Search Climate Insights Directory

This report details the results of a 2016 IISD expert meeting regarding the design of a proposed multilateral International Dispute Settlement Agency. The experts advocated for a shift from the narrow investor-state arbitration model toward an inclusive system allowing governments, investors, communities, and individuals to seek justice. The proposed framework includes a three-tiered judicial system (Judicial, Appellate, and Jurisdictional Chambers) alongside non-adversarial mechanisms like fact-finding and mediation. Key discussions centered on expanding jurisdictional scope to include human rights and environmental law, ensuring the independence and diversity of adjudicators, and establishing funding mechanisms to ensure access to justice for resource-poor stakeholders.

The report examines 'anti-ISIS foreign fighters', finding they are generally older than Islamist fighters, predominantly male, and frequently U.S. military veterans. It identifies the YPG and Peshmerga as the most popular affiliations and analyzes push factors like frustration with international responses and pull factors such as the desire to protect persecuted minorities. The document also explores the complex and inconsistent legal frameworks across Western nations regarding private citizens participating in foreign conflicts.

The report analyzes the intersection of climate change, World Heritage sites, and tourism, arguing that climate change acts as a 'threat multiplier' that degrades the outstanding universal value (OUV) of these sites while simultaneously threatening the tourism economies that depend on them. Through 30 case studies across 29 countries, it demonstrates that impacts range from glacier melt and sea-level rise to increased wildfire regimes and ocean acidification. The document emphasizes that while sustainable tourism can support conservation, unplanned development often increases site vulnerability. It concludes with recommendations for intergovernmental organizations, governments, and site managers to integrate climate science into management plans, reduce tourism's carbon footprint, and empower local and indigenous communities in adaptation efforts.

The text examines the 'resource curse', where mineral wealth leads to corruption and conflict rather than prosperity. It highlights the role of 'conflict minerals' in funding insurgencies in regions like the Democratic Republic of Congo and Afghanistan. The author argues that while national governance is primary, industrialized nations must implement binding transparency regulations—such as the OECD guidelines—to prevent human rights abuses and ensure resource extraction supports sustainable development.

The document outlines critical areas for climate finance at COP 21, emphasizing the need for developed countries to meet the $100 billion annual goal by 2020, increasing funding for adaptation, and improving transparency in reporting finance flows. It highlights recent pledges from various nations and argues for a shift in trillions of dollars from high-emissions to low-emissions activities.

The report evaluates a wide array of in-lake remediation techniques to combat eutrophication, emphasizing that these methods are generally only effective if external nutrient loads are simultaneously reduced. It categorizes treatments into biological engineering (e.g., biomanipulation, floating wetlands), physical engineering (e.g., hypolimnetic withdrawal, dredging, artificial circulation), and chemical applications (e.g., alum, Phoslock, algicides). The document provides detailed case studies from North America and Europe, analyzing the effectiveness, longevity, and costs of each method, while highlighting the critical role of internal phosphorus loading in delaying lake recovery.

The document is a call to action by cleantech entrepreneurs and supporting organisations directed at COP21. It argues that viable solutions for decarbonisation already exist but are hindered by policy influence and capital allocation favouring the fossil fuel industry. The signatories demand a global shift to 100% renewable energy by 2050, the redirection of finance away from fossil fuels, and the implementation of science-based targets and carbon pricing.

The document criticizes the European Union for promoting a 'one-sided' legal framework that empowers corporations via Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanisms in trade deals like TTIP and CETA, while simultaneously resisting a legally binding UN treaty on business and human rights. It highlights the inadequacy of the EU's reliance on voluntary Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) guidelines and the UN Guiding Principles (UNGP), noting that such 'soft laws' fail to provide victims of corporate abuse with effective access to justice or enforceable sanctions.

The report evaluates forest governance through three indicators: institutional policy scores, the rule of law (illegal logging and violence), and land tenure rights for indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLCs). While some progress is noted in policy frameworks and the total area of recognized IPLC rights, the report highlights a slowdown in tenure recognition since 2008, a rise in absolute volumes of illegal timber imports—particularly into China—and persistent violence against land defenders, especially in Latin America.

The report evaluates the market share of certified sustainable commodities and the volume of deforestation-free commitments from companies, financial institutions, and governments. It finds that while palm oil certification has increased, soy and paper have remained stagnant, and beef lacks a global certification standard. Corporate pledges have risen rapidly since 2009, but financial institutions and exporting jurisdictions show significantly lower levels of commitment and policy implementation.

