Sustainable Cities Challenge: Semi-Finalists to Increase Use of Low- and Zero-Carbon Transport Modes in Venice Announced
The Toyota Mobility Foundation announced the 10 semi-finalists for its Sustainable Cities Challenge in Venice, Italy. Developed in collaboration with the City of Venice, Challenge Works and World Resources Institute, the Challenge sought global innovators to present solutions to increase the use of existing low- and zero-carbon transport modes in Italy’s “City of Water.”
Despite a comprehensive transportation network in Venice, including low- and zero-carbon options such as buses, trains, trams, hybrid water buses and micromobility services, there’s been low public adoption of these services.
As part of the two-stage, three-year $9 million global Challenge, the Venice Sustainable Cities Challenge launched in June 2024, attracting 126 innovator entries from around the world to create solutions that will increase the use of low- and zero-carbon transportation.
The semi-finalists are:
- Betterpoints Ltd: BetterPoints is a behavior change technology company that encourages eco-friendly behavior while helping organizations achieve net-zero goals. Their solution will create an app, BetterPoints Italia, that rewards citizens with points (that can later be exchanged for vouchers) for switching from cars to more active and sustainable modes of travel.
- Bikeloop AS: Bikeloop is a cutting-edge green technology mobility company specializing in creating smart, secure and sustainable bicycle parking systems. Their solution will provide a comprehensive system for smart and secure bike parking integrated with value-added services, ensuring a safer and more convenient experience for cyclists in Venice.
- Factual Consulting SL: Factual is an innovation and strategy consulting firm committed to transforming mobility. They will use their platform, RIDEAL — a digital tool to manage multiple mobility incentive programs and mobility budgets — to encourage Venice to make more sustainable mobility choices.
- HCE S.R.L.: HCE is a web agency that has been designing and developing cutting-edge projects for international brands and agencies for more than 20 years. Their solution will foster behavioral change, especially in home-to-work commuting, by integrating two approaches: supporting and facilitating sustainable mobility promoters’ initiatives and raising awareness among citizens.
- Instant System SAS.: Instant System is a leading Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) provider, empowering over 100 cities and regions worldwide. Their MaaS platform integrates an intermodal trip planner with journey recognition, covering public transport, biking and shared mobility. Their solution will provide Venice’s transport users with gamified mobility profiles, nudging behavior change by simplifying access to the city’s diverse mobility options.
- ioki GmbH: ioki, the leading European technology company for digital mobility, offers data-based transport planning and innovative platform solutions. In Venice, ioki will create detailed microscopic simulations of daily movements and transport modes to identify key trip destinations that will inform the design of their intermodal solution for the city.
- Kooling Technologies Ltd: Kooling is a London-based, deep technology company focusing on addressing urban mobility challenges. To understand and influence Venice’s mobility trends, their solution, Every Street, combines insights from sensing technology and big data on individual mobility choices.
- My House Geek Pty Ltd (Bike Party): Bike Party is a social media application that allows people to organize group bicycle rides and provides cities a means of receiving feedback and data on active transport infrastructure in their jurisdiction. The company’s solution brings the application to Venice.
- Nudgd: Nudgd is a Swedish startup dedicated to driving sustainable behavior change through innovative digital nudging solutions. Their solution, the Smart Nudges Platform, integrates behavioral science with digital tools to encourage sustainable mobility habits. Through personalized, timely nudges embedded in apps, websites and digital signage, it motivates individuals to choose low-carbon transport modes.
- UrbanTide: UrbanTide helps organizations unlock the value of their data to support scalable solutions for sustainable transport and behavior change. Their solution, uMove_Venice, integrates city infrastructure and mobility data with an in-depth understanding of residents' motivations and usage.
The Challenge evaluated entries based on their potential to change citizen behavior by increasing use of active mobility, public transport and shared mobility. Semi-finalists will each receive a $50,000 implementation grant to help teams refine and localize their solutions to drive the use and adoption of existing low and zero-carbon transport modes in Venice.
“With 10 talented semi-finalists now selected, we look forward to working together with global innovators to encourage sustainable transport options for the people of Venice. The solutions that emerge from this Challenge can serve as a blueprint for other cities as well, inspiring a global shift toward low- and zero-carbon mobility,” said Monica Perez Lobo, director at Toyota Mobility Foundation Europe.
Challenge Works Director of Cities and Societies Kathy Nothstine said: “Announcing the 10 semi-finalists for Venice’s Sustainable Cities Challenge is a significant milestone. Sustainable transport solutions are about more than technology — they’re about understanding and meeting the needs of residents who benefit from these systems. This Challenge gives innovators the chance to test their ideas in a real-world context, exploring what truly impacts how people engage with transport in cities.”
“With the selection of these 10 semi-finalists, it’s exciting to see how innovators from around the world will respond to the Challenge and develop solutions to make Venice a more sustainable city,” said Ben Welle, director of Integrated Transport and Innovation at WRI Ross Center for Sustainable Cities. “The resulting innovations will directly benefit the people of Venice, and we hope these solutions can be applied to other cities worldwide, improving urban mobility on a broader scale.”
For more, visit the Sustainable Cities Challenge website.
Cities Urban Mobility transportation Type Project Update Exclude From Blog Feed? 0 ProjectsSTATEMENT: U.S. Can Boost Ocean-based Carbon Dioxide Removal with Bipartisan ReSCUE Oceans Act
Washington, DC (December 20, 2024) – Today in the U.S. Congress, Representatives Jenniffer González-Colón (R-PR), Suzanne Bonamici (D-OR) and Paul Tonko (D-NY) as well as Senator Brian Schatz (D-HI) introduced the bipartisan and bicameral Removing and Sequestering Carbon Unleashed in the Environment and Oceans (ReSCUE Oceans) Act.
The ReSCUE Oceans Act will provide additional federal funding and support to advance research, development, and demonstration of ocean-based carbon dioxide removal (CDR) approaches and technologies.
These actions are important because research shows that achieving global climate goals requires both deep and rapid reductions in greenhouse gas emissions as well as large-scale removal of excess carbon dioxide already present. The ocean covers 70% of the Earth and serves as its largest carbon sink, holding 42 times the carbon in the atmosphere.
