Search Climate Insights Directory

The report concludes that all analyzed policy frameworks are inadequate for the robust deployment of carbon dioxide removals (CDR). Most frameworks fail to establish a clear firewall between emissions reductions and removals, often treating them as interchangeable through offsetting mechanisms. Key deficiencies include the absence of legally binding, separate CDR targets, the lack of a robust definition of CDR that ensures long-term permanence, and insufficient monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) systems. The authors recommend that CDR be strictly defined as a secondary climate function to balance residual emissions, supported by dedicated legal targets and rigorous accounting to prevent 'mitigation deterrence'.

The analysis finds that July 2023 was likely Earth's hottest month on record, with human-caused climate change making extreme heat significantly more likely for a vast majority of the global population. Using the Climate Shift Index (CSI), the report demonstrates that 81% of people experienced at least one day where temperatures were at least three times more likely due to climate change. The strongest signals were observed in tropical regions and small island developing states, where conditions were often five times more likely due to human influence. The report highlights specific record-breaking temperatures in Africa, Asia, Europe, and North America, emphasizing that such extremes will increase in frequency as long as fossil fuel combustion continues.

The report uses the Six Americas Super Short Survey (SASSY) to categorize Facebook users in 110 countries and territories into six groups: Alarmed, Concerned, Cautious, Disengaged, Doubtful, and Dismissive. The 'Alarmed' group is the largest in approximately 80 of the surveyed locations, with the highest percentages found in Chile (65%), Mexico (64%), Malawi (63%), Bolivia (62%), and Sri Lanka (61%). Conversely, the United States exhibits a higher proportion of 'Doubtful' and 'Dismissive' respondents (22%) compared to other major carbon emitters and is less 'Alarmed' (34%) than many of its peers. Regional analysis shows South America has the highest proportion of countries with a majority of 'Alarmed' respondents, while Southwest Asia and North Africa show higher levels of doubt or dismissal, particularly in Yemen (34%).

The report argues that existing social contracts are broken, exclusionary, and ignore planetary boundaries, necessitating a transition to 'eco-social contracts'. These new frameworks are proposed to be grounded in human rights, gender justice, and a 'contract with nature'. The document explores various pathways for implementation, including rights-based economies, the recognition of the rights of nature, and the inclusion of marginalized groups such as informal workers and Indigenous peoples. It provides specific regional analyses and case studies from Nepal, the MENA region, India, and Australia to illustrate how participatory processes and communitarian imaginaries (such as Ubuntu and Sumak kawsay) can inform these new societal agreements.

The document outlines a comprehensive approach to achieving the '30x30' target, emphasizing that numerical expansion must be coupled with qualitative improvements in governance and management. It details a three-phase implementation timeline (Review, Planning, and Implementation), defines key concepts such as OECMs and human rights-based approaches, and provides guidance on integrating biodiversity conservation with climate goals and national policies.

The report explores how repeating national climate risk assessments (CRAs) can support the monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL) of national adaptation efforts. While CRAs are traditionally used to inform planning, the author argues they can also track changes in vulnerability over time to assess adaptation success. Analysis of 12 countries reveals a shift toward viewing CRAs as continuous learning processes rather than static reports, with a growing consensus that updates should occur roughly every five years to align with policy cycles. However, the report finds that fully standardized approaches to repeating CRAs are often impractical due to evolving science and shifting policy priorities. Instead, it suggests a flexible approach where only specific components are standardized. Early adopters like Germany and the United Kingdom have begun using CRAs to evaluate NAP effectiveness, though they face methodological challenges, including the time lag between implementing measures and seeing tangible risk reductions.

The report explores how national climate risk assessments (CRAs) can transition from one-off planning documents to iterative tools for monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL). Based on analysis from 12 countries, it argues that while periodic CRAs are essential for evidence-based National Adaptation Plans (NAPs), a fully standardized approach is often impractical due to evolving scientific knowledge and shifting policy priorities. The document highlights that countries like Germany and the UK are beginning to use CRAs to assess whether vulnerability is decreasing, though methodological challenges remain, such as the time lag between adaptation action and observable risk reduction.

The document asserts that ISDS mechanisms act as a major barrier to environmental and climate policies by allowing foreign investors to challenge state regulations. It highlights a lack of transparency, the phenomenon of 'regulatory chill' where states avoid policy for fear of arbitration, and the failure of 'modernized' treaties to limit risks. The authors argue that investment treaties do not significantly increase foreign direct investment but do impose high costs on states, particularly in the Global South. They recommend that states terminate old treaties, carve out climate measures from ISDS scope, and shift dispute resolution to domestic judicial systems.

The report argues that current global crises—including climate change, biodiversity loss, and extreme inequality—are symptoms of a systemic failure driven by neoliberal capitalism and corporate power. It proposes five interconnected 'pathways' for systemic change: gender justice, a transition to democratically controlled renewable energy, food sovereignty through agroecology, community forest management, and a redistributive economy that prioritizes people and the planet over profit. The document emphasizes the need to dismantle the patriarchy, challenge corporate impunity through binding international treaties, and support the rights of Indigenous peoples and local communities to manage their territories.

