Search Climate Insights Directory

The policy brief outlines how South Africa can leverage its 2025 G20 presidency and the African Union's (AU) G20 membership to promote the Pan-African Payment and Settlement System (PAPSS) and the AfCFTA Protocol on Digital Trade. It suggests aligning these African initiatives with the G20 Roadmap for Enhancing Cross-border Payments to improve the speed, cost, and transparency of international transactions. The author recommends that South Africa champion PAPSS adoption, foster collaboration between African central banks and Afreximbank, and utilize public-private partnerships to secure funding and technical assistance from organizations like the IMF and World Bank.

The policy brief argues that African countries face a crisis of 'debt that is too expensive' rather than too much debt, which hinders human development and the energy transition. It proposes a Cost of Capital Commission composed of high-level experts to recommend reforms to credit rating agency methodologies, Basel III macro-prudential regulations, and the integration of natural capital and remittances into debt sustainability analyses.

The Net Zero Stocktake 2024 reveals a consolidation of net zero targets across countries, cities, and companies, but highlights a critical gap in integrity. While national targets now cover 87% of global GHG emissions, fewer than 5% of non-state entities meet all minimum procedural and substantive integrity criteria. The report emphasizes that national targets often act as a 'ceiling' for subnational ambition, though some regions in countries like Australia and Japan have historically pushed national goals forward. It also notes that members of the Race to Zero campaign generally outperform non-members on integrity measures, although absolute performance remains low.

The report analyzes eight nature-based solutions (NbS) case studies across the EU and China, focusing on land, water, urban, and financing ecosystems. It evaluates these projects against the UNEA-5 definition and IUCN Global Standard, highlighting successes in large-scale landscape restoration and the role of research programs like Horizon 2020. Key findings emphasize that while NbS are increasingly mainstreamed, challenges remain in inclusive governance and private sector financing. The document recommends enhanced bilateral lesson-sharing, the development of a global costs-benefits database, and the use of standardized assessment tools to prevent greenwashing.

The report finds that G20 governments provided at least USD 168 billion in public financial support for renewable power in 2023, which is less than one third of the USD 535 billion provided in fossil fuel subsidies. Advanced economies and China account for 95% of this support, leaving many emerging market and developing economies (EMDEs) at risk. To meet the 2030 tripling target, public support in G20 countries may need to double to approximately USD 336 billion per year. The report highlights a shift from feed-in tariffs toward market-based mechanisms like auctions and a growing emphasis on domestic manufacturing support in the US, EU, and India.

The document defines traditional and synthetic securitization and analyzes how these mechanisms can be used by fossil fuel companies to diversify funding and manage balance sheets. It critiques current 'green' securitization definitions for being too broad and proposes a three-dimensional framework—focusing on use of proceeds, asset character, and company commitment—to prevent the mechanism from indirectly financing fossil fuel expansion. Reclaim Finance advocates for a regulatory framework that ensures transparency and restricts securitization to sustainable energy activities.

Reclaim Finance analyzes 243 sectoral targets from 30 global banks, concluding that most are ineffective due to flawed methodologies, partial coverage, and a lack of transparency. The report specifically criticizes the use of PCAF attribution factors, which can make emissions appear to drop even if real-world emissions remain flat. It recommends shifting toward targets based on financing volumes for fossil fuels, absolute sectoral portfolio emissions, and physical intensity for industrial sectors to drive genuine decarbonization.

Agri-PV, the simultaneous use of land for food production and solar electricity, offers significant potential for Central Europe to increase renewable energy generation and improve farmer livelihoods. Analysis shows that Czechia, Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia could deploy 180 GW of agri-PV, potentially tripling the region's annual renewable electricity production. While agri-PV can increase yields for certain crops like berries by up to 16%, it can also offset yield losses in shade-sensitive crops like wheat through electricity revenues. Despite this, Czechia is currently the only country in the region with agri-PV legislation, and the report recommends that other Central European governments introduce regulations to secure CAP subsidies and incentivize the transition.

The report finds that while CETP signatories have significantly reduced international public finance for fossil fuels, they have failed to scale up clean energy investment at a comparable rate.

The research paper examines the intersection of G7 initiatives, such as the Energy for Growth in Africa Initiative and the Mattei Plan, with South Africa's role as a representative for African climate priorities. It highlights the tension between Western-led green transitions and African concerns over 'green protectionism' (specifically the EU's CBAM), the need for adaptation financing based on the 'common but differentiated responsibilities' principle, and the geopolitical competition for critical minerals. The author argues that the G7 must provide concrete deliverables and respect African agency to effectively bridge its goals with South Africa's upcoming G20 presidency.

The report finds that while international public finance for fossil fuels from CETP signatories has decreased significantly, there has not been a corresponding increase in clean energy finance. Many signatories lack quantitative targets or comprehensive policies to prioritize clean energy, and some high-income countries continue to violate the pledge by financing fossil fuel projects.

