Search Climate Insights Directory

The document examines how 'suppressed demand'—the unmet desire for products or services due to barriers like low income, poor infrastructure, and high technology costs—leads to the underestimation of emission baselines in LDCs and African countries. It argues that because the CDM currently relies on actual (constrained) consumption rather than desired consumption, these regions are marginalized in the carbon market. The author advocates for the operationalization of guidelines adopted by the CDM Executive Board and the Conference of the Parties serving as a meeting of Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP) to incorporate suppressed demand into baselines, which would increase the number of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs) and encourage investment in sustainable development projects in poor regions.

The Climate and Development Knowledge Network (CDKN) provides research, technical assistance, and knowledge dissemination to help developing countries integrate low-carbon and resilient growth into their national policies. Funded by the UK's DFID and the Netherlands' DGIS, CDKN focuses on four strategic themes: climate-compatible development plans, improving access to climate finance, disaster risk management, and supporting negotiators from the least developed and most vulnerable countries. The organization operates in over 40 countries across Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Caribbean, aiming to improve the quality of life for those most affected by climate change through a demand-driven approach.

The Climate and Development Knowledge Network (CDKN) provides research, technical assistance, and advocacy to help developing countries integrate climate resilience and low-carbon growth into their national policies. Operating across Africa, Asia, and Latin America and the Caribbean, CDKN focuses on four strategic themes: climate compatible development strategies, access to climate finance, disaster risk management, and support for international climate negotiators from vulnerable nations. The network is funded by the UK Department for International Development (DFID) and the Netherlands Foreign Ministry (DGIS).

The document analyzes the tensions between Kenya's goals for industrial growth and energy access versus its climate mitigation ambitions. It highlights that while renewable energy aligns with national security goals, the discovery of oil and gas, along with a focus on large-scale capacity for industry, may marginalize pro-poor energy access and smaller-scale renewables like solar. The briefing emphasizes that the transition to a low-carbon economy is driven by power dynamics involving the government, international donors, and business associations, noting that current policy often prioritizes market-based approaches and industrial competitiveness over the needs of the rural poor.

The document introduces Minimum Standards for local climate-smart Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) to move beyond 'business as usual' by incorporating changing climate risks into local planning. These standards are designed as practical, achievable goals for communities with limited support, serving as a bridge to national adaptation strategies. The framework is organized into four themes: information flow and capacity development, project planning and implementation, monitoring, evaluation and learning, and awareness raising and policy dialogue. It includes specific roles for civil society organizations (CSOs) and government authorities to create an enabling environment for these standards. Developed through the Partners for Resilience (PfR) programme and consultations in Indonesia, the standards aim to ensure that local DRR contributes meaningfully to climate change adaptation.

The document assesses climate change impacts on Uganda's agricultural sector, projecting significant losses for export crops like coffee and certain food crops by 2050, while identifying droughts and floods as the most immediate adaptation priorities.

The study predicts a significant biomass deficit in Uganda from the 2020s onwards, which climate change is expected to exacerbate by reducing domestic wood availability by 5 to 10 percent between 2020 and 2050. Addressing this gap through imported biomass or LPG would require additional expenditures of US$0.6-1.3 billion or US$5-11 billion, respectively. While a potential 26 percent decline in hydropower potential by 2050 could be managed by the government's current expansion programme, this requires an estimated US$83 billion in capital investment for hydro, nuclear, and other generation through 2050. The document recommends prioritizing a switch from traditional biomass to modern energy sources and implementing energy efficiency standards.

The document assesses the economic risks climate change poses to Uganda's agricultural sector by 2050. It finds that while overall food crop losses may be limited to US$1.5 billion (less than 0.2% of GDP), specific crops like cassava and sweet potato could see 40% production reductions. Agricultural exports, particularly coffee and tea, face significant risks, with combined losses potentially reaching US$2.1 billion in a 75% reduction scenario. The report highlights that immediate threats from droughts and floods are more critical than gradual yield decreases, citing US$470 million in losses from the 2010-11 drought. To address these risks, the Government of Uganda has proposed a US$297 million budget over 15 years for eight adaptation priorities, including irrigation, crop diversification, and micro-insurance.

The document analyzes Uganda's energy sector using the LEAP model, predicting a significant biomass deficit by the 2020s. It estimates that climate change could further reduce domestic wood availability by 5-10% by 2050, requiring $5-11 billion in additional LPG expenditures. While hydropower potential may decrease by 26% by 2050, current government expansion plans are deemed sufficient if implemented. The report recommends prioritizing the transition from traditional biomass to LPG and modern energy, noting that the current national adaptation strategy lacks these specific components.

The report estimates that ensuring climate-resilient infrastructure in Uganda will cost between US$52-66 million (2015-2020) and US$638-1,157 million (2045-2050), with total costs by 2050 reaching up to US$3 billion under the RCP 8.5 scenario. Residential buildings are identified as the most affected sector, accounting for approximately half of all resilience costs. Regarding extreme events, the report projects that a doubling of event frequency every 25 years could lead to damages of US$738-3,294 million by 2050, representing 0.1-0.3% of GDP. Key adaptation priorities include climate-proofing public buildings and integrating resilient standards into infrastructure planning and risk assessment guidelines.

