Search Climate Insights Directory

The document argues that exporting pesticides banned in their country of origin to Africa and Central America violates the Bamako Convention, the Central American Agreement, and the Basel Convention, as these substances are defined as hazardous waste by the importing nations. It asserts that European states and other Basel Convention parties (such as Canada, China, and Russia) are failing their international legal and human rights obligations by allowing this trade, which harms health and ecosystems in low- and middle-income countries.

The report argues that pesticides banned in their country of manufacture are classified as 'hazardous wastes' under the Bamako Convention and the Central American Agreement. Because many importing nations in Africa and Central America have monist legal systems or specific domestic laws incorporating these definitions, the report concludes that exporting such substances from Basel Convention parties (including the EU, UK, and Switzerland) violates the Basel Convention, international customary law, and the extraterritorial human rights obligation to protect the right to health.

The report details the efforts of Clean Creatives South Africa to encourage agencies and individuals to pledge to decline work for fossil fuel companies. It highlights South Africa's high carbon intensity and vulnerability to climate change, while listing specific agencies that maintain contracts with fossil fuel entities. The document criticizes 'greenwashing' practices by companies like TotalEnergies and Sasol, and calls for the creative industry to stop rewarding fossil fuel advertising campaigns.

Parametric insurance provides rapid liquidity by paying fixed amounts based on predetermined triggers rather than assessed losses. It is used across agriculture, renewable energy, infrastructure, and tourism to stabilize budgets and protect credit ratings. Implementation requires specific analytical, regulatory, and data capacities, with regional risk pools like CCRIF and ARC serving as key models for sovereign coverage. While high premiums and basis risk remain challenges, the document suggests using donor support and pilot projects to increase uptake.

Risk pooling aggregates risks across geographies or portfolios to lower volatility and reduce reinsurance costs, providing rapid, rules-based liquidity after disasters. These mechanisms, including parametric pools and catastrophe (CAT) bonds, address credit, liquidity, and market risks by combining exposures and transferring high-risk layers to global capital markets. Examples include the Caribbean Catastrophe Risk Insurance Facility (CCRIF), African Risk Capacity (ARC), and the Pacific Catastrophe Risk Insurance Company (PCRIC), which have provided millions in payouts for cyclones, droughts, and floods. Implementation requires specific internal and regulatory capacities, ranging from basic budgeting for premiums to the legal ability to issue sovereign CAT bonds. While risk pools can reduce costs by 40–50% compared to standalone insurance, challenges such as basis risk, data gaps, and budget trade-offs persist.

The document provides a comprehensive overview of securitization as a tool for climate finance, detailing how pooling fragmented green assets into tradable securities can increase liquidity and recycle capital for originators. It outlines the roles of key stakeholders, provides a framework for assessing financial market readiness (shallow, emerging, and mature), and offers practical pathways for ministries of finance and regulators to implement these instruments. The guide also highlights specific examples of green asset-backed securities in Australia, Kenya, and West Africa, while addressing challenges such as data gaps and high transaction costs.

The report details a workshop in Cameroon that led to the creation of the Réseau Afrique Carbone & Changement Climatique (RAC3), a network designed to amplify African civil society voices in carbon market negotiations. It highlights the historical under-representation of Africa in the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and discusses the potential benefits of 'vintage restrictions' under the new Sustainable Development Mechanism (SDM) to encourage new projects. The event also addressed the role of African NGOs in monitoring the environmental integrity of aviation offsets under CORSIA and noted the need for increased advocacy to raise ambition regarding aviation emission reductions in Cameroon.

The 9th GCF Board meeting resulted in the accreditation of the first seven implementing entities and the adoption of an initial investment framework to screen project proposals. However, civil society criticized the accreditation process for a lack of transparency and the Board's failure to explicitly exclude fossil fuel projects from funding. The Fund faces a critical deadline of 30 April 2015 to secure the remaining US$4.5 billion in pledged contributions to become officially effective, with only about 1 per cent legally committed as of the report's date.

The document argues that expanding fossil gas production in Africa is a 'fallacy' that risks creating stranded assets, increasing national debt, and exacerbating climate vulnerability. It highlights that gas reserves are concentrated in a few nations, meaning expansion will not benefit the continent broadly. Furthermore, it asserts that fossil gas infrastructure often involves high foreign ownership and poor contractual terms, pulling wealth out of Africa. The report contrasts this with the potential of renewables, noting that Africa possesses vast solar and wind resources that could provide cheaper, more accessible energy and more sustainable jobs. Environmental risks cited include the destruction of biodiversity hotspots, such as mangroves and coral reefs, and the health impacts of gas flaring and fracking. The briefing concludes that Africa should leapfrog extractive energy systems in favor of a clean, distributed energy future supported by international climate finance.

