Search Climate Insights Directory

Mongolia possesses significant wind and solar potential, estimated at 2600 GW, yet renewable electricity production was only about 9% of the total as of 2023. The government aims for 30% renewable energy capacity by 2030 under its Vision 2050 strategy. While 12 utility-scale projects are operational with a total investment of USD 533 million, the sector faces challenges including a predominantly male workforce and a reliance on electricity imports from China and Russia (22.3% in 2023). Current regulations include USD-denominated tariffs capped in 2019 and various tax exemptions, with future plans focusing on competitive auctions and battery storage.

The report evaluates the effectiveness of nature-based infrastructure (NBI) and hybrid infrastructure in 12,000 hectares across the Lambussie, Wa West, Lawra, and Jirapa districts of Ghana. Comparing a reference scenario of no action against NBI and hybrid interventions, the analysis finds that both NBI and hybrid options effectively mitigate floods and droughts across various Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP). Specifically, reforestation of a 3,500-hectare area in one district reduced flood risk by 46.7%.

China is the world's largest coal producer and importer, with a significant shift toward large-scale and mega-scale mining operations. Despite climate goals, China is developing approximately 1,280 Mtpa of new coal capacity, nearly half of the global proposed pipeline. This expansion, concentrated in provinces like Inner Mongolia and Shanxi, drives massive methane emissions, with China's operating mines alone accounting for roughly 70% of global coal mine methane emissions from similar-sized operations. State-owned enterprises (SOEs) dominate the sector, controlling 40% of production capacity and contributing nearly 40% of the nation's coal mine methane emissions.

The briefing examines the global trend of shrinking lakes and reservoirs, highlighting a study that found 53% of nearly 2,000 lakes experienced significant storage declines between 1992 and 2020. It distinguishes between anthropogenic drivers, such as unsustainable consumption seen in the Aral Sea, and climate drivers, such as increased evaporation in Mongolia. The author argues that this attribution allows policymakers to choose between demand management and behavioral changes for overuse, or infrastructure resilience and conservation for climate-driven losses.

The evaluation finds that while the GCF has a prominent position in climate finance and a diverse set of instruments, its energy sector approach lacks a clearly articulated strategy and suffers from a mismatch between its stated and actual risk appetite. The portfolio is heavily skewed toward international accredited entities (IAEs) and focuses primarily on renewable energy generation, while underfinancing energy efficiency and emerging technologies like green hydrogen and large-scale storage. Results management is described as underdeveloped, with inconsistent metrics for measuring paradigm shifts and a lack of specific emissions reduction targets for the energy sector. The report recommends that the GCF clarify its role in the global energy transition, increase support for enabling environments and regulatory frameworks, and better align its risk appetite with transformational innovation.

The report analyzes the ASM value chain, from exploration to mine closure, highlighting a stark divide between rudimentary artisanal methods and more capitalized small-scale operations. It identifies critical gaps in technology for ore extraction, transportation, and beneficiation, while showcasing promising innovations in mercury-free gold processing, blockchain-based traceability, and digital mining cadastres. The document warns that while mechanization can boost yields and critical mineral supply, it risks displacing labor—particularly women—and increasing environmental degradation if not managed through inclusive policies and strategic zoning.

The report examines the environmental and health risks associated with ASGM tailings, which often contain mercury and cyanide. It finds that while large-scale mining (LSM) has robust standards, ASGM lacks specific international and regional tailings governance, relying on general mining codes that are often poorly enforced due to sector informality. The document recommends the creation of an international ASM-specific tailings standard, the implementation of strategic environmental assessments (SEAs), and the development of formalization schemes to improve waste management and recover critical minerals from tailings.

The document highlights that conventional financial analysis fails to capture the environmental and social impacts of transport projects, which contribute over 20% of global carbon dioxide emissions. It advocates for a holistic approach that accounts for externalities—such as public health benefits from improved air quality or costs from vehicle emissions—to better determine a project's overall value. The briefing also references several Sustainable Asset Valuation (SAVi) case studies involving electric vehicles in India, non-motorized transport in Coimbatore, wind portfolios in Germany, and bus electrification in Mongolia.

The report examines how developing countries can capture a fair share of financial benefits from critical minerals, highlighting risks such as price volatility, oversupply, and opaque markets. It suggests opportunities for these nations to increase state participation, develop downstream processing capabilities, and reform fiscal incentives to maximize economic gains from the energy transition.

The proposal seeks USD 553,230 over 24 months to address Cambodia's lack of national accredited entities with on-lending and blending fiduciary functions. It focuses on supporting the accreditation of three private banks—Foreign Trade Bank Plc. (FTB), ACLEDA Bank Plc., and Advanced Bank of Asia Ltd (ABA)—and the NCSD. The project includes institutional gap assessments, capacity-building workshops, a national readiness needs assessment, and a learning exchange with other Asian countries to develop a strategic accreditation framework.