Below is a statement from Christina DeConcini, Director of Government Affairs, U.S. Climate, World Resources Institute:
"Marine-based carbon dioxide removal could potentially extract billions of tons of carbon dioxide annually, but we need to better understand how effective various approaches are at removing and storing carbon and their potential impacts on local communities and the environment.
“The ReSCUE Oceans Act demonstrates there is bipartisan support for solving this challenge by directing more federal funding to conduct research and at-sea testing to better understand which approaches can be responsibly developed and deployed.
“We encourage other members of Congress to join their colleagues in seeking bipartisan climate solutions like the ReSCUE Oceans Act and advance this bill in the next Congress."
U.S. Climate United States carbon removal carbon removal legislation & policy Type Statement Exclude From Blog Feed? 02024 in Review: Our Biggest Stories on People, Nature and the Climate
2024 ushered in a new chapter of the climate crisis.
The world experienced its hottest year on record — with dire consequences for communities around the globe. Devastating floods destroyed lives and property in Brazil and Kenya. Wildfires scorched South America's forests. Blistering heat waves hit cities in India and the U.S.
But behind these stark headlines, we also saw signs of a better future starting to emerge — one where halting climate change is synonymous with growing economies and protecting nature.
In Brazil, farmers are reviving swathes of the Amazon through sustainable agriculture. In sub-Saharan Africa, distributed solar is expanding access to electricity while boosting incomes. In Vietnam, major companies like Apple and Nike are advocating for easier access to clean energy — and getting it.
At the global level, wealthy countries agreed at the recent UN climate summit in Baku, Azerbaijan triple their support for climate action in developing nations. It's still a far cry from what's needed, but a critical step toward getting finance flowing to the communities who need it most.
We brought you many of these stories on Insights. Whether reporting on water shortages in Ethiopia or writing from Baku to unpack the complexities of UN climate negotiations, WRI's experts analyzed today's most pressing challenges, explored solutions and pushed for higher ambition on the global stage.
Our biggest stories of the year span the breadth of this expertise, offering insight into the state of the world today and what's needed to secure the better future we know is possible.
Analyzing Today's ChallengesFires and Floods on the Rise2024 witnessed an onslaught of climate disasters, from record wildfires across South America to deadly floods in Kenya and Brazil. Our experts helped explain why these events are getting worse and how people are building resilience in unexpected ways.
What Could 3 Degrees C of Warming Look Like?What will happen if the world stays on course for nearly 3 degrees C of temperature rise this century? We modeled future heat waves and other climate risks in nearly 1,000 of the world's largest cities to find out. →
A rickshaw driver takes a drink during a heat wave in Dhaka, Bangladesh in April 2024. Photo by Mamunur Rashid/Shutterstock One-Quarter of World's Crops Threatened by Water RisksNew data on WRI's Aqueduct platform revealed that one-quarter of the world's crops are grown in areas where water is highly stressed, highly unreliable or both — threats that could exacerbate hunger. →
Tracking Deforestation Around the GlobeThe world lost an alarming number of trees in 2023: almost 10 football (soccer) fields of tropical primary forest per minute. But there were glimmers of progress, too, like Brazil and Colombia reducing primary forest loss by 36% and 49%, respectively. →
Community members unload tree seedlings to reforest a degraded area of the Amazon. Photo by Edward Parker/Alamy Stock Photo The History of Carbon Dioxide EmissionsOur visual history of carbon emissions shows which countries have contributed most to climate change — and how that list has changed over the last two centuries. →
Exploring SolutionsSmall Farmers Are Bringing Brazil's Amazon Back to LifeSmall-scale farmers are reviving abandoned palm oil plantations in the Amazon, showing that food production and healthy forests can go hand-in-hand. →
A New Solution to Power AfricaExpanding electricity access in Africa does little good if people can't afford it. But what if renewable power could also be used to boost people's incomes, tackling both issues at once? →
A nurse switches on the lights at a solar-powered health care facility in Tanzania. Photo by Jake Lyell/Alamy Stock Photo Our Health Depends on a Healthy OceanFrom staple foods to cancer-treating drugs, people everywhere rely on the ocean in more ways than they might realize — which means keeping it healthy should be a top priority. →
Is There Such a Thing As Better Meat?WRI research found that options like grass-fed and free-range meat, which are better for animals, often take a bigger toll on the planet than conventional farming. So, what's really the "better" option? →
Cows at pasture on a grass-fed cattle farm in Brazil. Photo by MS Cattle/Shutterstock Conserving Biodiversity Hinges on Indigenous RightsLands managed by Indigenous Peoples and local communities are some of the last biodiversity strongholds. But without secure legal rights, they can't always protect these pristine ecosystems from harm. →
Raising Global AmbitionTracking Progress on Global Climate PledgesWRI's climate commitment tracker takes stock of how countries are progressing on their promises to scale up renewables, halt deforestation, stem methane emissions and more. →
The Climate Action We Need This DecadeThe world is on track to cut emissions 1% by 2030. To prevent increasingly dangerous climate change impacts, that number needs to be 42% — a yawning gap, but one that's still possible to close. We outlined how. →
President-elect Donald Trump at a rally in Maryland. Photo by Jonah Elkowitz/Shutterstock Climate Action, Despite TrumpPresident Donald Trump's re-election was undoubtedly a blow to U.S. climate and environmental action — but not a death knell, say WRI experts. →
Stepping Up National Climate Commitments2025 will reveal a lot about where climate action is headed, with nearly all countries expected to submit new national commitments for the coming decade. Here's what to know. →
Denmark Sets a New Bar for AgricultureDenmark's groundbreaking agriculture policy is the most ambitious national effort yet to tackle the environmental impacts of farming while restoring nature, setting a new bar other countries should strive to meet. →
Explore more stories about the intersection of people, nature and climate on Insights.
solar-south-africa.jpg Climate Energy Finance Forests Cities Ocean Freshwater Food Type Commentary Exclude From Blog Feed? 0 Authors Maggie Overholt Sarah Parsons4 Cities Looking Beyond Rider Fares to Fund Better, More Resilient Public Transit
Public transit is not only a vital network connecting people to jobs, services and one another; it's also an important climate solution. The world needs to double public transit capacity by 2030 as part of its larger roadmap to slash planet-warming emissions and avert the worst of the climate crisis.
