Search Climate Insights Directory

SEforALL's 100 Days Report details the organization's efforts to integrate sustainable energy into COVID-19 recovery plans through 'Recover Better' guides for Africa, the Caribbean, and Southeast Asia. The report highlights the pandemic's severe impact on the off-grid sector, where surveyed companies expect revenue losses between 27% and 40%. It also outlines the launch of the 'Powering Healthcare' resource hub and the 'Chilling Prospects 2020' report, which identifies that 1.02 billion people lack cooling access. Strategically, SEforALL has approved a new Three-Year Business Plan (2021-2023) focusing on high-level advocacy and country-specific implementation across four thematic areas: Energy Diplomacy and Advocacy, Energy Access and Closing the Gap, Energy Transitions and Climate, and Intersection with other SDGs.

The proposal aims to support Morocco's 2030 Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) by addressing the lack of climate finance at the regional, provincial, and communal levels. It proposes two main components: the design of a multi-sector National Financing Vehicle (NFV) to blend public and private capital, and the creation of a 'train-the-trainer' capacity-building program for the Climate Change Competency Center (4C). The project will identify a 'champion' region to develop a climate finance pipeline and a GCF concept note, which will then inform the national training program. The initiative is designed to transition Morocco from a project-based funding approach to a coherent national integrated climate change investment strategy.

The report analyzes the fragile political alliance between President Felix Tshisekedi's CACH coalition and former President Joseph Kabila's FCC, which dominates the DRC's parliament. It identifies key priorities for the 2019–2023 period, including reforming the CENI and Constitutional Court, addressing socio-economic needs, and stabilizing the eastern DRC. The author presents several scenarios ranging from a best-case transition to democracy to a fragmentation and chaos scenario, while emphasizing the role of the international community and regional neighbors in supporting transformational change.

The Lab has launched six financial instruments targeting blue carbon, sustainable agriculture, sustainable cities, and energy access. These instruments, which follow a seven-month design and stress-testing period, aim to mobilize significant investment for sustainable development. Key projects include mangrove restoration in the Philippines, blockchain-based crop insurance in Kenya, and solar securitization in Rwanda.

The paper argues that ignoring gender and power inequalities in climate change adaptation is maladaptive and leads to further exclusion. It advocates for 'gender-transformative adaptation'—which seeks to change the fundamental attributes of a system and address the root causes of vulnerability—across the natural environment, food security, sustainable cities, infrastructure, industry, and finance. The authors highlight how intersecting inequalities (income, ethnicity, age, etc.) compound vulnerability and recommend rigorous, participatory gender analyses to inform policy and project design. Key findings include the risk of 'elite capture' in the green economy and the critical need for women's land and resource rights to enable nature-based solutions.

The paper argues that ignoring gender and power inequalities in climate adaptation is maladaptive and recommends transforming social structures to ensure equitable resilience. It analyzes six key systems—natural environment, food security, sustainable cities, infrastructure, industry, and finance—demonstrating how patriarchal norms and intersecting inequalities (such as class, ethnicity, and age) disproportionately burden women and marginalized groups. The authors advocate for rigorous gender analyses, the redistribution of care work, and the inclusion of diverse voices in decision-making to move beyond tokenistic gender mainstreaming toward systemic, gender-transformative change.

The report finds that insurance markets in Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, and Rwanda are underdeveloped, with low penetration and significant 'risk-protection gaps' for households and SMEs. While government-led health insurance has increased overall uptake, private insurance remains focused on large corporate risks and compulsory lines, which often lead to irrational price competition and poor consumer value. The authors argue that the sector's role as an institutional investor is limited by short-term balance sheets and a lack of long-term investment instruments. To unlock the potential of insurance for development, the report proposes six imperatives: proactive policy leadership, a transition to risk-based supervision, driving innovation through better data and regulatory tools, re-engineering compulsory products, improving risk management for SMEs, and incentivising long-term savings to support capital market development.

The 1969 OAU Refugee Convention has been ratified by 47 of 55 AU member states and is credited with expanding the legal definition of a refugee to include those fleeing external aggression or public order disturbances. Despite its wide domestication, implementation is hindered by xenophobia, security concerns, and declining international funding. The report argues that the Global Compact on Refugees (GCR) and its Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework (CRRF) can reinforce the Convention by promoting responsibility sharing, regional approaches, and socio-economic inclusion of refugees.

The document examines the Global Compact on Refugees (GCR) and the Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework (CRRF), arguing that while they offer a progressive 'whole of society' approach to refugee integration, their non-binding nature and flawed funding mechanisms hinder their effectiveness in Africa. It highlights a gap between liberal policy and implementation in South Africa and the failure of the CRRF in Tanzania due to financial burdens. The authors advocate for a results-based management system and a stronger link between security, development, and migration to address the root causes of displacement on the continent.

The report describes Africa as a 'resilient but marginal player' in a global order where multilateralism is eroding and power is shifting toward a polycentric model. It identifies key barriers to African agency, including structural economic dependence, internal political fragmentation among 55 diverse states, and limited capacity at UN missions. The authors argue that Africa can increase its leverage by pooling resources through the African Union (AU) and Regional Economic Communities (RECs), and by leveraging the 'Big 5' powers (Nigeria, South Africa, Egypt, Algeria, and Ethiopia) to unify continental positions. While the report notes the risks of great power competition—specifically the 'new Scramble for Africa'—it highlights that African states have successfully exercised agency in relations with China through the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) and the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

The document maps the 4IR readiness of SADC member states, identifying critical gaps in ICT infrastructure, data affordability, and digital skills. Through case studies of South Africa, Lesotho, and Malawi, it highlights how policy inconsistency, lack of competition, and a deficit in STEM education hinder technological adoption. It advocates for 'agile governance' and integrated science, technology, and innovation (STI) policies to bridge the digital divide and recommends that the SADC Secretariat focus on skills and awareness to create a regional enabling environment.

