STATEMENT: The Republican Budget Bill Will Hurt the U.S. Economy alison.cinnamo… Thu, 07/03/2025 - 14:13

WASHINGTON D.C. (July 3, 2025) — Today, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R.1., the Republican budget bill, by a vote of 218 to 214 following the U.S. Senate’s 51 to 50 vote passage earlier this week. 

The new law turns back the clock on America’s clean energy leadership, with provisions such as the rapid phaseout of critical wind and solar tax credits and introduction of onerous Foreign Entity of Concern (FEOC) restrictions, rendering many clean energy investments unworkable or uncertain at best. Taken together, these provisions will raise Americans’ electricity bills, eliminate hundreds of thousands of jobs, decimate investments in U.S. manufacturing, and undermine the ability to meet rapidly growing demand for electricity.

Following is a statement from Dr. David Widawsky, Director, WRI US:

“While other countries are benefitting from accelerated investment in the clean energy economy, the U.S. is taking a step backwards.

“H.R.1. will undercut the Administration’s stated goal of ‘unleashing American energy’ and sends a chilling signal to families, businesses and investors alike. Abruptly phasing out clean energy tax credits will raise costs, slow innovation and jeopardize America’s energy security.

“Electricity demand is growing everywhere—and growing fast. The clean energy cuts in this bill will increase costs and constrain supply at a time when demand for electricity is surging. Working families, business owners and local governments will bear the brunt through higher electricity bills, fewer jobs, and reduced energy resilience to extreme weather. Billions of dollars of investment in infrastructure, manufacturing, energy savings will be lost; failure to keep pace with growing energy demand will make brownouts and blackouts more likely; air will become less breathable; and American economic growth will be at risk.

“Fossil fuels alone won’t meet the skyrocketing energy demand from manufacturing, AI, electrification, and increasingly frequent and intense heat waves that prompt more AC usage. But America can create a more flexible, agile, and resilient power system with renewables and grid upgrades. Clean energy sources are better positioned to come online quickly to meet growing electricity needs and spur economic growth. That’s exactly what companies, state and local governments, utilities and families have been counting on, planning for and investing in.

“Many Americans remain committed to a clean energy future—and we expect to see progress from the cities, states and businesses that have become labs for innovation in recent years. While this bill throws up many roadblocks to progress, these innovators can and must continue driving the country’s energy economy forward. Opportunities remain for them to do so through coalition building, providing innovative financing and policy solutions, and facilitating infrastructure development for critical projects that serve their communities.

We simply can’t afford to double down on outdated energy sources and policies. Despite this setback, we are not going to give up the race for the secure, affordable and innovative power system that Americans need – and deserve.”

United States climate policy Type Statement Exclude From Blog Feed? 0

STATEMENT: EU 2040 Climate Goal Should Stay the Course Towards a Net-Zero Economy alison.cinnamo… Wed, 07/02/2025 - 13:28

BRUSSELS (July 2, 2025) - Today, the European Commission presented its formal proposal to cut the European Union’s greenhouse gas emissions by 90% by 2040, from 1990 levels.

The revised EU Climate Law aligns with the lower limit of the 90%-95% reduction range recommended by the European Scientific Advisory Board on Climate Change in 2024. The 2040 target will be a critical input to the EU’s forthcoming national climate plan, or Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC).

Following is a statement by Stientje van Veldhoven, Vice President and Regional Director for Europe, World Resources Institute: 

“A 90% emissions cut by 2040, as proposed by the Commission, keeps the EU on track for climate neutrality. It’s realistic, absolutely necessary and aligned with the bloc’s earlier commitment. If achieved, the EU will be well on its way to becoming carbon neutral by 2050.

The EU must back this credible 2040 target with a timely NDC by September with at least a 72.5% economy-wide emission reduction by 2035. This would set a clear, ambitious path for the green transition and show the EU is serious about leading the global energy race, investing in its industrial competitiveness and strengthening its energy security. 

The proposed emission reductions must be delivered through domestic action. Overreliance on carbon credits would undermine the credibility of the EU’s target while diverting investment away from the EU’s clean tech industry. It is critical that monitoring and verification guardrails are put in place to limit the use of carbon credits to less than 3% of the target, ensure transparency and prevent emissions leakage. 

The Commission also proposes leveraging carbon removal, which should be approached cautiously. While carbon removal can play a role in reaching the EU’s target, this must complement — not replace — deep emissions cuts. First and foremost, EU policymakers must take bold steps to phase out fossil fuels, scale up renewables, electrify transport and halt deforestation. Europe’s credible climate leadership will be vital as we approach COP30 in November.”

 

International Climate Action Europe NDC Type Statement Exclude From Blog Feed? 0

Managing Extremes: How South African Cities Are Tackling Water Crises sarah.brown@wri.org Wed, 07/02/2025 - 10:00

With about 464 millimeters of rainfall per year — less than half the global average — South Africa is one of the driest countries in the world. Its semi-arid climate, uneven rainfall distribution and persistent droughts leave the country facing chronic water shortages. At the same time, ecosystem degradation and climate change are causing increasingly frequent and intense flash floods.

Unlike tropical regions in Central and West Africa, where rainfall is relatively reliable, or parts of Eastern Africa with steady seasonal rains, South Africa must manage the growing demand on its limited water resources with extreme care: With high evaporation rates that sometimes exceed average annual rainfall, less than 9% of the country’s rainfall runs into rivers and less than 5% recharges groundwater aquifers. In its cities, rapid urbanization and industrial demand place additional pressure on already fragile water systems.  

South Africa is not alone — cities around the world are grappling with water crises. But some are adapting. Cape Town is restoring its watersheds to help the city withstand major droughts, while eThekwini (the municipality that includes the city of Durban) is investing in improved drainage, nature-based infrastructure and complementary systems, such as early warning flood alerts, to strengthen local responses to extreme rainfall. These efforts show how cities can rethink water management to become more resilient in a changing climate.

Too Little Water: Protecting Supply and Preventing Drought

In 2018, Cape Town nearly ran out of water.

After three years of severe drought, the city was just weeks away from Day Zero, when reservoirs were nearly empty and the government was preparing to shut off the water taps to homes and businesses.

Between February and April that year, residents were gradually limited to 50 liters of water a day — just enough for an average shower — which they collected from designated distribution points. Thanks to strict rationing and other water-saving measures, Cape Town was able to avert the crisis — but it was an extreme example of how droughts can impact cities.  

The Theewaterskloof dam in Western Cape during a drought in 2017 (left) vs the same dam with regular water levels in 2019 (right). Photo by vlbently/iStock (left) and Olga Ernest/WikimediaCommons (right)

The Day Zero crisis exposed how fragile Cape Town’s water system was. The city relies heavily on surface water stored in dams, which fill from rainwater running off surrounding catchment areas. But those catchments are under threat, especially from invasive plant species like pine, wattle and eucalyptus.

These trees consume significantly more water than native vegetation, reducing the amount that reaches reservoirs and, ultimately, shrinking the city’s water supply. In fact, invasive species use about 4% of the country’s available water every year — enough to meet the needs of at least 15 million people.  

To build a drought-resilient city, Cape Town has turned to nature-based solutions, including removing invasive plants and restoring degraded catchment areas. These efforts are not only eco-friendly — they're also much cheaper to implement than costly engineered alternatives such as groundwater exploration, desalination (removing salt from seawater) and recycling wastewater.

Implementing Nature-Based Solutions

In the wake of the Day Zero crisis, the Greater Cape Town Water Fund was launched — a public-private initiative led by the city, The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and other partners. It’s designed to protect Cape Town’s key catchment areas through a payment-for-ecosystem-services model. Through this initiative, the municipality and local businesses pool funds to pay upstream communities to restore the land that supplies the city with water.

These upstream stewards include small-scale farmers, private landowners, small community businesses and local youth and women. They’re trained to remove invasive plants using a mix of herbicides, ringbarking (stripping a deep band of bark from the tree trunk to cut off nutrients to the canopy) and manual clearing. Over the years, TNC has also trained a specialized team of high-altitude rope technicians to tackle invasive species on steep mountain slopes that are otherwise inaccessible.

So far, the Water Fund has cleared nearly 63,000 hectares of invasive alien plants. Where they once crowded out the region’s native flora, the iconic fynbos (a unique shrubland found only in South Africa), which includes native species like the King Protea and Sugarbush, is now taking root. This ecological shift is freeing more than 17 billion liters of water every year, helping the city move closer to its long-term goal of recovering 100 billion liters annually by 2050. 

Vegetation near the Breede river. At the front grows Indigenous shrubs; in the background are invasive eucalyptus trees. Photo by Amanda Gcanga

As well as removing invasive species, efforts are underway to restore native vegetation and rebalance ecosystems. In the Breede and Berg riverbanks, a partnership of environmental NGOs, government departments and water management bodies is working with local communities to slow the spread of invasive species and plant tens of thousands of native trees across the catchment.

These efforts are a win for both water security and biodiversity, as invasive species are replaced with eco-friendly indigenous trees and shrubs such as wild olives and fynbos. It's also brought employment opportunities — more than 300 jobs so far — as well as new recreational activities to the region. These nature-based interventions are not just cost-effective; they’re strategic. If invasive species continue spreading across Cape Town’s catchments, the city’s water losses could double by 2045.  

A study by the Development Bank of Southern Africa on the country’s water investment gaps towards 2020 found that, despite high upfront costs, removal efforts reduce the need for expensive water infrastructure projects later on. When comparing total future costs, actively clearing invasive plant species reduces investment expenditures by 9% by 2050, while inaction increases costs by about 13% — a total potential cost savings of 22% for the country. 

A local nursery for Indigenous plants use to restore the catchment areas after invasive species are removed. Photo by Amanda Gcanga Too Much Water: Preventing Flooding and Riverine Risks

In 2022, the eThekwini Municipality — home to Durban, a coastal city located in KwaZulu-Natal — faced the opposite of Cape Town’s drought crisis.

It suffered one of the deadliest and most damaging floods in South Africa’s history. More than a third of the region’s expected annual rainfall fell in just 24 hours, causing extensive damage to homes, infrastructure and ecosystems, costing the city more than $1.5 billion. More than 400 lives were lost, and tens of thousands were displaced.  

eThekwini faces some of South Africa’s most complex river and flood-related challenges. Home to more than 7,400 kilometers of rivers and streams, and facing an increasingly unpredictable climate, the region is particularly vulnerable to both flash floods and prolonged inundation. Rapid, informal urban expansion adds further pressure. Settlements often spread along riverbanks and in low-lying floodplains, where housing, roads and drainage systems are ill-equipped to withstand the heavy seasonal rains that are intensifying with climate change.  

Damage caused by floods in the KwaZulu-Natal province in April 2022 (left) and in May 2022 (right). Photo by KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Government (left) and eThekwini Municipality (right)

The city has taken bold steps to reform riverine management with the launch of its pioneering Transformative Riverine Management Programme (TRMP) in 2020 — one of the most ambitious efforts in the country to align communities, government and businesses around the value of restoring and protecting urban rivers. 

Rather than treating river restoration as a narrow or localized issue, the TRMP takes a holistic approach, recognizing the many pressures that contribute to flooding in riverine areas, including informal settlements in floodplains, stormwater runoff, solid waste and debris in the city’s rivers, and invasive plant species in and around the city's water bodies. To address these issues, the municipality is working with communities along river corridors to help clear invasive plants and waste, promote river stewardship and maintain stormwater and sewer infrastructure. All of these actions help strengthen the city's natural and built infrastructure to better absorb and manage stormwater during heavy rains.

The program has also supported creating retention ponds (a basin that holds stormwater runoff and slowly releases it), weirs and wetlands to slow water flow and reinforce riverbanks. In addition, community-driven early warning systems have been introduced to alert residents ahead of extreme flood events.

These investments in flood resilience make financial sense in the long run. The TRMP helped eThekwini build a solid business case for riverine resilience, showing that every dollar spent could generate between 1.8 and 3.4 times its value in broader social, environmental and economic benefits.

In 2022 alone, the city spent upwards of $1.5 billion in flood recovery, including repairs to roads, sewage systems and power lines — a huge cost for the city. Under business-as-usual scenarios, eThekwini faces annual losses of $9 million in infrastructure repair costs. But with a city-wide TRMP, the city will be able to save upward of $100 million in future infrastructure maintenance and recovery costs, particularly for flood-resilience assets like its culverts (a pipe or tunnel that allows water to flow under roads, railways or pathways).

These interventions go beyond ecological and social gains. They also reduce risk for businesses and insurers. Major floods can lead to soaring insurance premiums for companies with high-value assets, as well as cause significant financial losses for insurers. In this context, the TRMP has helped elevate river management as a shared priority across public and private sectors. It also brings wider benefits, from job creation and urban greening to stronger institutional coordination — showing how a systems-based, participatory approach can generate meaningful progress in riverine resilience. 

Toward a Shared Urban Water Future

The experiences of Cape Town and eThekwini show how cities around the world can strengthen urban water resilience through community-based approaches and the protection of natural ecosystems. While water challenges can be severe, integrating nature-based solutions with forward-looking planning can help communities better manage water risks in a changing climate. 

WRI in Johannesburg

In South Africa, these lessons are especially relevant to Johannesburg, South Africa’s largest economic hub. Faced with growing water risks, the city is looking ahead and rethinking how it manages its rivers and catchment areas through the City Water Resilience Approach.  

While the Jukskei and Klip rivers are not major water supply sources, they are an important starting point for restoring nature and reducing flood risks. Through the SUNCASA project, Johannesburg and its partners are creating a plan to clean up the Jukskei River catchment, which will help address flood risks to local communities, businesses and infrastructure, and lay the groundwork for a similar initiative to eThekwini’s river management program.

On average, people in Johannesburg use about 275 liters of water a day — around 60% more than the global average. Because of this, protecting the Vaal and Lesotho catchments is critical in making sure the city has enough water in the future. 

Recent droughts have shown just how fragile the system is. In 2024, water levels in the Vaal Reservoirs dropped to 35%, down from 75% in previous years. This makes it even more important to invest in ways to handle climate changes and water scarcity.  

In 2022, WRI developed a Water Resilience Profile for Johannesburg under its Urban Water Resilience in Africa Initiative. It showed that managing the catchments well and coordinating across the whole river basin are top priorities, especially as the city of 6 million faces rising water demand and frequent shortages. Over the next few months, WRI will work on finding ways to invest and build partnerships to restore the Vaal River Basin, which also serves the larger Gauteng region with nearly 15 million residents.

For Johannesburg, and other cities across the world, climate change, rapid urban growth and aging infrastructure mean the economic, environmental and social costs of inaction will only keep growing. But restoring rivers and catchment areas offers a rare opportunity to tackle multiple challenges at once: floods and droughts, supporting biodiversity, improving equity, making public spending more efficient and helping secure long-term water supply. It’s a lesson worth learning from the cities already leading the way. 

design-sem-nome-8.png Cities South Africa urban water resilience nature-based solutions floods drought rivers Type Commentary Exclude From Blog Feed? 0 Authors Amanda Gcanga Nikara Mahadeo Eden Takele

Istanbul Tackles Tourist Crowds and Climate Issues Together margaret.overh… Wed, 07/02/2025 - 10:00

Istanbul's Caferağa neighborhood has a longstanding reputation for its cultural richness and historic charm. Quaint cafes, restaurants and bars line the sidewalks. A thriving arts scene draws an eclectic crowd. More than 2.3 million visitors daily flock to the district in which Caferağa resides — but it's overwhelming the neighborhood's small community of 22,000 residents.

"The streets of Caferağa are struggling to bear the weight they carry," said Hanife Dağıstanlı, the neighborhood chief. "The sidewalks are too narrow and often blocked, and people are forced to step into the road just to keep moving." This overcrowding has made it hard for locals to navigate daily life, especially those who are older, have disabilities or are traveling with children or strollers. At the same time, heavy traffic contributes to Istanbul's worsening air pollution and discourages people from using cleaner travel options, like biking.

Caferağa's sidewalks overflow with parked cars, bikes, scooters and furniture, making it difficult for residents to get around. Photo by WRI Türkiye

Caferağa is not alone. Popular cities around the world are seeking ways to balance the economic boon of tourism with residents' needs and sustainability goals. Some (like Venice) now charge day-trippers an access fee to visit popular areas. Others (like Paris and Barcelona) are placing tighter restrictions on short-term rentals to curb tourism.

But Caferağa wanted to address its overcrowding differently: By collectively reimagining the neighborhood to be cleaner, safer and more livable for all.

In Caferağa, Urban Challenges Collide

While Caferağa is far from the only urban hub facing crowded sidewalks, polluted air and gridlocked streets, it makes a strong case study for better urban design.

The neighborhood is shaped like a peninsula, funneling travelers through just two main entry points and concentrating traffic along a narrow street network. It is also home to about twice as many older residents per capita as the national average, making safe and accessible mobility a high priority.

Meanwhile, residents in and around Caferağa are increasingly grappling with the dangers of extreme heat and air pollution as the planet warms. Istanbul's summer heat waves are already worsening and could become much more severe in the years ahead. Traffic exhaust compounds the issue, making it more dangerous to be outside on hot days.

The government has taken note. Caferağa was recently designated as one of three pilot Low Emission Zones in Istanbul under the city's Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan, which aims to address congestion, air quality issues and mobility challenges. Major cities like Mexico City, Buenos Aires, Madrid and Rome have seen success using similar low-emissions-zone strategies to curb emissions and improve mobility. Due to its higher population of older adults, the Kadıköy district (which houses Caferağa) was also included in Istanbul's Street Transformation Program, which supports sustainable, people-friendly urban design.

But designating a neighborhood as a priority for transformation doesn't mean the work is done. On the contrary: It's only a starting point.

Creating a Livable City from the Ground Up

It started with a single square block. In September 2023, Caferağa temporarily transformed Mehmet Ayvalıtaş Square at the center of the neighborhood — a small but ambitious pilot project.

About WRI Türkiye's Deep Dive Initiative

The Livable Caferağa project is part of WRI's Deep Dive Cities Initiative, which fosters long-term engagement with city officials and residents to build more sustainable, resilient urban environments. The next phase of the project will expand to the entire Kadıköy district and include nature-based solutions for urban heat island mitigation. We aim to develop a comprehensive concept plan, complete with pilot applications, for integrating nature-based solutions into urban mobility projects in Kadıköy. Learn more about the project here.

By temporarily restricting vehicles and using water-based paint and modular street furniture, pedestrians reclaimed the adjacent square. New benches and greenery created places to rest. Colorful crosswalks near the primary school improved safety and visibility. The usually vehicle-dominated space became, almost overnight, a vibrant gathering place for locals and visitors alike.

While temporary, the redesign caught residents' attention and helped catalyze months of collaboration to reimagine Caferağa's streets. Through discussions with the local government as well as researchers, NGOs and WRI Türkiye's Deep Dive Cities team, the community landed on five core recommendations to improve quality of life and tackle sustainability issues simultaneously. All five are currently moving forward with the municipality at various stages of implementation.

Mehmet Ayvalıtaş Square after the temporary redesign. Photos by WRI Türkiye 1) Prioritizing pedestrian space

Stepping into the reimagined Mehmet Ayvalıtaş Square was a breath of fresh air for locals. The vibrant space stood in contrast to their typical experience navigating Caferağa's narrow sidewalks — which, according to Emel Budak, an older resident, are so overrun with cafe tables and haphazardly parked scooters that "it is almost impossible for elderly or disabled individuals to pass through."

Trees brought in for the temporary square redesign. Photo by 

The pilot project highlighted the need for designated pedestrian zones throughout the neighborhood. Residents recommended wider sidewalks, accessible ramps, and raised, visible crosswalks to make the district safer — especially for people with disabilities. 

Meanwhile, planting trees along major pedestrian routes would help improve air quality and cool the streets on hot days. Installing benches would create places to rest and socialize. And residents raised the need for tactile (textured) paving at places like crosswalks and curb edges to make it easier for those who are visually impaired to get around.

Collectively, these solutions can significantly improve walkability, comfort and safety. As the city begins to roll the changes out, residents will be able to provide continuous feedback through the municipality's Accessible Kadıköy platform, which may help inform future improvements.

2) Making room for bikes and scooters

Caferağa's size makes it well suited for cycling or scootering, which can help cut down on vehicle traffic. But the neighborhood lacks a connected network of lanes. Parking is also an issue: Dağıstanlı told us that she receives countless complaints from residents about bikes and scooters blocking already crowded sidewalks.

Ride-share scooters in a designated parking area. Photo by WRI Türkiye

In response, Kadıköy Municipality plans to grow its network of bike lanes from 18 km to 58 km by 2050, while developing an e-bike sharing system and designated bike parking. 

Alongside addressing residents' concerns around safety and accessibility, this will support the district's broader sustainability efforts. With Kadıköy aiming for a 40% reduction in GHG emissions by 2030 and full climate neutrality by 2050, infrastructure for electric and zero-carbon transportation is essential.

3) Creating a new local shuttle system

Caferağa is conveniently located near major transit hubs. However, it doesn't have its own transportation system. This makes it difficult for people — especially caregivers and older residents — to navigate the neighborhood and access public transit like the metro system and ferry, which link Caferağa to the rest of the city.

Residents and the WRI Türkiye team proposed a new shuttle service for the neighborhood, called ModaBüs, to make local trips easier and provide connections to nearby transit centers. Kadıköy Municipality is now in the final planning stages, having worked closely with community members to identify 17 stop locations and assess proposed routes that will connect residential pockets with public spaces and transit points.

Set to launch in late 2025, ModaBüs will integrate with the wider public transport system — including metro, tram and ferry lines — providing first- and last-mile connectivity for the over 22,000 residents of Caferağa. It will operate free of charge for those with 65+ cards, disability cards, mother cards (which enable mothers to ride transport for free) and local residency documentation.

4) Developing a thoughtful approach to parking

With overcrowding at the core of Caferağa's challenges, it's not surprising that parking (or the lack thereof) emerged as a key issue. But rather than adding more parking — which residents recognized would only hike congestion and pollution — the community suggested sustainable management strategies. These include limiting on-street parking in commercial areas, installing digital systems for more effective regulation and enforcement, and prioritizing parking for residents.

An interactive display for community members in Mehmet Ayvalıtaş Square. Photo by WRI Türkiye

Nuran Kansu, an older neighborhood resident who often struggles to find parking during special events like football matches, suggested that "transforming nearby schoolyards or other suitable open spaces into temporary parking areas during such occasions would provide significant relief for residents." The community is also considering visitor parking fees to generate revenue that could support needed infrastructure upgrades and enforcement.

These proposals are still in the planning phase. Once approved, they will build on measures from Istanbul's Low Emission Zone strategy. Caferağa is also limiting the number of non-resident vehicles that can pass through the area, especially during peak hours on evenings and weekends.

5) Optimizing local deliveries

Over 600 motorized delivery vehicles make their way around Caferağa each day, sustaining the community's tourism and service industries. But during peak hours, trucks and couriers often stop in narrow streets and block sidewalks. Loud late-night and early-morning deliveries disturb residents.