But this rapid growth will be costly, and public transit systems have a funding problem. During COVID-19, ridership plummeted by up to 60% in major cities around the world. This drained the fare revenue that transit agencies often rely on to pay for staff, fuel, maintenance and more.
Many cities have yet to see ridership (and fare revenue) fully recover. While emergency government funding provided a temporary lifeline for many agencies, the expiration of these funds has left some facing a looming fiscal cliff.
Not all cities' transit systems are struggling, though.
WRI examined public transit agencies in cities around the world, comparing their funding and revenue sources before and during the pandemic. We found that some agencies maintained or even increased their revenue during this time — despite declines in ridership. While sustained government support played a key role, these agencies also had diverse funding models that proved more resilient to shock.
As all cities work to expand and improve their public transit systems in the coming years, these leaders offer a model for how to make transportation more accessible and more resilient in a changing world.
How Some Cities' Public Transit Systems Weathered the COVID-19 SlumpWRI's new working paper analyzed the predominant public transit agencies in 11 major cities: Addis Ababa, Bengaluru, Chicago, Copenhagen, Houston, Jakarta, Mexico City, Paris, Rio de Janeiro, Sao Paulo and Washington, D.C. Among this sample, we found key differences in how public transit is funded between advanced economies and low- and middle-income countries.
Agencies in low- and middle-income countries tended to rely more heavily on fare revenue and faced bigger financial challenges during COVID-19. Rio de Janeiro's agency, which was fully funded by fares before the pandemic, experienced the most significant decline, losing 25% of its revenue between 2019 and 2022.
In some places, riders and transit workers felt the impact of these losses immediately. In Brazil, 55 bus operating companies were forced to close and 90,000 urban bus workers lost their jobs. Bengaluru's only public bus provider had to shutter for nearly two months; when it reopened, riders saw their fares increase to compensate for lost revenue.
While most agencies we examined saw a decline in revenue during the pandemic, a few came out relatively unscathed.
One big reason for this was increased government support. Some transit agencies received a significant portion of their funding from government subsidies prior to the pandemic, including Addis Ababa, Jakarta and Mexico City. Meanwhile, agencies in the U.S. and Europe received substantial government support in response to the pandemic, in the form of emergency relief to stabilize their revenues. Agencies in Chicago, Paris, Washington, D.C. and Houston received enough subsidies to fill the gap left by fare loss and to sustain their operating expenses.
Other funding sources played a role, too. Of the transit agencies we examined, those in advanced economies typically had more diverse revenue streams — including transportation related fees, dedicated taxes and commercial income — that helped them stay financially stable even as ridership plummeted. This was critical to ensuring that riders who rely on public transit to reach jobs and other necessities could still access it during the pandemic.
How Can Cities Grow their Public Transit Funding?COVID-19 exposed how vulnerable public transit systems can be to external shock. As they emerge from the pandemic, cities and transit agencies now face a daunting task: They must continue working to revive ridership in the face of new commuting habits, grow their funding, and maintain the frequency and quality of service — all while building resilience to better withstand future crises.
Seeking new funding sources will be an important step. Diversified funding not only softens the impact of unforeseen events like pandemics, but also provides a more stable financial foundation for long-term planning and investment. Our research identified three main types of funding transit agencies can tap into:
- Direct funding: Direct funding comes straight from transport users, including fare revenues, parking fees and congestion charges. Raising fares is a straightforward way to increase transit funding; however, cities should consider adjusting fares based on factors like time, distance or passenger category to keep prices affordable for all. Fare revenues are also vulnerable to disruptions, as seen during COVID-19. In densely populated cities with extensive public transit coverage, governments can also leverage local parking fees and congestion charges. These fees can help manage road use while generating revenue to support and expand public transit systems.
- Indirect funding: Public transit can bring myriad economic benefits to a city: higher property values, better workforce access, increased revenue for businesses. Yet these benefits rarely return to transit's bottom line. Indirect funding mechanisms can help channel some of these economic gains back into the public transit system. For instance, land value capture involves taxing the increased property values that can result from improved access to public transit, then using that tax revenue to fund metro systems and other community development projects. Dedicated local area sales taxes can also capture a portion of the economic activity that benefits from the transportation system and serve as a stable source of revenue for an agency.
- General funding: General funding sources include broad-based revenue from government grants, state or national budgets, and other non-dedicated sources. These funds can fill gaps left by direct and indirect sources, especially during economic downturns or emergencies. National or state-level grants can provide significant support for infrastructure projects, operating subsidies or targeted access initiatives, such as reducing fares for low-income passengers.
High quality public transit with frequent and reliable service is expensive to maintain. But several cities around the world are already leveraging diverse funding models to expand and improve their systems. We looked at four strong examples, both within and outside of our study. (All use multiple funding sources and revenue streams to support their transit agencies, though we focus on one example from each city.)
Paris, FranceIn Paris, 48% of the city's transit budget is covered by the Versement Mobilité (VM), a tax on employers introduced in the 1970s. The tax — which applies to companies near the transit network with more than 11 employees, and ranges from 1.6%-2.4% of their gross wages — has been instrumental in supporting the Paris Metro and other transit throughout France.
The Versement Mobilité spreads the financial burden beyond just public transit users. By charging employers, even if their employees do not use public transport, it ensures that everybody contributes to the common good; not only expanding transit access but also improving air quality and reducing traffic congestion. Raising revenue through the Versement Mobilité also subsidizes fares, so rider costs can remain relatively low at €1.75 per trip ($1.86) or around €86 ($91) for a monthly travel pass valid in all zones.
Jakarta, IndonesiaIn Jakarta, public transit provides 10% of all motorized trips, connecting 2.56 million people daily to work, school and other necessities. Many riders are low-income earners who can afford public transit thanks to its set fares of just 3,500 rupiah (US$0.35) per trip. On their own, these fares are not enough to cover the transit agency's operational costs. But the local government has provided ample financial support to help grow the city's public transit network while keeping prices affordable.
From 2004 to 2021, Jakarta's government continuously increased its subsidy support for transit. This allowed the city to expand its Transjakarta bus network beyond the urban core to reach 82% of residents while maintaining the same set fare. The expansion has made it easier for residents on the outskirts of the city to access jobs and other opportunities while helping reduce congestion and improving air quality — two critical objectives in one of the world's most polluted cities.
