Search Climate Insights Directory

The report advocates for the adoption of Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) in the mining sector to integrate environmental and social considerations into high-level policies, plans, and programs (PPPs). Unlike project-level Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIA), SEA provides a broad perspective to manage cumulative effects, balance sectoral interests with other development goals, and improve governance. Through case studies in Namibia, Ghana, Romania, and Mozambique, the report demonstrates that SEA can lead to optimized infrastructure, sustainable mine closures, and better regulation of artisanal and small-scale mining. Key obstacles identified include limited institutional capacity, lack of political will, and insufficient stakeholder awareness. The report recommends that governments prioritize capacity building, inter-ministerial collaboration, and the active involvement of Indigenous and local communities, particularly when managing critical minerals for the energy transition.

The report advocates for Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) as a high-level tool to integrate environmental, social, and economic considerations into mining plans, policies, and programs (PPPs). Unlike project-level Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIA), SEA provides a long-term, iterative perspective that helps balance competing interests and address cumulative impacts. The document details how SEA has been applied in countries like Namibia, Ghana, Romania, and Mozambique, highlighting its role in optimizing infrastructure, improving regulatory frameworks, and enhancing public participation. It identifies key obstacles such as limited institutional capacity and lack of political will, recommending that governments prioritize inter-ministerial collaboration and inclusive stakeholder engagement, particularly when managing critical minerals for the energy transition.

The document advocates for Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) as a tool to integrate environmental and social considerations into high-level mining policies, plans, and programs (PPP). Unlike project-level Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIA), SEA provides a broad perspective to manage cumulative impacts and align mining with national development goals. Through case studies in Namibia, Ghana, Romania, Mozambique, and Canada, the report illustrates how SEA can optimize infrastructure, improve regulatory frameworks, and enhance stakeholder engagement, while identifying obstacles such as limited institutional capacity and lack of political will.

The fact sheet defines nature-based solutions (NbS) for climate adaptation as actions to protect, conserve, restore, sustainably use, and manage the natural environment. It emphasizes that because climate change impacts people differently based on identity—such as gender, age, and disability—NbS must be designed through inclusive local engagement. The document provides practical examples for inclusivity, such as ensuring mangrove restoration training considers women's childcare duties and that forest management meetings are held in local languages and accessible locations for Indigenous Peoples. It outlines a framework for inclusive engagement that involves listening to unique relationships with nature, consulting those most at risk, and involving community members in the design, monitoring, and evaluation of adaptation activities.

The 2024 state of global environmental governance is characterized by a 'polycrisis' of geopolitical tension, climate disasters, and economic instability. While some progress was made in Indigenous Peoples' participation and the establishment of the Cali Fund for biodiversity, major negotiations on plastic pollution and chemicals failed to reach landmarks. Climate finance remains a central point of contention, with the new collective quantified goal (NCQG) of USD 300 billion per year by 2035 falling short of developing countries' expectations. The report highlights a growing trend of environmental litigation at global courts and the persistent challenge of 'siloed' governance, where the three Rio Conventions operate independently despite the interconnected nature of climate, biodiversity, and land degradation.

The SUNCASA project, funded with USD 22 million by Global Affairs Canada and managed by IISD and WRI, implements nature-based solutions (NbS) to combat flooding, heat, and biodiversity loss in Dire Dawa, Kigali, and Johannesburg. The project targets 2.2 million beneficiaries, with a specific focus on gender equality and the empowerment of marginalized groups in climate adaptation planning.

The document describes nature-based adaptation solutions (SafN) as a subset of nature-based solutions (SfN) focused on protecting, conserving, restoring, and sustainably managing ecosystems to mitigate climate impacts. It details a four-step implementation process—from methodology development to identifying adaptation options—and highlights the co-benefits for biodiversity and human well-being, such as food and water security. The text emphasizes that effective SafN must be inclusive, gender-responsive, and integrated into broader adaptation strategies, drawing on international standards from the IUCN and the Convention on Biological Diversity.

The document outlines a technical framework for the valuation of lithium products—including brines, minerals, and chemicals—to ensure fair taxation in multinational mining operations. It details the physical characteristics of lithium deposits, the production processes for lithium carbonate and hydroxide, and the specific contractual elements that influence pricing. A significant portion of the guide is dedicated to analyzing price indices from major agencies like Argus Media, Fastmarkets, and Benchmark Mineral Intelligence, providing tax administrations with a methodology to adjust for product quality, economic circumstances, and delivery terms.

The fact sheet defines nature-based adaptation solutions (SafN) as actions to protect and manage ecosystems to improve community and nature resilience. It argues that for these solutions to be effective, they must be inclusive, accounting for how culture, customs, and social roles influence a person's ability to participate and benefit. The document provides a set of practical recommendations for inclusive planning, such as consulting high-risk groups, ensuring accessible meeting times and locations, and collaborating with local specialists to remove barriers to equitable benefit distribution. It highlights how climate impacts vary by identity, noting that women fishers, small-scale farmers, people with disabilities, and men in storm response face distinct risks based on their societal roles and resource access.