Scheduling deliveries during off-peak hours, designating specific loading zones and strengthening enforcement would improve quality of life in the neighborhood. It would also make a meaningful dent in carbon emissions: WRI estimates that transitioning even 30% of Caferağa's deliveries to electric or active transport (like bike couriers) could eliminate approximately 425 kg of CO2 emissions per week — roughly equivalent to eliminating 1,000 miles driven in a gas-powered car.

Taking inspiration from cities like London — where shifting to cargo bikes has reduced both delivery times and emissions — the community, including nearly 70% of local businesses, has expressed support for a comprehensive cargo bike delivery strategy for Caferağa. A pilot program is set to begin later in 2025.

Setting an Example Other Cities Can Follow

The changes proposed in Caferağa are not solely about infrastructure; they are about enhancing the quality of life for all residents.

These new strategies — and Caferağa's process to develop them — offer insights for other urban areas facing similar challenges:

• Community involvement is key. Participatory and inclusive planning processes are essential to developing successful solutions. By helping local stakeholders and residents to understand the challenges, and working closely with them to identify solutions, Caferağa arrived at a framework that truly meets community needs. Through regular neighborhood meetings and via the district's digital feedback platforms, residents will continue to shape and refine the improvements to their neighborhood.
• Testing out solutions and responding to feedback creates stronger buy-in. The pilot project implemented in Mehmet Ayvalıtaş Square invited community interaction and real-time feedback — and showed people what is possible through better street design. This effort catalyzed strong engagement from the beginning and added nuance to the final series of recommendations.
• The most successful solutions address multiple challenges at once. Working to address mobility needs, accessibility challenges and sustainability together can be more efficient and responsive to a community's needs. For example, adding shade trees and greenery along sidewalks and cycle lanes simultaneously reduces urban heat, encourages walking and biking, and fosters a sense of community among residents. Comprehensive efforts to calm traffic will make the neighborhood safer, more navigable and ultimately more sustainable. 

Caferağa is one of Istanbul's most unique and dynamic areas. But its struggles with overcrowding and pollution will only worsen if left alone. The neighborhood's collaborative, iterative approach to addressing these challenges could set it on a better and more sustainable path — and inspire other neighborhoods to do the same. Now it's time to bring this shared vision for a Livable Caferağa to life.

square-redesign.jpg Cities Cities Urban Mobility Air Quality pollution Type Vignette Exclude From Blog Feed? 0 Projects

• Deep Dive Cities

Authors Yunus Emre Yılmaz Cemil Oğuz Eillie Anzilotti Madeline Palmieri

Growing Water Risks Threaten World’s Most Cherished Heritage Sites alicia.cypress… Tue, 07/01/2025 - 05:00

Water is impacting some of the Earth’s most cherished places: The Taj Mahal, for example, faces water scarcity that is increasing pollution and depleting groundwater, both of which are damaging the mausoleum. In 2022, a massive flood closed down all of Yellowstone National Park and cost over $20 million in infrastructure repairs to reopen.

Water issues — whether it’s drought, scarcity, pollution or flooding — have become a threat to many of the more than 1,200 UNESCO World Heritage Sites. These natural landscapes and cultural landmarks around the globe, including the Taj Mahal and Yellowstone National Park, are recognized for their “outstanding universal value” to people and the planet.

Historic flooding at Yellowstone National Park in June 2022 washed away cabins and roads. Yellowstone is among many UNESCO World Heritage Sites threatened by water risks. Photo by NPS/Alamy. 

Places ranging from the biodiversity-rich Serengeti National Park in Tanzania, to cultural treasures like the sacred city of Chichén Itzá in Mexico, to bustling urban centers like Morocco’s Medina of Fez are facing growing water risks that are not just endangering the sites, but the millions of people who depend on them for food, livelihoods, a connection to their culture, or who just enjoy traveling to these destinations.

An analysis using WRI’s Aqueduct data shows 73% of all non-marine UNESCO World Heritage Sites are exposed to at least one severe water risk (water stress, drought, river flooding or coastal flooding), with 21% of sites facing dual problems of too much and too little water.

While the global share of World Heritage Sites exposed to high-to-extremely high levels of water stress is projected to rise from 40% to 44% by 2050, impacts will be far more severe in regions like the Middle East and North Africa, parts of South Asia, and northern China — areas where existing water stress is exacerbated by extensive river regulation, damming and upstream water withdrawals. In these regions, the combined pressures of infrastructure development and climate change pose a significant threat to both natural ecosystems and the cultural heritage they sustain.

Water risks — such as drought and flooding — are threatening many UNESCO World Heritage Sites around the globe. Hotspots like Petra in Jordan, the Historic Sanctuary of Machu Picchu in Peru and Sagarmatha National Park (the home of Mt. Everest) in Nepal, are facing growing problems of too much water, or too little. An analysis using WRI’s Aqueduct platform classify these sites and nearly 900 of the cultural and natural sites on UNESCO’s list as severe because they fall into high or extremely-high exposure categories.

Among the 1,172 non-marine sites we analyzed, 73% are exposed to at least one severe water risk; 21% face dual problems of too much and too little water.

Specifically, 40% (470) of world heritage sites are exposed to severe baseline water stress; 37% (434) face severe drought risk; 33% (391) of sites are exposed to severe riverine flood risk; and 4% (49) are exposed to severe coastal flood risk.

initFlourishScrolly( { trigger_point: "0%", offset_top: "50px" } ); @media screen and (max-width: 767px) { .fl-scrolly-step { width: 80vw !important; font-size: .95rem !important; text-align: left !important; } } @media screen and (min-width:768px) and (max-width: 1023px) { .fl-scrolly-step { width: 80vw !important; font-size: .95rem !important; text-align: left !important; } } @media screen and (min-width: 1024px) { #my-wrapper { margin-left: 35vw; width: 65vw; } .fl-scrolly-step { text-align: left !important; margin-left: -30.5vw !important; width: 25vw !important; box-shadow: none !important; } }

Here, we look at how water stress, drought and floods are impacting these iconic landmarks, including the Ahwar of Southern Iraq, Mosi-oa-Tunya / Victoria Falls in southern Africa, the Chan Chan Archaeological Zone in Peru and the Migratory Bird Sanctuaries along the Coast of Yellow Sea-Bohai Gulf of China — along with some of the solutions aimed at ensuring these sites don’t disappear.

About the Data 

WRI and UNESCO screened 1,172 non-marine UNESCO sites for four water risks: water stress (the ratio of water demand to renewable supply), drought, riverine flooding and coastal flooding. A result was considered severe if it fell into Aqueduct’s high or extremely-high category. Each indicator defines high risk differently (see Technical Note for details). UNESCO World Heritage Sites added after March 20, 2025, are not included in this analysis. 

 Water Stress in the Ahwar of Southern Iraq

Hidden in the heart of the Middle East’s arid landscapes lies one of the world’s most extraordinary places — the Ahwar of Southern Iraq. In 2016, UNESCO added the Ahwar to the World Heritage list as a mixed site — recognized for both its natural values and cultural legacy. It’s one of about 470 UNESCO World Heritage Sites facing water scarcity due to issues like pollution and competition for its water resources.

Fed by the mighty Tigris and Euphrates rivers, the Ahwar is among the largest inland delta systems on Earth. These sprawling marshes are teeming with life that include millions of migratory birds like the rare basra reed warbler and large wild buffalo that wade through its reed beds.

Water buffalo wade among the reed houses built on the Ahwar's marshes in southern Iraq. Photo by Jasim Al-Asady / UNESCO.

But nature is only half the story.

This realm was also the birthplace of human civilization. The Sumerians, inventors of writing, the wheel and the first cities, built legendary settlements like Ur, Uruk and Eridu on the fertile fringes of these marshes.

Today, the Marsh Arabs (Ma'dan), using ancient traditions, depend on the water, crafting floating reed houses and raising the water buffalo for food and income. Their way of life, adapted to the wetlands, tells a story of resilience that spans millennia.

However, intensifying use of water resources is placing greater strain on the Ahwar. Water stress — the ongoing competition over water — increases water pollution and threatens the ecological integrity, biodiversity and cultural significance of the Ahwar.

According to data from WRI’s Aqueduct platform, the Ahwar marshes face extremely high water stress, where over 80% of the renewable supply is withdrawn to meet human demand. Over the years, upstream dam construction, agricultural water use and periods of political instability — including significant drainage of the marshes in the 1990s — have reduced the freshwater flowing into the region. As a result, the area remains highly vulnerable during times of drought. In 2023, 68,000 people from central and southern Iraq were displaced by drought.

What survives today of the Ahwar is largely due to the determined efforts of local communities, international allies and nature itself fighting to heal. But the region is still at risk. Looking forward, climate change will only make the region hotter and drier. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ranks southern Iraq as one of the five most likely places to be impacted by climate change. By 2050, the Aqueduct platform shows that water stress is expected to intensify throughout the region.

The people of the Ahwar of Southern Iraq depend on the water for their homes, livelihood and cultural heritage. Photo by Jasim Al-Asady / UNESCO.  Drought at Mosi-oa-Tunya/Victoria Falls

Straddling the border between Zambia and Zimbabwe in southern Africa, Mosi-oa-Tunya (which means “the smoke that thunders")/ Victoria Falls is more than a stunning waterfall. It was inscribed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1989 for its vital ecosystem and essential source of livelihood for tens of thousands of people. Despite its reputation for massive cascading water, Mosi-oa-Tunya/Victoria Falls has faced recurring drought over the past decade and at times dried up to barely a trickle. 

Fed by floodwaters from the Zambezi River, Mosi-oa-Tunya/ Victoria Falls is crucial to the planet for several reasons.

Economically, Mosi-oa-Tunya/ Victoria Falls drives the tourism industry in both Zambia and Zimbabwe, drawing over 1 million visitors a year under normal conditions. Local tour guides, lodge owners, craft sellers and conservationists rely heavily on the flow of visitors. The water flowing from the falls also feed hydroelectric plants downstream that supply power to millions across southern Africa.

Ecologically, its riverine “rainforest” nurtures a rich diversity of wildlife and plants, including endangered and migratory birds like the Taita falcon. Rhinoceroses, elephants and lions roam the park in search of watering holes for drinking, bathing and hunting.

During a drought year, the thunderous Victoria Falls significantly dries up leading to both ecological and economic impacts to the southern Africa region. Photo by HandmadePictures / Shutterstock

Mosi-oa-Tunya/ Victoria Falls experienced droughts as recently as 2016, 2019 and 2024. Research on rainfall patterns near Mosi-oa-Tunya/Victoria Falls shows that the onset of the rainy season, normally in October, is arriving later in the year. That means in a drought year, it takes longer for relief to arrive; and the longer a drought continues, the more it affects the people, crops and economy around it.

In 2019, more than 300 people in Zimbabwe were attacked by animals in search of food and water; 45 million people in southern Africa were in need of food aid amid crop failures; and in Zimbabwe and Zambia, hydroelectric power shutdowns caused blackouts up to 18 hours a day — affecting millions while posing significant challenges to development and climate adaption goals.

An Aqueduct analysis found that Mosi-oa-Tunya/ Victoria Falls ranks as a medium drought risk, below the more than 430 UNESCO World Heritage Sites that rank as a high drought risk. This is primarily because relatively low population density and limited human development immediately surrounding the site reduces overall exposure. However, the site faces increasing pressure from tourism-related infrastructure development and data shows the probability of drought occurrence ranks high — a finding reinforced by the many recent droughts that have plagued the region.  

Climate change is not only expected to make these droughts more frequent, but recovery is expected to last longer, especially in places that aren’t prepared.  The time between droughts may not be long enough for the ecosystem to recover — which is particularly concerning for Mosi-oa-Tunya/ Victoria Falls.

Gushing water from Victoria Falls drives tourism and nurtures a rich diversity of wildlife and plants. Photo by Rawf8 / iStock. River Flooding in the Chan Chan Archeological Zone

Before the Inca carved their stone temples into the heights of Cusco and Machu Picchu in Peru, the Chimú sculpted an empire from sunbaked earth called Chan Chan (which means “Sun Sun”). Nestled between the Pacific Ocean and the foothills of the Andes Mountains, the desert city of Chan Chan was once the largest city in pre-Columbian South America.

Today, it remains the largest adobe ruins in the world and a marvel of urban planning. The site was inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage List in 1986 and simultaneously placed on the List of World Heritage in Danger, due to its overall vulnerability to natural erosion and extreme climatic events associated with the El Niño–Southern Oscillation phenomenon.

The Chan Chan Archaeological Zone in Peru is the largest adobe ruins in the world. Photo by Mariyam B / Shutterstock.  

Behind its intricately carved walls lies a complex cityscape of palaces, temples, homes, workshops and storehouses. Stretches of farmland once surrounded Chan Chan, supported by a sophisticated irrigation system that diverted water from the Moche and Chicama rivers. These advanced water management systems not only sustained the Chimú with water during times of drought, but may have also protected the city from El Niño flooding. 

But the1,000-year-old adobe walls of Chan Chan were not built to withstand the intensified El Niño flooding of the 21st century. 

The El Niño climate pattern warms the ocean and upends wind patterns, especially in the Pacific. In Peru, the warmer sea temperatures transform the normally dry winds into humid air that gathers in the foothills of the Andes. When fully saturated, this tropical atmosphere can release up to 10 times more rain than usual. Mountain rivers swell, hurtling toward the coast as torrents of water, mud and rock. Known locally as huaycos, these destructive mudslides sweep away everything in their path, from homes and roads to hospitals and schools.

Chan Chan is no exception. According to WRI’s Aqueduct platform, the UNESCO site and its surrounding region in La Libertad face extremely high risk to river flooding, a threat that is only expected to grow and is shared by more than 390 sites on the UNESCO World Heritage list. By 2050, the population affected by floods each year in an average, non- El Niño year in La Libertad is expected to double from 16,000 to 34,000 due to a combination of human activity and climate change. In an El Niño year, that increase may be much higher.

Modern agriculture has dramatically expanded around Chan Chan. All that irrigation has pushed up the groundwater level, leaving less room in the soil to absorb rainfall during storms. The result: more surface runoff and greater flood risk. At the same time, warming global temperatures are projected to make El Niño events more frequent and intense.

Some experts warn that Peru’s coast is already offering a glimpse of what climate change looks like in real time. Despite having disaster preparedness plans in place, Peru was hit hard by El Niño floods in both 2017 and 2023. Hundreds of people were killed, thousands were displaced — some permanently — and millions of residents were affected. From space, the scars of swollen rivers and devastating huaycos are visible near Chan Chan. On the ground, caretakers report that the site's delicate adobe structures are deteriorating from heavy rainfall and erosion.

Chan Chan has weathered centuries of time, wind and desert sun. Bold conservation and climate resilience measures are needed to prevent this ancient city — once a marvel of water mastery — from falling victim to the very element it once controlled.

Ongoing work at the Chan Chan Archeological Zone is aimed at keeping the adobe structures from deteriorating. Photo by padchas / iStock. Coastal Flooding Impacting the Migratory Bird Sanctuaries of the Yellow Sea and Bohai Gulf Coast of China

In 2022, a bar-tailed godwit known as B6, being studied by the U.S. Geological Survey, captured global attention with an astonishing feat of endurance: On his very first migration, the 4-month-old bird flew nonstop from Alaska to Australia — a staggering journey of over 8,425 miles completed in just 11 days, setting a new world record.

But B6’s journey didn’t end there. He still had to return home and would likely need additional rest and fuel to make the equally long journey back. Like other bar-tailed godwits, B6 could have stopped in the intertidal wetlands of China’s Yellow Sea–Bohai Gulf coastline to feed and rebuild his strength before completing his migration.

Scientists tracked B6's round-trip migration between Alaska and Australia. Photo by Dan Ruthrauff / U.S. Geological Survey

For 50 million migratory waterbirds like B6 that pass through this region each year, these tidal flats are more than just a pit stop, they are a lifeline that also provide shelter and breeding grounds.

However, the Migratory Bird Sanctuaries along the Yellow Sea and Bohai Gulf Coast of China, which was added to the UNESCO World Heritage list in 2019, have faced pressures from nature and human activities. Large-scale development and encroaching coastal flooding are squeezing the wetlands to death.

For decades, land reclamation — converting sea areas into land by filling in marshes for agriculture, industry or urban development — led to the loss of extensive mudflat habitats. In 2018, China responded by banning land reclamation in Bohai Bay, a move widely praised by conservation groups.

But another challenge is harder to control: coastal flooding, which is currently impacting close to 50 sites on the UNESCO World Heritage list. Sea levels in Bohai Bay have risen at least 6 inches (about 0.15 meters) since 1980, driven in large part due to climate change. Even without storms, tidal conditions have temporarily raised sea levels by up to 1 meter (3.2 feet) in some areas, flooding the nearby cities.

As the sea pushes inland, it leaves less exposed mudflats where birds can find food — especially where protective infrastructures like seawalls and levees prevent wetlands from naturally shifting further inland. While essential for protecting human communities, these structures limit coastal habitats from adapting to rising seas. Losing this flyway could lead to a dramatic decline in bird populations, potentially reducing numbers by as much as 72% according to a study in the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

Mudflats along the Yellow Sea and Bohai Gulf coast in China. Photo by Yancheng Broadcasting Television / UNESCO.

The effects of coastal flooding aren’t limited to birds. In Shandong Province, which includes parts of the Bohai wetlands, an estimated 21,000 residents are affected by coastal flooding each year, according to Aqueduct Floods data. That number could increase tenfold by 2050 due to a combination of climate change, sinking land — known as land subsidence — and population growth.

Despite the challenges, there are reasons for optimism. The 2018 ban on land reclamation was a major step forward, and local restoration projects are beginning to show positive results. In Nandagang Industrial Park, for example, coastal development was halted in 2015 to allow wetland restoration. In 2019, around 20,000 birds visited the site and by 2023, that number grew to 100,000.

Red-crowned cranes are among the rare species flocking to the migratory sanctuaries of the Yellow Sea and Bohai Gulf coast in China. Photo by Yancheng Broadcasting Television / UNESCO. Acting for the Future

Every World Heritage Site, shaped by the people and nature that created it, has the power to transport you to a time and place. Yet many of these sites are facing their own distinct challenges over water. While the stories vary, the path forward is the same — solutions that can be implemented today to protect our heritage for future generations.

• Locally: restore vital landscapes that support healthy, stable water. Invest in nature-based solutions like planting trees to restore headwater forests or revitalizing wetlands to capture flood waters and recharge aquifers. These approaches can build resilience to extreme weather and address multiple water challenges simultaneously.
   
• Nationally: enact conservation policies to protect vital landscapes from unsustainable development.
   
• Internationally: elevate water’s status as a global common good. Establish equitable transboundary agreements on sharing water across borders.

 

Data visualizations by Sara Staedicke; story edited by Alicia Cypress.

taj-mahal-india.jpg Freshwater drought floods Water Security Aqueduct water pollution water risk climate impacts data visualization Type Finding Exclude From Blog Feed? 0 Projects

• Aqueduct

Authors Samantha Kuzma

A New Satellite Data App Supports Better Monitoring of European Forests shannon.paton@… Mon, 06/30/2025 - 21:47

European forests are constantly changing as they experience the impacts of climate change and intensive harvesting. In Nordic regions, the area of tall trees — which store the most carbon — is declining as harvesting overtakes regrowth. In southern Europe, severe forest fires are decimating large areas during ever-hotter summers. In central Europe, insect outbreaks are increasing in production forests, and demand for biomass energy continues to increase.

Understanding where, why and how much forests are changing is crucial for the long-term health of Europe's forests and supporting ongoing policy discussions for improved forest management, as well as ensuring a sustainable bioeconomy — forests in the EU are estimated to generate €174 per hectare through the forestry and logging industry, and almost half a million people are employed in the industry.

There are different ways to monitor European forests: Historically, abundant and detailed ground data has been the main source of information, but a wealth of satellite data has been developed over the last few decades and has become increasingly important.

For example, the proposed EU Forest Monitoring Law, which aims to provide consistent monitoring of Europe's forests, is built on a combination of both ground and satellite data, and in early 2025, 78 scientists from 17 European countries signed a public letter describing the benefits of satellite data for EU forest monitoring needs. Many European initiatives, including the European Forest Fire Information System (EFFIS), also rely on satellite data. 

While there are many satellite data sets that give insights on European forests, including data with global coverage on WRI’s Global Forest Watch platform and annual tree height data for Europe from the University of Maryland, these do not provide targeted, comprehensive monitoring tools for the region.

Now, a new European Forest App, developed by researchers from WRI and Land & Carbon Lab in collaboration with GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences and building on the Forest Navigator Data Cube, supports better monitoring of European forests by providing tailored information and insights in an easy-to-use platform. This new tool demonstrates the value and availability of free and open satellite data for European forest monitoring needs.

About the New European Forest App

The European Forest App provides harmonized and accessible data derived from multiple sources that are useful for European forest monitoring needs. It includes 12 indicators for forest change and condition: tree cover loss, gain, height, extent and stable forest extent (all based on data from the University of Maryland); and forest age, fragmentation state and change, long term disturbance, biomass, forest type and forest management, long term disturbance, and biomass. 

European Forest App indicator details IndicatorSource and input dataDescriptionTree and forest characteristicsForest typeCopernicus 2018, based on 100-meter dataArea (ha) of broadleaved, coniferous and mixed forest areas in 2018Tree areaTurubanova et al. 2023, based on 30-meter dataArea of tree cover (ha) in six periods with 5-year intervals between 2001 and 2021Tree heightTurubanova et al. 2023, based on 30-meter dataMean tree height for 2001 and 2020 in areas of trees >= 5 metersForest ageBesnard et al. 2021, based on 1-kilometer dataArea of forest (ha) in specified age classes (e.g. <10 years, or between 50 and 100 years) for 2010BiomassAraza et al. 2022, based on 100-meter dataWoody aboveground biomass (Mg/ha) in 2020Forest changeTree cover lossTurubanova et al. 2023, based on 30-meter dataArea (ha) of tree cover lost in 5- and 10-year periods between 2001 and 2021Tree cover gainTurubanova et al. 2023, based on 30-meter dataArea (ha) of tree cover gained in 5- and 10-year periods between 2001 and 2021Stable tree cover extentTurubanova et al. 2023, based on 30-meter dataArea (ha) of tree cover which remained stable in 5- and 10-year periods between 2001 and 2021Disturbance

Senf and Seidl 2021, based on 30-meter data

 

Area of forest disturbance (ha) per year from 1986 to 2020

 

State of forestsForest fragmentationMa et al. 2023, metrics based on 30-meter data, with fragmentation calculated on a 5000-meter gridArea (ha) of forest in five different fragmentation classes in 2000 and 2020, and mean change in fragmentation from 2000-2020Forest managementLesiv et al. 2022, based on 100-meter data

Area of forest under different management classes in 2015

 

Users can select indicators from a dropdown menu and click on the map to see statistics calculated by country, province/state and district/municipality administrative levels. The example below shows areas of tree cover loss in different time periods and within and outside of natural and protected areas, and percent of tree cover loss within protected areas for a 10-year time period. 

