Search Climate Insights Directory

The Resilience Knowledge Coalition is a "network of networks" hosted by the Global Resilience Partnership and co-led by SouthSouthNorth and the International Centre for Climate Change and Development. It aims to ensure that the best knowledge and practice on resilience are used to shape policies and investments, particularly in Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Small Island Developing States (SIDS). The coalition operates through three interrelated functions: 'Collaborate' (peer-to-peer learning and capacity building), 'Connect' (virtual knowledge-sharing platforms), and 'Apply' (measurement, incubation, and scaling support). It emphasizes a bottom-up approach, prioritizing Global South demand and expertise to avoid the top-down, donor-driven models of previous knowledge-brokering initiatives.

The policy brief by the Global Resilience Partnership advocates for a systemic shift in how capital markets account for resilience-related risks. It argues that current policy frameworks and market incentives are inadequate, leaving assets exposed to increasing global shocks. The document proposes a new definition of resilience based on five attributes: diversity, redundancy, connectivity, inclusivity and equity, and adaptive learning. It emphasizes that investing in resilience, particularly in the Global South, is a risk mitigation strategy that can provide high economic returns, with benefit-cost ratios for climate adaptation ranging from 2:1 to 10:1.

Global Witness and CLARA criticize the VCMI's Provisional Claims Code of Practice, arguing it enables greenwashing and ignores the scientific reality that avoided emissions cannot balance current emissions. They contend that the voluntary carbon market facilitates the appropriation of lands in the global South by the global North and distracts from the mandatory decarbonization and consumption reductions necessary to meet the 1.5C Paris Agreement target.

The report argues that transdisciplinary (TD) research—which integrates diverse scientific disciplines and non-academic societal actors to solve real-world problems—is often hindered by a lack of formal coordination. Based on a 2024 workshop, the authors propose a framework for improving TD coordination centered on three goals: shifting scientific culture toward societal impact, transforming funding mechanisms to be more inclusive and flexible, and building specialized capacities in facilitation and communication. The document emphasizes the need to elevate Southern perspectives to correct power imbalances between the Global North and South in scientific collaboration.

The report argues that transdisciplinary research—which integrates academic and non-academic knowledge to solve real-world problems—often fails due to a lack of dedicated coordination. It proposes a three-pillar framework to improve this: changing scientific culture to value social impact over academic metrics, transforming funding mechanisms to be more flexible and inclusive of non-academic partners, and developing specialized capacities in facilitation, communication, and conflict resolution. The document emphasizes the need for these changes to support the Global South and ensure equitable partnerships in addressing the triple planetary crisis of climate change, biodiversity loss, and pollution.

The paper argues that renewable energy value chains (REVCs) often replicate existing global inequalities, where Global South countries are relegated to low-value-added activities like mineral extraction while Global North countries capture high-value R&D and manufacturing. By applying a 'social reproduction lens'—which examines the intersection of paid and unpaid work and the organization of everyday life—the authors highlight how these structural asymmetries, combined with the 'feminisation of informality,' create barriers to gender equity and sustainable livelihoods. The proposed framework consists of three dimensions: global distribution of value, work and livelihoods, and ecological justice. It emphasizes that a 'just transition' requires moving beyond individual capabilities to address systemic issues such as 'ecologically unequal exchange,' where the Global North appropriates land, labour, and materials from the South. The document concludes with an assessment matrix to guide policymakers in creating high-quality, formal jobs that are compatible with the social reproduction needs of marginalized groups.

The document serves as a survival guide for climate change negotiators, detailing the scientific basis of the climate crisis, the evolution of the international regime from the 1992 UNFCCC to the Paris Agreement, and the formal and informal structures of the UN process. It specifically addresses the structural disadvantages faced by negotiators from developing countries, such as 'hollow mandates' and limited coalition-forming power, and offers practical strategies for drafting, bargaining, and coping with the pressures of high-stakes diplomacy.

The document critically examines the 'turn towards technology' in humanitarian aid, specifically regarding sexual violence. It warns that technological solutions often fail due to inadequate problem definitions and the exclusion of affected populations. The author identifies four key areas of concern: the creation of 'digital bodies' (data representations of physical people), the use of intrusive wearables for reproductive and health tracking, the 'technologization' of safeguarding through quantification and criminal law, and the use of data-driven vulnerability assessments that may render male victims invisible. Finally, it cautions against 'humanitarian experimentation,' where untested technologies are deployed in fragile environments without sufficient ethical frameworks, potentially introducing new harms to victims of gender-based violence.

The fact sheet contends that the traditional reliance on natural gas and LNG as a bridge to decarbonization in the Global South is outdated. It asserts that modern renewables and storage can meet reliability, speed, and cost requirements more effectively than gas. Citing IEA data, the document warns that gas-heavy strategies expose developing economies to higher consumer prices, price volatility, and technology lock-in, whereas a net-zero aligned approach could meet over 60% of their electricity needs via local renewables by 2050.

The paper argues that global indicators from UNICEF and the WHO overestimate water access in the global south. Analysis of 15 cities reveals that nearly half of households lack piped utility water, forcing them to rely on private sources that can be up to 52 times more expensive. The document contends that private sector involvement and the corporatization of utilities have failed to improve access for the under-served and recommends extending formal piped networks, addressing intermittent service, and upgrading informal settlements.

The analysis identifies 105 cities with populations over one million across 34 Global South countries where electrification is currently a viable low-carbon strategy. Suitability is determined by a minimum 90 percent urban electricity access rate and a carbon intensity of electricity supply below 600 tCO2e/GWh. While all South American cities meet these criteria, suitability is significantly lower in sub-Saharan Africa (3 out of 40 cities) and South and East Asia (26 out of 202 cities).

The document outlines the urgent need for increased financial flows to meet Paris Agreement goals, noting that global mitigation investments must increase by a factor of 36 by 2030 to limit warming to 2°C. It identifies a three-stage process for financing NDCs—planning, implementation, and monitoring—and suggests that governments utilize a mix of financial, fiscal, and policy instruments to mobilize both public and private finance. The report highlights that developing countries face significant gaps, with reported financial needs reaching $4.3 trillion, far exceeding existing pledges.

The report outlines seven key transformations—infrastructure design, service provision, data collection, urban employment, financing, land management, and governance—to close the urban services divide. It assigns specific roles to city governments, national governments, civil society, the private sector, and the international community to ensure that urban growth is inclusive, climate-resilient, and sustainable.

The document outlines four critical barriers to the adoption of nature-based solutions (NbS) for climate adaptation: lack of awareness, policy and governance gaps, knowledge and capacity deficits, and financial challenges. It argues that NbS, also known as Ecosystem-based Adaptation (EbA), are underutilized despite their ability to reduce disaster risk and enhance resilience. To address these issues, WWF and partners are developing a global NbS platform to provide tailored technical assistance to governments, particularly in the Global South, to help them mainstream NbS into national strategies like NDCs and NAPs.