Search Climate Insights Directory

The report analyzes the role of Free Trade Agreements (FTAs), International Investment Agreements (IIAs), and Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) in the critical minerals supply chain. It highlights a fundamental tension: exporting countries seek to maximize domestic value addition and industrialization, while importing countries prioritize stable, affordable access to raw materials. Through case studies of Chile, Indonesia, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), the report demonstrates that while newer agreements are beginning to incorporate ESG standards and protect policy space for producers, old-generation IIAs still pose significant risks via Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanisms. The authors recommend that exporting countries reform outdated treaties to secure industrial policy space and that importing countries support value addition in producer nations to enhance overall supply chain resilience.

The report finds that BP's 2025 strategy shift prioritizes oil and gas expansion and shareholder returns over low-carbon energy. BP has retired its scope 3 net zero production target and increased its 2030 oil and gas production target to 2.3-2.5 mmboe per day, which is 57% above the IEA Net Zero Emissions (NZE) scenario. Investment in low-carbon energy has been sharply reduced from a planned US$4 billion per year to US$0.8 billion per year for 2025-2027. Additionally, BP is expanding its LNG capacity and gas power plants, while abandoning previous targets for installed renewable power capacities by 2030.

The document identifies significant gaps in the implementation of procedural rights necessary to uphold the right to a healthy environment (RtHE) in Southeast Asia. It highlights how ambiguous disclosure requirements, lack of enforcement in environmental impact assessments (EIAs), and resource-constrained judicial bodies hinder environmental justice. The brief showcases emerging community-led assessments and judicial capacity-building efforts as potential solutions, while noting the ASEAN Declaration on the Right to a Safe, Clean, Healthy, and Sustainable Environment as a key regional entry point for improvement.

The document examines the interdependence of climate and biodiversity, arguing that current international policy regimes operate in silos. It identifies risks where climate mitigation (such as bioenergy monocultures or transition mineral mining) harms biodiversity, and opportunities where ecosystem restoration provides mutual benefits. The authors recommend establishing a formal work programme or technical expert group under the UNFCCC to coordinate with the CBD, improving the science-policy interface between the IPCC and IPBES, and addressing the double-counting of synergistic finance reported by OECD DAC members.

In 2024, global new coal capacity reached its lowest level in two decades at 44 GW, though China and India continued significant expansions. While the EU27 saw a fourfold increase in plant closures and the UK shut its last coal plant, Indonesia faces a contradictory trend: overall proposed capacity is down 90% since 2015, but 'captive' coal plants for industrial use are surging. Indonesia's transition is further complicated by conflicting government statements on a 2040 phase-out, the withdrawal of the US from the JETP leadership, and record coal production reaching 831 million tons in 2024.

In 2024, the world commissioned the lowest amount of new coal power capacity in twenty years (44 GW), yet the global coal fleet still grew by 18.8 GW because additions exceeded retirements. The report highlights a stark divergence: while the UK became coal-free and EU27 retirements quadrupled, China saw its highest construction starts since 2015 (94 GW) and India recorded its highest year for new proposals (38.4 GW). Together, China and India accounted for 92% of all newly proposed coal capacity in 2024. In the OECD, proposals have plummeted from 142 in 2015 to five today, though annual retirements must more than triple to 70 GW to meet 1.5°C pathways. The report also notes the rise of 'captive' coal plants in Indonesia and the promotion of ammonia co-firing in Japan and South Korea as strategies to prolong coal use.

The study identifies a significant gap between the theoretical potential of individual behavior shifts to reduce emissions and the actual results achieved through behavioral interventions. While comprehensive behavioral changes could theoretically offset the average global citizen's per capita emissions, real-world interventions typically achieve only 10% of that potential. The authors identify four 'Priority Shifts'—reducing gas-powered vehicle use, decreasing air travel, lowering residential fossil fuel consumption through structural changes, and reducing animal product consumption—as the most impactful actions. Conversely, 'Supplementary Shifts' like composting have minimal impact. The research highlights a geographic imbalance, with a surplus of studies in the US and EU and a deficit in high-emitting nations like China, India, Brazil, and Indonesia. The most effective behavioral tools for driving change are choice architecture and commitment devices, while information-based approaches are the least effective.

The report finds that human-caused climate change significantly increased extreme heat and health risks globally from December 2024 to February 2025. At least 1.8 billion people experienced temperatures at least twice as likely due to climate change every day of the period, with exposure peaking at 3 billion people on February 28, 2025. Africa was particularly affected, with 293 million people experiencing 30 or more 'risky heat days' added by climate change. The analysis also highlights that 110 out of 220 analyzed countries and 287 out of 940 cities saw the average person experience strong climate influence for at least one-third of the season.

The report identifies that approximately 30% of global upstream coal and oil and gas infrastructure is located in regions where environmental conditions make satellite methane monitoring challenging. It details how factors such as persistent cloud cover in the tropics, low sun angles in high latitudes, and rugged terrain in mountainous regions limit data availability and accuracy. The authors argue for a multi-tiered observing system that combines satellite data with near-ground measurements to ensure comprehensive emissions monitoring across diverse geographies.

