Search Climate Insights Directory

CILRIF is a financial innovation designed to provide cities with long-term climate insurance and access to capital for resilience building. The mechanism uses a results-based pricing structure where insurance premiums decrease as cities implement adaptation measures, thereby reducing overall financing costs and managing climate risk. The initiative targets specific cities in South Africa, the Philippines, and Sierra Leone, focusing on risks such as riverine floods and extreme heat.

The report finds that while global climate finance almost doubled between 2011 and 2020 to a cumulative USD 4.8 trillion, current growth rates are insufficient to meet climate goals. Renewable energy dominates mitigation finance, while adaptation and sectors like agriculture and industry remain severely underfunded. A significant barrier is the continued high level of fossil fuel subsidies, which exceeded total climate finance during the decade. The report emphasizes the need for a 20% annual increase in finance by 2030, reaching USD 4.3 trillion annually, and calls for holistic sectoral strategies and a shift in the financial paradigm to mobilize private capital.

The report finds that climate finance for AFOLU sectors is severely underfunded, representing only 2.5% of total tracked climate finance in 2019/20. While overall trends were positive between 2013 and 2020, a 20% drop occurred between 2017/18 and 2019/20. The sectors require an estimated USD 423.4 billion annually by 2030 to align with the Paris Agreement, a nearly 26-fold increase over 2019/20 levels. Finance is dominated by public sources, with significant gaps in private investment and a stagnation in adaptation funding. Geographically, East Asia and the Pacific are the primary recipients, followed by Sub-Saharan Africa.

The report finds that the introduction of a mandatory environmental conciliation stage has paralyzed 98% of deforestation-related infringement notices issued between October 2019 and May 2021, exacerbating impunity. This occurs against a broader trend of weakening environmental control since 2015, with deforestation rates returning to 2006 levels by 2021. The analysis also highlights severe transparency gaps in Ibama's open data, including the loss of geographic area data for sanctions after August 2019 and restricted public access to procedural documents.

The document examines a legislative report by Senator Carlos Fávaro that favors Bill (PL) no 510/2021 over Bill (PL) no 2633/2020. The authors argue that the proposed changes primarily benefit medium and large land occupants while failing to assist small farmers, potentially incentivizing illegal deforestation and increasing land conflicts in Brazil, particularly in the Amazon.

The document examines the role of BNDES in Brazil's agricultural investment credit, highlighting a significant increase in disbursements between 1995 and 2020. It details the bank's credit structure, noting a predominance of indirect loans and a focus on crop activities, particularly soy. The analysis reveals that credit for equipment is concentrated in the Midwestern region and primarily operated by private financial agents, such as banks owned by machine manufacturers, which contrasts with the broader Brazilian rural credit market dominated by public banks.

The study finds that while forest fires in the Brazilian Amazon are not systematically used as a direct first step to clear vegetation—with only 11% of fire-affected areas being deforested within three years—they often serve as a leading indicator of imminent deforestation in the surrounding vicinity. This association is significantly stronger in rural settlements and occupied public lands, suggesting fires may facilitate land grabbing. Regionally, the link between fire and nearby deforestation has strengthened in states such as Acre, Amazonas, Pará, Rondônia, and Roraima, peaking in 2017.

The study finds that while the direct local conversion of degraded areas into deforested land is low (10% of total deforestation), there is a strong regional association: 30% of total deforestation occurs within one kilometer of previously degraded areas. This association is most frequent in medium or large private properties, rural settlements, and undesignated areas. The authors argue that degradation alerts can serve as a leading indicator for regional forest risk, suggesting that law enforcement should target both degraded areas and their immediate surroundings, particularly on private lands.

The report examines BNDES's impact on Brazilian agricultural investment credit, noting that disbursements nearly quadrupled in real terms between 1995 and 2020. The bank's credit is heavily concentrated in crop activities, particularly soy, and the acquisition of harvesters and tractors. Geographically, the Center-West region has become the primary recipient of these funds, reflecting the expansion of the agricultural frontier. Unlike general rural credit in Brazil, which is dominated by public banks, BNDES equipment credit is primarily channeled through private commercial banks and manufacturer-owned banks.

Between 2013 and 2020, approximately 42% of fire hotspots in the Brazilian Amazon occurred in previously undisturbed forests, affecting an estimated 18,000 square kilometers annually. While only 11% of fire-affected forest areas transitioned to clear-cut deforestation within three years, fire serves as a strong regional indicator of risk, with high rates of subsequent deforestation occurring in the surrounding areas. This association is particularly strong in rural settlements and public land holdings, where fire may facilitate land grabbing. Regional analysis shows an intensification of this fire-deforestation link in states such as Acre, Amazonas, Pará, Rondônia, and Roraima, especially around 2017.