Users do not need geospatial data analysis experience to use and pull key insights from the app. The app also harmonizes data at different resolutions to show all at the same spatial unit. 

It also shows all layers based on protected status and whether or not forest is natural, which is particularly valuable for assessing some of Europe’s most important forests.

Users interested in seeing more detail can follow these instructions to download the shapefiles showing the statistics.

Why Use Satellite Data Vs. Ground Data for Monitoring European Forests? 

Many European countries have robust monitoring of their forests based on extensive ground data, so what is the benefit of using satellite data?

First, not all countries have up-to-date or detailed national data, so satellite data can bolster national monitoring efforts for these countries.

Additionally, while ground data is detailed and precise, and is essential for calibrating and validating satellite-derived estimates, satellite data is complementary and offers many benefits for monitoring European forests:

• Globally consistent: Satellite data provides a large-scale comprehensive and common data source for all countries so that progress towards shared EU-wide goals can be tracked.
• Timely: Satellite data provides much more frequent updates than ground monitoring campaigns, which typically occur every five to 10 years.
• High quality: While no data is error-free, all the data on the European Forest App is based on peer-reviewed science and has open and transparent information on their quality, such as uncertainty measures, which can guide users in interpreting the information.
• Cost effective: Satellites can provide large amounts of data more cost effectively than other sources like airborne surveys or data collection in the field, which can be very costly. This makes it easier for companies and others to comply with regulations like the EU Deforestation Regulation.
• Open and free: Anyone anywhere can use the European Forest App for their own forest monitoring needs.

Ultimately, no one data source can meet all data needs — for example, risk assessments under the EU Deforestation Regulation can benefit from both ground and satellite data — so having quality data of both kinds is important.

How Does the European Forest App Differ from Global Forest Watch? 

For the past decade, WRI’s Global Forest Watch (GFW) platform has provided free, open-source, globally consistent data on the world’s forests. While GFW provides important data on European forests, the new app uses different data, including a Europe-specific data set from the University of Maryland’s (UMD) GLAD lab that is not available on GFW. Unlike the global data on GFW, this data set is optimized for Europe.

In Europe, where many forests are actively managed and are replanted or allowed to regenerate after harvesting, the app provides additional data on gain, extent and stable forest area, which is particularly important.

For example, for the indicators based on UMD data from Turubanova et al. 2023, the app is able to provide data for all five-year and 10-year periods between 2001 and 2021 (e.g. 2001-2011, 2001-2006 and so on), whereas a similar global data set based on tree height also from UMD on GFW only provides the option to change the baseline year for tree cover gain, and offers more limited options for extent (10 year intervals).

The app also includes other Europe-specific data types not available on GFW, such as forest age, that are relevant for discussions related to the EU Forest Monitoring Law and the EU Nature Restoration Law. Additionally, the app provides some historical data as far back as 1986, where GFW provides data from 2000 onwards. In Europe, where harvest cycles are longer and growth is slower than in many parts of the tropics, this long timeframe can provide valuable insights into European forest dynamics.

However, GFW offers some important data not available on the app, such as annually updated data on tree cover loss, contextual data like biodiversity hotspots, and near-real-time deforestation alerts. GFW also provides dozens of widgets with data-derived statistics, additional Help Center support and compatible tools such as Forest Watcher that support users for specific use cases.

While there is overlap between the European Forest App and GFW, and major trends revealed by the data remain the same, the data will not completely align in all cases — different data and methods will lead to slightly different results. Users monitoring European forests should consult both sources to identify which better suits their needs: those interested in only European forest information over longer timeframes may prefer the European Forest App, and those interested in other information, such as near-real-time disturbances, may prefer the GFW platform.

Explore the European Forest App here. If you have questions, please contact sarah.carter@wri.org.

Forests Europe data deforestation fires Type Project Update Exclude From Blog Feed? 0 Projects

• Land & Carbon Lab
• Global Forest Watch

Authors Sarah Carter Manuka Khan

4 Ways Financing for Development Can Deliver for People, Nature and Climate sarah.brown@wri.org Sun, 06/29/2025 - 17:02

The path to accelerating progress on global goals for people, nature and the climate depends on bringing together different sources of finance to align efforts and work better as a system. It also requires agreement to tackle systemic challenges, such as high capital costs and limited fiscal space. That’s exactly what this year’s Financing for Development Conference (FFD4) aims to deliver. It’s an opportunity to identify where more supportive, integrated frameworks could help countries more quickly shift, align and increase finance for sustainable development. 

This opportunity comes amid a rocky global context. Poverty, inequality, climate change, environmental degradation and rising fragility are not isolated crises — they are deeply interconnected and mutually reinforcing challenges that require an integrated response. Yet they are often addressed separately, resulting in unintended consequences and missed opportunities for sustainable solutions.

This gap is evident as we’re on track to achieve just 17% of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) — which include targets for people, nature and the climate — by their 2030 deadline. The progress report also shows that since 2015, progress on the climate action goal (SDG 13) has gone backward on 30% of its targets, while the remainder show only marginal improvement.

The Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development (FFD4)

The UN is organizing the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development (FFD4) — taking place in Seville, Spain, from June 30 to July 3, 2025 — to take stock of the role finance plays in reaching the Sustainable Development Goals. 

Bringing together leaders from every UN member country and organization, along with many international financial institutions and private-sector actors, FFD4 is a key venue to integrate climate and development finance and goals, and to reduce fragmentation in the international finance system through reforms at both national and international levels.

 An outcome document known as the Compromiso de Sevilla  (the Seville Commitment), was endorsed by UN member countries ahead of the conference, with the U.S. exiting the process.

FFD4 also comes at a time when multilateralism is under strain, as evidenced by recent cuts to Official Development Assistance (ODA) — finance provided by the governments to promote and specifically target the economic development and welfare of developing countries. ODA grew at an average annual rate of 7.6% from 2019 to 2023, but dropped 7.1% between 2023 and 2024, and may decline further amid shifting geopolitics, financial pressures in provider countries and a reprioritization of investments toward defense and other domestic priorities. Despite its past demonstrated resilience in response to crises, recent cuts by some of the wealthiest countries, including the U.S. and the UK, have raised concerns about future levels of ODA.

Despite these headwinds, there are four key areas where multistakeholder approaches to financing sustainable and equitable development can be better coordinated — at FFD4 and beyond.  

1. Integrate Climate and Nature into Development Planning

Since the Earth Summit in 1992, financing for development and financing for climate and nature have largely evolved on separate tracks. But this parallel trend is reaching its limits. A central theme at FFD4 is the need to rethink sustainable development in light of new, compounding shifts in the global economy, climate and biosphere. 

Addressing climate, nature and development goals together brings both the opportunity for economic growth — up to $26 trillion from bold climate action by 2030 — and recognizes the imperative for development to be climate-resilient and nature-positive. Climate transitions must also be inclusive if they are to be sustained. 

The 2015 FFD in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, outlined the principles that this FFD must now turn into action, recommending concrete ways to incorporate climate and nature into development and economic decision-making. An independent expert report to the G20 emphasized the need to integrate climate and nature into macroeconomic planning through a whole-of-economy, whole-of-government and whole-of-society approach. This would allow countries to weigh the choices and trade-offs involved in meeting climate, nature and people goals, and to drive forward structural reforms that shift economies onto a more sustainable path. 

There is a range of tools that countries will need to make this possible. In addition to new macroeconomic models and multistakeholder consultations, Wealth and Natural Capital Accounting offers a way for decision-makers to incorporate climate and nature into their analytical toolkit. The WAVES (Wealth Accounting and the Valuation of Ecosystem Services) partnership, coordinated by the World Bank, shows how governments are integrating natural capital accounting into macroeconomic planning, budget decisions and development policy in countries such as Colombia, Indonesia and Rwanda (WAVES core implementing partners). This approach to national accounting includes incorporating water resources, minerals, forests, biodiversity and tourism, helping shift decision making away from short-term GDP growth toward long-term sustainability.

International data-gathering frameworks offer another key opportunity for progress. Frameworks like the one underpinning the SDGs have helped governments adopt and monitor policies aligned with global targets. Many countries have already used these data to develop SDG action plans; now, innovative data-gathering methods can support more targeted development policies. 

FFD4’s Compromiso de Sevilla underscores the need to support “high quality and disaggregated data and statistics [to] enable evidence-based policy decisions and enhance accountability and transparency, fostering public trust and international cooperation.”

But countries can’t do this alone. Data sharing and international cooperation are crucial for addressing global challenges such as climate change and nature loss. To help finance flow to climate and nature, the Compromiso de Sevilla emphasizes the importance of “economic, financial, risk, and resilience data [to be made] available to all financial market actors, including through capacity building for developing countries.” 

In implementing the Compromiso de Sevilla, a shared global vision for data cooperation on SDGs could unlock international investment and bridge capacity gaps. Ministers of finance, climate and environment can jointly lead this effort. 

2. Rewire Public Finance for Development, Climate and Nature

There are several areas where countries broadly agree on the need for national action but require a coordinated approach, given the interconnected nature of the global economy. 

Coordinate subsidy reform

It is widely recognized that countries — both developed and developing — should reform environmentally harmful subsidies, including those related to fossil fuels ($7 trillion in 2022, 18% in “explicit” subsidies, where fuels are sold below retail cost through government support) and unsustainable agricultural practices ($619 billion in 2021). Ending these subsidies would help reduce environmental and atmospheric degradation; repurposing them could help reverse it. 

But such shifts would have to be coordinated to ensure a just transition where no worker or country is left behind. Without coordination, any first mover is likely to face a competitive disadvantage. FFD4 should call on governments to lead in reforming subsidy frameworks and to work together to ensure a just and equitable transition. 

Align and unlock investment flows

A holistic, country-level approach to financing, such as the concept of ‘country platforms’, could help match appropriate finance to transition needs. Country platforms are a way for governments to align public and private, national and international finance at scale behind country-led plans and policy reforms to deliver climate, nature and development goals. 

These platforms have the potential to address policy risks by aligning stakeholders around a shared vision and creating an enabling environment for attracting private finance. They recognize the centrality of capacity building and technical assistance in supporting countries — especially the poorest and most vulnerable — to take a systemic approach. They also allow for the most strategic use of scarce concessional and blended finance by prioritizing structural reform and taking more programmatic approaches.

FFD4 calls to “support enhancing the ability of MDBs [multilateral development banks] and other PDBs [public development banks] to work better as a system, aligned with country-led development priorities and strategies”. It also calls on other development partners, financial institutions, relevant domestic actors, civil society and local governments to play their part in integrated approaches based on each actor’s comparative advantage. Countries are in the driver’s seat to initiate this convergence and advance country platform mechanisms.

3. Activate Private Investments in the Real Economy

Right now, mobilizing private investment aligned with people, nature and climate goals, and its potential to transform the real economy, is not happening fast enough or at sufficient scale. 

Building on the 2015 Addis Ababa declaration, FFD4 aims to address the systemic issues that limit private sector investments in sustainable finance. The UN estimates developing countries face a $4 trillion investment gap to achieve the SDGs, particularly in sectors such as renewable energy and infrastructure, where the private sector plays a crucial role. 

As stated in the Addis Ababa Accord, the private sector is a major driver of productivity, inclusive of economic growth and job creation; yet looking to private financiers to “fill in the gaps” has proven complex. To date, there has been a strong focus on the use of blended finance to de-risk and thereby mobilize more private investment. This includes using concessional finance (from MDBs, for instance) or philanthropic finance to catalyze investments in nascent markets where risks are currently too high, or returns too low, for investors to step in alone. 

Reforming risk-sharing instruments — such as guarantees, first-loss capital and hybrid instruments — and blended finance would help bring these approaches to scale. In the G20 process, MDBs have been encouraged to take more programmatic approaches (e.g., guaranteeing portfolios rather than single projects) and to streamline and harmonize internal processes, both among themselves and with other PDBs. They have also been encouraged to unlock more institutional investment through originate-to-share models and by supporting the development of sustainable asset classes. The Compromiso de Sevilla also proposes promoting the use of risk management, risk mitigation and risk transfer practices too. 

However, mobilization of private finance also requires a stronger focus on changes in fiscal incentives, regulatory environments, enabling conditions and business models, as well as changes in demand. It is important to achieve cost-effectiveness, improve returns and reduce risks in this way, rather than rely solely on blended finance. In some cases, this can be done by using better data on returns or by showcasing the dividends that can come from investing in adaptation.

When it comes to investing in climate and nature, delivery has been inconsistent and difficult to track, especially in the case of private finance. The conference is likely to call for UN member states to implement proposals by adopting standards, tools and metrics as targets, and to publish performance indicators to better measure private sector mobilization rates, sustainable finance mechanisms and their impacts on people, nature and the climate (e.g., continuing the GEMS effort). 

4. Improve Global Cooperation on Debt

As developing countries face increasing repayment burdens due to rising interest payments on debt, about 40% of the global population lives in a country that spends more on debt servicing than on essential public services such as education and health.

The climate- and nature-relevant provisions of the Compromiso de Sevilla acknowledge the importance of accounting for climate and nature in debt frameworks and include the following:

• A request for a UN-led working group (with the IMF and the World Bank) to propose voluntary principles for responsible sovereign borrowing and lending, “to strengthen debt management,” including:
  • Supporting more frequent use of state-contingent debt instruments, including climate-resilient debt clauses and debt pause clauses, which allow debt service suspension during climate or other external shocks. This would increase fiscal resilience.
  • Encouraging wider uptake of such clauses across both official and commercial lending, with international financial institutions supporting implementation.
     
• Support scaling up debt swaps for the SDGs, especially those targeting climate and biodiversity outcomes, to “lower the cost of borrowing”:
  • Promotes concessional finance based on vulnerability to enhance debt sustainability and climate-resilient development.
  • Calls for simplifying debt swap processes, lowering transaction costs and ensuring country ownership.
     
• Launch an intergovernmental UN-led process to close gaps in the international debt architecture and explore options to enhance sustainability, aiming to “restore countries to a path of debt sustainability and continue to work toward debt restructurings being timely, orderly, effective, fair, negotiated in good faith, predictable, and coordinated”:
  • This includes dialogues with all stakeholders (UN Members, Paris Club, MDBs, IMF, World Bank and private creditors) to address debt challenges and climate-linked vulnerabilities.
     
• Calls for reforming Debt Sustainability Assessments (DSAs) to “ensure that debt sustainability and credit assessments are accurate, objective and long term oriented”:
  • Calls for more accurate, long-term DSAs that integrate climate and nature spending needs, and account for investments in resilience, nature protection and productive capacity.
  • Account for multidimensional vulnerabilities and spillovers from monetary policy.
  • Encourages open consultation on DSA reformulation, capacity building and for countries to conduct their own assessments.

Multilateral initiatives to support countries at risk of, or already in, debt distress are mainly led by the World Bank, the IMF and forums such as G20. However, gaps and challenges remain across these initiatives, limiting comprehensive support that considers factors like climate vulnerability as an indicator for debt management and risk assessments. 

International Framework/
Taskforce
 ActorsScopeDrawbacksCommon Framework for Debt Treatment (G20)Low-income countries in debt distress. Debt treatment (e.g., debt rescheduling, relief and write-off).The process is currently lengthy, needs to be expedited to benefit more countries and expand private creditors' participation.Global Sovereign Debt Roundtable Creditors and beneficiaries.
Co-chaired by IMF, World Bank and G20 Presidency, includes official creditor members from the Paris Club, new creditors, private creditors and borrowing countries.  
 Debt treatment (e.g., debt restructuring) for countries in default.Lack of clarity on options available to debtor countries throughout the debt treatment process, such as suspending debt service payments.Debt Sustainability Framework (LIC DSF) (IMF/WB)Low-income countries with long-maturity concessional debt and countries eligible for the World Bank's International Development Association (IDA) grants.Assess borrower risk using threshold and benchmark indicators such as GDP, exports and revenue to inform lending decisions and determine debt limits based on borrower needs and repayment capability.Lack of debt data and inconsistent definitions may affect countries' risk assessments and ratings. 
Lack of data on vulnerability.
 

It is high time for a concrete breakthrough, one that takes a comprehensive approach to debt challenges and provides tailored solutions to free up fiscal space that countries need to invest in essential public services and resilient green growth. This should include measures addressing the drawbacks outlined in the table above.  

The World Bank Group and IMF have had climate strategies since 2021, yet integrating nature into their fundamental economic frameworks is still lagging. For example, FFD4 proposals are needed on how investments in resilience, nature protection and productive capacity can benefit economic activity and financial stability, including specific timelines for integrating these elements into national accounts. IMF and WBG are well positioned to lead the implementation of these proposals. 

Accelerating Sustainable Development Action

A systemic, transformational approach is essential for addressing complex, transboundary environmental challenges like climate change and environmental degradation, and to achieve the SDGs. This requires more inclusive and effective global governance. FFD4 presents an opportunity to enhance global cooperation on these issues, ensuring policies and actions are harmonized across borders and effective in addressing them. 

The Addis Ababa Action Agenda laid the groundwork for the SDGs and outlined a clear map for mobilizing finance to deliver them. Yet, with SDG progress currently off track, the task in Seville is to accelerate momentum by rebuilding trust and confidence in global cooperation. Political traction and impetus are urgently needed to implement complex domestic reforms, scale up international support to climate, nature and development, activate the private sector, address debt vulnerabilities and enable finance to work better as a system. 

FFD4 could be a unifying moment that brings together the aspirations of the Bridgetown Initiative, the Nairobi declaration, the Paris New Global Financing Pact and the Pact for the Future, along with wider development and nature finance commitments, into an integrated action agenda. Keeping leaders accountable for delivering on the indivisible integrity of the SDGs is paramount.

seville.jpg Finance sustainable development goals climate finance adaptation finance Type Technical Perspective Exclude From Blog Feed? 0 Authors Valerie Laxton Natalia Alayza Carolyn Neunuebel

Climate Resilience Takes Root on India’s Mint Farms margaret.overh… Fri, 06/27/2025 - 10:00

Uday Raj Chauhan proudly sports a red t-shirt with "Maati ka lal" (son of the soil) printed on it. The shirt's acrylic lettering has worn off with use, but Chauhan's beaming smile could rival a toothpaste advertisement.

Indeed, toothpaste isn't far off the mark. Chauhan is a mint farmer, one of many in the Uttar Pradesh state of northern India who depend on the crop. "I would have migrated from the village long ago in search of [a] livelihood if it was not for mint," he says. "People in my village moved from a mud structure to a concrete house, thanks to mint."

Uday Raj Chauhan, a mint farmer in Uttar Pradesh. Photo by Ravleen Kaur

Mentha Arvensis, a species of mint known as "mentha" in India, is used in countless everyday products — from medicines and pain relievers to candy, mouth fresheners, cosmetics and tobacco. India is by far the world's biggest producer and exporter of mentha oil, fulfilling around 80% of global demand. The bulk (70%) of this comes from Uttar Pradesh.

Yet what was once a stable cash crop is faltering. India's mint farmers now face stiff competition from synthetic menthol, coupled with rising production costs and high taxes. These challenges are only exacerbated by climate change, which is making harvests less reliable.

They aren't alone: Farmers and businesses around the globe are grappling with climate risks and market disruptions. But India's mint industry is also exploring solutions across the supply chain — from trade reforms to more climate-resilient crop varieties — that can offer lessons for resilience in a changing world.

Mint: The 'Green Gold' of India's Smallholder Farmers

Mentha farming has been a staple in Uttar Pradesh for over 40 years, particularly in the state's Barabanki region. Once a hub for opium cultivation, Barabanki leaned into mint farming in the 1980s and has been India's biggest producer since. Around the area, mint oil has earned monikers like "ATM" and "green gold."

"Mentha provides instant cash," says Dr. Sanjay Singh, Senior Principal Scientist at Central Institute of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants (CIMAP), a government-run research institute in Uttar Pradesh. "There are times when farmers don't even have enough money to buy essentials. That is when a mentha farmer would sell half a kilogram of [mentha] oil from his reserve."

Saroj Kumari Shukla, a resident of Barabanki district, is one such farmer. She lost her husband after 15 years of marriage and had to raise her six children alone. "I had a job, but it was not enough. Mentha came to our rescue in those days. Every time I had to pay the children's school fees, I would sell two kilograms of [mentha] oil," she said. "Even though my sons couldn't study much, today my four daughters are well-educated and working."

For Chauhan, mint has been a dependable source of cashflow. "Mentha brings an income in the season when no other crop grows. Its seed material, unlike chili and garlic, is also very affordable. It can be stored for [a long time] as it does not become rancid and doesn't even occupy space like other [produce]."

Demand Is Rising — but Production Is Falling

The global mint market is projected to grow from US$ 7.7 billion in 2025 to US$9.7 billion in 2030. In theory, this should be a boon not just for mint farmers, but for all those whose livelihoods are linked to the crop — from planting and harvesting to processing and exporting. "One million people are involved in the mint supply chain in India, with 100,000 farm families and 3,000-4,000 traders just in Barabanki," said Dr. Singh.

But even as farmers like Chauhan and Shukla are earning well from mint, many say its glory is fading.

Mint (left) and the roots used to grow it, called "suckers" (right) are both critical sources of income for farmers in Uttar Pradesh. Photos by Ravleen Kaur

In Barabanki, mint oil production decreased from around 11,200 metric tons (MT) in 2022-2023 to 7,950 MT in 2024-2025, according to Rajit Ram Verma, Secretary of the Barabanki district's agricultural produce marketing committee. That's nearly a 30% drop.

Gaurav Mittal from Aromatic & Allied Chemicals Pvt. Limited, a leading mint oil manufacturer and exporter in Uttar Pradesh, estimates that the total production across India came down by 60%-65% from 2023-2024."We are linked to about 5,000 farmers in our region who supply directly to us. This year, many have shifted to sugarcane and other crops," he said.

How Is Mint Oil Produced?

In Uttar Pradesh, farming for mentha suckers (offshoots that grow from the base of the mint plant) begins in July-August. The crop is sown from suckers in March and harvested from May to June, fitting well between the seasons for potato and paddy, the other dominant crops in the region. Once the harvest is dried, its essential oil is extracted in locally fabricated steam distillation units owned and operated by individual farmers or farmer collectives.

Farmers sell this mentha oil to aggregators in the village who further sell it to traders, exporters and small-scale and medium industries. The oil is either exported as-is or processed into menthol crystals and byproducts like Dementholized oil (DMO), alpha-pinene, beta-pinene and menthone.

What's Ailing the Mint Industry?

Traders, industrialists, scientists and farmers largely blame synthetic menthol for downturn in Barabanki's mint production.

