Search Climate Insights Directory

The report finds that the 60 largest global banks provided $3.8 trillion in fossil fuel financing from 2016 to 2020. Despite a 9% drop in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, financing levels remained higher than in 2016. JPMorgan Chase is identified as the world's worst fossil fuel banker, with $317 billion provided over the five-year period. The analysis highlights a significant gap between banks' 'net zero by 2050' pledges and their continued funding of fossil fuel expansion, particularly in sectors like LNG, offshore oil and gas, and coal. The report also details the human rights and environmental impacts of specific projects, such as the East African Crude Oil Pipeline and the Line 3 pipeline, and argues that current bank policies are insufficient to align with the 1.5C goal of the Paris Agreement.

The We Mean Business coalition asserts that ending coal dependence is critical for limiting global warming and achieving 2030 and 2050 climate targets. It advocates for a full phase-out of coal power in advanced economies by 2030 and globally by 2040, noting that renewables now outcompete new coal virtually everywhere. The text highlights a shift in the private sector, with major insurers and mining companies divesting from coal, and emphasizes that a transition to clean power would improve public health and create more jobs than traditional economic stimulus measures.

The 'Climate and Society Game' is a training tool that uses role-play to help participants understand the intersection of social identity and climate risk. Set in the fictional Indian neighbourhood of Krishna Nagar, the game asks participants to adopt character cards—representing diverse identities such as a transgender woman, an elderly grandmother, and a pastoralist—to simulate consultations on coastal flooding and resilience planning. The exercise aims to highlight barriers to participation and foster more equitable climate action.

Reclaim Finance assesses the March 2021 coal exclusion policy of UBS Asset Management, finding it insufficient due to the omission of the coal power sector and the exclusion of passively managed assets. The analysis highlights that UBS AM continues to support coal developers and companies below a 30% revenue threshold, such as Glencore and Adani, and lacks a defined global coal phase-out strategy aligned with IPCC-based deadlines.

The report positions urban centers as critical drivers for climate leadership and economic recovery, specifically examining Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Mexico, and South Africa to propose pathways for inclusive and climate-resilient futures.

The authors contend that environmental degradation and climate change are fundamental drivers of food insecurity and conflict. They highlight how resource competition in regions like the Sahel and Yemen fuels violence and extremism, while pointing to natural farming successes in India as a model for resilience. The document recommends that international security institutions acknowledge climate security risks to effectively address stability and displacement.

The study examines the impact of clean cooking interventions on fuelwood sourcing in Kullu and Koppal, India, finding that the reduction of forest dependence varies by location and is influenced by demand, resource substitutability, and socio-economic factors.

The briefing highlights the vulnerability of India's power sector to climate-induced extreme weather, citing the Tapovan Vishnugad hydropower plant disaster. It argues that current infrastructure is insufficient for future needs and calls for a shift toward flexibility, decentralized renewables, and higher design standards for grid hardening to protect critical services and social resilience.

The document analyzes how gender norms, poverty, and social structures exacerbate the vulnerabilities of women and girls to heat stress and limit their access to cooling services. It highlights specific risks in healthcare, domestic labor, and agriculture, while calling for sex-disaggregated data and gender-transformative policies to achieve universal sustainable cooling.

The document establishes a two-component eligibility framework for hydropower certification: a Mitigation Component and an Adaptation & Resilience (A&R) Component. The Mitigation Component uses a 'predictive screen' based on power density to identify low-risk assets, while others must undergo a GHG assessment using the G-res tool or on-site studies to meet emissions intensity thresholds of 100g CO2e/kWh (pre-2020) or 50g CO2e/kWh (post-2020). The A&R Component requires assets to be assessed via the ESG Gap Analysis Tool, with strict limits on the number of 'significant gaps' allowed and a requirement for an Environmental and Social Action Plan (ESAP) to close those gaps within 24 months. Additionally, the criteria mandate Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) for indigenous peoples and public disclosure of compliance data.

The report presents survey data from March 2021 on U.S. registered voters' attitudes toward international climate action. It finds broad support for the U.S. reducing emissions regardless of other countries' actions, participation in the Paris Climate Agreement, and pressuring other nations to reduce carbon pollution. While there is strong consensus that developing and industrialized nations should do more to address global warming, support for providing financial and technical aid to developing countries for mitigation and adaptation is more divided along partisan lines.

