Search Climate Insights Directory

The document discusses the use of the integrated vulnerability assessment (IVA) framework to incorporate community-level vulnerability data into the National Adaptation Plan (NAP) processes of three Pacific island states: Kiribati, Tuvalu, and the Solomon Islands. Developed in 2016 by Pacific organizations, the IVA Framework aims to provide a standardized and coordinated approach to assessing climate vulnerability in the region.

The document describes the application of the Integrated Vulnerability Assessment (IVA) Framework in three Pacific island states to enhance their National Adaptation Plan (NAP) processes. The IVA Framework uses a standardized approach to analyze 35 intersecting components—five livelihood assets and seven human security objectives—to create vulnerability baselines. In Kiribati, Tuvalu, and the Solomon Islands, the NAP Global Network supported the use of participatory field tools and tablet-based data collection to capture gender- and age-disaggregated perspectives from local communities. The briefing concludes that while tablet technology improves data accuracy and availability, there is a continuing need for robust information and knowledge management (IKM) systems and national capacity building to fully institutionalize these assessments within national budgeting and planning.

The document examines how the Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) integrates climate change into its monitoring of State obligations. In 2018, the CRC issued climate-related recommendations to 47% of reviewed States, focusing heavily on procedural rights, education, and disaster-sensitive social protection. While mitigation was addressed in only 14% of climate recommendations—specifically targeting fossil fuel exploitation in Norway and coal-fired power plants in Spain—the CRC also urged Niger to address deforestation and land regeneration. The briefing highlights a trend of linking recommendations to Sustainable Development Goal 13 and emphasizes the need for children's meaningful participation in climate policy-making.

The report details two workshops held in 2018 focused on South-South and triangular cooperation for climate action. It highlights case studies of technological exchange in agriculture, water management, and urban resilience, while identifying systemic barriers such as funding gaps and a lack of institutional capacity at the subnational level.

The report reveals that logging in the Solomon Islands is occurring at 19 times the sustainable rate, with natural forests predicted to be exhausted by 2036. It identifies systemic illegalities, including lack of landowner consent and breaches of logging codes, while noting that local communities see few benefits. China is identified as the dominant importer, purchasing 82% of the country's logs, and is urged to regulate its supply chain to mitigate commercial and environmental risks.

The proposal seeks USD 10 million in GCF grants to improve the capacity of National Meteorological and Hydrological Services (NMHSs) in 14 Pacific Island Countries. The project focuses on four components: improving governance and enabling environments, strengthening air and marine navigation services, enhancing climate prediction tools (specifically the PICASO software), and project governance. It aims to address critical gaps in human and technological resources, lack of user feedback on forecasts, and insufficient observation sites, aligning with the Pacific Islands Meteorological Strategy 2017-2026.

The policy brief examines the challenges facing small-scale fisheries (SSFs), particularly in Africa, such as data scarcity and the exclusion of fishers from governance. It proposes ICT tools as a means to enhance data collection, improve market transparency, and connect operational actors with strategic managers. The document highlights the ABALOBI initiative in South Africa as a successful model of a bottom-up, co-developed ICT suite that empowers fishers and supports the co-management of resources.

The NAP Global Network provided technical assistance to over 30 countries between November 2017 and November 2018, focusing on seven key themes including financing, gender, and monitoring and evaluation. The Network facilitated peer learning through Targeted Topics Forums and South-South exchanges, and worked to align bilateral donor support with national priorities, notably through a Donor Symposium in Barbados.

Carbon Market Watch criticizes the Green Climate Fund's approval of three large hydro dam projects in Nepal, Tajikistan, and the Solomon Islands, arguing that such investments contradict the fund's goal of promoting a paradigm shift and risk repeating the human rights and environmental failures seen in the Barro Blanco project in Panama.

A coalition of 272 organizations argues that large hydropower projects do not meet the Green Climate Fund's (GCF) investment criteria due to greenhouse gas emissions, lack of innovation, and negative social and environmental impacts. The letter specifically calls for the rejection or removal of three projects from the GCF pipeline: the Qairokkum Hydropower Rehabilitation in Tajikistan, the Upper Trishuli-1 in Nepal, and the Tina River Hydro Project in the Solomon Islands.

The document argues that large hydropower projects fail to meet GCF Investment Criteria due to greenhouse gas emissions, lack of innovation, negative environmental and human rights impacts, and vulnerability to climate change. It specifically opposes GCF support for the Qairokkum Hydropower Rehabilitation in Tajikistan, Upper Trishuli-1 in Nepal, and the Tina River Hydro Project in the Solomon Islands, urging the GCF to instead support the diversification of energy mixes in countries over-dependent on hydro.