Menthol crystals derived from mentha oil. Photo by Ravleen Kaur

Prices for natural mint oil can be volatile. When synthetic menthol — derived from Meta-cresol, a petrochemical — entered India around 2013, it offered an affordable alternative. "Since then, many Indian companies making menthol-based products shifted to it" said Tek Ram Sharma, a mint oil trader and chairman of essential oil company Ashri Naturals.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has also included synthetic menthol in its list of substances "generally recognized as safe". "Since synthetic menthol is approved for use in edible products, companies would not want to spend more on natural menthol," said Mittal. This has pushed prices down and driven some farmers to abandon natural mentha altogether.

Synthetics aren't the only challenge. Mint faces high taxes in India. The national government charges a Goods and Services Tax of 12% on mint oil, and Uttar Pradesh charges a 1.5% Mandi tax (a tax on agricultural produce sold in markets) to mint oil traders.

In addition, many farmers rely on locally fabricated steam distillation units for producing mint oil. These are inefficient, polluting and prone to fatal accidents. While CIMAP has developed and introduced safer, more fuel-efficient distillation units, many farmers cannot afford them.

Locally made distillation units for mint oil, like this one, are dangerous. But safer alternatives are too expensive for many farmers. Photo by Ravleen Kaur The Compounding Threats of Climate Change and Land Degradation

Market challenges may be the biggest hurdle for India's mint farmers today. But they also face twin threats farmers around the world are increasingly grappling with: climate change and land degradation.

Mint is grown in peak summer and requires substantial irrigation. According to one study, even when used optimally, around 10 million liters of water are required to irrigate 1 hectare (ha) of mint. By comparison, it takes about 7 million liters of water to irrigate 1 ha of wheat and 5 million liters to irrigate 1 ha of maize (corn). "As water scarcity increases, farmers in Sambal, Chanduasi and Amroha [districts in Uttar Pradesh] and in parts of Punjab and Bihar are quitting mentha," said Sharma.

Unlike these other regions, Barabanki has ample water thanks to its rivers and extensive canal network. But shifting weather patterns driven by climate change present their own problems.

Narendra Shukla, a farmer from Tandpur in Uttar Pradesh, has seen the region's escalating challenges firsthand. Photo by Ravleen Kaur

"Untimely rainfall destroys ready harvest, while excess heat [over] the last two years has led to more pests and disease, even though heat also increases oil yield," said Sudheer Kumar, a farmer from Badalkapurwa village in Uttar Pradesh.

Layer in the fact that much farmland is degraded, and some farmers are facing an onslaught of challenges at once. "Drawing water from a borewell costs more now due to increased diesel rates. After 20 years of mint farming, soil is also polluted with chemical fertilizers and pesticides. Production has gone down while diseases have increased. We need to spray pesticides at least once a week now," said Sanad Verma, another farmer in the region.

Verma adds that labor rates have more than tripled — from Rs 200 (US$2.32) to Rs 700 (US$8) per day — "because harvesting mentha and extracting oil in peak summer is a gruelling task."

While organic farming may help improve soil quality and yields in the long term, it is out of question for most mint farmers, who don't see monetary benefits in it. "A small farmer needs money all the time. Nobody will pay a better price for organic oil, so there is no reason to spend extra time and labour to cultivate organic mint," said Ram Savle Shukla of Tandpur.

How India's Mint Industry Is Building Resilience

Faced with mounting challenges — some local, some global — India's mint industry is finding new ways to adapt throughout the supply chain.

Lessons for Supply Chains Around the World

Farmers and small businesses are often on the front lines of the climate crisis. Yet large companies tend to overlook these supply chain partners in their climate risk assessments and sustainability efforts. WRI, through the Climate-Resilient Employees for a Sustainable Tomorrow (CREST) initiative, aims to create more resilient supply chains and help amplify the voices of the people within them. The Barabanki mint farmer is one of these voices. Explore more stories here.

At one end, traders and local politicians are pushing to reform taxes and trade policies that hamper the natural mint industry. In August 2024, a political representative from Barabanki worked with the Indian Parliament to separate natural and synthetic menthol in the country's trade code. This is meant to help ensure that potential issues with synthetics (such as defective products) will not impact the natural mint market.

Others are working from the ground up, helping farmers build resilience to climate and market shocks.

"Mint is CIMAP's baby. It took hard work to turn India from a mint importing country to the biggest exporter in the world. So we will do everything to sustain natural menthol in the market," said Dr. Singh from CIMAP.

In 2017, CIMAP introduced early mint technology (EMT). This involves training farmers to produce mint stolons (stems) in a nursery and then transplant them onto ridges to ensure minimal plant loss and damage. EMT can lower the cost of production by reducing the need for weeding, irrigation and fertilizer. By cutting water use 25%-30%, it also helps reduce pressure on limited supplies. "We found that the cost of cultivation with EMT has come down by 20% while crop yield has gone up by 15%," said Dr. Singh.

Experimental mint varieties developed by CIMAP have shown improved climate resilience and higher yields. Photo by Ravleen Kaur

CIMAP is also working to develop more resilient and productive mint varieties. In 2020, it developed and distributed "CIM-Unnati" — a hardy and high-yielding varietal that can better withstand extreme weather while yielding 180-190 kilograms of mint oil per hectare. (Other varietals produce 120-150 litres per hectare.) Almost 90% farmers in Barabanki now grow CIM-Unnati.

Chauhan — who runs a YouTube channel called "Mentha's new variety" — can attest to the benefits. "In 2020, I got 700 grams of a new variety of Menthol mint from CIMAP and made 1,000 saplings out of it. I propagated these saplings [on 0.25 hectares] of my land and got a profit of Rs 1.5 lakh (US$1,740) by selling mint suckers," he said. Encouraged, Chauhan started the YouTube channel to promote his enterprise. "Farmers from far and wide come to buy mentha suckers from me. This year, I rented 1.2 hectares of land to expand [production]."

Beyond this, CIMAP is looking for ways to help stabilize mint farmers' livelihoods. It supports activities like vermi compost production from distillation waste; mushroom cultivation; and beekeeping. "We are also exploring making disposable cutlery from mentha waste and aerosols from the water that comes out with oil at the time of distillation," said Dr. Singh. This is helping to diversify mint farmers income, boost their resilience and reduce dependency on one crop.

Savitri Devi, seen here holding a beeswax candle, is a member of the farmer group that CIMAP is supporting to help diversify their incomes. Photo by Ravleen Kaur

Thanks to such initiatives, farmers like Chauhan are optimistic that mint prices will bounce back. And they are more securely positioned when climate extremes and other setbacks strike.

The Way Ahead

While large companies are increasingly focused on climate risks and sustainability, supply chain partners, such as smallholder farmers, tend to be left out of the equation. But this status quo can't continue. For truly resilient supply chains, stakeholders need to work together to ensure that everyone involved — from production through to sale — has the tools, skills and knowledge to weather climate and economic shocks.

This will require coordinated efforts from governments, research institutions and the private sector. Barabanki shows how collaboration and innovation can make a difference, with CIMAP supporting farmers directly while traders and local politicians push for market reforms. Looking ahead, more support from the government could offer new avenues for investment and improvement. For example, as Dr. Sudeep Tandon, CIMAP's Chief Scientist, points out, "Menthol is one crop in which farmers themselves do the first level of processing. The government gives subsidies for other agricultural equipment and machinery; why can't there be a price support mechanism for menthol distillation units too?"

Such efforts are critical for all who depend on India's mint supply chain. "Mentha has prevented distress migration in [Barabanki] to a large extent," says farmer Ram Lagan Pal. "[The] district's prosperity is only due to mentha." More support for resilience-building efforts can help ensure that this prosperity continues.

Ravleen Kaur is an independent journalist working on environmental and rural issues in India. See more of her work here.

ram-lagan-pal-jamouli.jpg Climate Climate Resilience adaptation climate change agriculture Type Vignette Exclude From Blog Feed? 0 Projects

• Empowering People to Build Resilient and Equitable Supply Chains: A CREST Initiative

Authors Ravleen Kaur Elizabeth Issac

STATEMENT: Bonn Talks Leave Tough Questions for COP30 to Resolve alison.cinnamo… Thu, 06/26/2025 - 18:58

BONN, GERMANY (June 26, 2025) — The 2025 UN climate talks concluded today in Bonn after a challenging start, with a two-day delay over the agenda cutting into negotiation time. As a mid-year checkpoint before COP30, the largely technical talks aimed to bring countries closer on core issues including adaptation, mitigation and finance. While some progress emerged, political tensions slowed momentum. 
 
Following is a statement from David Waskow, Director, International Climate Initiative, World Resources Institute:

“With four months to go before COP30, leaders need to start delivering: they need to put forward strong national plans to cut emissions and transform key sectors; scale up climate finance from all sources; and urgently implement and mainstream adaptation and resilience to protect lives, economies, and security. With the 1.5°C window closing fast, every fraction of a degree — and every decision — matters.

“Persistent political tensions and competing agendas led to limited and uneven progress in Bonn. Delegates did lay essential groundwork for better measuring adaptation — a key part for planning and accountability — and made some headway on just transition issues. What’s now needed is a strong dose of decisive, coordinated action to deliver real results.

“There can be no further delays in achieving the Global Stocktake priorities set in 2023 — from transitioning away from fossil fuels to tripling renewables, doubling energy efficiency and ending deforestation. Moving forward requires bold, system-wide change across every sector, driven by all levels of government, business, and civil society, recommitting to the Paris Agreement — together.”

 

International Climate Action International Climate Action adaptation Type Statement Exclude From Blog Feed? 0

Co-Creating a More Sustainable and Livable Caferağa sarah.brown@wri.org Wed, 06/25/2025 - 16:08

In Istanbul’s Caferağa neighborhood, WRI Türkiye led a community-driven initiative to create a more sustainable, inclusive and livable urban environment. From April 2023 to July 2024, the Livable Caferağa project worked closely with residents to understand the neighborhood’s challenges around overcrowding, rising heat and pollution, and develop a set of responsive solutions.  

For several years, the WRI Türkiye Deep Dives team in Istanbul has worked closely with the city to advance neighborhood-scale active mobility planning. Istanbul is currently pursuing a citywide Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan (SUMP), which provides a broad framework for how the city can achieve a range of goals — from ensuring affordable, low-carbon public transport to encouraging a shift toward zero-carbon modes like walking and bicycling.

Creating Sustainable Cities

Through its Deep Dives initiative, WRI Ross Center works in a deep and sustained way with a network of cities to develop both long-term relationships and solutions to entrenched urban challenges. 

Explore the initiative. 

Within this strategy, Caferağa was selected as a priority area for developing a low-emission zone. As a key cultural and tourism hub in the city, the neighborhood faces increasing pressure from traffic and congestion. To support the SUMP’s implementation, WRI Türkiye focused its Deep Dive efforts on creating a plan that would balance Caferağa’s cultural vibrancy with the city’s goals of emissions reductions, sustainable mobility and livability.   

Empowering Communities to Shape a More Livable Space

Recognizing that Caferağa’s residents were bearing the consequences of overcrowding and pollution — including exposure to traffic fumes and limited mobility on crowded sidewalks, especially for older adults, people with disabilities and parents with young children — the Deep Dive project team put the community at the center of developing livable and sustainable solutions. Through a broad outreach and engagement campaign with residents, local organizations, metropolitan and district officials, researchers and NGO representatives, the WRI Türkiye team gathered a range of perspectives and insights to guide the creation of the Livable Caferağa plan.  

Beginning in July 2023, the WRI Türkiye team hosted a series of training sessions with community members and key stakeholders to build a strong and collective foundation of knowledge on how to create livable, climate-resilient neighborhoods. These sessions explored key aspects of pedestrian safety, active mobility planning and data-driven decision-making.

Together, the WRI Türkiye team and Caferağa stakeholders examined best practices for improving public spaces, balancing the needs of residents and visitors, mitigating climate challenges like extreme heat and implementing effective urban policies that support sustainable mobility. 

A snapshot from the Criteria Development Workshop where participants collaboratively evaluated thematic criteria for active mobility planning in the Caferağa neighborhood. Image by WRI Türkiye

The project also included four workshops hosted by the WRI Türkiye team in September 2023, accompanied by a pilot demonstration of pedestrian safety and public space enhancement solutions in Caferağa’s Mehmet Ayvalıtaş Square. Each workshop addressed a specific aspect of urban livability:

• Establishing criteria for an optimal neighborhood environment.
• Addressing the needs of people with disabilities.
• Understanding and mitigating urban heat islands.  
• Drawing inspiration from peer cities for improving livability.  

5 Local Solutions for Developing Caferağa’s Future

Through these regular capacity-building and engagement activities and workshops, the WRI Türkiye team co-created five key solutions for the district:

1. Prioritizing pedestrian space — by widening sidewalks, adding accessibility ramps and improving crosswalk visibility, for example — to enhance safety and encourage sustainable travel.  
2. Creating a cohesive micromobility strategy with a robust neighborhood network and clear guidelines for bicycle and scooter parking.  
3. Expanding public transit access with a new community shuttle service to help cut down on congestion and improve air quality.
4. Developing a thoughtful approach to parking restrictions — such as limiting on-street parking and prioritizing space for residents — in the district to support sustainability and livability.
5. Optimizing local deliveries by establishing new schedules and loading zones, while encouraging the use of cargo bicycles for local services.  

These strategies, now being formalized into a comprehensive plan, aim to preserve Caferağa’s vibrancy while addressing overcrowding and strengthening environmental resilience. Some, like the expansion of public transportation with the new ModaBüs shuttle service, will come as soon as the fourth quarter of 2025, while others, like revitalizing pedestrian spaces, will be tackled on an ongoing routine basis.  

By involving the community at every step of the development process, the WRI Türkiye team ensured that the solutions were responsive to the needs and expectations of Caferağa's residents, and that the community felt a sense of ownership over the plan.  

What’s Next for Deep Dives in Istanbul?  

The success of this Deep Dive Cities project will inform the next phase of the initiative, which will expand to focus on the entire Kadıköy district. In 2025 and 2026, the WRI Türkiye team will investigate nature-based solutions (NBS) for mitigating urban heat islands, building on the foundation established in Caferağa. With the aim to develop a comprehensive concept plan — complete with pilot applications — for integrating NBS into urban mobility projects, WRI will explore how these solutions can be embedded across Kadıköy’s urban mobility planning.  

imagem1.png Cities Turkey Urban Development Urban Mobility Climate Resilience low carbon development Type Project Update Exclude From Blog Feed? 0 Authors Yunus Emre Yılmaz Cemil Oğuz Eillie Anzilotti Madeline Palmieri

These Countries Are Electrifying Their Bus Fleets the Fastest alicia.cypress… Wed, 06/25/2025 - 08:00

In cities around the world, people are embracing electric buses, which provide a quieter, smoother ride without the harmful pollution from traditional gas and diesel buses. For example, bus riders in Pune, India, will skip boarding a diesel bus to wait for an electric bus, and in Santiago, Chile, riders rate electric buses more favorably than the rest of the public transit system.  

Electric buses are necessary for reducing carbon dioxide emissions in the transport sector. Buses  — including city, coach and school buses —  make up approximately 5% of global transport carbon dioxide emissions. Electrifying the bus fleet could also provide a model for electrifying trucks, which make up about a quarter of transport emissions.

What will it take to electrify the world’s bus fleet, and which countries are stepping up to the challenge? Five countries — China, the Netherlands, Finland, Switzerland and Denmark — are already setting an example by growing their electric bus sales from less than 6% to more than 60% of total bus sales in six years or less. That pace exceeds what is needed globally between 2024 and 2030 to meet climate targets.

On a pathway to reach net-zero emissions and limit global warming to 1.5 degrees C (2.7 degrees F), the world needs to grow electric buses from 6% of bus sales in 2024 to 56% by 2030, a span of six years.

Multiple countries have already proven this is possible. China, the Netherlands, Finland, Switzerland and Denmark all grew their electric bus sales from less than 6% to more than 60% in six years or less.

But sustaining growth in electric bus sales has sometimes proved difficult due to factors such as limited budgets, economic shocks from COVID-19 and technical barriers associated with the use of long-distance electric buses.

The rest of the world is behind but starting to catch up.

initFlourishScrolly( { trigger_point: "0%", offset_top: "50px" } ); @media screen and (max-width: 767px) { .fl-scrolly-step { width: 80vw !important; font-size: .95rem !important; text-align: left !important; } } @media screen and (min-width:768px) and (max-width: 1023px) { .fl-scrolly-step { width: 80vw !important; font-size: .95rem !important; text-align: left !important; } } @media screen and (min-width: 1024px) { #my-wrapper { margin-left: 35vw; width: 65vw; } .fl-scrolly-step { text-align: left !important; margin-left: -30.5vw !important; width: 25vw !important; box-shadow: none !important; } }

Shifting to electric buses will require supportive local and national policies. The countries leading this charge can provide lessons on how to grow electric bus sales quickly.

The Global State of Electric Buses

There are about 780,000 electric buses on the world’s roads as of 2024. Electric buses include battery electric buses, plug-in hybrid electric buses and fuel cell electric buses. So far, 94% of all electric buses are battery electric, which are expected to continue to dominate the industry.

More than 90% of the world’s electric buses are located in China — nearly 700,000 in total. China experienced massive growth in electric buses from 2014 to 2018, a time when other countries had barely started deploying them. In 2017, Shenzhen became the first city in the world to electrify its entire bus fleet (16,000 buses). By 2023, the top 10 global cities with the most electric bus sales were in China, with Shenzhen, Shanghai, Chengdu and Beijing leading the way. Outside of China, Santiago, Chile is the city with the highest electric bus sales.

The European Union is home to 17,000 electric buses, with most of the sales growth taking place after 2018. Several European countries such as the Netherlands, Finland and Switzerland have achieved very high rates of electric bus adoption.

India, South Korea and the United States are each home to more than 10,000 electric buses.

China: The Primary Electric Bus Player

China started deploying electric buses more than a decade ago, becoming the leading electric bus manufacturer and market in the world.

At first, the government supported electric buses as a strategic industry. China saw a competitive advantage in pursuing EVs in an already saturated fossil-fuel-vehicle-manufacturing market. City buses were a good candidate for early electrification because they were a public purchase and had fixed routes with a range — on average 120 miles per day — that could operate on a single charge.

After years of unhealthy smog in China’s most high-profile cities, the desire to reduce air pollution and improve health also became a motivator. The central government began evaluating local officials’ performances based on their progress in reducing air pollution, which created an incentive for those officials to electrify transportation. 

In 2009, China began an EV subsidy program in 10 pilot cities. Over time the program added 88 more cities. It was eventually replaced with a national EV subsidy program. The government also put in place favorable polices that lowered electricity prices for charging electric buses and gradually removed its existing subsidies for diesel buses.

Cities in China also designed their own policies to make electric buses financially viable. For example, Shenzhen provided city-level subsidies in addition to the national subsidies, which made it 36% cheaper to own an electric bus than a diesel bus over its lifetime. In some cases, the city leased the buses rather than buying them outright to spread out the costs over the leasing period. 

Many cities also developed creative strategies to optimize charging and designed operations schedules to compensate for the electric buses’ shorter ranges and recharging needs. In a few examples, charging infrastructures were built that could be shared with electric cars. As Shenzhen, Shanghai, Chengdu, Beijing and many other Chinese cities became electric bus leaders and the industry matured, the government gradually scaled down the subsidies.

Nearly 100% of city buses sold in China are now electric, an impressive accomplishment, but about half of its bus market is privately-owned coach buses — used for tourism, business and intercity travel. Only 6% of coach bus sales are electric. Coach buses travel longer distances, where the limited range and long charging times of electric buses can become more challenging. When looking at city and private buses together, since 2017 electric bus sales have plateaued at a little over half of all China’s bus sales.

For almost a decade, China’s total bus market has been shrinking. Fewer new buses may be needed because so many were deployed in a short amount of time. Also, car ownership has increased rapidly and China now has the world’s most extensive high-speed train network. The COVID-19 pandemic also had an impact — urban bus ridership still has not recovered to pre-2020 levels, and the economic impacts may have decreased city budgets.

Chinese electric bus companies, however, continue to show they’re a dominant force in the industry. The top 10 electric bus companies worldwide are all Chinese and China’s exports account for 30% of the electric buses sold in Europe and more than 85% of the electric buses in Latin America.

The Netherlands: An Early Leader in Europe

The Netherlands invested heavily in electric buses earlier than any other European country and now has more than 2,100 electric buses on the road.

In 2016, Dutch transit authorities set the most ambitious target in the world for all new bus sales to be zero-emissions by 2025, with the entire fleet to follow by 2030. The move, which was created as part of the Netherlands’ national climate plan to decarbonize transportation, triggered a rapid shift toward electric buses nationwide.

To facilitate the transition, public transit authorities gave longer contracts to the private electric bus companies that own and operate public transit buses in the Netherlands to help them recoup their investments (15 years instead of 8 to 10 years for diesel). Various cities and regions also provided financial support for the transition. For example, Amsterdam gave direct subsidies of up to 40,000 euros per bus (about $45,000 based on average 2019 and 2020 exchange rates — when the subsidies began implementation).

The country also used dynamic modeling to plan bus schedules and routes. In some cases, it also used opportunity charging systems that allowed for fast charging of the batteries during stops along the route.

After reaching more than 60% of bus sales, electric buses in the Netherlands fell in 2021. The COVID-19 pandemic caused financial constraints and supply chain bottlenecks, so many electric bus purchases were postponed. Today, the electric bus transition is still struggling due to overloaded electric grids and technical problems with charging. While the Netherlands has made impressive progress, it is in danger of missing its ambitious targets without making big investments in electric buses and supportive infrastructure.

The rest of the European Union has also been adding electric buses to its fleets. Electric buses increased from less than 2% of EU bus sales in 2018 to 19% in 2024. An important turning point came in 2019, when the EU adopted a Clean Vehicles Directive which set binding requirements for publicly-procured buses to be clean, with escalating targets as time goes on. Then in 2024, the EU released a target for a 90% reduction in city bus carbon dioxide emissions by 2030 and a 43% reduction in coach and intercity bus emissions.

About 70% of the EU’s buses are manufactured by European companies, including MAN and Mercedes-Benz from Germany and Solaris from Poland. Chinese companies grew from 10% of the EU market for electric buses in 2017 to 30% in 2023.

Chile: Home to the Leading City for Electric Buses Outside of China

Chile has more than 2,700 electric buses in operation as of April 2025, the most of any country in Latin America, with about 2,500 in its capital city. Santiago now has the largest fleet of electric buses of any non-Chinese city, making up more than a third of its total fleet.

In 2017, Chile established a national electromobility strategy and in 2021, it announced a goal of 100% bus electrification by 2035. By 2023, 46% of the buses sold in Chile were electric.

The push to clean up buses in Santiago — one of Latin America’s largest cities and home to 40% of Chile’s population — began out of a desire to reduce air pollution and reduce health impacts; the city was one of the most polluted in Latin America in the 1990s. Since then, the national government has developed climate policy and started regulating vehicle emissions as part of a comprehensive strategy to reduce air pollution.

In 2017, as the city entered a bidding process to renew its bus fleet, Santiago became the first city in Latin America to adopt European standards for diesel buses. The new standards increased the cost of diesel buses which made electric buses more financially feasible. Santiago also required each of its seven bus operators to have at least 15 electric buses.

