and promoting private sector engagement in Ghana, Saint Lucia, and Vietnam. The Network provided technical support to 33 countries this year and continues to focus on aligning NAPs with Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to foster climate-resilient development.

The 2019 Francophone Forum on the NAP process brought together representatives from nine countries to share best practices on integrating the private sector and gender dimensions into climate adaptation and improving direct access to international climate finance. Key outcomes include the identification of barriers to private sector engagement, such as low awareness and lack of incentive frameworks, and gender-related challenges, including cultural barriers and a lack of sex-disaggregated data. The forum also detailed the accreditation processes for the Green Climate Fund (GCF) and the Adaptation Fund (AF), highlighting the importance of scientific vulnerability studies and strong governance for successful funding applications.

The document examines the shift in Africa's debt structure toward non-concessional and domestic loans, identifying drivers such as commodity price shocks and fiscal deficits. It assesses the debt-carrying capacity of various African nations using IMF and World Bank frameworks, noting that several countries are in debt distress or at high risk. The briefing details current coping mechanisms, including the issuance of long-term Eurobonds and novel financial products, and recommends enhancing domestic revenue mobilization, economic diversification, and the establishment of autonomous debt management offices.

At its 21st meeting in October 2018, the GCF Board approved 19 new projects and programmes totaling USD 1.04 billion in GCF investment to support over USD 4 billion in climate action across more than 50 countries. The Board also accredited 16 new entities, appointed the World Bank as the Fund's Trustee, and launched the process for the GCF's first formal replenishment to be concluded by October 2019. Governance updates included the establishment of a Performance Oversight Committee and the appointment of Javier Manzanares as Executive Director ad interim.

The report argues that inclusivity is vital for sustaining peace and must be integrated into every stage of the peace continuum, from mediation to state-building. Using Liberia and South Sudan as case studies, it contrasts Liberia's relatively successful inclusive frameworks and unified regional support from ECOWAS with South Sudan's elite-driven processes and fragmented regional response from IGAD. The document highlights that technical exercises in security sector reform (SSR) and disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration (DDR) often fail if they do not address underlying political power structures and incentives for spoilers. It concludes with recommendations for the UN to prioritise joint analysis, community consultation, and support for institutionalised regional governance frameworks to ensure sustainable, inclusive peace.

The policy brief contends that climate risks are often 'borderless' and that treating adaptation as a local problem hinders global ambition. It advocates for a shared terminology and a transboundary framing of risk—recognizing how impacts in one country create risks in others via trade, migration, and ecosystems—to better utilize the Paris Agreement's mechanisms, such as the global stocktake and National Adaptation Plans, for collective resilience.

The report examines how civil society organizations (CSOs) engage with the Open Government Partnership (OGP), a multi-stakeholder initiative (MSI) designed to increase government transparency and civic participation. Through case studies of Georgia, South Africa, and Indonesia, the authors analyze the gap between the OGP's 'co-creation' aspirations and the reality of government dominance. Georgia is presented as a success story where a permanent multi-stakeholder forum fostered genuine partnership, while South Africa is characterized by tokenism and a lack of political will. Indonesia's experience is described as mixed, with active CSOs facing logistical hurdles and a restrictive political environment. The report concludes that while MSIs can open spaces for dialogue, their success depends on political commitment, institutional structures like permanent forums, and the ability of CSOs to form strategic coalitions.

The briefing argues that climate adaptation is currently undervalued and incorrectly viewed as a local problem, which hinders global ambition. It proposes a 'transboundary' approach to climate risk, recognizing that impacts in one country create risks in others through trade, biophysical flows, people, and finance. The authors review progress from COP23 and suggest that the Paris Agreement's mechanisms—such as the global stocktake and National Adaptation Plans—should be operationalized to track and manage these cross-border risks to avoid 'climate change contagion' in the global economy.

The workshop, organized by the IGF in partnership with the UNDP and OECD, focused on the 'IGF Guide for Governments: Managing Artisanal and Small-Scale Mining'. It combined technical training on strategy development—covering startup, elaboration, and implementation phases—with field visits to mining sites in Eséka and Pouma, Cameroon. Participants identified common regional challenges, including formalization, child labor, environmental degradation, and lack of institutional coordination, while sharing case studies from Cameroon, Guinea, Mauritania, and Morocco.

The document analyzes the Simandou iron ore project in Guinea, where the government sought to leverage mining infrastructure to create 'horizontal linkages' for broader economic development via the Southern Guinea Growth Corridor (SGGC). While the project promised to double Guinea's GDP through a 650km railway and deep-water port, it faced immense capital costs (estimated over USD 15 billion) and a more economical alternative route through Liberia. The case highlights the tension between national development goals and project financial feasibility, noting that requiring multipurpose infrastructure can lower investment returns and increase risk.

The NAP Global Network provided technical assistance to over 30 countries between November 2017 and November 2018, focusing on seven key themes including financing, gender, and monitoring and evaluation. The Network facilitated peer learning through Targeted Topics Forums and South-South exchanges, and worked to align bilateral donor support with national priorities, notably through a Donor Symposium in Barbados.

The document analyzes the divergent priorities between the EU, which focuses on stemming irregular migration and border control, and African nations, which prioritize development, employment, and legal mobility. It critiques the EU Emergency Trust Fund for Africa (EUTF) for using aid conditionality to secure readmission agreements and argues that a lack of AU consensus, combined with restrictive bilateral agreements, hinders a coherent continental approach to migration.