The GCF Secretariat reports progress across several operational areas, including the approval of USD 1.5 billion in funding and the signing of 19 accreditation master agreements. Key activities include the development of a gender and climate change training manual with UN Women, the processing of Project Preparation Facility (PPF) requests, and efforts to secure privileges and immunities (P&Is) through bilateral and multilateral agreements. The report also notes the recruitment of risk and monitoring specialists and ongoing engagement with UNFCCC thematic bodies.

The paper examines climate finance for 15 Pacific Island states from 2010 to 2014, finding that 748 million USD was committed, primarily as grants and project-based support. Adaptation received the largest share of funding (59%), with bilateral channels providing 72% of the total. While the Global Environment Facility was the dominant multilateral source through 2014, the Green Climate Fund and Pilot Program for Climate Resilience have provided significant allocations since 2015.

Between 2010 and 2014, US$748 million in climate finance primarily targeting climate change was committed to 15 Pacific SIDS, predominantly as grants. The funding was split between adaptation (59%) and mitigation (36%), with 72% sourced through bilateral channels, led by Australia. The vast majority of support (86%) was project-based, with a heavy concentration in creating 'enabling environments' and renewable energy. The analysis notes that Polynesian countries were more successful in attracting diverse funding than Micronesian countries, and highlights significant differences in flexibility and transaction costs between bilateral and multilateral funding sources.

Between 2010 and 2014, US$748 million in climate finance was committed to 15 Pacific SIDS, primarily as grants and delivered through bilateral channels. Adaptation received 59% of this funding, while 36% went to mitigation. The majority of support (86%) was project-based, with a strong focus on creating an 'enabling environment' for climate policy and planning.

Between 2010 and 2014, the Solomon Islands received US$42.4 million in grant-equivalent finance specifically targeting climate change, with a primary focus on adaptation. Major contributors included the Global Environment Facility, Japan, and the Adaptation Fund, with funding directed toward disaster prevention, forestry, and water policy. Additionally, the country received US$6.70 million for solar power development between 2015 and 2016.

The document examines the tension between 'mainstreaming' climate change adaptation—integrating it into development, business, and other policy sectors—and treating it as a specialized 'silo' of expertise. Drawing on the Adaptation Futures 2016 conference, it argues that neither approach is inherently superior; rather, the choice depends on the specific purpose and context. While mainstreaming promotes resource efficiency and policy coherence (particularly regarding poverty reduction), the author notes that it can make adaptation progress invisible, complicating monitoring, evaluation, and the tracking of earmarked finance. The brief highlights the expansion of mainstreaming into business operations and city planning, while recommending a pragmatic approach that recognizes the value of both integrated and stand-alone adaptation efforts.

More than 100 civil society organizations express deep concern over the Green Climate Fund's (GCF) lack of adequate policies for financing high-risk activities. The statement argues that the GCF Board should not approve high-risk projects—including large hydropower and infrastructure—until it adopts a full Environmental and Social Management System (ESMS) and a free-standing Indigenous Peoples' Policy aligned with international standards like UNDRIP. The groups demand more rigorous scrutiny for high-risk sub-projects, country-driven proposals, and strict adherence to public disclosure timelines for impact assessments.

The report analyzes the intersection of climate change, World Heritage sites, and tourism, arguing that climate change acts as a 'threat multiplier' that degrades the outstanding universal value (OUV) of these sites while simultaneously threatening the tourism economies that depend on them. Through 30 case studies across 29 countries, it demonstrates that impacts range from glacier melt and sea-level rise to increased wildfire regimes and ocean acidification. The document emphasizes that while sustainable tourism can support conservation, unplanned development often increases site vulnerability. It concludes with recommendations for intergovernmental organizations, governments, and site managers to integrate climate science into management plans, reduce tourism's carbon footprint, and empower local and indigenous communities in adaptation efforts.

The document advocates for Community Forest Management (CFM) as a critical tool for biodiversity conservation and climate mitigation. It presents evidence that CFM often outperforms strict protection regimes in reducing deforestation, particularly when supported by secure land tenure and local autonomy. The briefing highlights the role of CFM in carbon sequestration and climate adaptation, while warning against 'false solutions' like REDD+ and the financialisation of nature, which it claims threaten community rights and traditional governance.