Search Climate Insights Directory

The report examines how climate-induced migration, displacement, and planned relocation are incorporated into National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) and sub-national governance. It highlights a gap between high-level policy commitments and local implementation, emphasizing that sub-national actors often drive the national agenda. The document identifies strategies for better integration, such as localizing NAP priorities and improving finance flows to local leadership.

The report, produced by an international expert group convened by the Forum on Trade, Environment, & the SDGs (TESS), examines the environmental impacts of agricultural subsidies and proposes pathways for defining and addressing those that are environmentally harmful. It aims to facilitate cooperative international action through mechanisms such as new disciplines, soft law guidance, voluntary commitments, or transparency tools, targeting influence on international production and consumption patterns.

The document clarifies the distinctions and synergies between Nature-Based Solutions (NbS) and Landscape and Jurisdictional Approaches (LA/JAs). While NbS are typically project-level interventions that leverage nature for societal benefits, LA/JAs are broader socioecological management strategies designed to align multiple stakeholders and goals at a landscape or political scale. The briefing argues that NbS are most effective and durable when embedded within LA/JAs, which provide the necessary governance, long-term planning, and policy alignment to scale impacts and meet global commitments such as the Global Biodiversity Framework and the Paris Agreement.

The Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor (CCRM) methodology v5.0 provides a stepwise framework for assessing corporate climate claims across four key areas: emissions tracking, target setting, sectoral transitions, and responsibility for ongoing emissions and removals. The 2025 update introduces revised weightings for scoring, a new progress assessment for five-year emission trends, a full methodological revision of sectoral transition evaluations, and updated scientific insights regarding durable carbon dioxide removal.

The briefing outlines key objectives for the third UN Ocean Conference (UNOC) in Nice, France, emphasizing the need to scale up funding for SDG 14, integrate ocean-based solutions into national climate plans (NDCs), accelerate the ratification of the High Seas Treaty, and implement 100% sustainable ocean management through Sustainable Ocean Plans.

The briefing note critiques the OECD's two-pillar solution for its lack of transparency and failure to recover the $400 billion lost annually to tax abuse, noting that high-income countries benefit most. It advocates for the UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation as a democratic alternative for all 193 UN member states. The document urges South Africa, during its 2025 G20 presidency, to champion global minimum standards for taxing the super-rich and build consensus for the UN Convention to support sustainable development and the SDGs.

Reclaim Finance has issued an open letter to Patrick Tiernan, the new CEO of Lloyd’s of London, calling for the insurance market to cease underwriting new fossil fuel infrastructure. The letter argues that climate change is already causing market fragility, citing insurer withdrawals in California and potential town abandonment in the UK. It claims that while Lloyd's announced restrictions on thermal coal and Arctic exploration in 2020, these have since been "watered down to guidelines" without enforcement. Reclaim Finance proposes four specific actions: requiring managing agents to stop underwriting fossil fuel expansion, making new agent establishment conditional on net zero alignment, requiring disclosure of underwriting policies for new fossil fuel projects, and implementing monitoring and sanctions for non-compliance in annual ESG reports.

The document asserts that anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions constitute marine pollution, creating a legal duty for States to phase out fossil fuels. It examines how advisory opinions from the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), the International Court of Justice (ICJ), and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) reinforce the rights of vulnerable island States and establish standards of due diligence and corporate accountability for climate-related ocean harm.

The report outlines key elements of credible sovereign transition plans, focusing on science-based targets, investment and policy action plans, and governance and transparency measures. It emphasizes the role of green budgeting, the mobilization of private capital, and the importance of internationally interoperable taxonomies in reducing climate-related risks for sovereign bondholders.

The document outlines a framework for mobilizing capital to reduce methane emissions and flaring in the oil and gas sector. It details how to structure debt instruments—such as green, sustainable, and sustainability-linked bonds—to prioritize emission reduction projects. The guide provides a comprehensive list of eligible activities, a hierarchy for quantifying emissions, and specific KPI and Sustainability Performance Target (SPT) matrices. It emphasizes the role of National Oil Companies (NOCs) and provides safeguards against 'greenwashing,' including requirements for third-party verification and rigorous reporting standards.

The Climate Bonds Initiative's guide outlines a comprehensive framework for bank transition disclosures, focusing on the decarbonisation of banking books. It establishes best practices across six key areas: commitment, baselines and targets, delivery strategy, aspects beyond emissions, governance, and reporting. The guidance emphasizes the need for banks to disclose both financed and facilitated emissions, benchmark trajectories against credible sectoral pathways, and implement specific phase-out dates for misaligned activities like unabated coal and new oil and gas exploration. It also integrates requirements for just transition principles and climate resilience, while urging alignment between transition plans and formal financial reporting to ensure credibility.