The report examines the 'geography factor' in satellite methane monitoring, identifying that approximately 30% of global coal, oil, and gas infrastructure is located in regions where environmental conditions hinder data collection. It details how factors like persistent tropical cloud cover, low winter sunlight in high latitudes, and mountainous terrain create 'difficult' observation zones. The authors argue for a multi-tiered observation system that integrates satellites with aircraft, drones, and ground-based sensors to overcome these geographic limitations and support the Global Methane Pledge's goal of reducing emissions by 30% by 2030.

The report analyzes the impact of environmental conditions on satellite methane detection, finding that approximately 30% of global upstream coal, oil, and gas infrastructure is located in regions where monitoring is difficult. It identifies key challenges such as persistent cloud cover in the tropics, low solar elevation in high latitudes, and rugged terrain in mountainous regions. The authors argue for a 'tiered observation system' that combines satellite data with local measurements (drones, aircraft, ground stations) to overcome these geographic limitations and support the Global Methane Pledge's goal of reducing emissions by 30% by 2030.

The report identifies environmental factors that hinder satellite methane detection, estimating that 30% of upstream coal and 29% of onshore oil and gas production occur in challenging-to-monitor regions. It highlights specific regional difficulties, such as persistent cloud cover in Indonesia and low winter sunlight in Russia and Canada, and advocates for a multi-tiered observing system combining satellites with near-ground measurements.

The document examines the tension between mineral-exporting and importing nations, noting that traditional trade and investment agreements often prioritize importer access over exporter development. It highlights the limitations of current Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) and voluntary ESG provisions, recommending that exporting countries reform 'old-generation' investment agreements and that importing countries support local value addition to build more resilient and responsible supply chains.

The statement argues that large-scale forest biomass energy is not carbon neutral and actively harms the climate, biodiversity, and human rights. It claims that current carbon accounting erroneously labels biomass as zero-emission, which masks the actual greenhouse gas releases and encourages deforestation. The document further asserts that biomass energy extends the lifespan of coal plants and diverts investment from truly low-emission renewables like wind and solar. It calls on governments and financial institutions to stop the expansion of the biomass industry and eliminate related subsidies in favor of forest restoration.

The International Institute for Sustainable Development calls for the inclusion of natural resource taxation in the FfD4 outcome document, noting that the current zero draft overlooks this critical revenue source. The author highlights that resource rents are vital for many lower- and middle-income countries but are often undermined by tax avoidance and weak governance. The statement proposes specific amendments to the FfD4 draft to ensure fair fiscal terms and better benefit-sharing, particularly regarding critical energy transition minerals.

The 2030 Global Forest Vision provides a framework for governments to accelerate progress toward 2030 forest goals through actions in national planning, trade, finance, land rights, and governance. It emphasizes the need for integrated climate and biodiversity plans, the scaling of finance via mechanisms like the Tropical Forest Finance Facility (TFFF) and REDD+, and the recognition of Indigenous and local community land rights. The report also calls for financial regulators to address forest-related risks, the repurposing of harmful agricultural subsidies, and the restructuring of sovereign debt to value natural capital.

Global Witness reports that 92% of surveyed land and environmental defenders have suffered online attacks, with Meta-owned platforms (Facebook, WhatsApp, Instagram) being the most frequent sites of abuse. These digital attacks often precede or contribute to real-world violence, including physical assaults and criminalization. The report argues that profit-driven algorithms and inadequate moderation resources facilitate this harassment, particularly targeting women through sexualized threats and defenders in the Global South through political criminalization.

Global Witness conducted a global survey of 204 land and environmental defenders, finding that 92% have experienced online abuse or harassment. The report highlights a strong link between online attacks—such as doxxing and cyberattacks—and offline harms, including physical violence and criminalisation. Meta's platforms (Facebook, WhatsApp, and Instagram) are identified as the most common sites of abuse. The report argues that profit-driven business models, polarising algorithms, and inadequate content moderation resourcing exacerbate these threats, creating a chilling effect on climate activism.

The report introduces an Excel-based model designed to quantify the financial and economic viability of nature-based solutions (NBI), such as reforestation and mangrove restoration, to enhance road resilience against climate-induced hazards like floods and landslides in Indonesia. Moving beyond traditional CBAs, the model incorporates 'non-road benefits'—including socio-economic externalities like mental health, market access for crops and livestock, and air pollution—to provide a holistic view of investment value. The model was piloted in two distinct locations: Pekanbaru (an urban-rural connection) and West Kalimantan (a rural area). Results demonstrate that while conventional CBAs focusing only on road-related costs often show that costs outweigh benefits, the inclusion of non-road benefits makes these investments economically viable in all tested scenarios. For instance, in the Pekanbaru base case, the benefit-to-cost ratio (BCR) rose to 11.45 when non-road benefits were included.

The document defines a climate change adaptation investment plan (CCAIP) as a detailed set of investment-ready priority activities linked to specific financial sources. It outlines a structured process for developing these plans—including risk assessment, bundling activities into 'packages', and economic appraisal—to bridge the global adaptation finance gap. The briefing distinguishes CCAIPs from broader NAP financing strategies by their narrower scope, higher granularity, and focus on immediate implementation. It identifies key enabling factors such as political leadership (particularly from ministries of finance), institutional arrangements, and the integration of gender equality and social inclusion (GESI). The text also details various domestic and international funding sources and financial instruments, such as green bonds, blended finance, and debt-for-climate swaps, to support these investments.