Search Climate Insights Directory

The briefing reveals that German financial institutions continue to pour billions into LNG expansion despite climate pledges. Between 2021 and 2023, nine German banks provided US$7.6 billion in financing, with Deutsche Bank and LBBW accounting for 65% of this total. Additionally, eight German investors held US$5.8 billion in assets of top LNG developers as of May 2024, led by Allianz and Deutsche Bank/DWS. The report highlights a significant gap between these institutions' net-zero commitments and their actual financial activities, noting that Deutsche Bank's financing to LNG expansion rose by 35% between 2021 and 2023. Reclaim Finance argues that this infrastructure locks in long-term fossil fuel dependence and risks creating stranded assets, especially in Europe where gas consumption is declining.

The report examines the role of Italian financial institutions in funding the global expansion of liquefied natural gas (LNG). It finds that between 2021 and 2023, 12 Italian banks provided US$6 billion to the top 150 LNG developers, with Intesa Sanpaolo and UniCredit accounting for over 85% of this total. The document highlights a gap between these banks' net-zero pledges and their continued financing of LNG projects, including support for Eni and Enel. It warns that this support risks creating stranded assets and locking in long-term fossil fuel reliance, particularly in Europe where gas consumption is declining.

The report finds that Japanese financial institutions are among the world's largest supporters of LNG expansion, providing billions in financing despite public commitments to carbon neutrality. It highlights a significant gap between these climate pledges and actual financial flows, particularly from four major banks and the Government Pension Investment Fund (GPIF). The document argues that this support locks in long-term fossil fuel dependence and risks creating stranded assets, especially in Europe and South Korea where gas demand is declining.

The report finds that US financial institutions are primary drivers of global LNG expansion, providing billions in financing and investments despite climate pledges. Between 2021 and 2023, 85 US banks provided US$51.2 billion to LNG expansion, with six major banks accounting for 80% of this total. US investors held US$179.6 billion in assets of top LNG developers as of May 2024. The document highlights a significant gap between these institutions' net-zero commitments and their actual policies, which lack restrictions on LNG. It warns that new LNG infrastructure risks creating stranded assets, particularly in Europe, and contributes to substantial greenhouse gas emissions, including high levels of methane leakage from US shale gas fields.

The report finds that French financial institutions are among the top global supporters of LNG expansion, with four banks providing nearly all of the US$14 billion in financing between 2021 and 2023. It highlights a significant gap between these institutions' net-zero pledges and their continued funding of LNG export and import terminals, including support for TotalEnergies. The document argues that current sector policies are insufficient due to loopholes regarding corporate financing and import terminals, and calls for a comprehensive end to financial services for new LNG projects.

The 2024 Scorecard by Insure Our Future argues that the global insurance industry is in a 'vicious cycle,' where it continues to underwrite fossil fuel expansion while simultaneously withdrawing coverage from communities facing the resulting climate risks. Using climate attribution science, the report estimates that over one-third of weather-related insured losses between 2002 and 2022—approximately $600 billion—are attributable to human-caused climate change. The analysis reveals a stark mismatch in underwriting, with renewable energy premiums representing less than 30% of the size of the fossil fuel insurance market in 2023. For 15 of the 28 major property and casualty insurers analyzed, estimated climate-attributable losses exceeded the premiums they collected from fossil fuel clients. While Generali is noted as the first insurer to restrict oil and gas expansion across the entire value chain, the report concludes that voluntary corporate leadership has stalled, necessitating urgent regulatory intervention to mandate 1.5°C-aligned transition plans and higher capital requirements for fossil fuel exposure.

The document establishes a reference framework for financial actors to evaluate power utility transition plans across four categories: emissions reduction, energy planning, capital expenditure (CAPEX), and climate planning. It argues that for a plan to be 1.5°C-aligned, utilities must commit to a carbon-neutral power sector by 2035 in Europe and OECD countries (2040 elsewhere), implement plant-by-plant closure plans for fossil fuels without sales or conversions, and dedicate over 86% of CAPEX to sustainable technologies by 2030. The guide also recommends that financial institutions implement sectoral exclusion policies for fossil gas and achieve a 6:1 financing ratio in favor of sustainable power over fossil fuels by 2030.

The document argues that the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) is essential for reversing the marginalisation of African countries in global trade, with the potential to generate $450 billion in additional income by 2035 and lift 30 million people out of absolute poverty. However, full implementation has been delayed since January 2021 due to resource constraints, debt distress in over 50% of African countries, and fears of tariff revenue losses. To address this, the AfCFTA Secretariat introduced the AfCFTA Implementation Review Mechanism (AFIRM) in July 2024. The author suggests that AFIRM should move away from a narrow focus on compliance and instead adopt the broader, transparency-based approach of the WTO's Trade Policy Review Mechanism (TPRM). The TPRM is credited with enhancing adherence through peer pressure and factual reporting without being a tool for dispute settlement, a model that could reduce resistance among AfCFTA state parties.

The document introduces a framework to transition island states from vulnerable centralized grids to resilient decentralized renewable energy systems. Using Cuba as a test case, it demonstrates how identifying 'disruption hotspots' and applying context-specific modelling can maintain power supply during extreme weather events, though it notes that such resilience often requires higher upfront capital investments.