Passengers on a Transjakarta bus. Photo by Yan Budi Setiawan/iStock Bogotá, ColombiaAround 12%-15% of urban trips in Bogota are made by private cars, which have historically benefited from free on-street parking. But in 2021, Bogotá reclaimed the curb by implementing a new charge for on-street parking in key affluent areas. Revenues generated by car owners are set to be reinvested into TransMilenio's public transit system, supporting bus electrification, infrastructure maintenance and projects to improve the quality of service, such as more frequent bus services.
Alongside generating new revenue, this approach aims to encourage the use of public transit over private cars, benefit the local economy by circulating more people, and better manage curb space for deliveries.
Bengaluru, IndiaBengaluru is home to over 10.5 million residents and faces severe traffic congestion. While the city is in the process of expanding its metro rail to growing areas, this cost is high. Bengaluru Metro authorities are therefore considering a combination of land value capture; selling carbon credits (based on avoided emissions resulting from expanded public transportation); and selling permits for buildings within 500 meters of the track to build higher than typical city restrictions would allow. These instruments would help fund the expanded metro system and continued operational costs. The proposals could collectively raise up to $300 million USD if enacted.
Building Reliable, Resilient Transit for a Sustainable FuturePublic transit sits squarely at the intersection of climate and development solutions. But the COVID-19 pandemic underscored the fragility of many transit systems, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. Now more than ever, cities need a transit funding approach that can withstand future disruptions and adapt to changing realities.
By exploring diverse funding that includes a mix of direct, indirect and general sources for public transit, cities can create a more robust and resilient financial foundation. Those that weathered the pandemic — and those exploring innovative funding models today — offer lessons for how to safeguard and grow this essential service, benefiting riders, communities and the climate alike.
Note: The funding tools discussed here offer insight into possible sources that cities and transit agencies can tap into; this is not an exhaustive list. Transit agencies will need to engage with local and regional governments to identify funding opportunities, as these will vary with political and geographic characteristics. To learn more, see WRI's new working paper: A Fare Look: Funding Urban Public Transport Operations.
paris-metro.jpg Cities public transit transportation Cities Type Finding Exclude From Blog Feed? 0 Projects Authors Anna Kustar Adam Davidson Thet Hein Tun Ben Welle Meghna RayCommunity Benefits Snapshot: New Flyer Community Benefits Agreement
The New Flyer Community Benefits Agreement, signed in 2022, is a legally binding contract between New Flyer, Jobs to Move America and Greater Birmingham Ministries. This is a multi-state agreement, impacting New Flyer’s facilities in Alabama and California. It supports the creation of good-quality manufacturing jobs through investments in workforce development and training programs, especially for historically disadvantaged people.
Context- Project title: New Flyer
- Location: Ontario, California and Anniston, Alabama
- Sector: Public transit bus manufacturing
- Developer: New Flyer of America Inc.
- Project agreement type: Community benefits agreement
About the project and involved stakeholders: A community benefits agreement (CBA) was signed between New Flyer of America Inc., Greater Birmingham Ministries (GBM) and Jobs to Move America (JMA) on May 24, 2022. The New Flyer CBA supports the creation of a “robust jobs program through investments in pre-apprenticeship and training programs that create a jobs pipeline for low-income workers and historically disadvantaged people to quality manufacturing jobs with career advancement opportunities” in the manufacturing of public transit buses.
New Flyer is a Canadian multinational company that manufactures public transit buses, including zero-emissions buses, in North America. Founded in 2013, JMA is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization dedicated to advancing a fair and prosperous economy with good jobs and healthier communities for all. GBM is a 501(c)(3) multifaith and multiracial organization, founded in 1969, to provide emergency services for people in need and to pursue a more just society for all people. In addition to JMA and GBM, 13 other organizations, including A Better Balance, Adelante Alabama Workers Center, Alabama NAACP, Alabama Arise, Alabama Forward, Alabama Rivers Alliance, AFL-CIO, Communications Workers of America (CWA), Greater-Birmingham Alliance to Stop Pollution, Hometown Action, United Auto Workers, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, and United Steelworkers, formed the Alabama Coalition for Community Benefits. These organizations participated in the CBA negotiations with New Flyer, though they did not sign on.
The CBA applies to New Flyer’s facilities in Ontario, California and Anniston, Alabama. The Ontario facility has been shut down since the CBA was signed. The agreement is in force for five years from when it was signed and can be extended by mutual agreement on an annual basis.
EngagementBefore the CBA was signed, JMA had a long history of engagement with New Flyer. As city agencies have transitioned their public transit fleets to zero- and low-emissions technology over the last decade, JMA has pushed for higher work standards in transit manufacturing and advocated for leveraging government funding of transit projects to create jobs and economic opportunities for disadvantaged communities. JMA developed a policy tool, the U.S. Employment Plan, which enables cities, states and public agencies to build good jobs and equity into their public purchasing processes by requiring companies competing for public contracts to provide information related to number, type and location of jobs to be created, salaries, benefits and training programs to be provided, and plans to recruit historically marginalized workers. According to a JMA interviewee, “JMA’s theory of change is based heavily on demanding more from companies that receive public money to advance the greater public good.”
In 2019, JMA sued New Flyer on grounds of failing to pay its workers as much as the company had promised as part of its proposal to the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority to produce up to 900 buses. When New Flyer won the contract in 2013, it had signed onto a U.S. Employment Plan pledging to create more than 50 full-time jobs above a certain pay rate at its Ontario facility. New Flyer denied these allegations.
Around the same time, JMA, CWA and its industrial division, IUE-CWA, and a coalition of faith and environmental groups in Alabama launched a campaign to highlight low wages and discriminatory working conditions in New Flyer’s Anniston facility. The coalition published a study, based on interviews with 100 Anniston facility workers, which found a $3.14-per-hour pay gap between white and Black workers. The study also found that Black workers were denied promotion opportunities and more likely to get hurt on the job. CWA members from New Flyer’s unionized Minnesota facility attended the American Public Transportation Association conference to raise awareness about the study and share their stories about how having a union gave them a voice on the job. New Flyer employees also testified before local transit boards that were considering giving contracts to New Flyer about their work conditions and the company’s impact on their lives and communities.