Rather than manufacturing its own electric buses, Santiago imported them from Chinese companies like BYD, Yutong and others. The initial rollout cost about $300,000 per electric bus — which is more than diesel models — but each electric bus is expected to break even or be more cost-effective than diesel buses over its lifetime due to lower operating and maintenance costs.

 Direct government subsidies were not required to create the financial ecosystem that made the bus rollout possible, but city and national support was still needed — for example, by offering backup financial guarantees to private sector bus operators to incentivize investment. Bus operators, bus manufacturers and utilities partnered together to figure out viable financial and logistical options. Like in the Netherlands, bus operators receive longer contracts for electric buses than diesel buses to recoup investments.

To build on its success, Santiago will need to turn over the rest of its bus fleet quickly. And to meet Chile’s ambitious goals for electric buses, additional cities will need to follow its example.

Promising Developments in India and Other Countries

India is the leader in electric buses among lower-income countries. It has more than 10,000 electric buses on the roads, and in late 2024, the national government approved a multi-billion dollar initiative to incentivize the purchase of 14,000 more. India’s electric bus rollout is deliberately targeting many cities which don’t have any organized bus transport to expand mobility access. 

The government has kept electric bus prices affordable by buying them in bulk, including one of the biggest mass purchases of electric buses in the world. The goal for 2027 is 50,000 total electric buses on the roads. Compared to the more than 2 million public and private buses on the roads in India, this will be only a small fraction of the total fleet, but still a substantial endeavor.

To meet its goals, India is developing new  financial mechanisms. In India, city governments typically contract with private companies to own and operate the buses. The companies pay the large upfront cost for the buses, while the city pays the companies back over time. However, delayed payments from cash-strapped local governments can create challenges. In response, India has developed a payment security fund so bus operator companies can purchase electric buses with confidence.

Beyond India, there are a few more leaders in developing countries with some impressive plans in development.

• Colombia has a target for 100% of new public transport sales to be electric by 2035.
• Ecuador has a target for 100% electric new public transport vehicles by 2030.
• Jakarta, Indonesia purchased its first 100 electric buses and has a target to fully electrify its fleet of 10,000 buses by 2030.
• Dakar, Senegal has launched Africa’s first all-electric bus rapid transit system, expected to carry 300,000 passengers per day.

How Electric Buses Fit into the Transportation Picture

Electric buses are just one part of the story for decarbonizing road transport. Governments can follow the Avoid-Shift-Improve framework: First, plan cities in a compact and transit-oriented way so people can avoid lengthy trips; second, incentivize more people to shift from private passenger cars to walking, cycling or public transit; third, improve and optimize transport to be as efficient as possible. For motorized vehicles, this means electrifying not only buses but also passenger cars and heavy trucks, while ensuring the electricity comes from increasingly clean sources.

While buses are not the biggest contributor to carbon dioxide emissions in the transport sector, the transition to electric buses can lead to reduced climate change, healthier air, happier riders, less congestion and improved access to jobs and services for lower-income groups. Electric buses can also serve as a test case for other high-emitting vehicle types like heavy trucks.

Leading countries like China, the Netherlands, Chile and India prove that a rapid transition to electric buses is possible and desirable.

Data for electric bus sales, sales share and fleet size in this article are from the International Energy Agency's Global EV Data Explorer, as of April 2025. Sales share data has been modified to include battery electric, plug-in hybrid and fuel-cell electric buses.

This article is part of a series of deep-dive analyses from Systems Change Lab examining countries that are leaders in transformational change. Other articles in the series analyzed countries leading on renewable power, electric vehicles, coal phase-out and coal cancellations. Systems Change Lab is a collaborative initiative — which includes an open-sourced data platform — designed to spur action at the pace and scale needed to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees C, halt biodiversity loss and build a just and equitable economy.

china-electric-buses.jpg Climate electric mobility transportation public transit data visualization Type Finding Exclude From Blog Feed? 0 Projects

• Systems Change Lab

Authors Joel Jaeger

Protecting Naturally Regrowing Forests Is a Crucial — and Overlooked — Climate Solution margaret.overh… Tue, 06/24/2025 - 05:00

Protecting and restoring forests are essential for curbing climate change. But while efforts often focus on conserving mature forests and planting new trees (both of which are badly needed), a critical piece of the puzzle is often overlooked: managing naturally regrowing forests to increase the carbon they remove.

Until now, scientists did not have a detailed picture of the carbon removal value of naturally regrowing forests. But new research by The Nature Conservancy, WRI and partners shows that naturally regenerating "secondary forests" (which have regrown after being cleared by harvests, severe fires, agriculture or other disturbances) could be especially powerful for fighting climate change. It is the first to show where, and at what ages, they can have the biggest impact.

We found that secondary forests between 20 and 40 years old can remove carbon from the atmosphere up to 8 times faster per hectare than new natural growth — if they're allowed to reach those older ages. The catch is that many secondary forests don't regrow for this long, whether due to human activity (such as clearing or harvest) or climate-related disturbances (like fires or pests).

These findings highlight that countries may be underestimating the value of naturally regenerating secondary forests in their climate reporting — and that protecting them, or encouraging their regrowth for longer periods, offers untapped opportunities for climate action.

How Quickly Can Secondary Forests Remove Carbon?

The rate at which natural forests remove carbon from the atmosphere varies with location and age. Within a forest's first 100 years of regrowth after being cleared or destroyed — the age range covered in this research — carbon removal rates generally start relatively slow, then accelerate, before slowing again. That means it may take many years before newly established forests provide their largest climate benefits.

Our new research provides the first global maps of how these carbon removal rates vary across space and time as secondary forests regenerate naturally. The maps cover any square kilometer on Earth where forests could grow. Previous estimates have not captured as much geographic or age variation or did not provide global coverage.

We found that naturally regenerating forests typically remove carbon fastest when they're between 20 and 40 years old. This means that older secondary forests can provide more immediate and often greater carbon removals than younger regrowing forests.

However, the age at which forests reach their peak carbon removal rates varies across the globe. Tropical and subtropical rainforests (such as the Amazon and the Congo Basin) and some temperate forests (such as in in the United States) capture carbon fastest at younger ages. Meanwhile, boreal forests (like in Canada and Russia), Mediterranean forests, and forested areas in tropical and subtropical savanna regions (such as the Brazilian Cerrado), reach their maximum — and generally lower — carbon removal rates at older ages.

Maximum carbon removal rates also vary vastly by region. On average, established secondary forests at their peak removal age absorb 10% more carbon than newly growing forests. But in some areas, the difference is as large as 820%.

Carbon removal rates change most dramatically with age in tropical and subtropical wet forests, while changes were least pronounced in Mediterranean forests and woodlands. However, there is variation within each of these ecoregions, highlighting the value of knowing how carbon removal changes through time for every square kilometer of potential forest.

About the Data

To better understand carbon removal by naturally regenerating forests, we developed a global machine learning model that maps carbon removal rates across naturally regenerating forests up to 100 years old. The model combines over 100,000 field plot measurements of carbon stocks at different forest ages for 66 environmental covariates and predicts carbon stocks at 1 kilometer resolution every 5 years as forests age. Then, from the carbon stock maps, we derived carbon accumulation curves. The resulting maps show how much carbon could be removed by allowing forests to regenerate without major disturbances for any forest age and any location where forests naturally occur. (Note that these maps predict what would happen if regeneration does occur, but do not show where natural regeneration could or should occur.)

Many Secondary Forests Never Reach Peak Carbon Removal Age

Knowing when forests remove the most carbon matters. The world urgently needs to scale up climate action over the next 25 years (2025-2050) to achieve net-zero emissions deadlines and protect the planet from the worst effects of climate change. This new data shows that older secondary forests are some of the most effective at removing carbon within this critical window. And it pinpoints when and where regrowing forests pack the biggest climate punch.

Yet despite their importance, naturally regrowing secondary forests are frequently ignored in climate policy — and they are under threat. Across the tropics, forests regenerate for an average of 7.5 years before being cut down, with only 6% reaching 20 years of regrowth. In the Brazilian Amazon, half of secondary forests are cleared within eight years. In Costa Rica, where the clearance cycle is one of the longest in the tropics, the average age for regenerating forest is still only 20 years.

This means that many secondary forests never reach their peak carbon removal years, undercutting their climate benefits as well as the benefits they bring to people and nature. In addition to faster carbon removals, allowing forests to regrow naturally — as opposed to more active planting — can provide benefits like restoring biodiversity and protecting waterbodies at much lower costs.

Fire is used to clear an area in the Brazilian Amazon for agricultural use. Many naturally regrowing forests do not reach old age, whether due to human activity or natural causes. Photo by Paralaxis/iStock What Does This Mean for Natural Climate Solutions?

Restoring and protecting forests are proven, cost-effective and scalable ways to help tackle climate change. This new information provides valuable insights into how to prioritize forest management efforts to maximize their impact:

• Secondary forests should be protected or kept growing for longer periods. 

   

  Currently, secondary forests are often not prioritized for protection. But it's now possible to quantify the carbon removals that are foregone by cutting these forests down at a young age. While keeping intact and mature forests standing remains crucial, this research shows that protecting secondary forests — or in the case of production forests, delaying clear-cutting until after the peak age for carbon removal — warrants additional attention, as they can often provide the greatest per-hectare carbon removals. Additionally, some forests do not survive to their peak carbon removal age due to windthrow, pests, fire or drought (which are natural disturbances but are exacerbated by climate change). To effectively protect secondary forests, they must be managed for resilience to these risks.

   

• Large-scale natural forest regeneration must start now. 

   

  That way, new forests can reach the age at which their carbon removal is greatest within the window of time that carbon removal is most needed to reach climate goals. Our research shows that delaying natural forest regeneration by five or 10 years decreases potential carbon removals globally by a quarter or half through mid-century, respectively, compared to starting natural regeneration in all reforestable areas now.

   

• Policymakers and land managers can begin to make more strategic forest management decisions. 

   

  These maps can inform where and when the returns will be greatest from regrowing forests and/or letting forests continue to grow as a natural climate solution. They can be combined with forest restoration opportunity maps to estimate carbon removal in new forests over specified time horizons. They can also be integrated with maps of the age of naturally regenerating secondary forests and forest loss risk maps to estimate how much more carbon these forests could capture if they are left standing over specified time horizons.

   

• Countries can improve their carbon accounting and make more accurate climate projections. 

   

  Compared to the removal rates in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) greenhouse inventory guidelines, which are a common benchmark, the carbon removal rates we found are 26% lower for forests under 20 years old and 18% higher for those aged 20-100 years. (Differences vary by region.) This means governments and others that rely on IPCC rates are likely underestimating carbon removals by older secondary forests. Improved estimates could be used in developing Nationally Determined Contributions, place-based conservation and more.

Protecting secondary forests should go together with conserving mature forests (which have high carbon densities and biodiversity) and investing in restoring forests where they have been lost, which will bring long-term climate and nature benefits. In other words, it shouldn't be one or the other, but all of the above.

Conservation and restoration also need to be done in ways that benefit the more than 1 billion people who live near or rely on forests. Secondary forests are often used by low-income or rural communities to support their livelihoods, and their protection must consider the needs, knowledge and wishes of local communities.

Informing More Impactful Climate Solutions

With forests under attack and under-valued, the world needs to muster every resource it can to show how much value forests provide and prioritize their protection. Maintaining existing secondary forests, protecting mature forests and enabling new forests to grow are all important for strengthening the global forest carbon sink — but these must be done while also providing food, fiber and other resources on finite land for a growing population.

Mapping carbon removal rates in forests is a rapidly advancing field. More ground data is needed from underrepresented regions, which includes most of the tropics (especially in Africa). We also need a better understanding of the human and environmental factors that affect carbon accumulation in forests. This can help inform where and how to focus forest protection efforts to maximize nature-based carbon removals within the context of social needs and other ecosystem benefits.

These maps provide another line of evidence for the value of forests. The new information can help practitioners and decision-makers focus forest restoration and protection efforts so that they are as effective as possible in averting further climate change.

This article was written in collaboration with Susan Cook-Patton and Nathaniel Robinson of The Nature Conservancy.

bavaria-forest-regrowth.jpg Forests Forests carbon removal forest monitoring deforestation nature-based solutions Type Finding Exclude From Blog Feed? 0 Projects

• Global Forest Watch
• Forest Governance and Policy (FGP)

Authors David Gibbs Susan Cook-Patton Nathaniel Robinson

STATEMENT: Proposed Changes Threaten the Effectiveness of the EU Deforestation Regulation alison.cinnamo… Mon, 06/23/2025 - 16:27

BRUSSELS (June 23, 2025) – Earlier this year, the European Commission announced measures to simplify the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR), which is set to be enforced from 30 December 2025. Since then, a number of EU member states and political groups in the European Parliament have been pushing to further weaken the regulation — most recently during the Agriculture and Fisheries Council meeting in May 2025, and in parliamentary committee discussions this month.

These attempts include proposals to create a “no-risk” country category, which could exempt certain countries from key due diligence obligations — potentially creating a loophole for deforestation-linked goods to enter the EU market with reduced oversight; and to postpone implementation to allow more time for simplifying the EUDR.

Following is a statement from Stientje van Veldhoven, Vice-President and Regional Director for Europe, World Resources Institute:

“Renewed attempts to weaken and delay the EUDR are deeply concerning and could jeopardize global efforts to combat record-breaking forest loss. The latest data shows that in 2024 alone, the world lost 6.7 million hectares of tropical primary rainforest, an area nearly the size of the Republic of Ireland.

The proposed “no-risk” country category would erode the foundations of the EUDR's due diligence system, which is central to the law’s credibility and impact. WRI's analysis from November 2024 shows it could open up major loopholes and make the regulation much less effective.

While concerns about implementation challenges are understandable, it's important to acknowledge that many businesses have already taken steps to comply. Reopening the debate now — just six months before enforcement — could unintentionally penalize early movers and send the wrong signal about the EU's reliability as a market grounded in legal certainty and stability.

Implementation must be made practical and inclusive — but rolling back on core safeguards risks undermining trust in both the EU legislative process and Europe's commitment to forest protection. The European Commission, the European Parliament and Member States should stay the course and deliver the EUDR as planned, in collaboration with producers, businesses and countries.”
 

Forests Europe deforestation commodities Type Statement Exclude From Blog Feed? 0

Climate Compatible Growth and WRI Partner to Advance the Energy Transition margaret.overh… Mon, 06/23/2025 - 12:00

At London Climate Action Week on June 23, 2025, WRI and Climate Compatible Growth (CCG) formalized a strategic partnership to cooperate on energy transition, energy access, transport, critical minerals, political economy and more. WRI and CCG will continue to expand joint work supporting strategic energy planning and promoting sound scientific practice in energy modeling. The partnership builds on a history of collaboration between the two organizations. As WRI scales up its energy work with the new WRI Polsky Center for the Global Energy Transition, partnerships with visionary initiatives like CCG can lead to transformative change.

Energy planning and modeling are essential to an inclusive, low-carbon future. However, fragmented data, lack of tools and limited capacity of government departments are hampering development of energy plans. Open-source data and tools — such as Energy Access Explorer, an online platform for mapping energy access — are helping identify and prioritize areas for new and expanded energy projects. Together, WRI and CCG are helping inform inclusive energy planning to improve energy access and provide practical solutions on a global scale.

WRI's Energy Access Explorer is an open-source, interactive platform designed to visualize energy access in unserved and underserved areas, supporting solutions to achieve universal energy access.

Jennifer Layke, WRI's Global Director, Energy, said, "Collaborating with CCG enables us to move faster and go further as we tackle energy access challenges. To achieve access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all, around 135 million new connections are needed each year from 2024. This is why we are committed to finding the most impactful and scalable solutions. Through tools like the Energy Access Explorer, governments and businesses can identify opportunities that are truly transformative for communities around the world."

Through this partnership, WRI and CCG will:

• Facilitate training on Energy Access Explorer for energy planners, governments and digital tool developers through platforms such as Open University.
• Support energy modeling capacity building, including boot camps and training in Africa and Italy at the Energy Modelling Platforms (EMPs) and associated Energy Modelling Communities (EMCs), focused on energy access, energy transition and related sectors.
• Continue to collaborate on research papers and policy briefs that advance understanding and practical solutions for those planning for future energy needs.
• Foster South-South cooperation and integrate global and regional strategies for a clean, abundant, affordable and reliable energy future.

The Program Director of CCG, Professor Mark Howells of Loughborough University and Imperial College London, said "We are delighted to have put our working relationship with WRI on a more formal footing, having worked together for a number of years already. We share a point of view on many climate-related issues and agree on the most appropriate ways to tackle them. By working together, we hope to achieve significant progress on providing support for countries in the Global South in their energy transitions."

wri-ccg-partnership.jpg Energy Energy Energy Access Type Project Update Exclude From Blog Feed? 0 Projects

• Energy Access Explorer
• Energy Access and Equitable Development

Community Benefits Snapshot: Grain Belt Express Community Engagement and Benefits shannon.paton@… Mon, 06/23/2025 - 11:10 Highlights

The Grain Belt Express is the highest capacity transmission line to ever be planned in the United States and the first to connect four grid regions. At 800 miles, it will connect Kansas and Indiana by passing through Missouri and Illinois. The project is expected to create thousands of jobs, generate millions of dollars in tax revenues and provide billions of dollars in energy cost savings for consumers. Despite these positive economic impacts, the line has generated grassroots opposition from landowners, which has delayed the line’s development for the past 13 years. While the program has not deployed a formal community benefits framework, we chose this project to highlight the importance of early, frequent and inclusive landowner engagement and put a spotlight on how restrictive state regulatory environments can make transmission development difficult.

Context

• Project title: Grain Belt Express
• Location: Kansas, Missouri, Illinois, Indiana
• Sector: Transmission
• Developer: Invenergy (2018-Present), Clean Line Energy (2010-2018)
• Community benefits framework type: None.

About the Project

The Grain Belt Express (GBX) is an 800-mile, 5,000 megawatt, 600-kilovolt high-voltage direct current transmission line traversing and delivering energy to Kansas, Missouri, Illinois and Indiana. The project was originally owned by the merchant transmission developer Clean Line Energy before it was sold to Invenergy in 2018. The GBX line runs entirely through private land, requiring easements, including in certain cases easements acquired through eminent domain authority to secure its path.

GBX is an important transmission line for the country because of its potential to increase grid reliability, strengthen interregional transfer capability and transport large quantities of energy from the Central Plains to densely populated centers in the Midwest. By building high-voltage transmission lines like GBX, the U.S. can reduce grid congestion and improve power system reliability, especially in the face of extreme weather events and increasing electricity demand.

Proposed in 2010, GBX has secured state approval from all four of the states it will pass through.1 The project is broken into two phases: Phase 1 will connect Kansas to northeast Missouri while Phase 2 will connect northeast Missouri to Indiana. Invenergy has acquired 97% of the land rights for Phase 1 and construction is expected to begin in 2026. Phase 2 does not have a start date yet.

Stakeholders who will be involved with the GBX project include landowners, farm bureaus, communities adjacent to the project and county governments.

Research Method

The information presented in this snapshot was obtained through semi-structured interviews with 41 landowners, developers, county commissioners and state officials. Interviews were conducted anonymously, and interviewees were, in some cases, offered honoraria for their time. Additional desk research about the line’s history, siting laws and regulatory procedures related to public utility facilities such as transmission lines was also conducted.

Community Engagement

Clean Line and later Invenergy engaged stakeholders across a diverse set of communities and several levels of government to obtain approval to build the GBX transmission line. This included applying for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN), or an equivalent authorization, from utility regulators in the four states. In Missouri, the term Certificate of Convenience and Necessity (CCN) is used. These certificates subject prospective transmission line routes to a review process that assesses the project’s environmental impact, costs and benefits. The certificates can also grant eminent domain or serve as a prerequisite for eminent domain .

The regulatory process to obtain approval for the project has been complex and subject to several legal disputes, including efforts by counties to block the project using road-crossing regulations. When the project began, Clean Line employees said in interviews that its “understanding of Missouri state law” was that the company needed approval from every county hosting the transmission line in Missouri, a procedure they adopted in Kansas as well. In 2017, the Missouri Public Service Commission (PSC) rejected the GBX project, citing a previous Court of Appeals decision that said developers needed prior consent from every county impacted by the transmission line.

After it took over the project in 2018, Invenergy secured a CCN in Missouri without needing county approvals after the Missouri Supreme Court overturned the earlier Court of Appeals decision and instructed the Missouri PSC to re-evaluate the project without the county consent requirement. The Supreme Court clarified that while counties cannot block the construction of the transmission line, they can establish rules for how the GBX line crosses publicly owned roads. In other words, Invenergy would still need to negotiate with counties to acquire the necessary road crossing assents.

Clean Line and Invenergy’s engagement with counties and state public utilities commissions have been extensive and frequent to successfully navigate the complex regulatory landscape. Early in the project development process, Clean Line hosted open houses and workshops with county commissioners along the proposed line to identify and avoid areas they preferred not be developed in routing considerations. Invenergy continued engaging with state agencies and county commissioners after acquiring the project. GBX secured approval from the Missouri Public Service Commission in October 2023 after Invenergy increased the line’s capacity from 4,000 MW to 5,000 MW and reconfigured the facility to deliver up to half of the transmitted power to Missouri, facilitated by constructing an extra 40-mile connector line in the state.

The developers’ engagement with landowners, however, has been seen to be inadequate. Though Clean Line and Invenergy have stated that they were engaging with all impacted stakeholders, the perception among some stakeholders we interviewed was that Clean Line did not engage with landowners and the broader community early in the project. One landowner explained that they first had an open mind toward the GBX project, but became an ardent opponent after being turned away from a Clean Line press conference where they expected siting would be discussed. The landowner said they were told Clean Line was not yet ready to begin engaging with landowners. This exclusion led the landowner to mobilize opponents against the project for the next decade.

In interviews, other landowners expressed a wide array of concerns, including the use of eminent domain, potential visual and property value impacts and reduced agricultural efficiency.

In Missouri, grassroots opposition groups, such as the Missouri Landowner Alliance and the Missouri Farm Bureau have attempted to halt the GBX project and pushed for legislation to restrict or prohibit the use of eminent domain. The effort to revoke Invenergy’s ability to use eminent domain ultimately failed. However, in 2022, Missouri passed legislation requiring developers using eminent domain for electric transmission lines to pay landowners 150% of fair market value for agricultural and horticultural land, instead of the previous 100%. This legislation, endorsed by Invenergy, does not retroactively apply to GBX, but was seen as a way to protect the state’s landowners from  future large transmission line projects, while still allowing the GBX project to move forward in Missouri.

In Illinois, the Illinois Farm Bureau and other landowner groups have also challenged the GBX project in court. An Illinois state appeals court reversed the 2023 approval by the Illinois Commerce Commission of the Illinois portion of the project. The Illinois Supreme Court has taken up Invenergy’s appeal of the decision.

