Search Climate Insights Directory

The report identifies that while the Swedish transmission grid operator, Svenska Kraftnät, is a primary driver for grid development, most drivers are indirect, such as EU climate policy and the need to integrate wind power. Key barriers include a complex and ambiguous concession process, local resistance based on land-use and health concerns, and passive government governance. The study finds that current planned projects generally align with the geographic needs identified by the NORSTRAT project, though there are discrepancies in wind power production assumptions between the TSO and industry estimates.

Carbon Market Watch warns that the leaked 2030 Council Conclusions could reduce the effective EU greenhouse gas reduction target from 40% to 26% due to the potential banking of 'hot air' (surplus allowances). The organization criticizes the 40% target as postponing urgent action, opposes the use of EU ETS allowances to meet non-ETS targets, argues against including transport in the EU ETS, and condemns the dynamic allocation of free pollution permits as an industry subsidy.

The report argues that implementing cost-effective energy efficiency and renewable energy measures could halve the EU's net natural gas imports and reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 49% relative to 1990 levels by 2030. It identifies the buildings sector as having the highest potential for savings, followed by energy production and industry, while noting that domestic production, including shale gas, is unlikely to increase substantially.

The study examines pig production in the Neman/Nemunas river basin, covering Belarus, Lithuania, Latvia, Poland, and Kaliningrad (Russia). It highlights a shift toward large-scale industrial farming, which now constitutes 70-85% of the sector, while noting the continued importance of household farms for food security. The report identifies significant water pollution risks from manure management, particularly diffuse-source pollution, and notes a lack of transboundary coordination. Key recommendations include promoting nutrient reuse by linking pig and crop farms, improving manure handling through technologies like biogas plants and deep-litter housing, and strengthening regulatory frameworks to include small-scale producers.

The document examines the AAU market from 2008 to 2012, focusing on how Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries used Green Investment Schemes (GIS) to transform 'hot air'—surplus emission rights resulting from economic downturns—into funding for climate mitigation. It analyzes the strategies of seller countries like Estonia and the Czech Republic, which were successful due to transparent monitoring, and buyer countries like Japan and Spain, which used these deals for technology exports. The report highlights a significant price drop in AAUs by 2012 and discusses the potential for GIS to inform future fund-based mechanisms like NAMAs in developing countries.

The document updates the 2011 subsidy estimates for EU biofuels, reducing the total estimated support from €9,272–€10,653 million to €5,515–€6,896 million. This correction stems from an overestimation of the volume of biofuels eligible for fuel excise tax exemptions. While budgetary support figures for bioethanol and biodiesel were lowered, other support elements, such as market transfers, remain unchanged. The report also details the calculation methodologies for excise tax exemptions and market price support via blending mandates.

The document examines Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) as a tool to incentivize agricultural land managers to provide non-market environmental benefits. It distinguishes between action-based payments, which reward the adoption of specific practices, and outcome-based payments, which reward actual environmental results. The authors argue that outcome-based approaches are more effective at delivering biodiversity and ecosystem services because they encourage farmer innovation and target the most ecologically valuable land. While European examples often focus on site-specific biodiversity in grasslands, the report suggests that shifting from top-down contractual agreements to local governance and participatory design is essential for scaling these mechanisms. Barriers to implementation include scientific uncertainty, high administrative costs, and the risk of 'leakage' where environmental damage is displaced outside the PES zone.

The report documents IISD's contributions to the UN Internet Governance Forum (IGF) from 2008 to 2011. It details workshops that explored the co-evolution of Internet governance and global challenges, the development of indicators to measure the impact of ICTs on sustainable development, and the use of scenarios planning to anticipate future technological and social shifts. The document emphasizes the need for a broader multistakeholder approach that includes non-technical sectors—such as health, education, and environment—and highlights the importance of regional and national dialogue over purely global processes. It concludes with a toolkit of evidence- and consent-based tools for practitioners to facilitate public policy dialogue.

The report argues that corruption in South Africa is deeply linked to a general culture of non-compliance with administrative processes and organizational instability. It highlights a significant gap between legal definitions of corruption and the 'situational logic' of public servants, who may justify illegal acts based on perceived institutional unfairness or political imperatives. The analysis identifies supply chain management (SCM) as a primary area of vulnerability, noting that irregular expenditure has risen sharply, particularly at the local government level. The report concludes that effective anti-corruption strategies must shift from a narrow focus on policing and individual moral failure toward a broader emphasis on organizational development, the design of efficient administrative systems, and the perceived impartiality of enforcement agencies.

The letter expresses concern that carbon offsets are undermining EU climate goals by stifling domestic emission reductions and supporting projects that lack environmental integrity. It specifically highlights the negative impacts of coal-fired power plants and large hydro projects in the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), as well as the lack of transparency in Track 1 Joint Implementation (JI).