New Flyer denied allegations of pay inequality and racism. In 2020, the company published its own version of a “Community Benefits Framework” in partnership with the Transportation Diversity Council (TDC) to facilitate agreements with transit agencies and partners focused on local community needs. Under this framework, agreements would be managed and monitored by New Flyer’s workforce development manager and reported to the TDC and company leadership on a quarterly basis. According to a JMA interviewee, New Flyer’s Community Benefits Framework is separate from the CBA negotiated between the company and JMA and GBM. New Flyer did not engage with JMA and its coalition in creating this framework.
This was also happening at a time when transit agencies were set to receive billions from the $1.2 trillion Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the Biden administration was incorporating job quality and racial equity as priorities in federal spending. In 2022, New Flyer settled its LA Metro lawsuit for $7 million and agreed to negotiate a multi-state CBA covering factories in Alabama and California.
Separate from the CBA, New Flyer agreed to a neutrality agreement with CWA to voluntarily recognize unions that formed at its facilities. The path to securing the neutrality agreement was eased by JMA’s multi-year campaign to add job standards to public contracts for electric bus procurement.
BenefitsSeveral of New Flyer’s CBA benefits relate to workforce provisions and include the following:
- Select 45% of new hires and 20% of promotions at each plant from historically disadvantaged groups that have typically had limited access to good-quality jobs in U.S. manufacturing. Historically disadvantaged groups are defined to include Black, Indigenous, and People of Color, women, LGBTQ+ persons, formerly incarcerated people, persons emancipated from the foster care system, veterans and residents of Anniston, Alabama, lacking GED or high school diploma. New Flyer committed to collaborate with JMA and GBM to do outreach, recruitment and placement of individuals from historically disadvantaged groups into these jobs. In particular, to facilitate the entry of veterans into manufacturing jobs, New Flyer, JMA and GBM plan to collaborate with the Center for Military Recruitment, Assessment, and Veterans Employment, as well as maintain a database of veterans interested in working for New Flyer. The CBA also includes a “ban-the-box” commitment by New Flyer to not ask about an applicant’s criminal history before an offer of employment is made.
- Develop a pre-apprenticeship program to prepare workers for employment at New Flyer. The training curriculum includes life skills, language and mathematical literacy and techniques for working as a team. Those who are hired are to be provided mentoring so that they can succeed in an industrial work environment.
- Develop a technical training program consisting of both classroom and hands-on training. When recruiting workers for this program, New Flyer will give preference to those who have completed the pre-apprenticeship program. The CBA notes that the goal is to register the technical training program as an apprenticeship program with the U.S. Department of Labor, as well as the California Department of Industrial Relations in the case of the Ontario plant.
- Create a discrimination and harassment complaint system with a designated community organization (DCO) in each plant that will assist employees in filing and resolving complaints about perceived discrimination and harassment. The DCO in the Anniston plant is the Alabama State Chapter of the NAACP. Workers filing a complaint can stay in the job while they seek resolution and are protected from retaliation.
- Conduct semi-annual workplace safety training sessions at each plant. Sessions will be run by a nonprofit organization agreed upon by parties to the CBA. Employees that complete the training obtain OSHA 10 authorization cards, which identify them as worker safety experts in their workplace.
In addition to the workforce-related benefits, the CBA allows JMA and GBM to host semi-annual debt clinics on site at the Anniston plant, which offer free legal assistance with debt-related issues. Finally, New Flyer is working with JMA and GBM to address gaps in public transportation for both the Anniston and Ontario plants through the use of shuttles, ride-share and other services.
Oversight and EnforcementNew Flyer is required to track its efforts to meet hiring and promotion goals and disclose the data to JMA, GBM, and the rest of the coalition members on a quarterly basis. The parties to the agreement meet quarterly to evaluate compliance of the commitments included in the CBA. More than two years after it was signed, the CBA is having an impact. There has been increased hiring and promotion of workers from historically disadvantaged groups, with the company recruiting more workers through direct hire than through staffing agencies and delaying background checks until after a job offer has been made.
The CBA defines explicit dispute resolution mechanisms, including non-binding mediation and binding arbitration. The parties to the agreement can jointly select a mediator from JAMS: Mediation, Arbitration and ADR Services, the world’s largest private alternative dispute resolution provider. The cost of the mediation is to be shared equally among all the parties of the CBA. Before proceeding to binding arbitration, the complaining party must send a written complaint and representatives from both sides must meet to discuss the issue.
Strengths of New Flyer CBAFeatured on the U.S. Department of Labor’s website and identified by researchers as meeting the essential characteristics of a successful CBA, the New Flyer CBA is often highlighted as an example of a successful CBA. A JMA interviewee even said, “New Flyer is well on its way to being one of the best employers in east Alabama.”
JMA had significant CBA experience prior to entering negotiations with New Flyer. JMA had successfully negotiated CBAs with two other electric bus manufacturers: BYD Motors in 2017 and Proterra in 2020. Furthermore, Madeline Janis, the executive director of JMA, has significant experience developing CBAs dating back to the 1990s. Drawing from its considerable expertise in negotiating and implementing CBAs, JMA launched a Community Benefits Agreement Resource Center in 2024 to support the development of robust CBAs in the manufacturing sector.
JMA built a diverse coalition that focused on a common goal of securing good jobs for manufacturing workers. Alabama was ground zero for coalition building. Patricia Todd, former Alabama State Representative and current Southern Policy Manager for JMA, is deeply embedded in local communities across the state and played a key role in building the coalition based on her relationships. The broad-based coalition included unions and environmental, faith, and civil rights organizations. Though these organizations are not signatories to the CBA, they played an important role during the negotiations and now in monitoring the implementation. According to a JMA staff member, representatives from these organizations met monthly and had visioning sessions about what should be in the CBA.
JMA’s partnership with labor was key to New Flyer signing a neutrality agreement with CWA. While not a part of the CBA, the multi-year campaign by JMA and CWA led to a separate agreement between New Flyer and CWA where the company pledged to be neutral during union organizing at all of its locations and refrain from union-busting tactics. In May 2024, a significant milestone was reached when workers in the Anniston facility — in a region that has been traditionally anti-union — successfully unionized and ratified their first union contract, which includes raises between 15% and 38% by 2026, cost-of-living adjustments and enhanced retirement benefits. The campaign at the Anniston facility was supported by New Flyer workers in the Minnesota facility which has been unionized for over 20 years—a goal that JMA is now pursuing in the South where much of the recent investments in green energy technologies have flowed.