The document estimates that water demand in Uganda will increase from 408 million cubic meters per year in 2010 to 3,963 million cubic meters per year by 2050, with unmet demand rising to 1,651 million cubic meters per year. The expected economic cost of this unmet demand in 2050 is estimated at 14,558 billion shillings (US$5.5 billion), with the highest losses anticipated in the Lake Victoria, Albert Nile, and Lake Kyoga watersheds. Historical drought data shows significant losses, specifically $250 million in 2005-6 and $1,174 million in 2010-11. Analysis of the Government of Uganda's Costed Adaptation Strategy suggests that investments in water use efficiency, supply for agriculture and industry, and Integrated Water Resources Management would likely generate a 10% rate of return.

The document examines the intersection of climate change, population growth, and malaria in Uganda's Tororo and Kabale districts. It projects that the economic costs of malaria in these areas could more than double by 2050, driven by rising temperatures and increased population exposure. The study emphasizes the need for district-specific adaptation strategies, such as Long Lasting Insecticide Nets (LLINs) and Indoor Residential Spraying (IRS), and calls for improved climate-malaria research and cross-ministerial collaboration to maximize health co-benefits.

The document estimates that ensuring climate-resilient infrastructure in Uganda will cost between US$60-76 million in 2025 and US$347-621 million by 2050, with buildings accounting for 96% of these costs. Under a less favorable climate scenario (RCP 8.5), total costs to 2050 could reach US$4.4 billion. Additionally, the report warns that a doubling of the frequency of extreme events every 25 years could lead to damages of US$938-3,236 million by 2050, representing 0.1-0.4% of GDP. Key adaptation priorities include climate-proofing public buildings and integrating resilient standards into infrastructure planning.

The document evaluates the vulnerability of Kampala's infrastructure to climate change, specifically focusing on flooding and temperature increases. It projects a significant rise in annual flood damages by 2050 and estimates the cost of climate-proofing buildings and roads between US$3.3 billion and US$3.7 billion for the period 2015-2050.

The document examines climate-related agricultural losses in the Karamoja region of Uganda, highlighting that recent droughts have caused production losses of 50% to 100% for some households. It projects future losses of 9% to 32% of total production by 2050 and identifies significant yield reductions for maize and beans. The study recommends prioritizing water availability, crop diversification, and livestock support to build resilience.

The document examines the vulnerability of Arabica coffee in Uganda's Bududa District to climate variability and projected climate change. It compares 'Business as Usual' (BAU) with 'Climate Smart Agriculture' (CSA) scenarios, finding that CSA—which includes tree planting, mulching, and trench construction—offers a higher Internal Rate of Return (IRR) than BAU under both current and future conditions. The study suggests that combining CSA with institutional support could sustain coffee cultivation, though it notes that estimates are preliminary and require further research and piloting.

The study finds that climate change, characterized by rising temperatures and decreasing rainfall, will likely cause significant economic losses in the Mpanga river catchment, particularly in the energy sector. Annual costs for the energy sector are estimated between US$25 million and US$98 million by 2030-2035, while the water supply sector in the Rushango area may face annual losses of US$45,000 to US$79,000. Adaptation measures, including water resource regulation and energy diversification, are considered high priorities as they only need to offset between 2.8% and 32.8% of estimated losses to be economically justified.

The document estimates that water demand in Uganda will increase from 408 million cubic meters per year in 2010 to 3,963 million cubic meters per year by 2050. Under climate change scenarios and assuming no new investments beyond current plans, unmet demand is projected to rise to 1,651 million cubic meters per year, with an expected annual cost of approximately US$5.5 billion by 2050. The analysis highlights that the Lake Victoria, Albert Nile, and Lake Kyoga watersheds will face the largest economic losses. Historical drought data shows significant impacts, with events in 2005-6 and 2010-11 causing losses of US$250 million and US$1,174 million respectively. The report concludes that priority adaptation programmes focusing on water use efficiency, supply for agriculture and industry, and Integrated Water Resources Management are likely to generate high returns on investment.

The document argues that achieving water security in Africa requires tens of billions of dollars annually, with climate resilience adding an additional US$10–15 billion. It suggests a blended financing approach combining traditional water finance, official development assistance, and specialized climate finance to bridge the funding gap. While most climate finance currently targets mitigation, the briefing emphasizes the need for adaptation funding and the role of the Green Climate Fund in supporting African water infrastructure.

The document argues that the increasing use of manufactured nanomaterials (MNMs) in consumer and industrial products creates significant risks in the waste stream due to unknown toxicity and difficulties in characterization. It demands that governments and companies implement extended producer responsibility, restrict the transboundary movement of MNM waste, and establish public registries of nano-products, particularly within the European Union, to ensure safe recycling and disposal.