In the first half of 2024, wind and solar power generated 30% of the EU's electricity, surpassing fossil fuels (27%) for the first time. This transition occurred despite a 0.7% increase in electricity demand. Fossil fuel generation fell by 17%, with coal dropping by 24% and gas by 14%. Renewables overall provided 50% of the EU's electricity, aided by a 21% rebound in hydro generation. Power sector emissions decreased by 17% compared to the same period in 2023, and are 31% lower than in the first half of 2022. While capacity additions are high, the report notes a gap between national ambitions and the EU's 2030 targets under the REPowerEU plan, particularly for wind energy.

The text discusses Brazil's leadership in the G-20 to establish a Bioeconomy Initiative focused on science, technology, innovation, and sustainable biodiversity use. It emphasizes the need for 'High-Level Principles' to be included in the Rio Declaration to align member economies toward equity and sustainability. A critical barrier identified is the financing gap, with climate finance needs estimated at US$ 8.1 trillion annually from 2030, far exceeding the US$ 1.3 trillion average seen between 2021 and 2022. The authors call for a transition where nature-rich countries, particularly in the Global South, can generate wealth through biodiversity-based development models.

The Social Climate Fund (SCF) is an EU initiative designed to alleviate energy and transport poverty resulting from the introduction of the ETS2 carbon pricing system for buildings and road transport. Operating from 2026 to 2032, the fund will provide approximately €86.7 billion in targeted support to EU member states, primarily for lower-income groups and micro-enterprises. Funding is allocated based on need, with Poland, France, Italy, Spain, and Romania receiving the largest shares. To access funds, member states must submit Social Climate Plans (SCPs) by June 2025, which must include impact assessments and decarbonisation strategies. While the SCF supports green investments and limited temporary income support, it is not intended to solve the root causes of existing energy and transport poverty.

The report identifies a strategy of 'agricultural exceptionalism' employed by the meat and dairy industry to avoid environmental regulation. It details three primary tactics: distracting the public via greenwashing and targeting youth on social media; delaying action by promoting voluntary technical solutions over systemic dietary changes; and derailing legislation through extensive political lobbying and funding in the US and EU. The document highlights the industry's use of specific scientific narratives, such as the GWP* metric and 'regenerative agriculture', to minimize the perceived impact of methane emissions.

The report details how 'Big Meat and Dairy' companies employ tactics similar to those of the tobacco and fossil fuel industries to avoid environmental regulation. These strategies include 'greenwashing' through weak net-zero targets, funding industry-biased research to minimize the impact of methane emissions, and aggressive lobbying to prevent binding legislation. The document highlights a pattern of 'carrot-only' approaches where companies promote voluntary technological fixes while spending more on advertising than on actual R&D for low-carbon solutions. A detailed case study on Italy reveals the use of transnational far-right narratives and online disinformation to frame cultivated meat as a threat to tradition and health, thereby supporting legislative bans.

The report argues that 'Big Meat and Dairy' corporations employ strategies similar to those of the tobacco and fossil fuel industries to avoid environmental accountability. It identifies three primary tactics: distraction through greenwashing and targeting Gen Z; delaying action by promoting voluntary technical solutions over systemic dietary changes; and derailing legislation through political lobbying and 'revolving doors' between industry and government. The analysis covers 22 major corporations across four continents, finding that none meet UN integrity standards for climate goals. Specific case studies highlight how these tactics have weakened the EU's Green Deal and Farm to Fork strategy, influenced the US Inflation Reduction Act, and blocked agricultural emission regulations in New Zealand, Australia, Brazil, and Italy.

The report identifies a 'corporate playbook' used by the meat and dairy industry to avoid environmental regulation through three main tactics: distraction (greenwashing and funding biased science), procrastination (prioritizing advertising over low-carbon R&D), and dismantling (aggressive lobbying to weaken climate policies). It highlights how these strategies are applied globally, particularly in the EU, US, and Brazil, to maintain the status quo of animal agriculture.

The report reveals a 'corporate playbook' used by 'Big Meat and Dairy' to avoid environmental regulation through greenwashing, industry-funded science, and aggressive political lobbying. It argues that these companies use 'distract, delay and derail' tactics—similar to those used by the tobacco and fossil fuel industries—to maintain the status quo and prevent dietary shifts toward plant-based proteins. The investigation highlights how the industry promotes voluntary technological fixes over mandatory emissions cuts and leverages political influence to secure 'all-carrots-and-no-sticks' regulatory approaches.

The report exposes how 'Big Meat and Dairy' corporations employ strategies similar to those of the tobacco and fossil fuel industries to avoid environmental regulation. It identifies three primary tactics: distracting the public through greenwashing and targeting Gen Z via social media; delaying action by promoting voluntary targets and industry-funded science (such as GWP* metrics and 'regenerative agriculture'); and derailing legislation through political lobbying and 'revolving door' appointments. The analysis covers 22 major corporations across four continents, highlighting a systemic lack of scientific integrity in their climate goals and a preference for spending on advertising over low-carbon research and development. Specific case studies in the US, EU, Brazil, Australia, New Zealand, Italy, and Great Britain illustrate how these tactics have successfully weakened policies like the EU Green Deal and the Global Methane Pledge.