As this case continues to be litigated, Invenergy is obtaining the majority of easements from landowners in Kansas and Missouri through voluntary agreements. According to Invenergy, GBX has secured over 1,450 easements needed for the project, with 97% of landowners in Kansas and Missouri agreeing to the deals offered by the developer. Voluntary easements are often negotiated jointly by Invenergy employees and land agents from Contract Land Staff, a hired third-party agency specializing in land acquisition. For the rest, Invenergy is compensating landowners through eminent domain as a last resort.

Project Benefits

High-voltage transmission projects can benefit regional electricity grids through enhanced grid reliability by allowing more renewable interconnection and lowering energy system costs, all of which the developers of GBX have claimed in its CPCN applications and promotional materials. Additionally, transmission projects can provide a series of direct benefits to host communities.

The GBX project is expected to provide its host communities with the following key benefits:

Legal and Expected Benefits: These are legally required forms of compensation, such as taxes and easement payments, that naturally result from the development of a project.

• Taxes and construction impact mitigation payments: The GBX project is expected to generate significant property tax revenues for counties along its route, offering them an opportunity to invest that revenue in essential services, such as schools and fire departments. In Missouri, the GBX project is expected to provide $7 million in property tax revenue in the first year of operation. In Kansas, Invenergy benefits from a 10-year tax exemption on high-voltage transmission development. As a result, instead of receiving revenues through a traditional taxation scheme, Kansas counties will receive a one time “construction mitigation payment fee” in the first 10 years of operation. The counties will receive $7,500 per mile of transmission built within the counties’ boundaries, which amounts to a total of $2.8 million in payments to Kansas local governments. After 10 years, counties will receive standard tax revenues.
• Eminent domain and land payments: Invenergy will pay landowners to site the GBX project on their land through both voluntary easements and eminent domain, both of which are based on fair market evaluations. In Missouri and Kansas, Invenergy is expected to give $35 million in landowner payments in each state. Invenergy will pay landowners 110% of the fair market value of their land, plus an additional $18,000 for each tower placed on their property, with options for upfront or annual payments. Owners of century farms that have remained in the same family for over 100 years will receive an additional premium.
• Job creation: The project is estimated to create 22,300 direct jobs during the construction of the line and the new generation it is expected to enable, while operations will create 960 full-time jobs.

Procedural benefits: Procedural benefits are a class of optional benefits that developers often undertake to maintain goodwill with host communities and secure local and state approval.

• Providing local power: GBX project will deliver up to 2,500 MW of power to the line’s Missouri interconnection point, a portion of which will serve 39 community-owned utilities in cities and small towns in the state through a power purchase agreement with members of the Missouri Public Utility Alliance. The initial amount of power was increased after the project’s first CCN was rejected and developers wanted to ensure the project would satisfy the state benefits test requirements projects are subjected to during CCN review.
• Community grant program: Invenergy provides one-time grants of up to $500 to local organizations located along the route of the transmission line. These grants are intended to support community needs, including food insecurity, community development and other local initiatives. Invenergy also donates to the county fairs where its line is planned and sponsors and publicizes local events. These actions, according to interviews with Invenergy, are helpful in building trust and maintaining goodwill with the community. 

Strengths

Below are some of the project’s strengths as they relate to community engagement and providing communities with tangible benefits:

• The GBX project has demonstrated flexibility in its route design to address specific concerns. The project has made a series of modifications and adjustments to accommodate local and state interests and minimize environmental impacts. Both project developers made significant efforts to accommodate landowner siting requests. The project added the Tiger Connector, a 40-mile-long transmission line that will connect existing power infrastructure in Callaway County, Missouri, to the GBX transmission line in northern Missouri. The project was reconfigured to make it a 5,000 MW line, with half of the power delivered to Missouri. The project is also happening in two phases, enabling a gradual and phased approach to construction and development.
• Project developers remained committed to obtaining site control through voluntary easements even in the face of significant landowner opposition and litigation. Invenergy estimates that it needs 1,700 parcels of land to secure its route. Ninety-seven percent of property owners in Kansas and Missouri have agreed to the deals offered by Invenergy, which also said that it has voluntarily secured over 1,450 easements needed for the project. This could suggest that Invenergy is accommodating landowner siting requests and providing substantial land payments through voluntary easements. Eminent domain is being used as a last resort after all attempts to negotiate with a landowner fail. Since 2021, Invenergy has used eminent domain in 40 instances against Missouri property owners.

Challenges and Gaps

• The GBX project struggled to clearly articulate and communicate tax revenue benefits for counties along the transmission line. In our interviews, we found that county officials hold widely different estimates of revenues that will accrue to counties from the GBX project. County officials in Missouri and Illinois noted that they have “tremendous difficulty” estimating tax revenues from transmission development. A former Clean Line employee who was interviewed estimated that each mile of the line would generate $330,000 to $660,000 in taxes annually based on the line’s cost ($1 million to $2 million per mile and a utility tax rate of 33%). However, these estimates were met with skepticism from county commissioners, even as they welcomed a boost in revenues. The Missouri Times reported that the Missouri portion of GBX would likely pay about $7 million in property taxes in the first year of operation. This estimate would value the line’s tax potential at $35,000 per mile, nearly one-tenth the low estimate quoted by the former Clean Line developer. The ambiguity in estimating county tax revenue benefits can give government officials and other stakeholders a reason to oppose the project.
• Local opposition to the GBX project stemmed from the perception that benefits are spread broadly across large regions, but costs are concentrated along the transmission line. Interviews with landowners highlighted that the overall benefits of the project to their state and the nation, including grid reliability and provision of electricity to faraway places, were often not deemed sufficient to justify the project. Instead, they were concerned about the project’s potential to scar the landscape and negatively impact rural communities. Concerns were also raised about who is eligible for compensation. For instance, landowners whose land abuts transmission easements are not compensated for transmission’s visual and noise pollution One landowner described how a family-owned bed and breakfast, whose primary appeal was its rural aesthetic, expected to lose customers because the line would be sited next to their property. The bed and breakfast would not be compensated because they were not hosting the line. Similar complaints are cited in a hearing brief to the Missouri Public Service Commission. This reveals how crucial it is for transmission developers to identify and engage with all locally impacted community groups and clearly articulate local economic benefits to build support for projects. The GBX project also highlights that transmission projects that confer wide benefits but impose localized costs can often be challenging to build support for.
• Building support among state and local leaders before approaching landowners can spur local opposition. Grassroots opposition is more likely when landowners are not clearly notified of a project impacting them. For example, one landowner found out about the GBX project from their farm bureau president. After calling around to both their neighbors and local government offices, they found that none of their neighbors knew about the project but in some cases, county commissioners and state legislators had already agreed to the project. Community members also expressed dissatisfaction with how Clean Line communicated with individual landowners. In interviews, they contrasted the strategy adopted by oil pipeline developers, who would approach landowners individually at the beginning to start easement negotiations. Clean Line said their initial strategy was to notify landowners that the transmission line would cross their property via mail. Former employees of Clean Line acknowledged in interviews the shortcomings of this approach and shared that in their new roles with other developers they now solicit siting requests first from landowners — not county officials — to avoid grassroots opposition.
• Community engagement was constrained by state regulatory environments. The requirement that transmission lines (with some exceptions) receive CPCNs from each state they pass through can expose projects that prioritize early-on landowner engagement to greater risk. Ideally, developers would fully secure their line route through private easements before seeking state approval to better accommodate landowner siting requests. However, the cost and time entailed in doing so, especially on a project as large as GBX, can be prohibitive when developers have no guarantee of receiving a CPCN, which could impact whether they can complete their project. The burden of seeking CPCNs from states can also result in benefits that meet state priorities but not those of local communities, impacting host communities’ acceptance of the project. The Missouri Public Service Commission gave its approval in 2023 only after Invenergy agreed to expand the project to provide more renewable electricity within Missouri. While the Missouri spur line may have been critical for the project’s development, interviews with county commissioners and landowners revealed that this did not improve GBX’s standing with local communities.

Further resources

• Invenergy’s Grain Belt Express Benefits Page
• The Harvard Salata Institute’s Case Study of Grain Belt Express

 

Footnotes

1 GBX’s state approval is under appeal in Illinois having once before been granted and appealed by farming interest groups. Its state approval remains in effect in Illinois while the Illinois Supreme Court has taken up the appeal.

transmission-lines.jpg Climate U.S. Community Benefits Snapshots Type Snapshot Exclude From Blog Feed? 0 Projects

• U.S. People-Centered Transitions

Authors Joe Hack Josh Rogers Devashree Saha

Financing Nature Is Good Business. Here's How Companies Can Start. margaret.overh… Mon, 06/23/2025 - 10:00

Ecosystem services like clean air and water, healthy soils, flood management and climate regulation are not luxuries; they are foundational to life and economic activity. More than half of the global economy is moderately or highly dependent on nature — which is rapidly being degraded.

Since every society, and therefore every economy and business, relies on nature's services to function, all companies have a role to play in its conservation and restoration. Companies increasingly realize this.

Between 2022 and 2024, the share of Fortune 500 companies that set targets for preserving or restoring nature or acknowledged its importance in their business strategies grew significantly. Despite the current political environment, many remain committed to advancing sustainability-related initiatives.

Yet companies often have a hard time moving from pledges and planning to real action. The private sector currently contributes just 18% of all nature-positive investments, leaving much room for growth.

There are many reasons for this disconnect: Reporting and disclosure processes can be a burden. Incentives are often misaligned. Large-scale corporate financing for nature is still in its early stages, and some companies simply aren't sure where or how to begin.

But financing nature can be more accessible than it seems. Indeed, new WRI research shows that companies don't necessarily need large teams or sustainability budgets to act — what they need is a more effective approach.

Financing Nature Is Good Business

Nature is not an abstract responsibility; it is a tangible asset that businesses can manage, protect and restore for measurable impact, whether or not it directly relates to their value chains. When companies finance nature and "nature-based solutions," they achieve real benefits — from enhanced resource security to stronger brand reputations. In turn, nature regenerates, increasing its value and providing essential services for businesses and communities alike.

For example, Six Senses Laamu (a coastal tourism business in the Maldives) is protecting hundreds of acres of seagrass. This will support turtle and fish populations, enhance the ocean's carbon absorption capacity, and help protect against climate risks like storm surges. Critically, keeping local ecosystems healthy is also part of what keeps tourists coming back.

Elsewhere, food and beverage companies are investing in pollinator habitat restoration to protect their agricultural supply chains. General Mills is working with farmers to plant wildflower meadows and hedgerows, supporting pollinators for crops like almonds, oats and wheat. Unilever has incorporated pollinator conservation into its regenerative agriculture strategy, encouraging farming methods that promote biodiversity and soil health. These efforts improve crop yields, ecosystem resilience and soil fertility, as well as reduce reliance on harmful synthetic inputs.

An endangered Hawksbill sea turtle swimming through protected seagrass meadows in the Maldives. Many businesses, like in the tourism industry, directly depend on healthy ecosystems. Photo by Kiah Williams/iStock

Even companies in sectors like technology — which may not have visible land-use impacts, but still influence ecosystems through energy consumption, supply chains and data infrastructure — can play an important role in protecting and restoring nature. For example, Salesforce supports nature conservation as part of its broader strategy to mitigate climate risks, achieve net-zero goals and reinforce its brand value.

What's Blocking Companies from Taking Action?

While initiatives like these show great promise, they're still few and far between. In 2022, only $200 billion was allocated to nature-based solutions, with 82% of this coming from governments. To meet global climate and nature targets, finance for nature-based solutions must nearly triple to $542 billion per year by 2030 and quadruple to $737 billion per year by 2050, with private companies playing a much bigger role.

Yet that's easier said than done. We surveyed representatives from 41 companies of varying sizes and sectors and learned that they face a range of challenges in mobilizing finance for nature initiatives.

One reason is the persistent mindset that nature is merely a "nice-to-have" rather than a business imperative. This leaves some companies unaware of, or indifferent to, the benefits of nature initiatives.

How most key performance indicators (KPIs) and targets are structured may also be a barrier: The mid- to long-term planning often required for large-scale nature financing can be challenging for companies accustomed to short-term profit and loss considerations. Companies may struggle to identify a clear business case for financing nature initiatives, as the economic returns may be broad and longer-term, and less easily attributed to their own operations.

However, this is slowly shifting. Innovative finance models are resulting in companies beginning to place nature on their balance sheet and to invest in natural asset companies whose returns are based on environmental performance. Furthermore, nature continues to get broad public and political support, implying that not paying proper attention to nature may risk reputational and operational risks in the long run.

Finally, we found that companies can end up spending more time and resources assessing and reporting on nature than actually implementing projects. This stems in part from a fragmented reporting landscape; some companies currently use more than 3,000 metrics to describe nature-related outcomes in their sustainability disclosures. Investors also require clear, quantifiable data, which can push companies to focus on reporting rather than pursuing new solutions. In fact, one recent study revealed that spending on sustainability reporting exceeds spending on sustainability innovation by 43%.

A Practical Approach to Corporate Nature Action

These myriad challenges can create a sort of analysis paralysis, with companies so mired in planning, assessing and reporting that they fail to deliver progress at the pace and scale needed. While building a business case and evaluating potential risks and opportunities are all critical, the speed and scale of the nature crisis demand more urgent action.

WRI has developed a structured decision-making framework to help companies move beyond prolonged assessments and take meaningful action for nature. Core to this framework is "ARK" approach:

1. (A)ssess support with key internal and external stakeholders and identify relevant opportunities for nature.
2. (R)efine operational mechanisms by integrating nature into corporate strategy, securing financing and engaging with key stakeholders.
3. (K)ick off and evaluate implementation with a clear governance structure; monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) systems; and ongoing evaluation to ensure long-term success.

The ARK framework emphasizes swift yet strategic decision-making. By following these steps, companies can transition from concept to implementation more efficiently, helping to avoid delays that hinder progress.

Explore the Full Framework

An expanded version of this framework, "SPARK," offers additional steps for companies seeking a materiality assessment-informed approach. Download the Guidebook to learn more.

1) Assess support and action for nature

Among the companies we interviewed, nature initiatives were largely limited to sustainability teams. But securing broader company support is important to driving meaningful action. Engaging multiple departments, socializing nature initiatives across the company, and fostering a shared understanding of their benefits can support a more collaborative and effective approach. This, in turn, can foster long-term commitment, integration into business strategies and, ultimately, successful implementation.

Externally, partnering with NGOs, academic institutions, Indigenous groups and local communities can build more effective initiatives. According to our interviews and surveys, external parties were seen as helpful to provide expertise, share best practices, and streamline project design and implementation. This can be especially important if in-house teams are not established or do not have specific training or expertise in the field. Engaging with consortiums where companies share insights in collaborative manner (such as LEAF Coalition and the Symbiosis Coalition) can also help identify credible partners for evaluating nature financing options.

2) Refine operational mechanisms

The next step is to set up and refine operational mechanisms for nature initiatives, such as internal governance and strategy, financial mechanisms, and supply chain management and procurement.

Conflicting KPIs and targets need to be identified and addressed from the start. As several interviews indicated, middle management may be particularly hesitant to advance nature-based projects when their targets are focused on increasing sales, revenues and margins. Sustainability or nature-oriented targets (which may generate non-financial or hard-to-quantify benefits) can be perceived as misaligned with these goals. Even after senior executive buy-in, effective communication and alignment with middle management are critical.

Some companies we interviewed are developing strategies to address competing interests. For example, a multinational pharmaceutical company successfully integrated sustainability into its management remuneration by ensuring that every middle manager was also compensated based on sustainability targets. A European building material company offers internal incentives for progress against sustainability goals, with approximately 30% of senior executives' bonuses linked to sustainability.

3) Kick off and evaluate

Companies should involve local communities, NGOs and government bodies in their implementation plans to ensure strong and sustained support. Nature initiatives are long-term endeavors that often involve or impact nearby communities, which means they need buy-in from relevant parties — including incorporating local knowledge and customs. Without this, projects could risk local pushback, drive social and economic displacement, or simply fail to deliver the intended outcome. There are risks to companies, too, including accusations of greenwashing claims and reputational damage.

Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) systems are important for ensuring that activities meet their objectives in the most efficient and effective way possible. Properly designed M&E systems allow for iterative and adaptive learning, meaning companies can improve implementation over time. This may help relieve some of the burden of assessing every potential outcome upfront.

A mangrove planting initiative in Banda Aceh, Indonesia intended to help prevent erosion and protect coastal ecosystems. Nature-based initiatives should be planned and executed in close collaboration with nearby communities. Photo by Muhammad Hudari

One respondent recommended that, given the subjective nature of some aspects of environmental work, having a credible third-party partner to validate progress is essential. Transparency around a project's strategy, parameters and MRV processes — coupled with an iterative approach to improvement — can also help build confidence among investors and partners.

Another interviewee pointed out that, despite a wealth of learning and data collected in the field of nature-based solutions, much of this remains siloed within divisions, companies and sectors, limiting opportunities for collaboration and knowledge sharing. Greater cross-collaboration between companies and across industries and regions can help address this challenge and enable action on a larger scale.

For example, through the Rimba Collective, consumer goods manufacturers are working together to achieve their corporate sustainability objectives over the long-term, at scale, by protecting and restoring natural landscapes and supporting livelihoods. By collaborating, these companies can aggregate projects and landscape initiatives, along with impact KPIs, to mitigate risks associated with earlier-stage projects.

Embracing Nature as a Business Imperative

The path forward is clear: Businesses must treat nature as a strategic asset, essential to driving innovation, building resilience and creating long-term value. By securing supply chains, reducing liabilities, unlocking financial opportunities and enhancing brand value, companies that embrace this approach today will set themselves up to lead the future economy.

The good news is that meaningful change is achievable. By integrating nature into core business strategies, financing impactful projects and collaborating across sectors, business leaders can drive the transformation needed to restore and protect the planet's life-support systems — the foundation of our societies and economies.

boaters-maharashtra.jpg Finance nature-based solutions corporate sustainability climate finance Type Finding Exclude From Blog Feed? 0 Projects

• Private Sector Finance

Authors Esther Choi Roman Paul Czebiniak

1.5 Degrees C: Understanding World’s Critical Warming Threshold shannon.paton@… Wed, 06/18/2025 - 14:35

Nearly a decade ago, the world rallied around the Paris Agreement on climate change and the goal of holding global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees C (2.7 degrees F). Since then, the “1.5C goal” has become the world’s North Star for climate action — a critical benchmark against which policies are set and progress is measured. But an alarming wave of recent data underscores just how close we are to surpassing this widely cited threshold.

Atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide reached its highest level in 2 million years last year. 2024 also marked the first single year in which global average surface temperature rose more than 1.5 degrees C above pre-industrial levels. While the Paris Agreement goal refers to a long-term average, not a single year, scientists warn that we may be at the beginning of a full breach — and with it, increasingly dangerous floods, droughts, fires and other climate impacts.

So what exactly is the 1.5 degrees C goal, how was it set, and what happens if we exceed it? Here’s what to know.

• Where Did the 1.5 Degrees C Goal Come From?
• How Is the 1.5 Degrees C Temperature Target Used?
• How Do We Know When We’ve Exceeded 1.5 Degrees C?
• Has Earth Already Exceeded 1.5 Degrees C of Temperature Rise?
• What Happens If We Breach 1.5 Degrees C of Warming?
• Is It Still Possible to Hold Warming to 1.5 Degrees C?
• Should a New Goal Be Chosen if 1.5 Degrees C Is Surpassed?
• What Should We Do if the World Surpasses 1.5 Degrees C?

An electric rickshaw in New Delhi, India. The country has made significant moves toward electric vehicles in an effort to curb its emissions and reduce air pollution. Photo by Pradeep Gaurs/Shutterstock Where Did the 1.5 Degrees C Goal Come From?

The Paris Agreement’s 1.5 degrees C temperature goal reflects decades of interaction between climate science and climate politics.

The UN’s 1992 Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the world’s first international treaty to confront the climate crisis, did not specify a temperature limit. A temperature goal emerged later, as scientific assessments, the European Council, and the G8 initially converged on a benchmark of 2 degrees C (3.6 degrees F) above pre-industrial levels. The 2010 Cancun Agreements became the first global agreements to reference 2 degrees C, while also recognizing the potential for a stronger 1.5 degrees C limit. 

In the lead-up to the 2015 Paris Agreement, experts concluded that even 2 degrees C of warming posed severe risks. The Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) and Least Developed Countries (LDCs) pushed hard during the agreement’s negotiations for a more stringent limit, resulting in a compromise: Countries agreed to collectively limit warming to “well below 2 degrees C” and “pursue efforts” to limit it to 1.5 degrees C, reflecting growing recognition of the heightened risks from every fraction of a degree of temperature rise.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the world’s pre-eminent group of climate scientists, then prepared a report on the 1.5 degrees C goal. They found a stark contrast in climate change impacts under 1.5 vs. 2 degrees C of warming. They also mapped what it would take to stay within the 1.5 degrees C limit.

How Is the 1.5 Degrees C Goal Used? 

Since its adoption in the 2015 Paris Agreement, the 1.5 degrees C goal has served both as a powerful rhetorical symbol and as the basis for concrete technical benchmarks.

Vulnerable countries, NGOs and diplomats alike invoke the 1.5 degrees C goal to highlight what’s at stake in UN climate negotiations and other policy decisions. Climate-vulnerable nations like small island states have long framed 1.5 degrees C as a matter of survival, popularized in the phrase “1.5 to stay alive.” Youth movements and UN leaders, including Secretary-General António Guterres, have repeatedly called for urgent action to keep 1.5 degrees C “within reach.”

Technically, the 1.5 degrees C goal underpins a range of benchmarks and scientific assessments of climate action. It’s used to evaluate the ambition of countries’ national climate commitments (known as “nationally determined contributions” (NDCs)) and corporate emissions-reduction targets. It helps scientists estimate the remaining carbon budget — the amount of CO2 the world can still emit while limiting warming to 1.5 degrees C. The 1.5 degrees C-aligned pathways assessed by the IPCC form the basis for emissions-reduction timelines (such as the widely cited global benchmark of reducing emissions 43% below 2019 levels by 2030), deadlines for reaching net-zero emissions, and sector-specific targets like phasing out coal or replacing fossil-fueled vehicles with electric ones.

These timelines and benchmarks, in turn, underpin accountability tools like the Emissions Gap Report, the Science-Based Targets Initiative and the State of Climate Action report.

A woman tends to her cabbages in rural Kenya. Small farmers are often on the front lines of the impacts of climate change. Photo by James Karuga/Shutterstock How Do We Know When We’ve Exceeded the 1.5 Degrees C Goal?