JMA and its coalition partners held significant leverage that brought New Flyer to the negotiating table. As allegations related to job creation, pay inequity, racism and sexism began to come out, JMA and its partners built a compelling narrative by working with researchers at Alabama A&M University to publish a study which helped organize and garner support from a broad coalition. While denying all wrongdoing, New Flyer agreed to negotiate a CBA with JMA and its partners.
The CBA includes strong monitoring, accountability and enforceability provisions. To create accountability, the CBA includes robust monitoring and reporting provisions to measure progress against goals in an ongoing manner. While enforcement of the CBA hasn’t been an issue so far, the agreement includes clear and detailed language to track implementation. For instance, a JMA interviewee shared that they “negotiated back and forth extensively over the definition of historically disadvantaged people” to find the “sweet spot between [the definition] being too targeted and broad enough to include a diverse group of justice-impacted people.” Given that Alabama’s communities of color are heavily over-policed and over-criminalized, JMA and its partners were keen for the definition to include not just Black workers in Anniston but also formerly incarcerated individuals.
Challenges and Gaps of New Flyer CBAOrganizations without significant resources and the national presence of JMA may find it challenging to replicate JMA’s success. JMA is a national organization with significant presence in multiple states and a lot of experience building effective labor-environmental alliances. While the New Flyer CBA provides insights for future CBAs, it is not a replicable model for other organizations with limited resources and without JMA’s national profile. It is also rare that other organizations would have the opportunity to use an existing legal challenge to bolster the case for a CBA because legal cases are costly to initiate.
Further Resources- New Flyer CBA
- JMA Community Benefits Agreement Resource Center
- Community Benefits Tools and California Clean Energy Projects (Center for Law, Energy & the Environment, University of California Berkeley)
The Role of Agroecological Entrepreneurs and Territorial Markets in Africa's Sustainable Food Systems
Our current food systems are pushing the planet beyond its ecological limits, fueling declining agricultural productivity, biodiversity loss, exacerbating climate change, deepening food insecurity and hunger, and worsening poverty — especially in Africa.
Around one in five Africans are affected by hunger, driven by conflicts, climate change and economic downturns, according to the latest State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World. This is made worse due to limited social protection systems and economic constraints, which restrict access to diversified diets, further exacerbating food insecurity.
However, Africa has a unique opportunity to transform its food systems by adopting sustainable approaches to food production and consumption. By focusing on agroecological and regenerative approaches to restore degraded lands, enhance soil health, boost biodiversity and increase productivity, the continent can build resilient food systems that address food insecurity while promoting environmental conservation.
Prioritizing territorial markets can further localize food systems, reducing dependency on global supply chains, while decreasing food loss and waste. Territorial markets are markets within local or national food systems that rely on locally sourced products, where most goods sold are grown, processed or produced within the same geographical area.
In recent years, agroecology and regenerative approaches to food production have gained considerable momentum, challenging the industrial agricultural practices that have dominated for decades. Agroecological approaches integrate socio-ecological principles in the design and management of agrifood systems, optimizing sustainable interactions between plants, animals, humans and the broader environment.
While the concept of agroecology is still evolving in Africa, the rising demand for sustainably grown food across the continent presents a significant opportunity and it’s fueling the emergence of agroecological entrepreneurship, particularly within territorial markets and supply chains focused on providing healthy, safe, and culturally relevant food options.
In September 2024, the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa convened the second Agroecological Entrepreneurs and Territorial Markets Convening in Harare, Zimbabwe, to explore how agroecological enterprises can further advance this vital agenda.
WRI Africa’s food team in collaboration with our partners, Slow Food Kenya and the Center for AgroEcological Practices and Conservation of Nature in Rwanda, participated in this convening. The event showcased how agroecological enterprises are transforming food security in Africa, ensuring accessibility and sustainability for both people and the planet.
Participants observed that industrial agricultural development approaches to food security have not only failed to achieve food and nutrition security but also pose serious challenges to human and environmental health. In contrast, agroecology offers a sustainable solution that conserves soils, culture and social connections, while agroecological entrepreneurship ensures access to such foods through cross-border exchanges of seeds and produce.
Exploring Agroecological Enterprises in the Mbare MarketDuring the convening, the participants visited Harare’s iconic Mbare Market, a hub of local trade that exemplifies the importance of territorial markets. The market is a thriving center where local traders and small-scale farmers play a pivotal role in advancing sustainable food systems. Markets like Mbare support local producers, minimize food loss and waste and create opportunities for agroecological products to reach consumers.
The Mbare Market, a territorial market in Harare, Zimbabwe, sells locally sourced products to the community. Photo by Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa.Unfortunately, a month after the visit, a devastating fire severely damaged the symbolic market, causing millions of dollars in losses and disrupting the lives of thousands of traders and vendors. Our heartfelt sympathies go out to the affected traders, producers, vendors and their families.
This tragedy underscores the urgent need to strengthen the infrastructure of African territorial markets to prevent such disasters in the future. Stakeholders must collaborate to advocate for policies that strengthen, safeguard and revitalize territorial markets across Africa, ensuring sustainable livelihoods and a resilient food system.
Pathways to Transforming Africa’s Food SystemsHere are insights from the convening for how to advance agroecology in Africa to deliver sustainable food systems:
- Advocacy for Inclusive Financial Systems: There is a need for financial systems that support small-scale producers and entrepreneurs in agroecology. Increased investment in agroecological practices will drive entrepreneurship and innovation, making the food system more equitable.
- Favorable Policy Environments: Creating a policy framework that supports agroecological entrepreneurship is critical. Governments need to be at the forefront of developing pro-people policies that address gaps in existing frameworks and enable agroecology to thrive.
- Networking and Partnerships: Expanding networks among agroecological farmers, entrepreneurs and stakeholders is essential for knowledge-sharing and scaling sustainable practices. Collaborating across regions helps counter the growing corporate control of Africa’s food systems and promotes local food sovereignty.