The report presents survey data from March 2021 on U.S. registered voters' perspectives on international climate action. It finds broad support for the U.S. reducing emissions regardless of other nations' actions, participation in the Paris Climate Agreement, and pressuring other countries to reduce carbon pollution. While there is strong consensus that developing and industrialized nations should do more to address global warming, support for providing financial aid for mitigation and adaptation to developing countries is more divided along partisan lines.

The document critiques COVAX as a multi-stakeholder entity that marginalizes the World Health Organization (WHO) and replaces public health governance with a commercial banking model. It argues that COVAX is designed to protect the global pharmaceutical market and serve as a tool for geopolitical 'soft power' rather than ensuring equitable vaccine access. The author highlights that COVAX's funding mechanisms, dominated by a few wealthy nations and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, allow private interests to influence vaccine R&D and distribution, potentially risking the health and political autonomy of developing nations.

The document critiques COVAX as a multistakeholder group that functions more like a merchant bank than a health organization. It argues that COVAX marginalizes the World Health Organization (WHO) and the multilateral system, favoring the interests of pharmaceutical companies and wealthy donors. The author contends that COVAX's focus on a 20% vaccination target for 92 low- and middle-income countries is insufficient for herd immunity and risks turning vaccine access into a geopolitical tool for superpowers like China and Russia.

The document examines the systemic link between gender equality and sustainable development, asserting that discriminatory social norms and legal barriers hinder environmental and economic progress. It highlights the economic costs of gender inequality, the historical evolution of UN gender policies, and the specific benefits of women's leadership in climate-smart agriculture, renewable energy, and natural resource governance. The briefing concludes with recommendations for gender-responsive policies, increased funding for women-led organizations, and ensuring women's control over productive resources to meet the 2030 Agenda.

The policy brief examines the critical link between environmental degradation and human health, framing the COVID-19 pandemic as a consequence of neglecting these interconnections. It argues that a 'green recovery' requires breaking down policy silos between health and environment ministries and integrating health co-benefits into climate and biodiversity finance. The document highlights the high economic and human costs of pollution, zoonotic diseases, and inefficient food systems, proposing a transdisciplinary 'planetary health' framework to guide sustainable development and safeguard against future global health crises.

The Green Central Banking Scorecard evaluates G20 monetary and prudential authorities across four categories: Research and Advocacy, Monetary Policy, Financial Policy, and Leading by Example. The findings reveal a significant gap between rhetoric and action, with most institutions scoring high in research but failing to implement high-impact policies that restrict financial flows to fossil fuels. China, Brazil, and France are the top-ranked countries, though no G20 institution has implemented a 'high impact' policy as defined by the report's criteria.

The report argues that most non-light-water reactors (NLWRs) do not provide significant enough improvements over light-water reactors (LWRs) to justify their associated safety, security, and proliferation risks. It specifically evaluates sodium-cooled fast reactors (SFRs), high-temperature gas-cooled reactors (HTGRs), and molten salt reactors (MSRs), finding that claims regarding 'burning' nuclear waste are oversimplified and that the timelines for commercialization are often unrealistic. The author recommends that the US Department of Energy (DOE) prioritize improving existing LWR technology over pursuing immature NLWR designs.

The document analyzes the evolution of the public sphere from physical spaces to digital networks, arguing that while technology offers potential for inclusion, it has also enabled state and corporate control, misinformation, and the marginalization of vulnerable groups. It highlights the importance of 'public interest media' and 'communicative action' to foster democratic accountability. Through case studies in India, Latin America, Palestine, and Ecuador, the text illustrates how marginalized communities use alternative media—such as feminist journalism in India (Khabar Lahariya) and community radio in Ecuador (CORAPE)—to resist hegemony and reclaim their right to communicate. It concludes by advocating for regulatory frameworks that prioritize human rights and digital justice over market logic.

The document analyzes the private sector's engagement with sustainable development, moving from a history of disinformation and lobbying against regulation to a current landscape of sustainability pledges and impact investing. It argues that while 'greening' existing systems is valuable, true sustainability requires a shift toward 'regenerative equity' through Sustainability-Oriented Hybrid Organizations (SOHOs) that prioritize people and nature over profit-driven growth.