The Paris Agreement calls for “holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2 degrees C above pre-industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 degrees C above pre-industrial levels.” To know when we’ve exceeded the threshold, it’s important to define some terms:

• Global average temperature refers to the “estimated global average of near-surface air temperatures over land and sea ice, and sea surface temperature over ice-free ocean regions.” This estimate comes from temperature measurements from weather stations, ships and buoys around the world, which are then averaged to produce a global figure. (Some regions — including, critically, those over land — tend to warm more than average, while others warm less.)
• While the Paris Agreement does not define “pre-industrial levels,” scientists like those in the IPCC typically use 1850-1900. This period marks the beginning of reliable global temperature records.
• Today’s global average temperature is then compared to past conditions. The difference between the two is called the temperature anomaly.

By scientific convention, the Paris goal refers to a sustained temperature anomaly over a period of at least 20 years. This approach smooths out the effects of year-on-year temperature fluctuations due to factors like El Niño/La Niña, volcanic activity and changes in ocean circulation to provide a better estimate of human-caused warming. Scientists typically assess whether the long-term average exceeds 1.5 degrees C at any point during the 21st century, and specifically in 2100. If warming temporarily exceeds the threshold before falling back below it by the end of the century, this is referred to as “overshoot.”

Under this approach, the year in which a given temperature threshold is breached is the middle year of the 20-year period. As WMO put it, “1.5 degrees C of warming would only be confirmed once the observed temperature has reached that level over a 20-year period, 10 years after the year of exceedance. Thus, there would be a 10-year delay in recognizing and reacting to exceedance of the long-term temperature goal.” The scientific community is considering alternative approaches that would require less delay to confirm the year of exceedance.

Has the Earth Already Exceeded 1.5 Degrees C of Warming?

Yes, but it hasn’t yet breached the Paris Agreement’s temperature goal.

2024 was the first full year on record in which the global average temperature was more than 1.5 degrees C above pre-industrial levels, with an estimated anomaly of 1.55 degrees C. This continued an alarming pattern in which the 10 warmest years on record have all occurred since 2015. Prior to 2024, no full year had seen such a large temperature anomaly; though there were shorter periods — days, weeks and months — for which temperatures temporarily exceeded 1.5 degrees C. The WMO forecasts a 70% chance that the next five years will exceed 1.5 degrees C on average.

Importantly, a single hot year does not mean the Paris Agreement temperature goal has been breached or is no longer within reach. The global long-term average temperature anomaly is currently estimated at around 1.34 degrees C to 1.41 degrees C, depending on the method used.

Nevertheless, two recent climate modeling studies suggest that last year’s high temperatures likely mean the world has already entered the 20-year period in which the average temperature anomaly will breach the 1.5 degrees C limit.

What Happens if We Breach 1.5 Degrees C of Warming?

At current levels of 1.34 degrees C-1.41 degrees C of warming, we are already experiencing more frequent and intense heatwaves, wildfires, storms and floods. Food and water security are under growing pressure. Ecosystems like coral reefs are suffering irreversible damage. Surpassing 1.5 degrees C — even temporarily — augments the risks associated with these and other impacts.

According to the IPCC, even warming of 1.5 degrees C would expose nearly 1 billion people to water stress and desertification, cost an estimated $63 billion in adaptation and residual damages to major crops, and put 14% of the world’s species at risk of extinction. About 24% more people would face flooding compared to historical levels, coral reefs would decline by 70-90%, and the distribution of malaria would expand.

These same climate impacts would intensify if we exceed 1.5 degrees of warming. For instance, relative to 1.5 degrees C of warming, 2 degrees C of warming is expected to cause twice as many heat waves in Southern Africa, 1.6 times as much area burnt by wildfires in Mediterranean Europe, and cost $17 billion more globally in residual damage and adaptation for major crops. 2 degrees C of warming would also functionally destroy coral reefs. Extreme heatwaves would become increasingly common, creating dire impacts on human health and productivity, especially in South Asian and African cities.

Breaching 1.5 degrees C also increases the risk of crossing tipping points — critical thresholds beyond which parts of Earth may undergo abrupt, self-perpetuating and potentially irreversible changes. For example, the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets are at risk of collapse, worsening sea-level rise and disrupting ocean currents. Low-latitude coral reefs could die off entirely, a devastating blow for biodiversity and those whose livelihoods depend on fisheries. And boreal permafrost may abruptly thaw, releasing vast quantities of climate-warming methane into the atmosphere.

These systems are at risk of crossing tipping points around 1.5 degrees C. At higher temperatures, additional ice sheets, ocean circulation systems and ecosystems could completely collapse. Many tipping points shift systems from one stable state to another — such as the Amazon rainforest turning to savannah. Once these kinds of shifts occur, it becomes very hard or even impossible to reverse them on human timescales.

The bottom line is that with every additional fraction of a degree of warming, the impacts become harder or even impossible to adapt to. This is what’s known as loss and damage. Losses and damages can be economic, such as shrinking industries and associated loss of jobs and livelihoods. But the toughest are often those that can’t be quantified in economic terms — such as the losing burial grounds, family homes and loved ones.

Is it Still Possible to Hold Warming to 1.5 Degrees C?

In theory, it is still physically possible to avoid spending down the carbon budget required to limit warming to 1.5 degrees C through rapid, sustained emissions reductions. But the plausibility of executing the transformations at the pace and scale required is another matter.

The 2022 IPCC report on climate change mitigation identifies pathways for limiting warming to 1.5 degrees C with no or limited overshoot. They entail “rapid and deep and, in most cases, immediate greenhouse gas reductions in all sectors.” Specifically, greenhouse gas emissions would have peaked before 2025 and would decline by 43% by 2030 (from 2019 levels), and by 60% by 2035. CO2 emissions would reach net zero by around 2050, before exhausting the carbon budget. Concretely, this would involve phasing out unabated fossil fuel consumption, dramatically scaling up zero-carbon power, expanding sustainable transport, electrifying transport and industry, and halting deforestation. Removal of carbon from the atmosphere — by uptake in trees and through technologies — would also need to scale up dramatically.

The problem is that we are not following those pathways. The State of Climate Action report found that of 42 key milestones needed to limit warming to 1.5 degrees C, only one — the share of electric vehicles in light-duty vehicle sales — is currently on track for 2030. Despite significant increases in renewable energy capacity and electric vehicle sales, nearly 80% of global energy still comes from fossil fuels, the world is burning more coal than ever before, and deforestation continues at alarming rates. Coal and gas infrastructure continue to expand.

As a result, the world still emits 42 GtCO2 per year (and an additional 14 GtCO2e of other greenhouse gases). The remaining carbon budget to limit warming to 1.5 degrees C is 130 Gt CO2, which will be consumed in just over three years at current annual rates.

In simple, back-of-the-envelope terms, a linear path from 2024 CO2 emissions to net-zero CO2 emissions that stays within the remaining carbon budget would require cutting emissions by nearly 6 Gt CO2 per year, starting immediately and for the rest of the decade. For comparison, the economic shock during the COVID-19 pandemic caused CO2 emissions to drop by only  2 Gt in 2020, and the decline was temporary.

Achieving sustained emissions cuts of the magnitude needed would require unprecedented political and corporate leadership, backed by citizens, leading to a comprehensive and coordinated structural transformation across sectors and economies. There is scant evidence that such a deep transformation is poised to begin in the near future. One recent study found that while it is still theoretically possible to limit warming to below 1.6 degrees C at around 50% likelihood, the probability drops to between 5% and 45% when considering institutional and other barriers.

All these factors suggest that long-term average temperatures are likely to surpass 1.5 degrees C, at least temporarily. By how much, and for how long, is still very much in play.

Should a New Goal Be Chosen if 1.5 Degrees C Is Surpassed?

As skepticism about the feasibility of the 1.5 degrees C goal has grown, some scientists have proposed refocusing attention on limiting warming to “well below 2 degrees C” or returning warming to 1.5 degrees C after temporarily overshooting it. But adopting new benchmarks consistent with a higher temperature outcome poses another challenge: If derived from the modeling scenarios available today, these benchmarks would have the world reduce emissions more slowly and phase out fossil fuels later than we currently aim to do — an ineffective response to increasingly severe climate impacts. 

At the same time, our rhetoric should acknowledge the evolving reality. If long-term global average temperature rise surpasses 1.5 degrees C, it will no longer make sense to frame action in terms of what’s required “to avoid breaching the 1.5 degrees C limit.” Instead, we can refer to minimizing overshoot, stabilizing at the lowest feasible temperature, and avoiding as much warming as we can to protect people’s lives and economies.

A young girl carries water through an informal settlement in Johannesburg, South Africa. Many African cities face extreme heat, water scarcity and other impacts of climate change. Photo by Joe Eldridge/Alamy Stock Photo What Should We Do If the World Surpasses 1.5 Degrees C?

If 1.5 degrees C falls out of reach, the world should still do what it ought to be doing today: rapidly reducing emissions and enhancing removals, while stepping up efforts to build resilience. Because warming will continue to increase until CO2 emissions reach net zero, reducing net emissions will remain critical. And because most adaptation planning scenarios already envision the possibility of exceeding 1.5 degrees C, it is more important to ensure those plans are implemented than to develop new plans for higher-temperature scenarios.

Breaching 1.5 degrees C, however, does augment the scale and pace of action ultimately required, and may introduce new risks and trade-offs. For example, the further we exceed the carbon budget, the more CO2 will need to be removed from the atmosphere, demanding greater investment in CO2 removal. While most adaptation plans already account for higher temperatures, reaching those levels earlier shortens the planning horizon. Failing to keep pace could increase costs, result in inadequate adaptation, or even compound the risk of maladaptation. The world would also need to prepare to address higher levels of loss and damage, consequences of climate change that exceed what people can adapt to. Finally, breaching the established temperature goal may lend salience to controversial solar radiation modification (SRM) approaches that would temporarily cool the planet by reflecting sunlight. While SRM is risky and untested, its relatively low direct cost and potential to stem near-term warming point to the potential for unilateral deployment, which would require more proactive oversight and governance.

And while surpassing 1.5 degrees C is increasingly likely, the extent and duration of warming — and its associated impacts — remain within our control. Limiting peak warming will require deep and sustained emissions cuts, maintaining and enhancing carbon sinks, and strengthening resilience. Achieving these outcomes depends not only on geophysical and technological factors, but also on a step change in political and corporate leadership. Leaders must foster the right economic conditions for clean technologies to take hold, adopt public policies that catalyze investment in emissions reductions and resilience, and ensure people see economic and social benefits from low-carbon development.

Ultimately, every fraction of a degree matters. Decisions made today will continue to shape climate risk for generations to come.

installing-solar-panel-china.jpg Climate climate change greenhouse gases extreme weather climate science Paris Agreement Type Explainer Exclude From Blog Feed? 0 Authors Taryn Fransen

Johannesburg to Restore Urban Rivers Using Lessons from Durban shannon.paton@… Wed, 06/18/2025 - 09:50

South Africa’s cities face growing threats to their water resources, especially rivers, as rapid development and climate change undermine the health of water systems and the ecosystem services they provide. Urban areas are particularly vulnerable to serious flood risks during extreme weather events.

Without effective river management, cities risk losing out on valuable financial, socioeconomic, human and ecological benefits. In contrast, well-managed rivers enhance the delivery of municipal services, improve adaptation capacity and boost resilience to climate shocks.

The eThekwini Municipality, which includes the city of Durban, is one of the first South African cities to take steps to protect and revitalize its rivers. Its work has become an example for others to follow, including Johannesburg, where WRI and partners are helping improve its water resilience.

What Did eThekwini Do to Build Water Resilience?

eThekwini’s rapid economic growth, intense urbanization and climate change have degraded its natural ecosystems. Many of its rivers and coastlines are affected by pollution, while its coastal forests and wetlands are being lost to housing development or invasive species.

In response to climate-induced environmental damage to communities and infrastructure, eThekwini Municipality launched South Africa’s first Transformative Riverine Management Program (TRMP) in 2020. With support from C40 City Finance Facility, eThekwini embarked on the long journey of transforming the management of its rivers and bringing them back to life.  Through the TRMP — eThekwini has developed a high-level roadmap and business case for the rehabilitation and protection of its riverine assets.

 Its TRMP was the first to clearly link effective riverine management with the longevity of both natural and urban infrastructure and showed how every rand spent would yield 1.8 to 3.4 times in holistic benefits. eThekwini also created its Catchment Partnership Development Frameworks to guide climate adaptation and risk mitigation in specific river catchments, using spatial planning and corridor management to protect residents and infrastructure.

Johannesburg Co-Develops Plan to Build Water Resilience

Through the SUNCASA (Scaling Urban Nature-Based Solutions for Climate Adaptation in Sub-Saharan Africa) project, WRI and International Institute of Sustainable Development (IISD) are working with local partners to restore the riverine areas of the Upper Jukskei River and enhance urban forestry. The consortium of local partners includes the City of Johannesburg, Johannesburg City Parks and Zoo, Zutari, Johannesburg Inner City Partnership, Alexandra Water Warriors, GenderCC and Water for the Future.

Johannesburg, along with neighboring municipalities Tshwane and Ekurhuleni, has one of the region’s highest population densities and most degraded rivers whose hydrological boundaries are shared between the cities. The buildup of solid waste and debris, along with alien invasive plants, in the Jukskei River has increased flood risk.

Through the SUNCASA project, Zutari is leading the development of a TRMP, which includes a riverine management program and business case for the restoration of the Upper Jukskei — highlighting the first 15-kilometer (9-mile) stretch from the start of the river in the city center to Alexandra.

Initial TRMP assessments indicate that neighborhoods like Alexandra present the greatest opportunity for intervention. Hydro-ecological and socioeconomic vulnerability assessments found that infrastructure and communities near Queen’s Wetland in Bez Valley and Alexandra — where flood plains have been transformed or encroached — are most at risk. The assessments highlight how apartheid-era inequalities have left high-density, low-income neighborhoods especially vulnerable to climate, economic and social risks.

A Personal Computer Storm Water Management Model (PCSWMM) model was used to develop high-level flood extents for the Jukskei River’s path across Johannesburg. The map shows the extent of flooding in Johannesburg’s Alexandra Township. Image by Zutari/SUNCASA The map shows the extent of flooding in the Queens Wetland and Bruma Lake neighborhoods. Image by Zutari/SUNCASA

These insights, along with ongoing assessments, will inform the TRMP and business case for the Upper Jukskei in Johannesburg.

Sharing Knowledge Between Cities

In February 2025, WRI facilitated a knowledge exchange between four municipalities — eThekwini, Johannesburg, Tshwane and Ekurhuleni — to share lessons from the eThekwini TRMP and support other cities in developing their own programs.

The event drew stakeholders across local government, civil society, the private sector and NGOs. eThekwini shared insights on the processes and motivations behind the development of its TRMP, as well as mechanisms to ensure sustainability and implementation. Johannesburg also shared why it embarked on developing a TRMP and reported on progress to date.

Takeaways from the Exchange:

1. Rivers cross borders: In Gauteng, rivers flow in and out of different municipalities. It is important, particularly in this region, that local governments work together to address riverine management.
2. Collecting learning accelerates progress: Sharing insights and knowledge across municipalities is essential for regional urban resilience.
3. Shared responsibility: Local governments must work closely with all stakeholders — including all city government departments, civil society organizations, communities and the private sector — to drive action toward urban water resilience. Strong partnerships and communication channels create the enabling environment needed for greater impact.

The knowledge exchange between four municipalities shared insights from eThekwini’s TRMP experience to help other South African cities develop their own programs. Photo by John Mmnekoa/Alexandra Water Warriors What’s Next?

Over the next year, Zutari will conduct climate change risk and vulnerability assessments, a riverine management model and cost-benefit analysis to inform Johannesburg’s TRMP and the business case for the Upper Jukskei. Zutari and partners will also prepare an implementation framework and investment briefs to support the city in scaling up riverine management.

WRI will continue facilitating collaboration between Johannesburg, Tshwane and Ekurhuleni through the SUNCASA project and, together with IISD, will also support the city in structuring funding opportunities. This will help expand the TRMP approach to other river systems in Johannesburg and neighboring municipalities, building urban resilience through integrated catchment management.

To scale these efforts, WRI’s Green-Gray Infrastructure Accelerator aims to embed nature-positive approaches in urban development through policy instruments, a portfolio of Green-Gray Infrastructure projects and innovative financing to deliver climate-resilient outcomes in Johannesburg.

design-sem-nome-1.png Freshwater South Africa Urban Development urban water resilience Cities Freshwater Type Project Update Exclude From Blog Feed? 0 Projects

• Urban Development
• Urban Water Resilience Initiative

Authors Amanda Gcanga Nikara Mahadeo Mulalo Mbedzi

Cutting Cattle Methane through Feed Additives: Lessons from Early Adoption and the Road Ahead margaret.overh… Tue, 06/17/2025 - 10:00

Ruminants — cattle, sheep and goats — are a major source of greenhouse gas emissions. Methane produced during their digestion, known as "enteric methane," accounts for nearly 60% of agricultural methane emissions and over 25% of all human-caused methane emissions. Methane is a potent greenhouse gas with more than 80 times the warming power of CO2 over two decades.

While livestock methane is inherently tough to tackle, new techniques are emerging that offer a path forward. A recent WRI report outlined over 25 ways to reduce agricultural methane emissions, some of which show significant promise. In developing countries, a practical solution is to boost meat and milk yields per animal by improving feed — using better grazing, higher quality forages, supplemental crops or treated crop residues. But in developed countries, where productivity is already near its ceiling, reducing emissions will require newer and more innovative approaches.

The most rapidly emerging option today involves using feed additives to curb methane production during cows' digestion. This has been shown to reduce enteric methane emissions by around 30% in feedlots.

But while feed additives are seeing some early uptake, they have yet to be widely adopted. Cost can be a barrier, alongside regulatory hurdles, infrastructure challenges and farmer skepticism. Further scaling these solutions will require the right policies as well as financial investment and innovation.

The key question is: What can governments and the private sector do to accelerate adoption?

Promising Science, Unscaled Solutions

A range of solutions to reduce enteric methane are moving beyond research and into early commercial use. Methane-inhibiting feed additives are furthest along in science thanks to decades of research, a relatively clear understanding of how they inhibit methane, and regulatory progress. Feed additives reduce emissions by 30% on average, with some showing reductions of over 90%. And strong private sector investment and public-private partnerships are helping boost adoption, bringing them closer to widespread use. (Other approaches involving genetics or antimethane vaccines remain in early-stage research due to cost, longer development timelines and limited field validation.)

Today, most companies have their eyes on two specific methane inhibitors: 3-nitroxypropanol (3-NOP; commercially available under the trade name Bovaer) and an active ingredient from red seaweed called bromoform.

3-NOP works — but not everywhere, and not always

Among the various methane-reducing feed additives, 3-NOP stands out as the most widely approved and commercially advanced option. Developed by DSM-Firmenich and marketed in the U.S. by Elanco, it has received regulatory approval in over 65 countries. This far surpasses other methane inhibitors, many of which are still in early research phases or approved only in limited markets.

• Mechanism: Inhibits methane production in a cow's stomach when fed (¼ tablespoon to 1 tablespoon per cow daily).
• Impact: Cuts methane emissions by approximately 30% in dairy cattle and up to 45% in beef cattle.
• Adoption: Approved for use in 65+ countries, including the U.S., EU, Australia, Brazil, Canada and the U.K.
• Cost: About $100-150 per cow per year. (This translates to roughly 2-4 cents more per gallon of milk in the U.S.)

While methane inhibitors like 3-NOP show strong potential for reducing emissions, widespread adoption hinges on more than just regulatory approval — it requires clear economic incentives for farmers. These additives come with upfront costs and require changes to feeding practices, so financial support mechanisms are essential to make adoption viable at scale. While various mechanisms for widescale adoption are emerging, there is still no clarity on what would work best in different contexts.

For example, in the U.S., a growing number of farms are adopting 3-NOP through emerging carbon credit programs. Farmers track and report their emissions data using digital tools, which feed into third-party platforms that verify reductions and generate carbon credits. These credits are then purchased by food companies looking to meet their own climate targets — a model known as "insetting," where companies invest in emissions reductions within their own supply chains.

In Brazil, limited commercial trials are underway to explore the use of methane-reducing feed additives like 3-NOP, with early efforts looking to carbon credits and emerging green finance frameworks as potential tools to support adoption. These frameworks aim to align agricultural practices with national climate goals and could, in theory, help channel investment into low-carbon technologies. Adoption is also growing in Europe and Canada, particularly in dairy systems that benefit from strong regulatory and incentive support.

In Southeast Asia and Africa, the focus is largely on improving feed efficiency rather than on methane inhibitors. However, 3-NOP is gaining regulatory traction and interest across these regions, too. It has been approved in Japan, South Korea, China and South Africa, and is drawing attention in other countries.

Despite its early success, 3-NOP faces challenges. Cost remains a barrier in regions without strong incentives. And its impact can diminish over time, particularly as cows progress through their lactation cycle or consume high-fiber diets such as crop residues (which is common in Africa and South Asia). Many companies also prefer to conduct their own trials before scaling up, and uncertainty around methane accounting standards continues to slow broader adoption.

Bromoform offers high potential but faces scrutiny

No single solution will be enough to reduce enteric methane emissions on its own. 3-NOP's ongoing challenges highlight the need for complementary solutions.

One promising alternative is bromoform, a compound found in certain species of red seaweed, specifically those belonging to the Asparagopsis family. While seaweed itself is being explored as a feed additive and can offer some additional benefits, it's not as effective as the synthetic version of bromoform and is expensive to produce. Seaweed is like drinking herbal tea for a headache; bromoform is like taking ibuprofen. The tea might help, but you need a lot of it. The pill works faster and with a much smaller amount. Even in very small doses, synthetic bromoform can reduce methane emissions by over 90%.

• Mechanism: Inhibits methane production in a cow's stomach.
• Impact: Pure bromoform is observed to almost eliminate methane formation. Recent animal studies have shown more than 90% methane reduction.
• Adoption: Not yet approved for use, though several pilot trials are underway in Australia, the EU and the U.S.
• Cost: The cost of chemically synthesized bromoform is unknown; however, it is likely to be significantly lower than red seaweed, which currently appears to cost around $300-$500 per cow, per year.

While promising, bromoform comes with strong challenges, especially from a regulatory perspective. In high amounts, bromoform can pass into milk and meat, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency classifies it as a probable human carcinogen. The good news is that the doses proposed for livestock feed are only about 1% of those used in safety studies, so the risk of bromoform entering the food supply is very low. The main concern is limiting its environmental release, as bromoform is a volatile compound that can pose a risk to the ozone layer and may contaminate drinking water if concentrations exceed safe limits. And for people who handle the chemical, as even small exposures could pose health risks.

Although bromoform will need more regulatory scrutiny, its methane reduction potential is very high. In the future, a combined approach — using 3-NOP alongside tiny amounts of bromoform — could offer a more powerful and scalable way to reduce methane emissions from livestock.

Governments Can Enable Innovation and Adoption

Regardless of the technology, reducing livestock methane at scale will require coordinated action across sectors, with governments, companies and public-private partnerships each playing a critical role.