A coalition of 98 global entities argues that the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) fails to comply with international human rights obligations, specifically those recognized in the 2010 Cancun Agreements. The letter calls for the establishment of an independent accountability mechanism, the adoption of international sustainable development safeguards, and the implementation of improved stakeholder consultation processes to prevent environmental and social harms.

The document challenges the justification for granting free carbon allowances to EU industries to prevent 'carbon leakage' (production relocation). It argues that there is no compelling evidence of such leakage and that free allocations instead create windfall profits for companies, disincentivize low-carbon innovation, and deprive the public of auctioning revenues. The brief recommends a transition to 100% auctioning of allowances and a more stringent, transparent criteria for the carbon leakage list to ensure only truly high-risk sectors receive support.

The report identifies barriers to climate finance for MSMEs in developing countries—including weak policies, knowledge gaps, and unsuitable financial products—and proposes solutions such as risk-sharing instruments, matchmaking platforms, and the use of financial intermediaries to deliver funds efficiently.

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) Board met in March 2015 to finalize key operational frameworks. The Board accredited seven entities, including the Asian Development Bank and UNDP, and adopted a Gender Policy and Action Plan (2015–2017). It established financial terms for grants and concessional loans, including a distinction between high and low concessionality for the public sector. The Board also approved the terms of reference for an independent Technical Advisory Panel and a Policy on Ethics and Conflicts of Interest. Discussions continued on the Private Sector Facility and the Initial Resource Mobilization process, with a target for 50% of Berlin pledges to be signed by April 30, 2015.

The author contends that cannabis prohibition in Germany has failed, fostering organised crime and leaving consumers and youth unprotected. The text advocates for a regulated market—specifically proposing a draft by the German Greens—that would allow limited personal possession, mandate licensed stores with strict ID checks, and redirect law enforcement savings toward drug prevention.

The paper examines how to balance the allocation of traffic and toll revenue risks between public agencies and private concessionaires in highway PPPs. It argues that full risk transfer is often suboptimal and suggests a combination of 'downside' protection (to ensure bankability and lower financing costs) and 'upside' sharing (to prevent excessive private returns). The author analyzes different metrics for calculating returns—gross revenue, net revenue, and internal rate of return (IRR)—and provides international examples from the US, Chile, and the Netherlands to illustrate the impact of these mechanisms on value for money (VFM).

The document argues that while PPPs are often viewed as a means to access private capital, the primary goal should be maximizing value for money (VFM). It challenges the assumption that PPPs must be 100 per cent privately financed, suggesting that a hybrid structure—combining low-cost public financing with private capital—can reduce the weighted average cost of capital (WACC) without sacrificing risk transfer. By applying and then critiquing the Modigliani-Miller theorem, the author asserts that in practice, private lenders do not significantly increase their rates when public financing is introduced, allowing for a more cost-effective project structure. The paper concludes that an optimal capital structure minimizes private financing to the level required for bankability and concessionaire incentive (net security), thereby reducing the total cost to society.

The report analyzes food waste in Estonia, finding that households are the largest contributors, with an average of 130.4 kg of food waste per household annually. In the catering sector, restaurants exhibit the highest rate of food loss, with 87% of their total food waste being avoidable. The study identifies food spoilage as the primary driver of household waste and plate leftovers as the main cause in hospitals and restaurants. It concludes with specific recommendations for households, schools, and healthcare facilities to reduce waste through better planning and consumer awareness.

As of 31 March 2015, the Green Climate Fund Trust Fund had received total contributions of USDeq. 171.20 million, with USDeq. 128.00 million deposited by 23 contributors. The GCF Board approved funding totaling USD 65.11 million for administrative budgets and readiness activities, while the interim trustee transferred USD 19.62 million. Total funds available to support GCF Board funding decisions were USD 63,147,206.

The document analyzes the EU's Effort Sharing Decision (ESD), which sets emission targets for non-ETS sectors (transport, buildings, agriculture, and waste). It argues that the 2013-2020 period was characterized by weak targets and overgenerous flexibilities, leading to projected overachievement without new mitigation actions. For the 2021-2030 period, the EU aims for a 30% reduction compared to 2005. The brief warns that certain proposed flexibilities—specifically the use of EU ETS allowances and forestry offsets—could increase overall EU emissions by up to 28% by 2030. It recommends focusing on early action, implementing EU-wide mitigation policies, introducing auctioning based on the polluter-pays principle, and restricting borrowing to avoid delaying climate action.