- Empowering Women and Youth: Women and youth must be at the center of agroecology initiatives, as they are crucial to ensuring the intergenerational transfer of knowledge and the continued growth of agroecological entrepreneurship.
- Participatory Research: Engaging farmers in research processes is key to understanding and solving the challenges facing agroecology. Co-creation of knowledge ensures that innovations are rooted in local contexts, leading to higher-quality products and more resilient farming practices.
- Strategic media engagement: There is a need to leverage the power of media in promotion of agroecology, changing narratives and increasing demand for agroecological products.
STATEMENT: Biden Administration Announces 2035 Emissions Reduction Target, Setting North Star for Non-Federal Actors
WASHINGTON D.C. (December 19, 2024) – Today the U.S. government announced a new climate commitment under the Paris Agreement, known as a nationally determined contribution (NDC). The plan includes a target to cut greenhouse gas emissions 61 to 66% below 2005 levels by 2035.
If President Trump follows through with his intention to withdraw from the Paris Agreement, the United States would no longer be obligated to strive towards this new target. However, the NDC will serve as an important marker for non-federal actors and future U.S. administrations.
The following is a statement from Debbie Weyl, WRI US Acting Director:
“The United States’ new climate commitment offers a clear path forward for states, cities, businesses, and other leaders dedicated to ramping up action over the next four years. Even though the Trump administration may not lift a finger to deliver on this plan, it sets a north star for what the U.S. should be aiming for and could help guide the federal government’s priorities once Trump leaves office in 2029.
“The 2035 emissions reduction target is at the lower bound of what the science demands and yet it is close to the upper bound of what is realistic if nearly every available policy lever were pulled. Assertive action by states and cities will be essential to achieving this goal.
“The United States needs to swiftly expand renewable energy and electric vehicles, modernize the electric grid, and decarbonize heavy industry. Transitioning to a clean energy economy can create millions of good jobs, revitalize middle America and boost U.S. competitiveness globally.
“The devastating climate disasters we’ve seen in recent months are a stark reminder that all actors in the United States must do far more to protect communities, infrastructure and food security from floods, wildfires, droughts and rising seas. To safeguard our future, we will need to significantly increase investments to boost resilience in the face of climate impacts that will continue to get worse. The American people deserve nothing less.”
STATEMENT: U.S. EPA Grants California Waiver to Set Strong Tailpipe Pollution Rules for Passenger Cars and Trucks
Washington, D.C. (December 18, 2024) – Today the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) granted California the authority to enforce strong emissions rules for passenger cars and trucks.
California established a rule to phase out new polluting passenger vehicle sales and sell 100% zero-emission vehicles by 2035. Eleven states and Washington D.C. follow California’s light-duty zero-emission vehicles rule.
Following is a statement from Dan Lashof, Senior Fellow, WRI United States:
“Curbing tailpipe emissions that cause asthma and other harms is not just good policy, it's common sense for anyone who cares about their children's health. The EPA’s waiver will allow California and other states to continue reducing harmful pollution from passenger vehicles while supercharging the transition to a clean electric future.
“Transportation emissions continue to be the largest source of climate pollution in the United States. Any action by the next administration to restrict the power of states to enact stronger vehicle emissions standards will only result in more air pollution, higher health costs and premature deaths.”
U.S. Climate United States Clean Energy Type Statement Exclude From Blog Feed? 0Tackling Climate and Nature Together in 2025
Few issues are more enmeshed than climate and nature.
Scientists are increasingly learning how biodiversity loss and climate change compound and reinforce each other. For example, deforestation releases greenhouse gas emissions that fuel climate change, spurring wildfires and forest dieback that then release more emissions and cause further warming. It’s a vicious cycle that both accelerates and amplifies the extreme heat, drought, flooding and other impacts endangering communities around the world.
Yet despite their inexorable connection, policymaking for climate and for nature still largely operate in separate spheres.
Just this year, the world saw major international summits to advance three global treaties: the Kunming-Montreal Biodiversity Framework, the Paris Agreement on climate change, and the UN Convention to Combat Desertification. The successive convenings brought needed attention to climate change and ecosystem degradation. But they also laid bare one of the biggest barriers to tackling these dual crises — siloed thinking.
That’s where 2025 can change things. Opportunities this year can help the world finally start addressing climate and nature as the interrelated issues they are.
It will require ambition and finance.
Volunteers plant mangrove seedlings in Makassar, Indonesia. In addition to storing carbon, mangroves protect coastal communities from storms, filter pollutants and provide habitat for fish and other animals. Photo by Ikbal Salehe/Shutterstock Acting with Ambition for People, Nature and ClimateThe past year showed us why immediate action on climate and nature is essential.
We witnessed the hottest year on record. Devastating floods took lives and destroyed homes in Brazil and Kenya — places where degraded landscapes make communities more vulnerable to heavy rainfall. Blistering heat caused heatstroke and deaths in India, Europe and the U.S. Wildfires scorched South America.
At the same time, agriculture and other industries continued their rampant destruction of nature. WRI analysis revealed that the world still loses 10 football fields of tropical primary forest every minute. A significant driver is production of the soy, beef, palm oil and other commodities we use every day. Not only does tree cover loss spew carbon emissions, it degrades the many benefits forests provide, such as clean water, foods, medicines and livelihoods.
People simply cannot thrive without healthy ecosystems and a stable climate. That’s why policymakers need to act ambitiously on climate and nature — together — in 2025.
There are several opportunities for them to do so:
Traditional stilt houses along the Amazon river in Para State, Brazil. The Amazon stores billions of tons of greenhouse gases, but is on the verge of becoming a net carbon source due to continued deforestation and degradation. Photo by Victor Carvalho/Shutterstock 1) Countries’ next round of climate pledges.As part of the Paris Agreement, countries are expected to submit new climate action plans in early 2025, known as “nationally determined contributions,” or NDCs. NDCs form the backbone of international climate action, yet they currently fall far short of the level of ambition needed.
Research shows global emissions must drop 43% from 2019 levels by 2030 to prevent increasingly dangerous floods, droughts and other impacts, but current NDCs will only cut them by 8%. Countries’ climate plans also fail to address the vast and vital role nature plays in stabilizing the climate: Less than half of NDCs include quantified targets for land use change and forestry.
