Search Climate Insights Directory

The author argues that international trade policy is shifting from a primary focus on trade liberalization and economic efficiency toward a 'multipurpose' approach. This new framework integrates broader objectives—including climate action, supply chain resilience, and national security—directly into trade policy rather than treating them as externalities. The document outlines domestic challenges, such as balancing incommensurable goals and breaking down departmental silos, and international challenges, including the increasing tension between national policy imperatives and World Trade Organization (WTO) rules. It concludes that while this shift addresses the perceived failures of globalization, it risks fragmenting international cooperation and increasing the divide between developed and developing nations.

The report argues that current global economic responses to COVID-19, the war in Ukraine, and the climate crisis have been too focused on short-term stabilisation and stimulus rather than long-term structural reform. It highlights that only 18% of the USD 14.6tn allocated to COVID-19 recovery in 2020 was green spending, and that such investments have been concentrated in wealthier nations and focused primarily on decarbonisation. The authors advocate for a 'systems mind-set' that integrates circular economy principles, nature-based solutions, and just transition policies. Key recommendations include the use of debt-for-nature swaps, increased multilateral funding for the Global South, and the implementation of a 'Green Structural Recovery Menu' featuring fiscal reforms and the phasing out of fossil fuel subsidies.

The report finds that GFANZ members, including major banks and asset managers, have provided hundreds of billions of dollars to companies expanding fossil fuel production. It argues that the alliance's sectoral guidelines and individual member policies are insufficient to prevent this expansion, often relying on flawed decarbonization targets that do not explicitly prohibit new fossil fuel supply. The document calls for the adoption of robust 'no-expansion' policies, alignment with UN Race to Zero criteria, and the implementation of meaningful accountability mechanisms to ensure financial flows are redirected toward clean energy.

The document analyzes the vulnerability of the ASEAN region to climate change and evaluates the current mitigation and adaptation strategies of its member states. It argues that while ASEAN countries have ambitious Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), there is a significant disconnect between climate goals and trade policy. The author recommends reducing tariffs and non-tariff barriers on environmental goods, reforming fossil fuel subsidies, and utilizing WTO flexibilities for technology transfer to bridge this gap.

The CESCR frequently addressed climate change in its 2022 State reviews, focusing on mitigation policies, adaptation plans, and the phase-out of fossil fuels. The Committee emphasized the need for States to meet Paris Agreement commitments and highlighted extraterritorial obligations to ensure that domestic policies and international agreements do not adversely affect human rights in other countries. Additionally, the 2022 General Comment No. 26 on land rights stressed that climate mitigation measures, such as large-scale renewable energy projects, must include robust safeguards to protect human rights and the environment.

The 2023 F-List report identifies numerous global advertising and PR agencies that maintain contracts with fossil fuel companies despite climate warnings. It highlights a gap between the sustainability commitments of holding companies like WPP, Omnicom, and IPG and their actual client rosters. The report specifically critiques the use of influencers to repair the image of 'Big Oil' and details the ongoing promotion of projects like the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP).

The ASIA F-LIST 2023 report examines the role of advertising in sustaining fossil fuel consumption across selected Asian markets. It argues that companies use reward programs, prize giveaways, and 'purpose-washing' campaigns—such as rural development projects and environmental restoration—to distract from their contribution to the climate crisis. The report notes a gap between sustainable intent and action among Asian consumers, partly due to misleading marketing, and highlights a growing but inconsistent regulatory landscape for climate disclosure in the region.

The report analyzes fossil fuel marketing in Asia, identifying two primary strategies: incentivizing increased fuel consumption through loyalty programs and prizes, and 'purpose-washing' to shift climate responsibility onto individuals or project a sustainable image. It notes a gap between Asian consumers' sustainable intent and action, partly due to misleading marketing, while highlighting a trend toward mandatory climate disclosures in countries like India, Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong, and Singapore.

The Healthy NDC Scorecard 2023 analyzes 58 NDCs to evaluate the integration of health into national climate policies. While 90% of analyzed NDCs mention health and climate linkages, the report finds a significant mismatch between health recognition and actual climate ambition, particularly in G20 nations. Low- and middle-income countries generally achieved the highest health scores, while several high-income nations scored zero. The report recommends enhanced intersectoral collaboration, the quantification of health co-benefits to secure financing, and the exclusion of the fossil fuel industry from climate policymaking.

The document outlines a roadmap for Indonesia to transition to a low-carbon economy without leaving vulnerable workers and communities behind. It defines the dimensions of just transition—procedural, distributive, and restorative—and provides a set of principles and a planning checklist. The guide analyses Indonesia's current policy landscape, highlighting the dominance of the energy sector in transition discussions and the need for a more cross-sectoral approach. It also presents international case studies from Germany, Canada, Sweden, the USA, and Australia to illustrate different leadership models and outcomes. Key recommendations include establishing a national governing body, creating a centralised database of affected workers, and enhancing social dialogue to ensure inclusive decision-making.