The document argues that while climate adaptation is often sidelined by immediate security needs in conflict-affected states, integrating climate adaptation planning with peacebuilding is essential for long-term stability. It outlines a framework for creating conflict-sensitive NAPs by focusing on enabling factors such as leadership, financing, and stakeholder engagement to ensure adaptation programming does not inadvertently contribute to further conflict.

The IISD welcomes the launch of a new coalition for fossil fuel subsidy (FFS) reform at COP 28, which aims to increase transparency, evaluate barriers to reform, and develop national phase-out strategies. However, the IISD warns that public financial support for fossil fuels reached a record USD 1.7 trillion in 2022 and notes that only 16 countries have included FFS reform in their current nationally determined contributions (NDCs). To ensure success, the IISD recommends establishing a 2025 deadline for FFS removal in OECD countries and 2030 for non-OECD countries, reinvesting savings into just transition programs, and avoiding narrow definitions of subsidies that have historically delayed action.

The International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) views Canada's new oil and gas emissions cap framework as a necessary foundation for a sector-specific cap-and-trade system, but warns that the proposed 2030 reduction target of 16-20% relative to 2005 levels is insufficient compared to the broader economy-wide goal of 40-45%. The IISD expresses concern over compliance flexibilities, such as carbon offsets and decarbonization fund payments, which it argues may undermine actual emissions reductions. To align with the 2022 Emissions Reduction Plan, the IISD recommends strengthening the 2030 target toward a 40% reduction and minimizing the use of offsets.

A coalition of civil society organizations urges CETP signatories to bridge the gap between fossil fuel divestment and clean energy investment. While signatories shifted an estimated USD 6.5 billion away from fossil fuels in the first year, clean energy financing increased by only USD 5.2 billion. The statement demands that signatories set targets to match these levels by 2024, prioritize low-income countries and small island developing states, and ensure financing is rights-based and community-led.

The IISD welcomes the Emirates COP28 Leaders Declaration as a historic first for food systems at a COP, praising its commitment to integrate food and land use into national climate and biodiversity plans by 2025. While the IISD supports the declaration's focus on financial support and the interlinkages between climate and biodiversity, it argues that the document should have explicitly called for the urgent phase-out of fossil fuels within food systems to align with the Paris Agreement's 1.5°C target.

The report provides a comprehensive analysis of Uzbekistan's environmental status from 2012 to 2022, highlighting critical challenges in water scarcity, land degradation, and air pollution driven by population and economic growth. It details the ongoing Aral Sea crisis and the country's vulnerability to climate change, while outlining national responses such as the Yashil Makon afforestation project and a transition toward green energy.

The report provides a comprehensive analysis of Uzbekistan's environmental status using the DPSIR framework. It highlights critical challenges including severe water scarcity, land degradation, and the ongoing Aral Sea crisis, while noting progress in expanding protected areas and transitioning toward renewable energy. The document emphasizes the high vulnerability of the region to climate change, which manifests in rising temperatures and glacier loss, and outlines national strategies for adaptation and sustainable resource management.

The report provides a comprehensive analysis of Uzbekistan's environmental state from 2012 to 2022, utilizing the Drivers-Pressures-State-Impacts-Responses (DPSIR) framework. It highlights critical challenges including severe water scarcity, land degradation, and the ongoing Aral Sea crisis, while noting improvements in protected area coverage and the adoption of green energy. The document emphasizes the link between environmental degradation and public health, particularly in the Aral Sea region, and details national strategies to mitigate climate change and improve waste management.

The report examines the risks associated with LNG export projects in Mozambique, particularly those involving the European Union. It finds that these projects have caused social displacement, environmental damage, and increased sovereign debt without delivering promised economic development. The authors argue that the 'gas for development' narrative is unsupported by evidence, as Cabo Delgado's socio-economic conditions have worsened since gas discoveries. Financial risks include volatile global gas prices, declining long-term demand due to the energy transition, and contractual designs that delay government revenues until the 2030s. Furthermore, the report highlights an erosion of sovereignty through investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanisms and the prioritization of infrastructure security over civilian protection. It recommends that Mozambique reassess operational projects, halt new LNG developments, and prioritize sustainable economic diversification.

The report analyzes producer inclusion across executive, legislative, judicial, and monitoring and evaluation (M&E) governance in six agricultural VSSSOs: African Organisation for Standardisation, Better Cotton, Fairtrade International, Rainforest Alliance, Trustea, and VietFarm. It finds that while some organizations reserve seats for producers, there is a widespread lack of voting and veto power, limited transparency in executive decisions, and a significant gap in producer representation within grievance and M&E processes. The document recommends that VSSSOs formally reserve seats for producers, support producer-led networks, and increase the transparency of governance and grievance decisions.

The report evaluates the inclusion of producers—including farmers and workers—within the governance of six agricultural voluntary sustainability standard-setting organizations (VSSSOs) based on principles of representation, participation, transparency, and subsidiarity. While noting promising progress, it argues that more must be done to allow producers to influence decisions affecting their lives. The document recommends specific structural changes, such as granting producers voting and veto power in high-level governance bodies, integrating producer-led networks, and increasing transparency regarding executive and grievance decisions.