Search Climate Insights Directory

This research paper examines the development of green economies within the BRICS nations, analyzing how individual national economic priorities and policy approaches have led to varying levels of adoption and skepticism toward green growth.

The document introduces the CaRROT toolkit, an MS Excel-based tool for Kenya's flower industry to account for GHG emissions, energy, and water consumption. It outlines the assessment methodology based on ISO, IPCC, and GHG Protocol standards, and identifies climate-related business opportunities such as the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and voluntary carbon markets. The report recommends establishing sectoral baselines and enhancing capacity building to transition the industry toward a low-carbon model.

Carbon Market Watch advocates for a domestic greenhouse gas reduction target of at least 55% by 2030 for Europe. The briefing argues that international offsetting is a 'major policy failure' that undermines domestic abatement and calls for the expiration of the estimated 2 billion surplus allowances and offsets accumulated up to 2020. It further recommends increasing the 'linear reduction factor' for permits in the EU ETS and implementing strict safeguards for any future linking with external carbon markets to prevent the import of substandard credits.

The document argues that fossil fuel subsidies undermine climate mitigation and the trading system, yet remain under-reported at the WTO due to definitional ambiguities and Member reluctance. It concludes that while formal rules on such subsidies are unlikely in the near term, the Trade Policy Review Mechanism (TPRM) provides a non-coercive forum for transparency. The authors propose a standardized notification template for NGOs to provide publicly available data on fossil fuel subsidies to the WTO Secretariat, thereby encouraging government accountability and potential reform without immediately triggering legal disputes.

The document posits a correlation between domestic climate laws and international ambition, suggesting that national legislation provides the confidence and evidence needed for negotiators to defend ambitious global commitments. It identifies several factors influencing a country's negotiation position, including economic competitiveness, national interest, and leadership goals, while noting that the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) serves as the primary system for these negotiations.

The document analyzes how climate change affects the production, logistics, and consumption of bioenergy in the Nordic region, specifically Denmark, Finland, and Sweden. While warming temperatures may increase biomass productivity in Northern Europe, the region faces risks from extreme weather and pest infestations. The brief argues for diversifying supply chains and increasing fuel flexibility to build resilience against climate-driven disruptions in global bioenergy trade.

The report examines the water-energy nexus, focusing on the trade-offs associated with hydropower and bioenergy. It highlights the role of hydropower in grid stability and the water-intensive nature of bioenergy feedstock, while emphasizing the need for integrated water management and strict sustainability criteria for private sector investments, particularly in developing countries.

The briefing critiques the EU's Energy Roadmap 2050 for providing only a "superficial treatment" of energy security, primarily limiting its analysis to import dependency and grid stability. The authors argue that energy security is a complex concept encompassing not only security of supply but also security of demand, economic and political risks, and environmental threats. They highlight that the roadmap relies on implicit assumptions—such as the guaranteed expansion of transmission infrastructure and the resolution of nuclear security issues—which may conceal potential challenges in the transition to a low-carbon system. The document advocates for a shift from purely quantitative metrics to a framework that includes qualitative assessments and considers the perspectives of various actors, including households and industries.

The document examines the concept of 'unburnable carbon' and the risk of 'lock-in' where new fossil fuel infrastructure commits societies to high-emission pathways. It highlights a gap in green growth planning, which typically focuses on demand-side efficiency rather than supply-side extraction limits. The authors argue that without widespread carbon capture and storage (CCS), a 2°C warming limit will require leaving the majority of coal and unconventional oil reserves in the ground, potentially creating a 'carbon bubble' of overvalued assets.

The Living Planet Report 2014 highlights a critical decline in global vertebrate populations and an ecological overshoot where humanity requires 1.5 Earths to sustain its current consumption. It emphasizes the interdependence of food, water, and energy security with healthy ecosystems and proposes a 'One Planet Perspective' to align human development with planetary boundaries.

The report documents a pattern of violence and judicial harassment against land and environmental rights defenders in 2013. It argues that these individuals are particularly vulnerable as global competition for land and resources increases, often facing threats from government forces and corporations. The document provides specific case studies from Europe, the Americas, Africa, and Asia, detailing arrests, murders, and forced evictions linked to opposition against extractive industries, mega-projects, and agribusiness.

