Search Climate Insights Directory

A review of 41 multisector NAP documents reveals that transboundary climate risks are sporadically mentioned and lack a systematic approach, with most references limited to shared ecosystems like river basins. The document argues that the dominance of place-based adaptation and state sovereignty norms hinder the integration of cross-border risks, and recommends leveraging intergovernmental organizations and territorial framing to improve regional collaboration.

Friends of the Earth International argues that the current global crises—climate, biodiversity, and social inequality—are rooted in a capitalist model, industrial agriculture, and patriarchal relations. The organization advocates for a transition toward a 'new economy' based on solidarity, food sovereignty, and community-led energy and forest management. It emphasizes the necessity of dismantling corporate power and oppression to create a world where human rights and planetary boundaries are central to governance.

Friends of the Earth International proposes a framework for 'system change' to address the interconnected crises of climate change, biodiversity loss, and social inequality. The document identifies five primary pathways for transformation: gender justice, energy sovereignty, food sovereignty, community forest management, and a regenerative economy. It critiques 'false solutions'—such as carbon markets and geoengineering—that allow corporations to profit while maintaining harmful structures. The report emphasizes the role of grassroots movements, the reclamation of the state for the common good, and internationalist solidarity to dismantle corporate power and patriarchy.

Friends of the Earth International argues that systemic change requires dismantling the capitalist economic model, industrial agriculture, fossil-fuel-based energy, and patriarchal relations. The organization advocates for a transition toward food sovereignty, climate justice, and community-led biodiversity management, emphasizing the need to replace corporate power with popular sovereignty and solidarity. The guide provides specific examples of these pathways in action, including legal victories against Shell in the Netherlands, community forest management in Indonesia, and renewable energy initiatives in Palestine and Africa.

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 global systems—specifically capitalism, industrial agriculture, fossil-fuel energy, and patriarchy—are based on oppression and exploitation. It proposes a transition toward a world based on solidarity, people's sovereignty, and harmony with nature. The framework focuses on several key pathways: transforming the energy system toward 100% renewables, establishing food sovereignty through agroecology, implementing community-led forest management, and dismantling the power of large corporations to prioritize people and the planet. The guide provides case studies from Palestine, Indonesia, Africa, the Netherlands, Uruguay, Brazil, and Colombia to illustrate these systemic shifts in action.

The report by Friends of the Earth International outlines a framework for systemic change to address the interconnected crises of climate change, biodiversity loss, and social inequality. It identifies neoliberal capitalism, patriarchy, and colonialism as the root causes of these crises and proposes 'people's solutions' centered on gender justice, democratic energy systems, food sovereignty, community forest management, and a distributive economy. The document emphasizes the need to dismantle corporate power and reclaim political agency to ensure a future based on social, environmental, and gender justice.

The report analyzes 41 multisectoral National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) to explore their role in managing loss and damage. It finds that while nearly half of NAPs explicitly mention loss and damage and almost all incorporate disaster risk management, there are significant gaps in addressing non-economic losses and irreversible impacts. The authors argue that NAPs are essential tools for minimizing loss and damage and recommend that international funding and planning for loss and damage build upon existing NAP risk assessments and institutional frameworks.

The report analyzes 41 multisectoral NAPs to determine the extent to which they integrate loss and damage (L&D) information and actions. It argues that NAPs are fundamental tools for minimizing L&D through adaptation and disaster risk management, though they often lack detailed analysis of irreversible impacts and non-economic losses. The authors propose a 'spectrum' approach to L&D—ranging from avoidance (mitigation) to minimization (adaptation/DRR) and addressing (humanitarian response/reparations)—and recommend that international financing mechanisms leverage existing NAP risk assessments to avoid duplication and ensure climate justice.

The report analyzes 41 multisectoral National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) to assess their integration of loss and damage (L&D) strategies. It finds that while nearly half of NAPs explicitly mention L&D and almost all include disaster risk management (DRM) components, there is a significant gap in addressing non-economic losses and irreversible impacts. The document proposes a 'spectrum' approach to L&D, ranging from avoidance (mitigation) and minimization (adaptation/DRR) to remediation (humanitarian response and reparations). It recommends that governments and international funders leverage existing NAP risk analyses as a starting point for L&D assessments and ensure that new L&D financing targets impacts that exceed adaptation limits to avoid duplicating existing adaptation efforts.

China's engagement in the Middle East is fundamentally driven by the need for energy security, as it imports approximately half of its crude oil from the region. To mitigate vulnerabilities, Beijing utilizes the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) to invest in infrastructure and digital technology, while balancing diplomatic ties between Saudi Arabia and Iran. China has recently acted as a mediator in the Saudi-Iran relationship and is expanding its arms trade, offering alternatives to US weapons. Following the escalation of the Israel-Hamas conflict, China has shifted its approach to favor Palestine and Arab states, viewing its ties with Israel as increasingly expendable to better align with the Global South.