The author contends that austerity policies in Europe, especially in post-socialist states, have led to substantial budget cuts in higher education and a push toward the commodification of learning. The text highlights that these measures often shift costs to students through tuition fees and prioritize market-driven research over humanities and fundamental sciences, thereby undermining social equality and the goals of the Europe 2020 strategy.

The report examines water protection in Estonia's Pandivere and Adavere-Põltsamaa nitrate-vulnerable zones (NVZ), highlighting a disconnect between administrative water management plans and agricultural policy. While groundwater generally remains below the 50 mg/l nitrate limit, 45% of surface water bodies in the NVZ are in moderate or poor condition. A survey of 52 farmers reveals that while they acknowledge the impact of point-source pollution (e.g., manure storage), they are skeptical about the impact of diffuse pollution from fertilizer quantities and feel that NVZ restrictions create an unfair economic disadvantage compared to farmers outside these zones.

The report analyzes the challenges of implementing agri-environmental measures under the EU's Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) within the Baltic Sea Region (BSR). It finds that a lack of coordination between agricultural and environmental sectors, insufficient stakeholder involvement, and an 'uneven playing field' in funding and entitlements have hindered the achievement of environmental boundary conditions. The authors argue that the CAP's national focus often undermines transboundary cooperation and regional cohesion. To address this, they recommend consolidating CAP Pillars 1 and 2 to treat environmental services as a core value of farming and introducing 'soft measures' to support stakeholder dialogue and regional nutrient reduction targets.

The BalticClimate toolkit provides climate science overviews, scenarios, and tailored tools for policy-makers, spatial planners, and the business community in the Baltic Sea Region. It offers projections for sectors such as agriculture, energy, and housing, alongside over 120 practical examples of 'win-win-win' solutions for adaptation, mitigation, and economic development. Specific tools include checklists for policy-makers, a Vulnerability Assessment framework for spatial planners, and a Climate SWOT analysis for small- and medium-sized enterprises.

The report identifies a wide array of technical innovations for phosphorus capture and reuse in the Baltic Sea Region but notes they are often voluntary and under-supported by EU policy. Stakeholders generally oppose a centralised EU regulatory approach, citing a lack of confidence in administration and the need to respect regional diversity in farming systems. Instead, there is significant interest in market-based approaches to commoditise phosphorus residues and the use of stakeholder platforms to mediate between competing regional interests.

The document analyzes how the European Union has integrated New Member States (NMS) into its climate framework through various effort-sharing mechanisms. It highlights the systemic economic and energy divergences between the EU15 and NMS, such as higher energy intensity and coal dependence in the East. The report examines the evolution of target distribution from the Kyoto Protocol and the EU ETS Phase II to the 2008 Climate and Energy Package, concluding that while centralized governance and GDP-based redistribution have improved fairness and ambition, they have often come at the cost of economic efficiency and domestic sovereignty over energy mixes.

The paper examines the EU power sector's transition toward a low-carbon future, highlighting the critical role of the electricity sector in decarbonizing transport and buildings. It identifies significant risks in current investment trends, such as carbon lock-in from new gas and coal plants, and argues that the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) fails to provide a credible long-term signal for post-2020 investments. The authors recommend establishing post-2020 emissions caps and calibrating the ETS to ensure carbon scarcity after accounting for energy efficiency and renewable energy objectives.

The research examines how increasing the EU's 2020 emission reduction target beyond 20% interacts with energy security in Poland, the Czech Republic, and Latvia. It distinguishes between 'objective' energy security (quantifiable parameters) and 'subjective' energy security (political discourse), finding that these often diverge. The authors argue that more stringent targets could improve energy security by reducing import dependency through renewables and energy efficiency, and by providing a clearer policy framework to avoid 'suboptimal investment' and 'stranded assets' in technologies like nuclear and carbon capture and storage (CCS). While Poland and the Czech Republic express high subjective insecurity despite relatively stable objective positions, Latvia remains objectively vulnerable due to its high reliance on Russian imports, though it possesses significant renewable potential.

The paper examines the tension between international investment law and climate action, arguing that common investor protections can hinder environmental regulation. It suggests specific drafting changes to IIAs to preserve policy space and explores using the Kyoto Protocol's Clean Development Mechanism as a model for promoting green investment.

The report identifies 'Carbon Fat Cats'—companies that received excessive free emissions permits under Phase 2 of the EU ETS (2008-2012). It finds that the top ten companies held 35 million surplus permits in 2008, valued at €500 million, with projected surpluses reaching 230 million permits (€3.2 billion) by 2012. This over-allocation in industrial sectors like iron, steel, and cement means that a small number of power companies, specifically RWE and EON, must deliver the majority of the scheme's net emissions reductions. The report argues that this creates competitive distortions and undermines climate targets, recommending higher ambition (a 30% cut by 2020), limited access to overseas offsets, and the cancellation of Member State reserves.