Search Climate Insights Directory

The policy brief argues that the USD 8.5 billion Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP) in South Africa relies on a 'de-risking' model that prioritises private finance and Independent Power Producers (IPPs), shifting commercial risks to the state and consumers. This approach is criticised for potentially worsening South Africa's debt profile, increasing energy poverty through higher tariffs, and undermining local renewable energy manufacturing. The authors suggest alternatives including the regulation of PPPs, debt cancellation of 'odious debt' (such as World Bank loans for the Medupi plant), climate reparations, and the implementation of allocative green credit policies to direct investment toward productive, labour-intensive green industries.

The document critiques the South African JETP for prioritising blended finance and public-private partnerships (PPPs), which the authors argue shifts commercial risk to the state while privatising gains. It highlights how this model can increase energy poverty through higher tariffs and hinder local renewable energy manufacturing. The brief suggests alternatives such as regulating private finance, pursuing debt cancellation and climate reparations, and implementing allocative green credit policies.

The report analyzes the African medical manufacturing landscape, highlighting a heavy reliance on imports (over 70% for health technology) and a concentration of capabilities in North Africa, South Africa, and Nigeria. It identifies critical gaps in Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient (API) production and medical device manufacturing, while noting that vaccine production is limited to four countries. The study argues that localization is a political project requiring a shift from generic-drug business models to more complex technologies, supported by patient capital, innovative public procurement, and the establishment of specialized pharmaceutical parks. It emphasizes the need for regulatory harmonization and the development of local 'notifying bodies' for medical devices to reduce compliance costs.

The report examines the global cocoa market, highlighting the tension between growing demand and climate-related supply risks. It analyzes how VSSs like Fairtrade and Rainforest Alliance attempt to improve sustainability and farmer incomes, while noting that power imbalances and low farm-gate prices continue to drive poverty among the 5 to 6 million cocoa farmers worldwide.

The document examines the 'fair and equitable treatment' (FET) standard, a controversial provision found in nearly 95% of international investment agreements. It argues that the vagueness of FET leads to inconsistent interpretations by arbitral tribunals, which can result in 'regulatory chill' for states. The brief analyzes five common treaty formulations of FET and concludes that even 'new-generation' agreements often produce the same unpredictable outcomes as older ones. To mitigate these risks, the authors propose three policy options: excluding FET standards entirely, using alternative terminology like 'fair administrative treatment,' or implementing a strictly defined, closed list of breach conditions that explicitly excludes investor expectations.

The document examines the 'fair and equitable treatment' (FET) standard in international investment agreements, noting its prevalence in nearly 95% of such treaties and its role in 83% of treaty-based arbitrations. It argues that the vagueness of FET leads to inconsistent interpretations by tribunals, which can result in 'regulatory chill' for states. The brief outlines five common formulations of FET and suggests three primary policy alternatives: excluding the FET standard entirely, using alternative terminology like 'fair administrative treatment', or implementing a strictly defined, limited FET standard with a closed list of violations.

The document analyzes the 'fair and equitable treatment' (FET) standard, which appears in nearly 95% of international investment agreements and is the basis for approximately 83% of investor-state arbitrations. It argues that the lack of a precise definition allows tribunals to expand the standard's scope, creating legal unpredictability and 'regulatory chill' for states. The brief details five common drafting approaches—ranging from unqualified FET clauses to those linked to customary international law—and concludes that even 'new generation' treaties often produce the same results as older ones. To protect their right to regulate, the authors suggest three policy options: excluding the FET standard entirely, using alternative terminology like 'fair administrative treatment', or implementing a strictly defined, closed list of violations that explicitly excludes investor expectations.

The 2022 Green Central Banking Scorecard evaluates G20 monetary and prudential authorities, finding that most remain insufficiently ambitious in mitigating climate risks. While research and advocacy have improved, the report argues that central banks prioritize analysis over action and are hindered by a commitment to 'market neutrality' and flawed taxonomies. The Banque de France is the top-ranked institution, while Saudi Arabia is the lowest. The report recommends implementing green lending schemes, increasing capital requirements for fossil fuel exposures, and adopting a 'double materiality' framework to account for the financial sector's impact on the environment.

The report argues that India's buildings sector must adopt an integrative whole-system approach to address both embodied and operational emissions. It highlights that building operations account for about a third of India's energy use, and without intervention, energy consumption could triple by 2050. The proposed framework prioritises reducing energy needs through passive design, serving those needs with super-efficient equipment, and transitioning to clean energy procurement and demand flexibility. Key recommendations include government mandates for net-zero public buildings, the adoption of carbon accounting for corporations, and the implementation of building performance standards to ensure actual operational efficiency.

In 2022, 1.2 billion rural and urban poor were at high risk due to lack of cooling access, an increase of 28 million from 2021. An additional 2.47 billion lower-middle-income people are at medium risk, while 1.36 billion middle-income people are at low risk. The report highlights that while electricity access has improved, income and urbanization trends drive cooling demand, with significant risks concentrated in Africa and the 'Critical 9' countries.