The Middle East experienced a significant decline in battle-related deaths in 2022, primarily due to de-escalation in Syria and Yemen. While state-based conflicts remain the deadliest and most common, non-state conflicts proliferated in the 2010s before declining. One-sided violence increased in Iran in 2022 following protests sparked by the death of Mahsa Amini.

The report argues that the rapid deployment of renewable energy in the Global South often mirrors the destructive patterns of the fossil fuel era, leading to 'green grabbing' and 'energy colonialism'. Through case studies, it demonstrates how mega-solar projects in India and lithium mining in Argentina displace communities and deplete water resources, while political obstacles and outdated grids hinder decentralized energy access in Bangladesh and Palestine. The document advocates for a feminist energy transition centered on energy sovereignty, small-scale decentralized technology, and the protection of land and water rights.

The report argues that the rapid deployment of renewable energy in the Global South often mirrors the harms of the fossil fuel era, leading to 'green grabbing' and 'green energy colonialism'. Through case studies, it documents the displacement of rural and pastoral communities in India, the impact of Israeli occupation on energy sovereignty in Palestine, political apathy toward decentralized solar in Bangladesh, and the ecological threats posed by lithium extraction in Argentina. It emphasizes that without community control, gender equality, and rigorous environmental oversight, the energy transition risks sacrificing the rights of marginalized peoples for a perceived global collective interest.

The report argues that the rapid scale-up of renewables in the Global South often replicates 'energy colonialism' and 'green grabbing,' where land and resources are appropriated for climate goals while host communities suffer from loss of livelihoods, water scarcity, and continued energy poverty. Through case studies in India, Palestine, Bangladesh, and Argentina, it highlights systemic barriers including patriarchal structures that exclude women from decision-making, outdated grid infrastructure, and a lack of effective environmental impact assessments. It recommends a shift toward small-scale, socially controlled, and decentralized renewable energy that prioritizes human rights and ecological conservation over corporate profit.

The CESCR addressed climate change in most of its 2023 work, including twelve Concluding Observations and seven Lists of Issues. The Committee focused on mitigation policies, urging states like Brazil, Panama, and Portugal to meet their Paris Agreement NDCs, and recommended that China expand its emissions trading system and stop financing overseas coal power. Adaptation efforts were highlighted in nineteen statements, with specific calls for national adaptation plans in Cambodia, Palestine, and Yemen, and an emphasis on the participation of Indigenous Peoples in Panama. Additionally, the Committee challenged the fossil fuel reliance of states such as Qatar and China, while inquiring about oil refinery pollution in Curaçao.

The Healthy NDC Scorecard 2023 analyzes 58 NDCs to evaluate the integration of health into national climate policies. While 90% of analyzed NDCs mention health and climate linkages, the report finds a significant mismatch between health recognition and actual climate ambition, particularly in G20 nations. Low- and middle-income countries generally achieved the highest health scores, while several high-income nations scored zero. The report recommends enhanced intersectoral collaboration, the quantification of health co-benefits to secure financing, and the exclusion of the fossil fuel industry from climate policymaking.

The document advocates for a transition to renewable energy based on 'energy sovereignty' and 'energy sufficiency' rather than corporate extractivism. It warns that urgent climate action can lead to 'green' projects that cause land grabbing and human rights violations. Through case studies in India, Argentina, Palestine, and Scotland, it illustrates the need for community participation, respect for land rights, circular economy investments, and a move away from treating energy as a commodity.

The document analyzes the Mediterranean's electricity grid infrastructure, identifying four main interconnection zones and various proposed projects like the EuroAsia and EuroAfrica Interconnectors. It highlights how geopolitical tensions, particularly in the Eastern Mediterranean, hinder integration while suggesting that the energy transition and EU demand for renewables could drive cooperation. The author proposes guidelines for enhancing interconnectivity, emphasizing the need for political alignment and regulatory cooperation.

The document explores how ethics functions within peace negotiations, arguing that while often implicit or subordinated to power and strategy, ethical considerations significantly impact the process. Using the 'situated holism framework'—which analyzes positions, participants, practices, procedures, and principles—the author identifies key ethical dilemmas, such as the tradeoff between immediate peace and long-term justice, the legitimacy of including controversial stakeholders, and the tension between a negotiator's mandate and the urgency of reaching an agreement. The findings suggest that ethics in this field is often a matter of 'principled realism,' where normative concerns coexist with realpolitik.