Search Climate Insights Directory

The document critiques biodiversity offsetting markets, asserting that they are conceptually flawed and practically ineffective. It argues that nature cannot be accurately priced or restored to its original state, and that such markets often lead to land grabbing and human rights violations. Instead, the author proposes a return to binding environmental regulations and sustainable practices like agroecology to protect ecosystems.

The briefing critiques the shift in biodiversity policy from conservation to 'restoration' through financial markets. It argues that biodiversity offsetting—where developers pay to recreate habitats to justify destroying existing ones—is based on the flawed premise that nature can be monetized and replaced. The author cites high failure rates in restoration projects, the inability of markets to price public goods or scarcity, and the risk of land grabbing. Instead of market tools, the document advocates for binding environmental laws and sustainable practices like agroecology to protect biodiversity.

The document critiques the shift from biodiversity conservation to 'restoration' via financial markets, arguing that biodiversity offsets are conceptually flawed and practically ineffective. It asserts that these mechanisms often lead to net habitat loss and human rights abuses. The author contends that nature cannot be accurately valued monetarily and that the core concepts of 'price signals' and 'additionality' are invalid in this context. As an alternative, the report proposes binding conservation laws to restrict unsustainable economic activities and foster sustainable practices like agroecology.

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 document examines the transition of digital technologies from tools of democratic empowerment to instruments of state control in Africa. It distinguishes between 'hard' digital dictatorship, characterized by internet shutdowns and restrictive legislation, and 'soft' digital dictatorship, involving the use of big data and disinformation to manipulate public behavior. While hard tactics are currently more prevalent in Africa, the author warns of a shift toward more sophisticated, data-driven manipulation.

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 'Building a Resilient Future Day' outcome document outlines a multi-stakeholder effort to move beyond incremental change toward transformative climate resilience. It identifies 70 specific actions and emphasizes the need for risk-informed decision-making, nature-based solutions, and the integration of climate action with food security and conflict prevention. The report highlights the critical role of local communities, youth, and women in decision-making and calls for decentralized funding to reach grassroots levels. Key focus areas include the transformation of food systems, the implementation of early warning, early action (EWEA) systems, and the development of resilient urban infrastructure. The document aligns these efforts with the UN Climate Action Summit's Call for Action and the Global Commission on Adaptation's Year of Action.

The document assesses the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) against two other multi-stakeholder initiatives (MSIs), the Open Government Partnership (OGP) and the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI). It identifies weaknesses in the APRM's digital transparency, member accountability, and civil society integration, while suggesting the APRM can offer lessons in strategic partnership building.

The document examines the challenges of measuring climate change adaptation, noting that most existing frameworks are designed for project-level monitoring rather than national or global assessment. It argues against a 'one-size-fits-all' metric, suggesting instead that metrics be tailored to specific purposes—such as identifying needs, tracking implementation, or assessing effectiveness. The paper highlights evolving practices in agriculture, urban planning (using the City of Melbourne as a case study), and multilateral development bank (MDB) financing, while recommending the integration of qualitative data, new technologies like earth observation, and alignment with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to improve the comparability and transparency of adaptation tracking.

The assessment finds that green finance for forests is severely insufficient, totaling under USD 22 billion since 2010, and represents only 1.5% of total climate mitigation commitments from developed countries and multilateral institutions. While some domestic initiatives and Green Climate Fund projects show progress, private sector investment remains dominated by traditional 'grey finance' with few mandatory safeguards to prevent deforestation in commodity supply chains.

The report identifies five key intervention areas for building resilience: nature-based solutions, empowering marginalized groups, information and technology, inclusive financial services, and low-cost infrastructure. It argues that effective resilience programming must be systemic by design, utilize layered and linked interventions, create agile networks, promote equity and inclusion, and prioritize iterative learning and scaling. Evidence from GRP's USAID and Z Zurich Foundation challenges, as well as 42 partner programs, demonstrates that these approaches can protect development gains and improve well-being in the face of climate and economic shocks.

The document analyzes 44 resilience programs to determine which design elements contribute to success in helping vulnerable populations persist, adapt, and transform in the face of shocks. Key findings highlight the importance of community-led vulnerability assessments, the role of savings as a critical resilience buffer, and the necessity of integrating climate risk interventions into local governance and market systems.

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 briefing introduces a policy taxonomy for agricultural transformation that categorizes interventions based on their target: agricultural markets, the rural economy, the macroeconomy, or institutions. It emphasizes the concept of 'anti-agricultural bias'—where policies favor other sectors like industry over agriculture—and argues that removing this bias is a critical precondition for successful agricultural transformation, citing Brazil and Vietnam as positive examples and Ethiopia, Malawi, Togo, and Uganda as countries where such bias persists.

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 report examines South Africa's historical and recent involvement in Burundi, highlighting a transition from significant military and diplomatic leadership during the Arusha Peace and Reconciliation Agreement to a more peripheral role following Burundi's 2015 political crisis. While South Africa has provided tangible support in electoral capacity building and civil service training, the report finds that bilateral agreements have been implemented in a fragmented manner. It emphasizes the value of 'citizen diplomacy' through civil society and academic exchanges, particularly in supporting Burundi's Truth and Reconciliation Commission. The authors argue that South Africa should leverage its remaining political capital and technical expertise through a holistic strategy that navigates complex regional dynamics involving the East African Community (EAC) and the International Conference for the Great Lakes Region (ICGLR).

The document analyzes the vulnerability of MSMEs in low- and middle-income countries to physical and transition climate risks, highlighting how these risks are amplified through value chains. It identifies significant barriers to adaptation, including limited access to climate data, finance, and technical skills. The authors argue for a participatory, inclusive approach where MSMEs are not only resilient but also act as providers of adaptation goods and services, supported by state policies, large businesses, and financial institutions.