On the part of governments, this will take:

1) Policies supporting innovation

Governments can play a pivotal role in scaling agricultural climate solutions by creating policies that both mandate and support innovation. For example, Denmark's climate strategy requires all dairy farms with more than 50 cows to use methane-reducing feed additives. This includes options for 3-NOP or other innovative additives. The policy complements Denmark's Green Tripartite Agreement, which introduced an agricultural emissions tax from 2030. Farmers who have enrolled in 2024-2025 and apply for a government subsidy will receive full cost reimbursements for additives in 2026.

2) Clarify and streamline regulatory approval pathways

Methane-reducing feed additives must be rigorously evaluated for safety to animals, humans and the environment. This is often a lengthy process, and the lack of standardized protocols across countries leads to duplicated efforts, higher compliance costs and trade inefficiencies. While all jurisdictions require strong evidence of efficacy and safety, the specifics of study design and documentation vary widely.

For example, methane inhibitors are categorized as "veterinary drugs" in the U.S., "zootechnical substances" in the EU, "gut modifiers" in Canada and "methane reducing agents" in South Korea — highlighting the complexity of achieving global alignment for approval and adoption.

This presents a unique opportunity to align regulatory frameworks globally — ideally in coordination with international climate goals like the Global Methane Pledge or the Paris Agreement. Early collaboration between scientists, companies and regulators is essential to streamline approvals and ensure that innovations can scale efficiently across markets

3) Integrate agricultural methane into nationally determined contributions (NDCs)

To meet global climate goals like those in the Global Methane Pledge, countries are being encouraged to include livestock methane in their national climate plans ("known as nationally determined contributions" or "NDCs"). By the end of 2023, only 22% of countries had methane-specific targets in their NDCs, and only about a third of those addressed agricultural methane.

The latest international guidance by the Climate and Clean Air Coalition (CCAC) outlines practical measures that can be taken at different levels to address the issue:

• At the animal level, this means making sure animals have enough good-quality feed, adjusting their diets to reduce methane, using methane-reducing additives like 3-NOP in feedlots, keeping animals healthy, and breeding animals that naturally produce less methane.
• At the herd level, it involves managing livestock more efficiently — like reducing the number of animals kept just for breeding, shortening the time it takes to raise animals for meat, and focusing on more productive animals.
• At the farm level, farmers can improve pastures, grow plants that help reduce methane and make better use of crop residues as animal feed.

Including these actions in their NDCs can help countries cut emissions quickly while also supporting farmers, improving food systems and protecting the environment.

Companies Must Move from Commitments to Implementation

Companies with beef and dairy in their portfolios have a direct role in advancing enteric methane solutions. Beyond goal setting and reporting, companies can support field-level implementation. This includes funding pilot programs with producers, helping scale additives or improved nutrition strategies, and co-investing in producer support services. In some cases, this may involve premium pricing or carbon-credit generation; in others, it may mean collaborating on technical assistance or infrastructure. For real progress, the focus should shift towards enabling measurable emissions reductions on farms.

1) Invest in the "unattractive" science

3-NOP's growing success illustrates why the private sector must be willing to fund early-stage, high-risk research that may not appear commercially viable at first. It took years of mechanistic development, repeated trials and sustained investment before the additive became a breakthrough solution for enteric methane reduction. This kind of foundational science is essential for unlocking future markets and regulatory pathways.

We need more — and more cost-effective — solutions to cover all geographies and all production systems (e.g. confined feedlots, pastures, smallholder farms). Companies that invest early will have an opportunity to shape the innovation landscape and position themselves as leaders in methane mitigation.

2) Demonstrate what works in different contexts

To translate scientific breakthroughs into real-world impact, companies should co-invest in scalable, context-specific on-farm demonstrations. Rather than relying on generic farm trials, these efforts should showcase methane-inhibiting feed additives, such as 3-NOP, bromoform and other emerging technologies, under local conditions and within actual production systems.

Embedding these demonstrations in real-world supply chains (for example, through dairy processors or beef integrators) can ensure the practical application of these solutions in various contexts. Importantly, trials should not only measure emissions reductions but also highlight economic and productivity co-benefits, making the case for adoption across diverse stakeholders.

3) Collaborate early: Pre-competitive research and data sharing

While regulatory agencies still require product-specific data, shared research that involves early collaboration between scientists, companies, farmers, extension specialists and regulatory bodies can help in two ways. First, it can establish a general scientific consensus around the safety and effectiveness of certain types or chemical classes of additives. Second, pre-competitive research can be designed in consultation with regulatory bodies to align with approval requirements from the start. By using validated methods, standardized protocols and transparent reporting, collaborative studies can generate data that regulators are more likely to accept or reference. This reduces duplication, builds trust and could define clearer pathways for approval.

Initiatives such as Enteric Fermentation R&D Accelerator are encouraging pre-competitive collaboration, and more companies should invest in this and similar R&D programs.

This will require some tough conversations about open data sharing. But the goal isn't for everyone to do the same thing — it's to build a common understanding of science, so each company can innovate from a stronger foundation during the competitive stage. Think of it like building a road together, then racing their own cars on it.

4) Incentivize adoption through price premiums and market signals

To scale methane-reducing solutions in livestock, we need more than innovation — we need demand. The biggest challenge is getting farmers on board. A company can't mandate change; instead, it has to understand farmers' contexts and work within them. Ultimately, there won't be a one-size-fits-all solution.

One promising approach comes from Fonterra, which offers price premiums to farmers who reduce emissions. What makes this model effective is its flexibility: Farmers can choose the intervention that works best for their operation, whether it's a feed additive, improved grazing or another practice. This kind of incentive aligns environmental goals with business realities and sends a clear signal that low-emissions products are valued.

At the same time, food and retail companies can play a big role in creating demand for low-emissions livestock products. One way to do this is by changing how they buy their products to reward suppliers who can prove they're reducing methane. This could mean offering better prices, long-term contracts or other benefits to farmers who use climate-friendly practices. Companies can also help farmers get ready to participate in carbon markets by supporting programs that link feed additives or other practices to verified emissions reductions. 

Finally, to reduce methane emissions from their supply chains, consumer-facing companies can shift the mix of what they source and serve toward lower-emissions products. This could include other meats (such as poultry) or plant-based or alternative proteins.

Public-Private Partnerships Can Help Scale Success

In agriculture, public-private partnerships have already demonstrated their ability to deliver tangible results. They combine the innovation and efficiency of the private sector with the public sector's ability to create enabling environments and ensure broader social benefits. When applied to methane mitigation, these partnerships can help build the infrastructure needed to modernize livestock systems, reduce financial and technical barriers to adoption, and ensure that solutions are designed for — and tested in — the places where they're most needed.

1) Strengthen R&D capacity building in developing nations

Developing countries are home to roughly half — likely more — of the world's ruminant livestock. However, most R&D data is generated in wealthier countries, where access to laboratories, equipment and testing facilities is more readily available. If methane-reducing solutions are to be effective and applicable across diverse regions, it is essential to strengthen research capacity in developing nations. This includes investing in local infrastructure, training programs, and collaborative partnerships that enable scientists and producers to create and test solutions suited to their specific environments.

2) Develop advance market commitments

Advance market commitments (AMCs) are legally binding agreements in which funders — typically governments or philanthropic organizations — commit to purchasing a specified quantity of a product or service once it meets agreed-upon performance criteria. This mechanism creates a guaranteed market, reducing financial risk and encouraging private sector investment in innovations that serve the public good.

AMCs have already proven successful in areas like the global health sector. For example, a $1.5 billion commitment to purchase pneumonia vaccines for low-income countries helped spur the vaccines' development and distribution to more than 150 million children.

In the livestock sector, AMCs could help accelerate the development and adoption of methane-reducing technologies. This is especially true in the beef industry, where progress is slower than in the dairy sector. In theory, an AMC could offer a per-unit subsidy for any product that achieves a defined emissions reduction target, such as cutting methane per unit of milk or beef by 20%.

Unlike grants or upfront investments, AMCs only pay for success: firms are compensated only if their product meets the criteria and is actually adopted by farmers. If a product works in theory but fails to gain traction due to cost, usability or side effects, it receives no payout. This "no adoption, no reward" principle may be a good upcoming mechanism to make sure public funds support real-world impact.

Coordinated Action for Scalable Impact

The science is clear, the tools are emerging, and the urgency is real. Reducing enteric methane emissions from livestock is no longer a distant ambition — it's a near-term opportunity to address climate change, strengthen food systems and unlock economic value.

But turning this opportunity into impact requires targeted action. Governments must create policies that enable innovation and adoption. The private sector needs to invest in and collaborate with farmers and researchers on context-specific farm trials that reflect the diversity of production systems.

Equally important is building R&D capacity in developing countries, where livestock systems are an indispensable source of income and the potential for methane mitigation is high. Supporting local innovation ecosystems is necessary for the equitable adoption of these methane mitigation solutions.

This is a global challenge that demands coordinated, cross-sector action. The window for impact is open — now is the time to act.

The author would like to thank Ermias Kebreab (UC Davis) and Charles Brooke (Spark Climate Solutions) for their valuable insights into this article.

cattle-feed.jpg Food GHG emissions Food Climate Type Technical Perspective Exclude From Blog Feed? 0 Related Resources and Data From Better Breeding to Cow-Burp Vaccines, Emerging Solutions Could Curb Agricultural Emissions Opportunities for Methane Mitigation in Agriculture: Technological, Economic and Regulatory Considerations Authors Swati Hegde

4 Takeaways from California’s Carbon Dioxide Removal Policies alicia.cypress… Tue, 06/17/2025 - 09:00

California has long been a national leader on ambitious climate policy and action. In 2006, the state passed landmark legislation that led to the first economywide cap-and-trade system. It later became the first state to set strict greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions standards for vehicles and, in 2022, approved a net-zero plan to eliminate GHG emissions by 2045 — five years ahead of the national net zero GHG target.

Now, California is leading the nation in its carbon dioxide removal (CDR) policies and actions to help meet the state’s climate goals. CDR approaches directly remove carbon dioxide (CO2) from the air and are needed alongside deep emissions reductions to reach net zero.

The carbon removal-related policies proposed or enacted in California over the past several years are among the first of their kind in the U.S. They include an innovative and ambitious set of proposals that can provide a model for other states looking to progress on carbon removal. California’s actions on carbon removal are also particularly important as uncertainty remains around federal policy support for CDR.

California’s Scoping Plan and Key Carbon Dioxide Removal Policies

In late 2022, the California Air Resources Board, the air pollution regulator in California, adopted the state’s latest Scoping Plan, which serves as a roadmap for how California can reach net-zero GHG emissions by 2045 or sooner. Although it does not create any laws, it serves as a guide for agencies and regulators. The 2022 Scoping Plan also lays out specific targets for carbon removal in California: 7 million metric tons of CO2 in 2030 and 75 million metric tons of CO2 in 2045.

These targets cover both natural and working lands (such as croplands, forests or grasslands), as well as novel technological approaches, such as direct air capture and biomass carbon removal. However, because the Scoping Plan anticipates only around 1.5 million metric tons of CO2 removal per year through 2045 from natural and working lands, most of the removal needed to meet these two targets is expected to come from newer technological methods.

In Switzerland, the company Climeworks installed direct air capture technology on top of a garbage incinerator in Hinwil, outside of Zurich. Technologies like this, used to extract carbon dioxide from the air, are what California is creating its policies and legislation around. Photo by Orjan Ellingvag / Alamy Stock Photo. 

As California works to meet these goals, it is at the forefront of scaling up carbon dioxide removal and developing regulatory frameworks to guide responsible deployment.

At the same time, California’s cap-and-trade system is currently set up to operate through 2030, so discussions have begun on reauthorizing the program to extend its lifetime and help the state meet its climate goals. Depending on whether the reauthorization is a simple extension of the program’s lifetime or a more extensive revision of the program, cap-and-trade reauthorization could include broader changes that may affect carbon removal development and deployment in the state.   

Existing and Proposed Policies and Activities in California Relevant to CDRLegislationDetailsStatusCarbon sequestration: state goals: natural and working lands: registry of projects (SB 27)Establishes and maintains a directory of projects for carbon sequestration from natural and working lands and direct air capture.Signed into law in 2021.California Climate Crisis Act (AB 1279)Establishes legal target of 85% emission reductions and net zero emissions by 2045.Signed into law in 2022.Carbon Sequestration: Carbon Capture, Removal, Utilization and Storage Program (SB 905)Establishes a regulatory foundation to govern the safe deployment of carbon dioxide capture, removal, utilization and sequestration.Signed into law in 2022.California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006: climate goal: natural and working lands (AB 1757)Establishes targets for carbon sequestration from natural and working lands for 2030, 2038 and 2045 that are incorporated into the Scoping Plan.Signed into law in 2022.Net zero greenhouse gas emissions goal: carbon dioxide removal: regulations (SB 285)Would create requirements for carbon removal used to counterbalance residual emissions in California.  Held in Senate committee.  Carbon Dioxide Removal Purchase Program (SB 643)Would require CARB to procure $50 million worth of CDR credits before 2035.Passed Senate. Advancing to Assembly committee consideration.Marine Carbon Initiative (AB 1086)Would establish a Marine Carbon Council to advance scientific understanding of mCDR and a Marine Carbon Research Program to fund research projects up to $2 million per year.Held in Assembly committee.Carbon Dioxide Removal Market Development Act (SB 308)

The 2023 version would have required emitting entities to purchase increasing amounts of carbon removal to counterbalance their emissions.

The 2024 revision would have required CARB to adopt regulations to ensure the state scales CDR to a level needed to reach net zero in 2045.

2023 version passed Senate, but not the Assembly. 2024 version did not pass the Senate Appropriations committee.Air resources: carbon emissions: biomass (SB 88)Directs CARB and the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection to develop a system to quantify the lifecycle emissions of biomass removed from wildfire mitigation treatments in forests, including its use for CDR.Passed Senate. Advancing to Assembly committee consideration.

Note: Updated June 2025.

California’s Innovative Policy Directions

California is the only U.S. state so far that has set a specific quantitative target for scaling up carbon removal. Complementing this, the state has begun to develop a broader regulatory framework to meet these targets as well as emerging efforts to support early stage research and development of novel approaches.

1) Setting Targets to Ensure Climate Impact

The California Climate Crisis Act, or AB 1279, was signed into law in September 2022 and requires net-zero greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) by 2045 and net-negative emissions thereafter. It mandates at least 85% emissions reductions from 1990 levels by 2045, ensuring that carbon dioxide removal (CDR) does not delay ambitious emissions reductions as the state approaches net zero.

One concern around CDR is that it could reduce or delay efforts to cut GHG emissions and enable continued oil and gas production. By placing legal requirements on the minimum amount of emission reductions needed by mid-century, AB 1279 helps ensure that the state’s priority remains on reducing emissions and that carbon removal plays a complementary role.

Other states, particularly those with net-zero targets, should ensure that emissions reduction remains the top priority in reaching net zero, which can be done by establishing minimum emission reduction levels (for example, 85% or higher) as part of the overall target. Besides California, New York has also set an 85% emissions reduction requirement and Washington has set a legally binding 95% GHG emission reduction goal by 2050. Both are part of broader goals to reach net zero by 2050.

Beyond requiring specific levels of emission reductions, other states with net-zero targets could also consider making the role of CDR more explicit — for instance, estimating the expected level of residual emissions to be counterbalanced by carbon removal, distinguishing between the role of enhancing natural carbon sinks and scaling up novel technological carbon removal approaches, as California has also done in its Scoping Plan.

A bicyclist rides along the beach past a factory in Manhattan Beach, California. A proposed rule would require emitters to purchase carbon removal credits to offset their emissions. Photo by rarpia/iStock.

While California’s Scoping Plan relies exclusively on direct air capture and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage for durable CDR, there is a broad range of carbon removal approaches that should be considered (with some approaches being more applicable in some states than others) including carbon mineralization, seaweed cultivation and other types of biomass carbon removal. Previous analysis looking at carbon removal potential in California found that biomass conversion to hydrogen with carbon capture could play a large role. WRI’s research has found that burial of biomass residues from wildfire treatments could also provide effective long-duration carbon removal.   

California has also set targets for increasing sequestration in natural and working lands. AB 1757 establishes targets for carbon sequestration from natural and working lands for the years 2030, 2038 and 2045. As directed by AB 1757, potential carbon removal from natural and working lands is incorporated into the state’s Scoping Plan. Projects that increase sequestration on natural and working lands are also tracked via a registry established by SB 27 in 2021.  

2) Developing a Governance Framework for Carbon Dioxide Removal  

SB 905, also known as the Carbon Sequestration: Carbon Capture, Removal, Utilization and Storage Program, was signed into law at the same time as AB 1279 in September 2022. This bill directs California state agencies to establish the regulatory foundation for carbon dioxide removal (CDR) and carbon capture, utilization and sequestration (CCUS) projects.

What is the difference between CDR and CCUS?

The two processes are distinct from one another: Carbon capture, utilization and sequestration (CCUS) technology captures emissions at the source, while carbon dioxide removal (CDR) approaches directly remove it from the air. However, some carbon removal approaches — like direct air capture — can share infrastructure with carbon capture approaches. Therefore, SB 905 will create a regulatory framework around both sets of technologies. 

SB 905 directs the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to create a program in California aimed at accelerating the deployment of both CCUS and CDR. It calls for regulation on six key issues: permitting, financial responsibility, safety and monitoring, pipelines, unitization and storage. The bill also requires CARB to adopt regulations to minimize GHG emissions, co-pollutants, air and water pollution, seismic impacts and potential health and safety risks to local communities, among many other things.

Since being signed into law in September 2022, the main proceeding around the creation of a Carbon Capture, Removal, Utilization and Storage Program kicked off in March 2025, while some of the regulatory proceedings around the individual key issues are underway. WRI submitted public comments addressing key considerations for financial responsibility, safety and monitoring, and published an article further exploring these issues.

Having one comprehensive regulatory framework that addresses key issues related to carbon capture, removal and sequestration, as will be the case once SB 905 has been fully implemented, is crucial to governing the safe and responsible deployment of carbon capture and carbon dioxide removal projects.

In February 2025, Democratic State Sen. Josh Becker introduced SB 285, which outlines what types of CDR would qualify to counterbalance residual emissions in California when the state reaches net-zero. While this bill did not advance out of Senate committee consideration, so will not move forward this year, it raises an important issue about how CDR is used.

A key element of this bill was the “like-for-like” concept, which would have required the expected duration of the carbon removal to either match the expected duration of the GHG in the atmosphere that it counterbalances or match the source from which it is emitted. For example, long-duration CDR would need to counterbalance fossil CO2, but shorter duration CDR, like some nature-based solutions, could counterbalance methane emissions as well as CO2 emissions from land use and forests. 

Such a provision would have been precedent-setting in legislation. It aligns with recommendations from some scientists and groups in the CDR community but has also raised concerns about unintended impacts on finance for forest protection and restoration. 

SB 88 directs CARB and the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection to develop a system for quantifying lifecycle emissions associated with utilization of biomass removed from wildfire mitigation treatments in forests, including the use of biomass for CDR. It would also require CARB to assess the suitability of developing a carbon credit protocol for biomass carbon removal. As of mid-June 2025, SB 88 passed out of the Senate and will go to the Assembly next. 

3) Increasing Demand for Carbon Removal in California

Democratic State Sen. Anna Caballero introduced SB 643, the Carbon Dioxide Removal Purchase Program, in February 2025. This bill would require CARB to establish and administer a program to purchase $50 million worth of CDR credits from eligible projects by the end of 2035. It includes requirements that no more than $25 million can be used on a single CDR category (e.g., direct air capture, biomass carbon removal and storage, enhanced mineralization and marine carbon dioxide removal) and no more than $12.5 million can go to a single CDR supplier. Both requirements help ensure a diversity of approaches and suppliers will be supported. The bill would require CARB to adopt guidelines for eligible carbon dioxide removal projects in 2026, require projects to be located within the state and prioritize projects that are geographically diverse and provide community benefits.

The Mojave Desert in Kern County, California is home to the Tehachapi Pass wind farm and has been a focal point for direct air capture development in the state. Photo by GaryKavanagh/iStock.

Under the Biden Administration, the Department of Energy led a procurement program to purchase $35 million in carbon removal, which the Trump administration is not continuing. CDR procurement bills have also been introduced in Massachusetts in 2023 and New York in 2022, but neither state passed them. If SB 643 passes, it would represent an important step forward for government procurement of CDR, making progress toward reaching California’s CDR goals and creating demand in the state.

As of mid-June 2025, SB 643 made it through the Senate and will go to the Assembly next.

In 2023, during California’s previous legislative session, Becker introduced the Carbon Dioxide Removal Market Development Act, or SB 308. While this bill was revised in 2024 and ultimately did not pass, it represents an innovative and ambitious policy formulation that could be reintroduced or modeled elsewhere.

In its original form, SB 308 would have required certain emitters to purchase CDR equivalent to an increasing amount of their emissions, up to 100% in 2045, when the state is committed to net-zero. Such an approach would have simultaneously incentivized emissions reductions and driven demand for CDR.

A revised version of the bill, updated in 2024, moved away from specifying that polluters pay for CDR. Instead it directed CARB to develop and adopt regulations to ensure that the state could meet its goal of scaling carbon removal to compensate for any continued emissions in 2045, thereby achieving net zero GHG emissions.

4) Increasing Understanding of Marine Carbon Removal

A third bill introduced in the 2025 legislative session, AB 1086, aimed to increase research and understanding of marine carbon dioxide removal (mCDR) approaches. It didn’t move out of Assembly committee consideration and will not advance this year, but represents an important effort to increase research and development funding for mCDR as the federal government steps back.

AB 1086 would have established a Marine Carbon Initiative consisting of a Marine Carbon Council and Marine Carbon Research Program. The council would have identified knowledge gaps and made recommendations to address them by 2028. By that same year, the research program would have been established to provide grants for mCDR projects.

What’s Next for Carbon Dioxide Removal Policy Across the US?

As the U.S. federal government appears unlikely to support carbon removal at the levels seen in past years, state-level action is more important than ever. While California is not the only state introducing and enacting policies to advance carbon removal, it is a leader and has taken innovative approaches that have not yet been tested in other states or federally.  

Although states across the U.S. have different political contexts and levels of interest in climate policy, the way that California has approached carbon removal in policy can provide valuable insights and potentially a model for other states on how to use target-setting to maximize climate impact, support demand creation and ensure there are governance frameworks in place. At the same time, given the magnitude of California’s commitment toward carbon removal — 75 million metric tons of CO2 per year by 2045 — there is still room for additional innovation and creativity to help achieve this ambitious goal.

This article was originally published in September 2023. It was last updated in June 2025, to reflect the latest state of play for California’s carbon removal policies.

sacramento-california-state-capitol-building.jpg U.S. Climate United States carbon removal U.S. Climate Policy-Direct Air Capture climate policy Type Explainer Exclude From Blog Feed? 0 Projects

• U.S. Climate Policy Resource Center
• Carbon Removal

Authors Katie Lebling Danielle Riedl Haley Leslie-Bole Dan Lashof