The document outlines the principles of a just transition, drawing on international case studies from Germany, Canada, Sweden, the US, and Australia to inform Indonesia's approach. It identifies key challenges in Indonesia, such as the lack of centralized data on affected workers and the need for cross-sectoral coordination. The guide proposes specific actions for government, non-governmental actors, and businesses, and introduces the Energy Transition Mechanism Country Platform (ETM-CP) and the Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP) as primary financial frameworks for Indonesia's energy shift.

The Ninth Meeting of the San Giorgio Group convened financial sector actors to identify practical solutions for scaling climate finance. The discussions focused on three primary areas: evolving 'just energy transition' into a broader 'just transformation' through co-creation and pilot projects; reframing adaptation finance as an investment opportunity rather than solely a public finance issue; and reforming Multilateral Development Bank (MDB) operating models to move toward country-level platforms and innovative risk-sharing instruments.

The report analyzes how different audiences perceive the intersection of climate change and health and evaluates the effectiveness of various communication frames. It finds that framing climate change as a public health issue, particularly by emphasizing the health benefits of solutions (gain framing) and the harms of air pollution, can increase public engagement and reduce political polarization. The document highlights health professionals as highly trusted messengers who are generally willing to engage in advocacy but face barriers such as lack of time and specialized knowledge. It also notes that public officials exhibit varying levels of awareness and face institutional barriers to prioritizing climate-health issues. The report concludes with a research agenda calling for more diverse geographic data, better integration of equity in messaging, and the expansion of climate-health curricula in medical education.

The report finds that majorities in all 73 surveyed low-emission areas have experienced extreme weather, with unusually hot weather being the most common hazard. Most respondents attribute these events to climate change, yet significant gaps in individual and household preparedness exist, particularly in South America and Europe. Recovery times vary widely, with some populations in Central Asia and the Balkans expecting recovery to take a year or more.

The report argues that nature-based solutions (NbS) and carbon offsetting schemes often serve as a facade for corporate polluters to continue emitting while facilitating land grabbing and violating human rights. It provides numerous case studies across Africa, Asia-Pacific, Europe, and the Americas, highlighting systemic issues such as inflated carbon baselines, lack of free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC), and the failure of projects to deliver promised climate or social benefits. The document specifically critiques REDD+ projects, industrial tree plantations, and soil carbon programs for their lack of 'additionality' and their role in undermining food sovereignty and indigenous land rights.

The document argues that nature-based solutions (NBS) and carbon offsets often serve as a distraction for 'Big Polluters' to continue emitting while facilitating land grabs and violating Indigenous rights. It provides detailed evidence of inflated carbon baselines, lack of additionality, and social harms across Africa, Asia Pacific, Europe, Latin America, and North America. Key examples include REDD+ projects in Zimbabwe and Gabon that overestimated carbon savings, and soil carbon initiatives in the US and Kenya that threaten food sovereignty and traditional livelihoods. The report also critiques improved cookstove offsets for using flawed accounting to generate 'fake emission cuts'.

The 2023 Forest Declaration Assessment executive summary reports that global gross deforestation in 2022 exceeded the trajectory required to eliminate deforestation by 2030, despite progress in over 50 countries and specific reductions in Indonesia and Malaysia.

The document examines the state of forest governance globally, noting that while protected area coverage has increased, human rights violations and the 'downgrading, downsizing, and degazettement' of these areas persist. It highlights a disparity between international focus on tropical forests and the limited scrutiny of industrial logging in boreal and temperate forests in developed nations. While some progress in the legal recognition of Indigenous Peoples' and local communities' land rights has occurred, approximately 1.375 billion hectares of customary claims remain unrecognized globally, and environmental defenders continue to face violence.

The document details the definitions, data sources, and analytical frameworks used to assess global forest loss, degradation, and restoration. It establishes a 'gross zero' deforestation benchmark for 2030, utilizing a linear reduction pathway from a 2018-2020 baseline. The annexes include a detailed regional aggregation based on UN geoscheme designations and a data table comparing 2022 deforestation levels across 30 high-impact countries against their interim targets.

The 2023 Forest Declaration Assessment reports that the world is off track to meet 2030 forest goals, with global gross deforestation reaching 6.6 million hectares in 2022. While over 50 countries are on track to eliminate deforestation, including sustainable reductions in Indonesia and Malaysia, these gains are offset by massive losses in other critical ecosystems. The report emphasizes a severe funding gap, noting that only 2.2 billion USD in annual government funding is allocated to forests, and criticizes the lack of corporate accountability and transparency. It calls for a radical shift away from 'business-as-usual' economic models toward those that value standing forests and support the land rights of indigenous and local communities.