The document examines the rollout of Community Health Clubs (CHCs) in Rwanda, highlighting a gap between national policy and local implementation. While the model is praised for its cultural alignment and focus on positive peer pressure, it suffers from fragmented, donor-driven funding, poor coordination between districts and NGOs, and a lack of harmonized monitoring. The report emphasizes the need for increased government funding, inclusive strategies to reach vulnerable groups and men, and a shift toward district-level ownership to ensure sustainable hygiene and sanitation behaviour change.

The document examines the trade-offs for African nations joining the AIIB, noting that while the bank offers a new source of low-cost finance to address an annual infrastructure deficit of $68 to $108 billion, its lack of technical capacity-building and specific instruments for low-income countries outside Asia limits its appeal. It concludes that middle-income African countries are better positioned to benefit from membership than low-income countries.

The document advocates for Integrated Landscape Management (ILM) as a critical mechanism to overcome the limitations of siloed sectoral approaches to climate change adaptation. It defines ILM as a process where diverse stakeholders collaborate to manage natural resources sustainably at a local scale, typically ranging from 100 to 10,000 km2. The authors identify five key features of effective ILM: multi-stakeholder institutions, structured cross-sector planning, synergistic interventions, aligned public policies, and coordinated investment portfolios. Using the Imarisha Naivasha initiative in Kenya as a case study, the paper demonstrates how ILM can resolve resource conflicts and build resilience. It concludes with recommendations for the Global Commission on Adaptation to foster ILM platforms, improve inter-agency planning, mobilize private sector investment, and build research systems for climate-resilient landscapes.

The paper argues that government-led adaptation is insufficient and that individuals and households must be actively involved to reduce climate risks. It identifies six categories of adaptive behavior—information seeking, preparative measures, protective measures, evacuation/migration, insurance, and political action—and analyzes the psychological drivers of these actions. Key motivators include risk perception, negative emotions, self-efficacy, outcome efficacy, social norms, and perceived responsibility. The authors conclude that while communication campaigns are common, they are often ineffective if they only provide information; instead, they should target psychological antecedents. Furthermore, the paper advocates for genuine public participation in decision-making to empower citizens and improve policy effectiveness, while noting that individual action must be supported by systemic, large-scale governmental infrastructure.

The assessment finds that the world is not on track to meet the 2020 restoration goal, with only 18% of the target documented as restored since 2000. While political will is evident through Bonn Challenge pledges totaling 170.6 million hectares, actual biophysical progress is limited and difficult to quantify due to data gaps. A pilot study in the Mekong region reveals that most tree cover gain occurs outside of forests on croplands and shrublands, while natural forests in the region have seen a net loss. The report emphasizes that monoculture plantations, which make up 45% of planned commitments, provide significantly less carbon storage than natural forests. It highlights the need for coherent policies, multidisciplinary technical planning, and increased financial flows to scale up effective forest landscape restoration.

The document defines anti-agricultural bias as a condition where policies and market failures disadvantage farmers relative to other economic sectors. It details four primary economic indicators for measuring this bias: the Nominal Rate of Protection, the Nominal Rate of Assistance, the Relative Rate of Assistance, and the Effective Rate of Protection. The report argues that while historical bias was driven by explicit taxes on agriculture and subsidies for industry, contemporary bias in non-transformed economies often stems from market failures, such as poor infrastructure and unbalanced market power. Through case studies of 12 countries, the report demonstrates that bias is often heterogeneous across different crops; for example, rice often benefits from protection via regional tariffs, while cash crops like tea or cashew nuts are frequently taxed. Specific country analyses reveal that in nations like Ethiopia and Zambia, high anti-agricultural bias is driven by low output prices and export bans, despite the presence of agricultural import tariffs.

The report analyzes agricultural transformation across 117 countries from 1970 to 2015, identifying six phases of transformation and five structural contexts based on land fertility, availability, and population dynamics. It argues that successful transformation requires a tailored mix of 'push' strategies (increasing agricultural productivity) or 'pull' strategies (growing non-agricultural sectors), depending on a country's endowments. Key drivers of success include removing 'anti-agricultural bias' in price policies, strategic public investment in R&D and extension services, and critical institutional reforms such as land redistribution. The report provides specific policy recommendations for 13 focus countries in Africa and Asia, matching them with historically successful 'analogue' countries based on their 2015 structural contexts.

The report assesses Ethiopia's development path to 2040, highlighting a tension between rapid GDP growth and lagging human development indicators. While the country has seen significant improvements in health and agricultural yields, it faces critical bottlenecks in primary education completion, basic infrastructure (WASH), and gender equality. The analysis warns that political liberalisation may create short-term instability due to ethnic factionalism and an 'anocratic' regime type. The report contrasts a positive 'Abiynomics' scenario, driven by targeted investments in human capital and governance, with a 'Dark Days' scenario characterized by political regression and economic decline.

The paper introduces a three-step framework—enabling environments, mobilization, and delivery of adaptation benefits—to analyze how the private sector can be engaged in climate adaptation. Testing the framework in Kenya and Rwanda reveals that while both countries have established broad policy and regulatory frameworks, actual mobilization of private finance for adaptation remains limited and difficult to track. The authors find that private investments often lack explicit adaptation labeling and that a lack of awareness among private actors, combined with weak enforcement of existing policies, hinders progress. The study highlights the risk of maladaptation and 'climate-washing' and recommends integrating adaptation criteria into environmental impact assessments (EIAs) to better monitor outcomes and prevent counterproductive investments.