Search Climate Insights Directory

The Buildings Criteria provide a framework for certifying Use-of-Proceeds instruments, assets, entities, and Sustainability-Linked Debt based on their emissions performance. Eligibility is determined through two primary pathways: an Absolute Performance Threshold (using city-specific trajectories or approved proxies) and a Relative Performance Improvement pathway (requiring 30-50% emissions reductions for retrofits). New buildings constructed after 2023 face stricter requirements, including a total ban on fossil fuels for heating, hot water, and cooking, and mandatory infrastructure for electric mobility. Starting January 1, 2026, new buildings must also report on Whole Life Carbon Assessments (WLCA), with specific emissions thresholds for steel and cement. The criteria also define certification levels for entities and sustainability-linked debt, categorizing them as either 'Aligned' or 'Transition' based on their adherence to low-carbon trajectories.

The Electrical Utilities Criteria provide a framework for certifying entities and debt instruments based on their emissions intensity and transition pathways toward net-zero by 2040. The criteria distinguish between existing and new capacity, setting specific GHG thresholds for low-carbon technologies and phase-out dates for unabated fossil fuel plants. It also defines requirements for mitigation measures like CCS/CCUS and cofiring, as well as a comprehensive adaptation and resilience checklist to ensure infrastructure is robust against physical climate hazards.

The report outlines the development of certification criteria for electrical utilities to ensure their financing aligns with the Paris Agreement. It establishes a global emissions intensity transition pathway based on the IEA Net Zero Emissions (NZE) by 2050 scenario, targeting near-zero emissions for the power sector by 2040. The criteria distinguish between existing capacity, which must follow phase-out or retrofitting benchmarks, and new capacity, which must be low-carbon as no new fossil fuel plants are eligible. It also details specific thresholds for non-combustion emissions in hydropower, geothermal, and bioenergy, and sets requirements for decarbonization measures like Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) and hydrogen co-firing.

The document explains the eligibility and certification process for Low Carbon Buildings Bonds, detailing the pathways to achieve net-zero by 2050 and the specific requirements for new and existing buildings. It outlines the use of trajectories and proxies to measure emissions intensity and highlights new 2023 requirements for new buildings, including the prohibition of fossil fuels and mandatory Whole Life Carbon Assessments.

The document analyzes the green agricultural policies and financial markets of China and Brazil, highlighting the strategic importance of soy and beef in their bilateral trade. It identifies a divergence in focus, with China prioritizing technical production efficiency and pollution control, while Brazil focuses on land-use change, deforestation, and livestock management. The report recommends that Brazil develop a national taxonomy combining 'white list' and 'technical screening' approaches and suggests seven specific actions for China-Brazil collaboration, including the creation of a joint green agriculture fund and the harmonization of sustainable production standards for key commodities.

The report analyzes the green agriculture landscapes of China and Brazil, highlighting their strategic trade partnership and shared climate challenges. It contrasts China's focus on production technology and pollution control with Brazil's emphasis on land use, deforestation, and livestock management. The document proposes a framework for Brazil to develop its own sustainable taxonomy and suggests seven action points for the two nations to establish a common green agriculture classification standard to facilitate cross-border capital flow and sustainable commodity value chains, particularly for soy and beef.

The report analyzes the green agriculture policies and finance markets of China and Brazil, emphasizing the strategic importance of their bilateral trade in soybeans and beef. It identifies a need for harmonized green taxonomies to reduce transaction costs and prevent greenwashing, providing specific recommendations for Brazil's upcoming sustainable taxonomy and a framework for bilateral cooperation.

The report outlines a methodology to distinguish between green, transition, and phase-down activities to mobilise private capital for Australia's net zero goals. It defines 'green' activities as consistent with Paris Agreement goals and 'transition' activities as those with a continued role in a net zero economy that lack low-carbon alternatives. The methodology recommends using internationally recognised 1.5°C aligned climate-science scenarios, specifically from the IEA and Climateworks, to objectively determine eligibility and avoid greenwashing and carbon lock-in.

The report provides a toolkit for investors to assess the climate credentials of Brazilian agri-food companies using the 'Five Principles for Transition' and 'Five Hallmarks for a Credible Transitioning Company'. It highlights the critical role of the agricultural sector in Brazil's emissions profile, where land-use change and agriculture account for nearly 75% of gross emissions. Through case studies of Syngenta and Amaggi, the document illustrates the application of these screening tools, noting that while major companies are developing transition plans, gaps remain in financial strategies and the alignment of actual emissions trends with 1.5°C goals. Additionally, it outlines the landscape of sustainable finance instruments in Brazil, such as LCAs and CRAs, and discusses regulatory pressures like the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR).

The guide outlines a five-step process for corporates to issue transition-linked bonds: building a credible transition plan, selecting a thematic label, creating a sustainable financing framework, executing the bond issuance, and conducting post-issuance reporting. It emphasizes the necessity of science-based, 1.5°C-aligned decarbonisation pathways and the integration of social safeguards to ensure a just transition. The document details the differences between Use of Proceeds (UoP) bonds and Sustainability-Linked Bonds (SLBs), providing criteria for selecting material Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and Sustainability Performance Targets (SPTs). It also highlights market trends, such as the 'greenium' (cheaper pricing for labelled debt), and warns against greenwashing risks associated with non-transparent frameworks or carbon lock-in activities.

