Search Climate Insights Directory

The report identifies significant financial, regulatory, and awareness barriers that hinder energy efficiency projects in Indonesia, noting that traditional shared and guaranteed savings models are often unsuccessful. It proposes three alternative models—service or device, leasing and purchase, and quality energy service—to reduce perceived risks for investors and clients, while emphasizing the need for stronger government regulation and financial incentives to meet national energy saving targets.

In 2020, IDFC members committed $185 billion in green finance, representing 20% of their total new commitments. While total green finance declined by 6% due to the COVID-19 pandemic, cumulative commitments since 2015 surpassed $1 trillion. Climate finance dominated at $178.5 billion, with adaptation finance growing by 42% to $27.5 billion. For the first time, the report separately tracked biodiversity finance, which totaled $14 billion. The majority of climate and biodiversity finance was provided by non-OECD institutions and directed toward the East Asia and Pacific region.

The report finds that Jakarta's urban climate finance from 2015-2019 totaled USD 44.9 billion, heavily dominated by public funding and a single mega-project, the Giant Sea Wall. Despite having the highest fiscal capacity in Indonesia, Jakarta underutilizes private finance, which accounted for only 2% of total climate investment. The study recommends better alignment between the city, the central government, and satellite cities, alongside the adoption of innovative financing tools like green municipal bonds to reduce reliance on central government funding, especially given plans to move the national capital.

China's commitment to cease overseas coal financing could remove two-thirds of the pre-construction coal pipeline in Asia, reducing it from over 65 GW to 22 GW. This shift, aligned with similar pledges from Japan, South Korea, and G20 nations, makes the remaining projects unlikely to be completed due to a lack of available capital. The report argues that cancelling these remaining projects would save US$27 billion in capital costs and avoid 103 million tons of annual CO2 emissions.

The report analyzes the evolution of gender-related provisions in trade agreements, categorizing them into five types: reaffirmation of commitments, avoidance of adverse effects, preservation of the state's right to regulate, promotion of women's economic empowerment, and cooperation mechanisms. It highlights a shift toward dedicated 'trade and gender' chapters in recent agreements, such as those involving Canada and Chile, though it notes these often lack enforceable targets or budgets. The author argues that current provisions are frequently 'gender-blind' or overly focused on women as formal workers, neglecting their roles as consumers, carers, and rights holders. To improve policy, the report advocates for ex ante gender impact assessments—citing Canada's GBA+ and the UNCTAD Trade and Gender Toolbox—and ex post monitoring to generate sex-disaggregated data. It concludes that for trade to be inclusive, gender mainstreaming must move beyond symbolic cooperation toward a holistic approach grounded in human rights frameworks like CEDAW.

The briefing finds that sectoral pledges on methane, coal, transport, and deforestation could close the 2030 emissions gap by approximately 9% (2.2 GtCO2e), though global emissions would still remain nearly twice as high as necessary for a 1.5°C pathway. The Global Methane Pledge and the Glasgow Leaders’ Declaration on Forests and Land Use offer the highest likely impacts, while the coal and electric vehicle initiatives provide minimal additional reductions due to limited signatory participation or delayed phase-out timelines.

The document examines China's role as a primary funder and contractor of ICT networks in the Global South, specifically through the Digital Silk Road (DSR) initiative. It compares the implementation of a submarine fibre optic cable in Cambodia and the National ICT Broadband Backbone in Tanzania. The analysis finds that while these projects generally had limited environmental impacts and provided essential connectivity, they suffered from a lack of transparency and mixed results in socioeconomic mitigation, such as limited high-level technology transfer and underutilisation of infrastructure.

The document argues that while businesses recognize the benefits of circular economy practices, they are hindered by systemic technical, knowledge, and financial barriers. It identifies information availability and government support as primary drivers for transition, particularly for SMEs in Southeast Asia.

The analysis reveals that the COVID-19 pandemic has widened the climate finance gap in developing countries, leading to domestic budget reallocations away from climate projects toward health and economic recovery. International climate finance has also decreased, with a higher reliance on loans that increase national debt burdens. The report highlights that climate-finance needs, estimated at $4.6 trillion based on a sample of NDCs, far exceed current flows, and that pandemic-related restrictions have delayed the approval and execution of critical climate projects.

The document details the status of five rhino species. The greater one-horned rhino and white rhino show recovery trends, while the Javan, Sumatran, and black rhinos remain critically threatened. Poaching is a universal threat across all species, with climate change and habitat loss specifically impacting the greater one-horned rhino.

Mighty Earth argues that the European Commission's decision to exclude natural rubber from its proposed anti-deforestation law is based on an incomplete dataset that ignores processed rubber imports. The briefing highlights that rubber expansion has caused millions of hectares of forest loss in Southeast Asia and Africa, and warns that a projected 33% increase in global demand by 2030 will further drive biodiversity loss and carbon emissions.