The report analyzes the spatial and temporal links between forest degradation and deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon from 2017 to 2020. Using INPE's DETER and PRODES systems, it finds that while direct local conversion of degraded areas into deforested land is low (10%), a significant portion of deforestation (30%) occurs within 1 km of previously degraded areas. The study highlights that degradation is more prevalent in medium and large private properties than deforestation is, suggesting that degradation can serve as a regional risk indicator for future deforestation and that policy efforts should be targeted based on land tenure categories.

The briefing introduces an 'energy efficiency cost premium' method to isolate energy efficiency spending from total construction costs in green-certified buildings. Analyzing over 16,000 certifications from 2019-2020, it finds that incremental energy efficiency investments averaged USD 10.5 billion annually, representing only about 5% of the total cost of those buildings. The report highlights that green certifications are inconsistent indicators of energy performance, with over half of tracked assets achieving less than a 30% efficiency gain. It argues that current certifications often fail to align with 1.5°C or 2°C decarbonization pathways and recommends standardized asset-level reporting and a shift toward certifying retrofits in developed economies.

The document examines Senator Carlos Fávaro's legislative report which favors PL 510/2021 over PL 2633/2020. The authors argue that the proposed changes primarily benefit medium and large land occupants by extending the time frame for land occupation, simplifying titling procedures through self-declaration for larger areas, and weakening environmental safeguards. These changes are seen as incentives for illegal deforestation and land grabbing, particularly in the Amazon, while offering no benefits to small-scale farmers.

The Global Landscape of Climate Finance 2021 reports that annual climate finance reached USD 632 billion in 2019/2020, though growth has slowed. The report highlights a massive investment gap, noting that an increase of at least 590% is needed to meet 2030 climate objectives. Mitigation remains the dominant focus, particularly in renewable energy and low-carbon transport, while adaptation finance continues to lag, relying almost entirely on public sources. Geographically, investments are heavily concentrated in East Asia & Pacific, Western Europe, and North America, with China accounting for an estimated 81% of investments in its region.

The methodology for the Global Landscape of Climate Finance 2021 focuses on tracking primary capital flows for greenhouse gas mitigation and adaptation. It employs a conservative approach to avoid double counting and carbon lock-in, prioritizing project-level data and financial commitments over disbursements. The framework categorizes finance by instrument (grants, debt, equity), investor type (private vs. public), and a multi-layer sectoral breakdown, while applying specific assumptions for complex areas like electric vehicles and renewable energy gearing ratios.

The report examines the Brazil's Federal Court of Accounts (TCU) as a key entity for risk management and preventive audits in federal land transport infrastructure. It finds that the TCU often becomes the primary body for approving Technical, Economical and Environmental Feasibility Studies (EVTEA), but typically does so too late in the project life cycle, leading to inefficiencies and wasted public resources. Through case studies of the BR-163/230/MT/PA highway, the North-South Railway (FNSTC), the South Integration Highway (RIS), and Ferrogrão, the document illustrates the TCU's role in defining environmental responsibilities and identifying flaws in feasibility studies, while maintaining a boundary that avoids infringing on the Executive Branch's discretionary power.

This case study by the Climate Policy Initiative tracks public and private urban climate investment flows in Jakarta between 2015 and 2019, identifying a heavy reliance on public funding and a significant underutilization of private finance.

This report examines the landscape of urban green finance in Hyderabad and Kolkata, India, mapping the flow of public and private funds toward climate change mitigation and adaptation across six key sectors, including clean energy, sustainable transportation, and waste and water management.

The FAST-Infra Sustainable Infrastructure Label (SI Label) is a self-declared sustainability certification for infrastructure assets. It is based on a mapping of over 25 global standards, including the IFC Performance Standards and the EU Green Taxonomy. To achieve the label, assets must meet 14 baseline requirements across four sustainability dimensions, comply with minimum safeguards, and demonstrate a positive contribution to at least one sustainability criterion. While the label is sector-agnostic, fossil fuel projects, including unabated natural gas, are unlikely to qualify due to a carbon threshold of <100g CO2e/kWh. The framework encourages external third-party verification to enhance transparency and market trust.

The FAST-Infra Sustainable Infrastructure Label (SI Label) is a voluntary framework designed to identify infrastructure assets that demonstrate significant positive sustainability performance. To qualify, an asset must meet baseline standards—primarily the IFC Performance Standards—and show a significant positive contribution to at least one of 14 sustainability criteria across four dimensions: environmental, social, governance, and adaptation & resilience. The framework mandates environmental and social safeguards, including the use of the Equator Principles 4 and the publication of Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIA). It requires a structured process of declaration, disclosure, and reporting, and strongly encourages an independent external review to ensure market integrity and investor confidence.