The report argues that fugitive methane emissions significantly increase the lifecycle emissions of fossil gas, making it comparable to coal and oil in climate impact. It examines global sustainable finance taxonomies, noting that while most exclude hydrocarbons, some include fossil gas under strict conditions. Specifically, it analyzes the EU Taxonomy, concluding that its rigorous carbon intensity thresholds and lifecycle emission requirements make new gas-powered plants economically unviable compared to renewable energy alternatives.

The report provides a toolkit for assessing corporate transition plans in Brazil's agri-food sector, using case studies of Syngenta and Amaggi to illustrate the application of the 'Triple A' (Ambition, Action, Accountability) framework. It highlights Brazil's significant role as a GHG emitter, primarily through land use and livestock, and outlines various sustainable finance instruments available to fund the transition to net-zero.

The EU chemicals sector faces a critical investment window until 2030, requiring over EUR1tn by 2050 to achieve net zero. The document argues that decarbonisation must address scope 3 emissions—which account for 60% to 80% of total emissions—through demand reduction, circularity, and alternative feedstocks. Key policy recommendations include expanding the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) to include polymers and organic chemicals, implementing Carbon Contracts for Difference (CCfDs) for low-carbon hydrogen, and strengthening the EU Taxonomy to better incentivise low-carbon basic chemicals production.

The global aligned GSS+ debt market reached a cumulative volume of USD 4.2 trillion by the end of Q3 2023, though year-to-date volumes declined by 10% compared to 2022. Green bonds remain the dominant theme, surpassing a cumulative USD 2.5 trillion milestone. In the Middle East and Africa (MEA), the market grew by 158% in 2023, driven largely by Saudi Arabia and the UAE, with a strong preference for green instruments and a recent increase in public sector issuance.

The guidance introduces the 'Triple A' framework (Ambition, Action, and Accountability) and five specific 'Hallmarks' to evaluate corporate transition plans. It emphasizes that credible plans must feature science-based, time-bound targets covering all material GHG emissions (Scopes 1, 2, and 3), detailed financial plans, and strong board-level governance. The document warns against the over-reliance on carbon offsets and the use of national NDCs as a substitute for sectoral science-based pathways, while advocating for annual third-party verification to ensure transparency and accountability.

The Brazilian sustainable debt market reached USD 33.3bn by H1 2023, with green bonds dominating at 45.2%. Within the agriculture sector, forestry is the most financed land-use category, followed by agriculture and bioenergy. The report highlights the role of sustainability-linked bonds (SLBs) for hard-to-abate sectors and recommends government guarantees and a national taxonomy to scale GSS+ financing.

The Climate Bonds Initiative argues that Japan's GX plan requires strengthening in several key areas to be truly 1.5°C-aligned. Key recommendations include prioritizing established renewable technologies, setting a clear phase-out date for unabated coal power by 2035, strictly limiting gas investments, and tightening standards for low-carbon hydrogen and ammonia. The report emphasizes that the success of Japan's planned 20 trillion yen GX Economic Transition Bonds depends on rigorous alignment with scientific pathways to mobilize private capital and avoid stranded assets.

The Climate Bonds Initiative evaluates Japan's GX Plan, noting that while it provides a solid foundation for transition finance, certain elements—specifically the reliance on ammonia co-firing and fossil gas—risk undermining its credibility. The report recommends prioritising mature renewable technologies, setting a clear phase-out date for unabated coal by 2035, and implementing a mandatory emissions trading system with a strong carbon price to ensure alignment with global 1.5°C goals.

The report examines how international taxonomies and the national policies of the US, China, and Germany handle fossil fuels to inform the development of a Canadian taxonomy. It finds that while most taxonomies exclude new oil and coal capacity, fossil gas is often treated as a transitional fuel with strict emission limits and phase-out dates (typically 2030–2035). The document highlights the critical role of fugitive methane emissions in determining the actual climate impact of natural gas, arguing that lifecycle assessments are necessary to avoid 'carbon lock-in'. It concludes that Canada's main trading partners are using economic incentives and regulations to reduce hydrocarbon consumption, suggesting that a science-based taxonomy is essential for attracting private capital for decarbonization.

The report assesses the alignment between the Colombian and EU taxonomies, finding a high degree of similarity in technical screening criteria for climate change mitigation, particularly in the energy and manufacturing sectors. While both frameworks share guiding principles and a focus on decarbonisation, the EU Taxonomy is generally more detailed regarding climate change adaptation and minimum safeguards. The Colombian Green Taxonomy offers more specific criteria for land-use sectors (AFOLU) and certain waste management activities, reflecting its regional context. Currently, the EU Taxonomy mandates disclosure for large companies and financial participants, whereas the Colombian framework remains primarily voluntary.