The document examines the allocation of Indonesia's COVID-19 recovery funds, noting a heavy bias toward fossil fuels over renewable energy, and suggests shifting fiscal stimulus toward renewables to meet climate targets.

The global pipeline of proposed coal power plants has decreased by 76% since 2015. As of July 2021, 44 economies have formally committed to no new coal, while another 40 are positioned to do so because they have no projects in their pre-construction pipeline. However, 37 economies still consider new coal, with China, India, Viet Nam, Indonesia, Turkey, and Bangladesh accounting for 82% of the remaining global pipeline. The report provides detailed profiles of these economies, highlighting the role of Chinese financing and the impact of local opposition and environmental concerns in halting projects.

The GFCR Investment Window is a proposed $500 million fund, with $125 million requested from the Green Climate Fund (GCF) as a first-loss equity position. Managed by Pegasus Capital Advisors, the fund targets 'climate refugia'—reefs most likely to survive warming oceans—by investing in sustainable ocean production, ecotourism, and sustainable infrastructure to reduce local stressors. The program aims to protect 29,000 hectares of reef, create over 12,700 direct jobs, and benefit over 35 million people indirectly. It utilizes a dual-window model, pairing the Investment Window with a Grant Window to provide technical assistance and pipeline incubation.

Superhot rock (SHR) geothermal energy, defined as heat energy mined at temperatures of 400°C or hotter, is presented as a high-energy-density resource capable of providing competitive, dispatchable, zero-carbon power worldwide. While current geothermal capacity is limited to 15 GW in volcanic or thin-crust regions, SHR could potentially be accessed anywhere through super-deep drilling. The report estimates that mature SHR electricity could be competitive at $20-35 per MWh, producing five to ten times the energy per well compared to conventional systems. Realizing this potential requires overcoming engineering challenges in drilling (reaching 7-15 km), reservoir creation, and well metallurgy. The proposed path forward involves moving three to five pilot demonstrations forward in the next five years, transitioning from shallow hot dry rock to deep continental resources, and leveraging the expertise of the unconventional oil and gas industry to accelerate commercialization within 10 to 15 years.

The report argues that the food industry's reliance on single-use plastics creates significant ecological and health crises while exposing the sector and its financiers to material financial risks. It highlights a 'financial bubble' in the plastics industry driven by overproduction and impending regulation. Research reveals that seven banks operating in Belgium provided over 78 billion euros in financing to nine food industry companies between 2015 and 2021, with Deutsche Bank, BNP Paribas, and ING as the primary financiers. The document calls for banks to implement concrete plastic policies and for the Belgian government to use its influence as a shareholder to drive a transition toward a circular economy.

Carbon Market Watch analyzed 18 "carbon neutral" fossil fuel claims, primarily involving liquefied natural gas (LNG), and found that every claim failed to meet basic criteria for environmental integrity and transparency. The report argues that fossil fuels cannot be carbon neutral because the firms involved are not aligned with 1.5°C pathways and rely on flawed "tonne-for-tonne" offsetting. Key failures include the omission of Scope 3 emissions in one-third of claims, a total lack of transparency regarding the price paid for carbon credits, and the use of impermanent nature-based sinks to offset long-term fossil carbon emissions. The report recommends that fossil fuel firms cease these claims, stop new exploration, and shift toward a "contribution" model for climate finance.

The fact sheet identifies six corporate entities—BP, Microsoft, IETA, BlackRock, Shell, and Drax—that the author claims are using "net zero" agendas to mask continued fossil fuel investment, rely on unproven technology, and influence policymakers through extensive lobbying and partnerships surrounding COP26.

The fact sheet details how six major corporate players—BP, Microsoft, Drax, IETA, BlackRock, and Shell—employ 'net zero' agendas to maintain business-as-usual operations. It contends that these entities promote 'false solutions' such as carbon offsets, BECCS, and hydrogen to delay emissions cuts at the source. The document further highlights the influence of these corporations on COP26 through sponsorship, lobbying, and participation in industry-led initiatives like the Race to Zero and the Taskforce on Scaling Voluntary Carbon Markets.

Friends of the Earth International (FOEI) rejects Nature Based Solutions (NBS), characterizing it as a 'wolf in sheep's clothing' that instrumentalizes nature to serve corporate profits and 'net-zero' offsetting schemes. The document contends that NBS promotes monoculture plantations, enables the financialization of nature, and threatens the sovereignty of Indigenous Peoples and local communities. FOEI argues that NBS distracts from the urgent need to phase out fossil fuels and instead advocates for systemic changes such as agroecology and Community Forest Management (CFM).