The document argues that current economic systems are failing and that large-scale economic reform requires broad public support, which can be generated through participatory mechanisms. It defines a 'social contract' as an agreement between state and society on rights, responsibilities, and resource distribution, suggesting that a new 'eco-social contract' is needed to prioritize the planet and people over profit. The briefing details various innovative mechanisms for citizen engagement—such as citizen assemblies, participatory budgeting, and just transition processes—and identifies five key tools best suited for driving economic reform. It emphasizes the need to expand these mechanisms to the Global South and frontline communities to restore trust and create a 'social mandate' for a just and sustainable transition.

The assessment finds that data transparency in Asia is generally insufficient, with 24 out of 39 economies scoring poorly. While high-income nations and a few lower-middle income economies like India, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka show better transparency, the region overall struggles with publishing lags, geographical granularity, and time granularity. Only seven economies provide hourly data, and 75% of economies fail to make data available in a timely manner, hindering the analysis required for a renewable energy transition.

The report identifies New Zealand, Australia, and India as leaders in power data transparency, evaluating them across six criteria: time granularity, publishing lag, geographical granularity, fuel breakdown, ease of access, and additional data. It specifically examines the partnership between India's NITI Aayog and the Vasudha Foundation to create a centralized, open-access data platform for the country's energy transition. The document concludes with recommendations for improving data transparency across Asia, emphasizing machine-readable formats, unique identifiers, and the removal of access restrictions.

The Asia Data Transparency Report 2023 finds that over half of the surveyed Asian economies have poor or insufficient power sector data transparency, affecting the electricity needs of 684 million people. While high-income economies generally score better, some lower-middle income nations like India, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka are demonstrating good practice. The report emphasizes that granular, real-time, and open-access data is essential for grid optimization and evidence-based policymaking to meet decarbonisation targets. It highlights a successful public-private partnership in India between NITI Aayog and the Vasudha Foundation and provides nine practical recommendations for improving data governance, including the use of machine-readable formats and unique identifiers.

The report analyzes the increasing engagement of UN human rights treaty bodies (HRTBs) with climate change, noting that in 2022, 52 percent of outputs to States included climate-related recommendations. It highlights a shift toward more specific demands regarding mitigation, the phasing out of fossil fuels, and the protection of vulnerable groups, including children, women, and Indigenous Peoples. A landmark decision by the Human Rights Committee in Billy et al. v. Australia established a State's duty to protect individuals from climate impacts and provide effective remedy. The document argues for further HRTB guidance on extraterritorial obligations and the regulation of private business actors to prevent climate-induced human rights violations.

The briefing advocates for a global Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty based on three pillars: ending new exploration and production, phasing out existing production equitably, and enabling a just global transition. It outlines the necessity of international coordination to address the supply side of climate change, noting that current global production plans exceed 1.5°C limits. The document provides a roadmap for governments to support the treaty through public endorsements, diplomatic engagement, and domestic policy measures such as removing subsidies and restricting new infrastructure.

The briefing advocates for an international treaty to end the proliferation of coal, oil, and gas, phase out existing production equitably, and enable a global just transition. It outlines the necessary 'ingredients' for such a treaty, proposes specific diplomatic and domestic actions for governments, and provides suggested language for multilateral statements.

The briefing advocates for an international treaty to end fossil fuel proliferation through three pillars: prohibiting new exploration and production, phasing out existing production equitably, and facilitating a just transition for dependent countries and communities. It outlines the necessary ingredients for such a treaty—including civil society movements and 'champion' countries like Vanuatu and Tuvalu—and provides a roadmap of diplomatic and national policy actions for governments to reduce fossil fuel dependency.

The briefing proposes a Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty based on three pillars: preventing new exploration licenses, phasing out existing production equitably, and ensuring a just transition for workers and dependent communities. It outlines a strategy for 'precursor countries' to drive international cooperation, suggests specific diplomatic actions for national governments, and provides a menu of domestic policy options to reduce fossil fuel dependency.

The briefing asserts that current climate frameworks, including the Paris Agreement, are insufficient because they focus on emissions (demand) rather than production (supply). It proposes a new legal instrument—a Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty—to prevent the proliferation of fossil fuels, manage a fair phase-out where wealthy nations transition fastest, and ensure a global just transition for workers and communities. The document outlines building blocks for this cooperation, such as the Beyond Oil and Gas Alliance (BOGA) and a Global Registry of Fossil Fuels, and calls for governments to support the initiative and an ICJ Advisory opinion on climate change.

The briefing asserts that current global production plans for fossil fuels will lead to emissions more than double what is compatible with the 1.5 °C target. It argues that while the Paris Agreement focuses on emissions, a new international legal instrument is needed to specifically target the supply side by ending new exploration and managing the equitable decline of existing production. The proposed treaty framework emphasizes a 'just transition' where wealthy nations transition fastest and provide financial and technological support to poorer, dependent nations. The document suggests a path toward this treaty through new country coalitions, such as the Beyond Oil and Gas Alliance (BOGA), increased transparency via the Global Fossil Fuel Registry, and the potential creation of a Global Commission on Fossil Fuels.