The document argues that while methane abatement is a cost-effective near-term strategy to limit global warming, capital deployment in the oil and gas sector is significantly lagging behind the targets required for the IEA's Net Zero Emissions by 2050 Scenario. It proposes a framework for using use-of-proceeds (UoP) bonds, key performance indicator (KPI)-linked bonds, and conventional debt with methane-related covenants to bridge this investment gap. The authors highlight the critical role of National Oil Companies (NOCs) and the need for credible, science-based guardrails to mitigate greenwashing and fungibility risks.

The Guidance for Including Methane Abatement in Oil and Gas Debt Structuring offers a framework for using debt capital markets to fund emissions reductions in the oil and gas sector. It specifically targets National Oil Companies (NOCs) and independent producers, providing detailed criteria for qualifying projects in use-of-proceeds (UoP) instruments and defining core and secondary key performance indicators (KPIs) for KPI-linked instruments. The document emphasizes the need for measurement-based quantification, external verification by subject matter experts, and guardrails to prevent greenwashing and 'transferred emissions' during asset mergers and acquisitions.

ClientEarth advocates for a shift from 'paper commitments' to legal action to address the ocean crisis. The briefing prioritises the enforcement of existing frameworks, such as the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), to protect marine biodiversity and combat climate change. It specifically calls for the elimination of harmful fisheries subsidies, the banning of bottom trawling in marine protected areas (MPAs), and the ratification of the BBNJ Agreement to protect the high seas. The document also highlights the need for a 'Protection Principle' that makes ocean conservation the default norm and outlines specific legal priorities for the EU, Mediterranean, China, and the UK.

The document argues that the fossil fuel industry poses a direct threat to human health and mental wellbeing, contributing to millions of deaths and widespread climate anxiety. It specifically highlights a conflict of interest where marketing agencies serve both the health sector and fossil fuel companies, facilitating 'greenwashing' that delays climate action. The authors call on health industry leaders to review these agency relationships and cease partnerships with firms that continue to work with fossil fuel clients.

Canada possesses significant reserves of six priority critical minerals—cobalt, copper, graphite, lithium, nickel, and rare earth elements—essential for the global energy transition. However, current investment is insufficient to meet a projected domestic demand of over $16 billion per year by 2040. The report identifies three primary risks deterring investors: financial volatility, environmental liabilities, and risks to Indigenous rights. To address these, the authors recommend that the federal government implement financial risk-sharing agreements (such as contracts for difference and equity investments), scale up capacity-building and capital access for Indigenous communities, and mandate global environmental standards for tailings management. The report warns that attempting to speed up project approvals by cutting environmental or consultation requirements is likely to backfire by increasing local opposition and litigation.

The report argues that Canada can capitalize on the global energy transition by increasing production of cobalt, copper, lithium, nickel, graphite, and rare earth elements. To achieve this, it recommends that the federal government implement financial risk-sharing agreements to mitigate price volatility, support Indigenous self-determination and equity ownership, strengthen provincial mining regulations to meet international environmental standards, and avoid shortening regulatory reviews by cutting environmental or consultation safeguards.

The document addresses the significant underfunding of climate-smart agrifood systems, which contribute approximately 30% of global greenhouse gas emissions. It argues that while public and private capital have roles, concessional capital is essential for the 'missing middle'—investments with high social and environmental impact but sub-commercial returns. The playbook proposes five 'investment plays': deploying system-level approaches, supporting natural capital restoration, strengthening shared infrastructure, expanding technical assistance for innovation, and scaling local financial intermediaries. It includes a four-step framework for investor action: diagnosing the landscape, identifying financing gaps, designing instruments, and integrating partnerships.

The Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor 2025 finds that major agrifood companies often rely on undefined land-based carbon dioxide removals (CDR) to meet emission targets, which obscures a lack of structural action on key transitions. While most companies commit to halting deforestation, they generally lack strong commitments to shifting toward plant-based proteins or reducing synthetic fertilizer use. The report highlights significant integrity gaps, particularly for JBS, and calls for standard setters like the SBTi and GHG Protocol to require separate targets for emission reductions and removals.

The report finds that while some fashion companies have improved their GHG emission reduction targets, these commitments often lack credibility due to a failure to implement systemic transitions. Key issues include a reliance on 'false solutions' like biomass and fossil gas instead of electrification, limited transparency regarding supply chain energy, and a persistent adherence to fast fashion business models that prioritise volume over value. While H&M Group is noted for its transparency in disclosing supply chain energy balances, the sector generally lacks the prescriptive guidance and regulatory interventions needed to curb overproduction and scale low-GHG fibres.