The FSD Africa and FSDAi venture finance portfolio consists of numerous funds and platforms targeting climate action, gender-lens investing, and financial inclusion across the African continent. Key climate-focused initiatives include Africa Climate Ventures, which aims to reduce 100 million tonnes of carbon emissions by 2030, and the Catalyst Fund, which targets 40 pre-seed climate resilience start-ups. Gender-focused funds such as Aruwa Capital and RiTA Fund I specifically address capital imbalances for female-led businesses. The portfolio also includes sector-specific vehicles for fintech (First Circle Capital), insurance (Inclusive Insurance Investment Fund), and renewable energy (Nithio, Spark Energy), utilizing a mix of equity, grants, and debt to catalyze private investment and drive sustainable economic growth.

FSD Africa co-funded the Digital Frontiers Institute (DFI) from 2016 to 2021 to train digital finance professionals in low-middle income countries. The partnership established the Certified Digital Finance Practitioner (CDFP) qualification and reached over 15,000 professionals. Key achievements include the creation of 22 Communities of Practice across 20 countries and the development of 47 DFS regulations, policies, or directives.

The document outlines systemic financing barriers in Africa, noting that climate tech start-ups, nature-based enterprises, and women entrepreneurs—particularly in Francophone West Africa—struggle to access necessary investment. It highlights that Africa receives only 6% of global biodiversity funding and that in Senegal, only 3.5% of women entrepreneurs access formal finance. A specific case study focuses on Saglan Wajee General Hospital in Ethiopia, which, supported by FSD Africa's BimaLab, launched 'Efoy', a micro-health insurance product. Efoy 1.0 attracted over 1,200 customers in its first year, and the subsequent Efoy 2.0 has reached 900 new clients, providing affordable coverage for low- and middle-income families.

The report identifies severe coastal erosion, flooding, fishery decline, and poor waste management as existential threats to Saint-Louis, Senegal. After evaluating eighteen financial instruments, it recommends the use of Impact Bonds due to their flexibility in scale, capacity to crowd in private capital, and focus on measurable outcomes. The report suggests potential applications for these bonds in waste management, sustainable tourism, and aquaculture, particularly targeting youth and women.

The report analyzes social protection as a tool for climate resilience, highlighting its ability to provide shock-responsive support, facilitate sustainable natural resource management, and cushion the impacts of low-carbon transitions. It identifies a gap in long-term structural adaptation and notes that while multilateral climate funds are increasingly engaging with social protection, integration remains fragmented and often prioritizes project-based interventions over systemic strengthening.

The document is a compilation of inputs regarding the GCF's accreditation process. Key themes include the need to prioritize National Implementing Entities (NIEs) over international ones to ensure country ownership, the demand for a more 'fit-for-purpose' approach for smaller or private sector entities, and proposals to monitor the overall carbon footprints of accredited entities to ensure they align with the Paris Agreement. Stakeholders highlight systemic delays in the accreditation pipeline and suggest streamlining processes through third-party verification and multi-language support.

The document outlines mandatory requirements and recommendations for several GCF funding proposals across various countries. General requirements for all proposals include signing a funded activity agreement (FAA), completing legal due diligence, and confirming internal approvals. Project-specific conditions vary, including requirements for solar power financing in Mongolia, grievance mechanisms in Senegal, co-financing and budget increases for forest conservation in Bhutan, and water-balance studies in Ethiopia. Recommendations focus on gender-sensitive training, biodiversity protection in Egypt, and women's participation in water committees in Colombia.

The Green Climate Fund's Accreditation Panel recommends the accreditation of La Banque Agricole (LBA) in Senegal for small-scale projects with a medium environmental and social risk category (I-2). While LBA demonstrates strong basic fiduciary standards and a robust environmental and social management system, the recommendation is subject to six conditions to be met before the first funding proposal. These conditions include establishing procedures to oversee the procurement and loan portfolios of executing entities, demonstrating the application of updated environmental and social tools, and strengthening gender mainstreaming capacity through the appointment of a focal point and the creation of a gender committee.

The document outlines mandatory conditions and recommendations for multiple GCF funding proposals across various countries. General conditions for all proposals include the signing of a funded activity agreement (FAA) and completion of legal due diligence. Specific conditions target projects in Afghanistan (mini-grid market governance), Colombia (REDD+ emission reductions), Ghana (sustainability of shea landscapes), Sudan (conflict analysis and water infrastructure), and others. Recommendations from the independent Technical Advisory Panel (TAP) focus on quality assurance in Indonesia, policy advocacy in Nepal, and gender-inclusive decision-making in Sudan.

The Accreditation Panel recommends that the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) be upgraded to 'large' project size and 'high risk' (Category A/I-1) environmental and social risk categories. The assessment found that IFAD's fiduciary standards, project management capacities, and environmental and social safeguards fully meet GCF requirements for these expanded parameters.

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) assessed the Centre de Suivi Ecologique (CSE) for re-accreditation. While the GCF recommends re-accreditation for a second term, it did not grant the requested upgrade to 'small' project size or 'medium risk' (category B) status, maintaining the entity's 'micro' size and 'minimal to no risk' (category C) status. The assessment found that CSE aligns with GCF's strategic goals, particularly in climate change adaptation in Senegal, but identified gaps in its internal audit functions, risk management, and grievance redress mechanisms. Re-accreditation is subject to several conditions, including the operationalization of an independent internal audit function and the appointment of an independent observer for its grievance mechanism.