The report examines the potential of South Africa's shale gas reserves, estimated by the US Energy Information Administration as the eighth largest globally. It contrasts a 'Base Case' of no fracking with a 'Shale Boom' and a 'Blue Bridge' scenario. While a shale boom could boost GDP and reduce poverty, it risks significant water contamination in the semi-arid Karoo region and may increase long-term carbon emissions by delaying renewable energy investment. The authors propose a 'Blue Bridge' approach, using an excise tax on fracking to fund renewable energy infrastructure, which they argue could maximize economic growth while ensuring long-term environmental sustainability.

The paper argues that while FDI is beneficial for growth, the tendency of transnational companies to prioritize short-term shareholder dividends over long-term reinvestment (Brownfield investments) exacerbates current account deficits in middle-income countries. In South Africa, this is particularly acute because large investment income outflows are not offset by a trade surplus, unlike in some other BRIC nations. The author recommends shifting policy toward attracting 'quality' FDI that is labour-absorbing and export-oriented, utilizing corporate-level incentives to encourage the reinvestment of profits into the domestic economy.

The paper examines how Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa integrate green economy principles into their national development strategies. It finds that while some countries like South Africa embrace the concept as a path to sustainable development and job creation, others, such as Brazil, view it with skepticism, fearing it may benefit developed nations or hinder economic growth. The authors conclude that for a green transition to be successful, it must be aligned with each country's specific economic priorities and social objectives.

The policy brief argues that Africa has been sidelined in the Doha Development Round (DDR) and must shift from relying on emerging power leadership to a strategy of 'common interest' partnerships. It specifically identifies trade facilitation and a Least Developed Country (LDC) package as key areas for leverage. The author emphasizes that the Africa Group should use its collective voting power to mediate and block harmful decisions while maintaining internal unity to avoid marginalization in a global economy increasingly shaped by Free Trade Areas and the rise of BRIC nations.

Carbon Market Watch argues that international carbon offsets have failed to deliver promised climate benefits and have undermined the EU's domestic abatement efforts. The brief recommends a legally binding EU domestic GHG reduction target of at least 55% below 1990 levels for 2030, the total elimination of international offsets for meeting mitigation obligations post-2020, and the implementation of safeguards when linking the EU ETS to other trading schemes. It further suggests that climate finance should shift away from carbon markets toward regulation, standards, and incentive programs, such as performance-based financing for Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs).

The document examines China's approach to the green economy, noting a domestic consensus on the need for green transformation due to severe environmental degradation, while highlighting China's reluctance to accept mandatory international obligations that might hinder economic growth. It analyzes the 2012 G-20 summit in Mexico, where the concept of 'inclusive green growth' was introduced to balance environmental goals with the social and economic concerns of developing nations. The author argues that China's internal organizational framework—where the Ministry of Finance coordinates G-20 affairs but the Ministry of Environmental Protection is excluded—contributed to its lack of engagement with the G-20's green growth agenda. Ultimately, the paper suggests that while the G-20 process has not yet directly shaped Chinese national policy, increasing domestic pressure and international dialogue may eventually push China toward more active participation and acceptance of green obligations.

The document examines the tension between the 'green growth' agenda promoted by developed nations and Brazil's preference for 'sustainable development' and autonomous industrialisation. It argues that while Brazil possesses significant environmental assets, its domestic policies—including those of the BNDES and Petrobras—continue to prioritise short-term economic growth and fossil fuel consumption over a green transition. Internationally, Brazil aligns with BRICS and other emerging economies to resist binding emissions commitments and protectionist 'green' trade barriers, despite its own voluntary GHG reduction targets.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) warns that TTIP may hinder public health and safety goals by promoting regulatory harmonization and mutual recognition that could lower chemical safety standards. The document highlights the divergence between the EU's hazard-based REACH approach and the US's risk-based TSCA approach, arguing that trade-driven 'regulatory coherence' often results in a 'lowest-common denominator' outcome. It further cautions against investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanisms, which could allow corporations to sue governments over environmental laws, and warns that TTIP could preempt protective sub-national regulations in the US and EU. Finally, it suggests that a US-EU agreement could negatively influence the development of chemical regulations in other regions, such as the BRIICS countries.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), on behalf of several environmental organizations, warns the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance that TTIP may prioritize trade interests over public health. The document highlights the divergence between the EU's hazard-based REACH regulation and the U.S.'s risk-based Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), arguing that harmonization or mutual recognition could lead to a 'lowest-common denominator' approach to chemical safety. It specifically opposes investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanisms, which it claims allow corporations to sue governments over public interest laws, and warns that TTIP could preempt protective sub-federal laws in the U.S. and national laws in EU member states. Finally, it suggests that a restrictive TTIP could discourage other nations, particularly BRIICS countries, from adopting more stringent chemical safety standards.