The document examines how anti-fossil fuel norms—specifically the phase-out of coal, oil, and gas, the end of public financing for fossil fuels, and subsidy reform—can overlook the needs of marginalized communities and the Global South. It argues that while these norms create political momentum, they risk causing unintended inequitable consequences, such as asset stranding in developing nations, unless paired with financial support and a focus on energy access.

The report finds that IFIs have historically had limited exposure to the steel sector, with most investments focused on business-as-usual modernization rather than transformative decarbonization. While barriers such as the high capital intensity of steel projects and a lack of national policy frameworks in developing countries exist, the authors argue that IFIs can accelerate the transition by de-risking first movers, supporting green hydrogen strategies, and creating demand through green public procurement standards for infrastructure projects.

The report argues that transitioning away from industrial meat production is essential for climate and health goals but requires a 'just transition' framework to protect vulnerable stakeholders. It identifies five key stakeholder groups—consumers, farmers, workers, communities, and companies—and outlines five guiding principles for policy-makers: phasing down industrial meat support, increasing support for sustainable alternatives, ensuring inclusive planning, providing offset support for adverse impacts, and addressing root causes of injustice.

The document examines the intersection of global trade flows and climate change, highlighting how trade can both exacerbate emissions through 'embodied' carbon and facilitate the diffusion of green technologies. It details a variety of policy levers—including border carbon adjustments, the removal of fossil fuel subsidies, and the liberalization of environmental goods—that can align trade with climate goals. The brief analyzes the role of the WTO, noting that while existing rules generally allow for good-faith environmental policies, tensions arise over local content requirements and discriminatory measures. It highlights member-led initiatives like the Trade and Environmental Sustainability Structured Discussions (TESSD) and the Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reform group as critical paths for future cooperation, emphasizing the need for a 'just transition' for developing countries and least developed countries (LDCs).

The document evaluates the IMF's updated surveillance practices by analyzing recent reports for Indonesia and South Africa. While it notes a 'sea change' in the IMF's willingness to integrate climate issues—such as endorsing carbon taxes and green financing—it argues that the organization continues to prioritize steep fiscal consolidation and austerity. This focus on budget deficit ceilings is seen as a threat to the funding required for climate adaptation and mitigation. The authors highlight significant 'blind spots,' including the failure to fully account for the long-term fiscal risks of stranded fossil fuel assets and the potential for carbon-intensive exports to decline as trade partners decarbonize. The report concludes that while there is 'cautious optimism' due to more sophisticated analytical work, the IMF's advice remains insufficient for achieving a socially-just green transition.

The report argues that current climate finance is woefully inadequate to meet Paris Agreement goals, with developing countries alone requiring $4.3 trillion for 2030 commitments. It outlines a three-stage framework—planning, implementation, and monitoring—and details a variety of fiscal and policy instruments to align public spending, increase public funding, and mobilize private capital.

The report evaluates seven ocean-based carbon dioxide removal (CDR) strategies: coastal blue carbon restoration, seaweed cultivation, ocean fertilization, artificial upwelling, alkalinity enhancement, electrochemical techniques, and artificial downwelling. It finds that most of these methods are in early development with significant scientific gaps and environmental risks. The authors argue that current international legal frameworks, such as UNCLOS and the CBD, are insufficient to proactively regulate these technologies. To address this, the report recommends increasing funding for collaborative research, establishing an international code of conduct for at-sea trials, and developing a comprehensive global governance regime to manage transboundary impacts and ensure equitable benefit sharing.

The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022 represents the largest congressional action to date on climate change, allocating nearly $370 billion toward disadvantaged communities and clean energy. It introduces technology-neutral tax credits starting in 2025, a 10-year runway for energy incentives, and significant funding for domestic manufacturing of solar, wind, and batteries. Rhodium Group modeling suggests the IRA could increase U.S. greenhouse gas reductions to 31%-44% by 2030, potentially meeting the U.S. nationally determined contribution when combined with other agency and local actions. The law also establishes the $27 billion Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and provides incentives for electric vehicle adoption, though domestic content requirements may affect the scale of EV growth.

The report finds that while global climate finance almost doubled between 2011 and 2020, reaching a cumulative USD 4.8 trillion, current growth rates are insufficient to meet climate goals. Preliminary 2021 estimates show an all-time high of USD 850–940 billion, driven largely by electric vehicle demand. However, a significant gap remains in adaptation finance, and continued fossil fuel subsidies in 51 major countries exceeded total global climate finance investment for the 2011-2020 period. The report argues that annual flows must reach USD 4.3 trillion by 2030 to avoid the worst impacts of climate change.

The report finds that the world's largest private companies significantly lag behind their publicly-listed counterparts in setting net zero targets and publishing implementation plans. While 69% of the top 100 public companies have net zero targets, only 32% of the top 100 private companies do. Furthermore, only 13% of private companies with targets have published a plan to achieve them, compared to 73% of public companies. The analysis highlights a 'blind spot' in climate accountability, particularly in high-emitting sectors like fossil fuels, where none of the investigated private firms have pledged net zero. The authors warn of 'fossil-spinning,' where public companies divest carbon-intensive assets to less-regulated private firms, and call for mandatory climate disclosure for large private entities to ensure whole-economy decarbonisation.