The document examines the transition of energy-intensive heavy industries toward net-zero emissions, highlighting how global trade dynamics and national policies in developed economies impact emerging markets. It identifies four primary technological levers for decarbonization: energy efficiency, alternative fuel use/electrification, material efficiency, and carbon capture and storage. The author argues that while developing countries with abundant renewables can become new green industrial hubs, they face significant risks from carbon border measures, green protectionism, and reduced access to secondary materials. The briefing emphasizes the need for international coordination on standards, technology transfer, and finance to ensure a just transition for emerging and developing economies.

The report highlights a significant gap between the public sustainability commitments of major seafood companies and their actual implementation of robust traceability. While some companies like Thai Union and CP Foods have group-level commitments, most lack time-bound targets, detailed implementation plans, or annual progress reporting. The document argues that full-chain, digital, and interoperable traceability—specifically aligned with Global Dialogue on Seafood Traceability (GDST) standards—is essential for managing material risks such as IUU fishing, forced labour, and overfishing, and for complying with emerging regulations in the EU, US, and Japan.

The document argues that Africa-EU and Africa-Germany relations are still defined by 'coloniality', manifesting as power imbalances that marginalise African agency. It critiques the EU's security-development nexus and the 'Samoa Agreement' for prioritising European interests, and examines German development aid through the GIZ as often intrusive or tokenistic. The author highlights the exploitation of raw materials and the use of intelligence services to acquire indigenous medicines as contemporary colonial practices. To decolonise, the paper recommends respecting African demands on trade and resource beneficiation, ending the 'Europeanisation' of security missions, and shifting from development aid to industrialisation projects.

The document argues that terms like "net zero" and "carbon neutral" are often meaningless to consumers and prone to greenwashing, particularly when they rely on offsets or distant targets. It advises marketers to prioritize immediate emissions cuts over long-term goals and to use plain, truthful language to maintain consumer trust.

The document argues that sanitation systems are both vulnerable to climate change and contributors to greenhouse gas emissions, yet remain poorly integrated into national climate and sanitation policies. This disconnect leads to missed synergies between Sustainable Development Goals 6 and 13 and results in sanitation initiatives receiving minimal climate finance. The authors analyze NDCs and sanitation plans to provide recommendations for integrating climate-resilient water, sanitation and health (WASH) initiatives into national adaptation plans and updated NDCs.

The We Mean Business Coalition describes the COP29 finance deal as insufficient, noting that the $300bn figure falls short of developing countries' needs. While the coalition views the 'Baku to Belém Roadmap' as a positive step for scaling public finance, it argues that the final agreement missed a leadership opportunity by omitting specific language on transitioning from fossil fuels. The coalition highlights that the global market for clean technologies is projected to exceed $2 trillion by 2035 and calls for 1.5°C-aligned Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to mobilize private investment.

COP 29 concluded with a new climate finance goal of at least USD 300 billion per year by 2035 for developing countries, though this remains below their identified needs. The conference saw a lack of progress on the COP 28 energy package, including the rejection of proposals for annual progress reports on transitioning away from fossil fuels and a failure to reiterate calls to phase out fossil fuel subsidies. While the national adaptation plan (NAP) assessment was delayed to 2025, agreements were reached on indicators for the UAE Framework for Global Climate Resilience and the establishment of the Baku Adaptation Road Map. Additionally, the Lima work programme on gender was extended by 10 years, but the document notes a failure to explicitly address human rights and gender-responsive finance in the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) decision.

The document examines rural energy cooperatives as a means to overcome technical, financial, and organizational barriers that have historically marginalized rural communities during the energy transition. It argues that these community-led models can improve energy access and affordability for the 2.4 billion people relying on traditional fuels while shifting energy systems from centralized to decentralized structures. The analysis explores various financing and benefit-distribution models to provide a framework for countries, specifically China and other developing nations, to drive rural revitalization through distributed renewable energy.

The World Resources Institute describes the COP29 agreement to deliver at least $300 billion per year by 2035 as an important but insufficient 'downpayment' for developing countries. While the deal triples current finance flows and establishes a roadmap to reach $1.3 trillion from all sources, the WRI emphasizes that this amount does not meet the actual needs of vulnerable nations to pursue low-carbon economies and manage climate disasters.

South Africa's upcoming G20 presidency is positioned as a critical lever for reforming the global financial architecture to better support African nations facing a severe debt crisis and escalating climate risks. The paper highlights that Africa's debt has surged by 183% since 2010, with 57% of the population living in countries that spend more on interest payments than on healthcare, education, and infrastructure. It critiques existing G20 mechanisms like the Debt Service Suspension Initiative (DSSI) and the Common Framework for Debt Treatments for their slow implementation and failure to secure private creditor participation. The author advocates for a holistic approach that links debt sustainability with climate resilience, noting that climate financing needs are projected to exceed USD 10 trillion annually from 2031 to 2050. South Africa's presidency, themed 'solidarity, equality and sustainable development', aims to amplify the voice of the Global South and the African Union within the G20 to secure equitable debt relief and increased concessional finance for climate adaptation.

The We Mean Business Coalition calls on COP29 negotiators to reinforce the transition away from fossil fuels and implement Global Stocktake outcomes. The coalition argues that policy certainty and ambitious Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) are essential to unlock large-scale private investment in clean energy. Additionally, they advocate for a robust New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) on climate finance to support low- and middle-income countries and reduce investment risks.