Ideas to Action:
Independent research for global prosperity
Three ways that COP-26 could deliver for those countries are to properly define what counts as “new and additional” climate finance, make sure carbon markets rather than aid pays for the additional costs of mitigation in poorer developing countries, and agree to exempt the poorest countries from carbon tariffs.
Last week President Biden announced sweeping measures to reengage the US government in the fight against climate change. With US Special Envoy for Climate John Kerry suggesting the need for “humility and ambition,” we suggest five ways for the new US administration to be more ambitious on the international stage.
Future generations are (currently) blameless, our actions leave them in peril, but we can do something about it. All of this is utterly true of climate change, and it is why rich countries (that disproportionately pollute) should take the lead in paying for climate change mitigation and adaptation.
We don’t know as much as we should about the real-world costs and effectiveness of climate mitigation projects in low- and middle-income countries. This blog looks at what we do know and finds that real-world cost-effectiveness appears to be orders-of-magnitude different between projects even in the same sector.
This week, development ministers of the OECD’s Development Assistance Committee (DAC) come together for one of their occasional “high-level meetings.” Here's what we think should be on the agenda.
There are two ways to look at progress in the developing world context. I think the right way to look at it is that there has been tremendous success. The downside is that, as we see with the threat of COVID as well as the risk of more natural disasters because of climate change, that they and the economies in which they live and work, are vulnerable - lacking resilience, obviously, especially now.
This blog undertakes an initial analysis to map the ways that development agencies are integrating climate objectives into their development programs.
While the world’s decision makers are now rightly focusing on the COVID-19 crisis and its potentially devastating economic aftermath, the climate change agenda has been moved from the center stage. As the world begins to rethink what the post COVID-19 economic order will look like, climate change will again play a key role. And so will the IMF.
Last month, the UK government announced its commitment to “hold the largest review of the UK’s foreign, defence, security and development policy since the end of the Cold War,” with the review adopting an integrated, whole-of-government perspective.
The New Zealand example, while well-intentioned, shows that developed countries cannot and should not merely skip to the end result.
Commentary Menu