Search Climate Insights Directory

The report examines China's green finance landscape, identifying a significant gap between current investment levels and the estimated USD 1.4 trillion annual investment needed over the next decade to meet 2015 climate and environmental targets. While green credit and bonds saw success during the 13th Five-Year Plan, finance remains heavily dominated by the public sector, with at least 51% of total green finance coming from public sources, primarily Central State Owned Enterprises and state-owned banks. The document highlights barriers for private capital, such as high 'search costs' and limited access to financing channels, and notes that half of the USD 292 billion in energy-related investments to Belt and Road Initiative countries between 2013 and 2019 went to fossil fuels. It recommends increasing the ambition of green standards, improving project pipeline visibility for private actors, and introducing mandatory exclusion lists for high-emission sectors.

The document assesses China's transition toward a comprehensive 'one-permit' governance system for stationary pollution sources, analyzing the legal framework, implementation challenges at the local level, and the role of the Ministry of Ecology and Environment (MEE). It highlights gaps in the current system, such as the exclusion of noise and solid waste from the primary permitting regime and a lack of specific legal liabilities for permit violations. The report compares China's approach with the EU's Industrial Emissions Directive (IED), emphasizing the use of Best Available Techniques (BAT) and risk-based inspection strategies to improve environmental quality.

The document analyzes China's heavy reliance on fossil fuels, particularly coal, and the fiscal implications of this dependence. It details the structure of government revenues from fossil fuels, the influence of state-owned enterprises, and the prevalence of subsidies. While China has implemented policies to reduce coal overcapacity and peak emissions by 2030, it continues to provide significant subsidies and finance fossil fuel projects internationally through the Belt and Road Initiative.

The report exposes the destructive nature of irresponsible rayon production, detailing water and air pollution, worker fatalities, and severe health issues in Asia. It identifies a direct link between these polluting factories—operated by conglomerates like Aditya Birla and Lenzing—and major global brands such as H&M, Zara, and ASOS. The document argues that while rayon is often marketed as a 'green' alternative, its current chemical-intensive production is unsustainable, and calls for brands to use their purchasing power to force a transition to closed-loop, non-toxic manufacturing systems.

The report exposes severe pollution from viscose production in Asia, where manufacturers dump untreated wastewater and emit toxic gases, impacting local health and ecosystems. It identifies direct sourcing links between these polluting sites and major brands like H&M and Zara, arguing that the 'green' image of viscose is misleading due to the use of hazardous chemicals like carbon disulphide. The authors call for a transition to closed-loop production systems and mandatory supply chain due diligence.

The report details how the viscose industry in China, India, and Indonesia causes severe water and air pollution, leading to health crises like cancer and birth deformities in local communities. It identifies a lack of transparency in fashion supply chains and argues that a small group of dominant producers, pressured by major brands, could rapidly transition the industry toward closed-loop, non-toxic production systems.

The report utilizes the "window of opportunity" framework—examining context, champions, concerns, and complementary policies—to analyze coal phase-outs in California, Denmark, France, and Beijing. It highlights how resource endowment, international climate commitments, and public health concerns drive reform. For Beijing, the report details the closure of coal mines and power plants, the role of central and local government coordination, and the impact of high-profile events like the Olympics and APEC summit in accelerating the transition. It concludes that successful nationwide phase-out in China requires viable energy alternatives, social protection for workers, and high-level political leadership supported by grassroots demand.

The report identifies 18 subsidies to coal extraction in China for the 2013–2015 period, quantifying 11 of them. For 2013, quantifiable subsidies (excluding credit support) totaled CNY 35.7 billion (USD 5.8 billion). The most significant quantified measures include temporary tax and fee relief from provincial and local governments (USD 1.65 billion), state budget investment in fixed assets (USD 1.27 billion), and compensations for mine shutdowns under phase-out plans (USD 1.03 billion). Credit support is identified as a potentially massive but uncertain subsidy, estimated between CNY 3.5 billion and 35.7 billion annually depending on the scenario. The report argues that these subsidies, particularly those driving long-term investment, lock in coal use and act as barriers to renewable energy deployment.

This case study examines the integration of climate change adaptation into China's Comprehensive Agricultural Development (CAD) program, specifically through the World Bank-financed Irrigated Agriculture Intensification Loan III Project (IAIL3) and a subsequent Global Environmental Facility (GEF) grant. Focused on the 3H Plain, the initiative aimed to address water scarcity and agricultural vulnerability by implementing drought-resistant crop varieties, water-harvesting infrastructure, and capacity-building for farmers, including rural women.