The document argues that integrating the agendas of the UNFCCC, CBD, and UNCCD is essential for effective environmental governance, particularly in Latin America and the Caribbean. It proposes creating formal dialogue spaces at COP30, aligning national planning instruments (NDCs, NBSAPs, and NAPs), and implementing multi-purpose financial mechanisms to address the interconnected crises of climate change and biodiversity loss.

The SAVi assessment of the proposed BRT system in Bandung, Indonesia, indicates the project is highly profitable, with a benefit-cost ratio of 6.67 per USD 1 invested. The system is expected to generate USD 2.02 billion in cumulative discounted net benefits between 2022 and 2050. Primary benefits include time savings for users, increased retail revenues near stations, and health improvements resulting from reduced air pollution and increased physical activity.

The report finds that comprehensive requirements for benefit sharing arrangements are not common practice across major carbon crediting programmes. While some projects, particularly those under Plan Vivo, demonstrate best practices by providing detailed monitoring reports on monetary and non-monetary benefits, many others provide only procedural information or limited evidence of actual implementation. Major carbon crediting programmes like Verra (VCS), CAR, and ACR have largely resisted mandatory disclosure of benefit sharing terms, citing commercial confidentiality and a lack of institutional expertise to monitor downstream financial flows.

The briefing reveals a systemic lack of rules and enforcement regarding benefit sharing arrangements (BSAs) in the voluntary carbon market. An analysis by Öko-Institut found that only two of five assessed carbon standards referenced BSAs, and only four of 47 reviewed projects provided clear evidence of benefit sharing with stakeholders beyond project implementers. The document argues that payments for results (such as payments for ecosystem services) are often incorrectly conflated with benefit sharing, which should instead be a distribution of revenues. It further notes that major standards like CAR, ACR, and VCS have opposed mandatory BSA rules from the ICVCM, citing confidentiality and capacity constraints.

The document examines the prevalence and quality of benefit-sharing agreements in the voluntary carbon market (VCM). Based on an Öko-Institut study, it finds that most carbon standards and projects lack clear, enforceable mechanisms to distribute financial and non-financial benefits to local communities. It highlights a critical confusion between 'benefit-sharing' and 'payment for results' (such as salaries or payments for ecosystem services), arguing that the former should be a separate share of profits. The brief concludes that the absence of uniform definitions and the opposition of major standards to mandatory rules hinder the equitable distribution of carbon credit revenues.

The document analyzes the lack of standardized rules for benefit-sharing agreements (BSAs) in the voluntary carbon market, finding that most carbon standards and projects fail to provide evidence of equitable benefit distribution to indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLCs).

The document reports on a study by the Öko-Institut commissioned by Carbon Market Watch, which found that benefit-sharing arrangements (BSAs) in the voluntary carbon market are largely insufficient and lack transparency. Analysis of five carbon standards and 47 projects revealed that most standards do not require BSAs, and very few projects provide evidence of distributing benefits beyond simple performance-based payments. The brief argues that performance payments (like salaries) should not be conflated with benefit-sharing and calls for the Integrity Council for Voluntary Carbon Markets (ICVCM) to mandate standardized, transparent BSA rules.

The report examines parental leave policies in the mining sector across 12 countries, comparing national laws with corporate policies. While many mining companies provide benefits that meet or exceed legal requirements, the report identifies a 'leaky pipeline' where women leave the industry between ages 35 and 44. This suggests that formal policies are undermined by workplace cultures that create anxiety around pregnancy disclosure and a lack of support for the transition back to work. The document advocates for normalizing paternity leave for men and improving awareness of reproductive rights to foster a more inclusive environment.

The report examines the intersection of gender equality and mine closure, noting that women often face disproportionate negative impacts during the post-mining transition, including increased gender-based violence and economic vulnerability. It argues that conventional environmental and social impact assessments (ESIAs) often lack gender responsiveness. The document provides a framework for integrating gender-based analysis (GBA) and inclusive community engagement across the mine life cycle—from pre-mining planning and land-use decisions to the transition of workers in the service and supply sectors. It concludes with specific recommendations for governments to develop gender mining strategies and mandate the use of GBA in regulatory processes.

The document argues that mine closures often exacerbate the social, economic, and domestic vulnerability of women, who are frequently excluded from decision-making and formal employment in the mining sector. It outlines how gender-blind closure processes can lead to increased gender-based violence, food insecurity, and a higher burden of unpaid care work. To counter this, the report recommends that governments mandate gender-based analysis in Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIAs), ensure women's representation in closure committees, and provide targeted social services and retraining for women in the service and supply sectors during the transition to post-mining economies.