The new round of climate plans could close the emissions gap, but only with significant action across every sector. This includes recognizing the importance of nature-based solutions, such as by setting conservation and restoration targets for forests and other ecosystems.
2) Continued negotiations on the global biodiversity treaty.As part of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, nations agreed in 2022 to protect 30% of the world’s land and sea by 2030 while mobilizing billions for conservation. The 2024 UN biodiversity summit (COP16) in Cali, Colombia was supposed to yield plans for achieving the “30x30” target, but negotiations stalled.
Leaders will resume talks in Rome this February. There, they have an opportunity to truly put the 30x30 target within reach.
Necessary outcomes include a plan to finance the 30x30 goal — one that helps close the $700 billion gap in annual spending needed to protect nature and eliminates harmful subsidies fueling its destruction. Countries should also put forward strong National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) that collectively bring the amount of land and sea under conservation from 17% and 8%, respectively, to 30% by 2030. All countries were due to submit NBSAPs last year, but only 44 have done so.
Countries should ensure their NBSAPs support their NDCs, and vice versa. Colombia, for example, said it may submit a unified nature and climate plan. Regardless of whether countries submit separate or combined plans, all policies should reflect climate and nature’s interrelationship.
3) System-changing domestic policies.NDCs and NBSAPs are just words on paper without ambitious domestic policies to back them up. Countries should set policies that transform the sectors impacting nature and climate the most: food and energy systems and cities.
A recent example from Denmark showcases what this kind of system change looks like. The country’s 2024 Green Tripartite Agreement taxes emissions from livestock production while also restoring peatlands, planting trees and paying farmers to reduce nitrogen pollution. The policy could reshape Denmark’s food system into one that supports agricultural production while simultaneously reducing emissions and boosting biodiversity. We hope to see more countries produce similarly ambitious national policies in 2025.
4) COP30 in Belém, Brazil.There’s no better place to see climate and nature come together than the UN climate summit in November 2025 (COP30). The conference is the first-such summit to be held inside the Amazon rainforest. The Amazon stores billions of tons of greenhouse gases, but is on the verge of becoming a net carbon source due to continued deforestation and degradation.
The location should inspire negotiators to put nature-based climate solutions at the heart of the COP agenda. Brazil’s environment minister Marina Silva has already said the country will use COP30 to “create synergy” between the UN conventions for biodiversity, climate and desertification. Brazil also aims to operationalize the Tropical Forests Finance Facility by COP30, an ambitious plan to mobilize $125 billion to conserve more than a billion hectares of tropical forest.
COP30 is also a key moment for countries and others to demonstrate progress against existing nature commitments — such as the Glasgow Leaders’ Declaration on Forests and Land Use — and put forward new initiatives.
Fishermen pull fish from the river in the Peruvian Amazon. Photo by Damian Sikora/Shutterstock Backing Ambition with FinanceOf course ambitious policies are only useful if they’re actually implemented. That’s where finance comes in.
By 2035, developing countries will need $1.3 trillion in finance annually to build resilience, shift toward net-zero economies, and conserve and restore nature. The world will need to access every possible avenue of funding, including public and private sources, and use every tool to ensure finance starts flowing to the right places.
Finance is a system — one with both demand and supply side interventions. The supply side consists of public and private financial institutions like the World Bank and other multilateral development banks (MDBs). Continued and ambitious reforms at these institutions can help grow the pot of finance available for both nature and climate goals.
But there’s also the demand side to consider — the developing countries who seek to attract more funding to properly invest in nature and climate. Just as finance is essential for turning pledges into reality, so, too, can ambitious domestic policies unlock more finance. A good regulatory environment is critical for attracting outside investments. Another tool countries can use to consolidate their nature and climate efforts is designing “country platforms” that mobilize, coordinate and channel public and private investments into nature and climate solutions. Brazil recently launched such a platform to attract foreign investment.
Institutions on both the demand and supply side can also collaborate in innovative ways to simultaneously invest in nature and climate. This could include operationalizing the Tropical Forests Finance Facility; expanding the use of debt-for-nature swaps; or, as Barbados recently demonstrated for the first time, implementing debt-for-climate-resilience swaps.
As we look to 2025, immediate priorities include securing a strong finance deal from the UN biodiversity talks and moving toward implementation of the $300 billion annual climate finance goal recently established at the 2024 UN climate summit (COP29). But ultimately, these must fit into the bigger, systemic shifts needed to meet long-term financing goals.(WRI will explore how to create a more sustainable financial system in more depth at our annual Stories to Watch event. Tune in on January 30, 2025.)
Building a Future that’s Good for People, Nature and ClimateThese aren’t the only ways to bring nature and climate together, nor will these actions alone tackle the vast and dual crises before us. But they will start to bring together the two worlds that are integral to the future of our one planet.
Let’s make 2025 the year for climate and nature.
restoration-kenya.jpg Climate climate change biodiversity development climate finance Climate COP29 Type Commentary Exclude From Blog Feed? 0 Authors Ani DasguptaSTATEMENT: Desertification COP Produces Mixed Results on Land and Drought
December 16, 2024 (Riyadh, Saudi Arabia) — The UN Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD)’s COP16 summit concluded without an agreement to tackle drought, while making some progress on other issues, including civil society engagement and inclusion of Indigenous Peoples and local communities.
The world loses 100 million hectares of land to degradation yearly, yet healthy land is key to achieving sustainable development, climate, and biodiversity goals. The UNCCD released a report that shows while funding for land restoration has increased from $37 billion in 2016 to $66 billion by 2022, this still falls far short of the $355 billion per year needed.
The COP Presidency launched the Riyadh Action Agenda, aiming to mobilize ambitious commitments to conserve and restore 1.5 billion hectares of land globally by 2030. The Riyadh Global Drought Resilience Partnership announced $12.15 billion to support 80 of the world’s most vulnerable countries in tackling drought resilience.
Following is a statement by Susan Chomba, Director of Vital Landscapes, WRI Africa:
“This summit ended with mixed results for restoring the land that all humans rely on. There is now much greater global attention to the crisis our land is facing and the widespread implications for people’s food security and livelihoods.
“Yet it is disappointing that countries did not agree on a new framework for tackling droughts, a major growing risk. No country is immune to drought, and not reaching a consensus threatens the world’s goals on poverty, hunger, gender equality, climate change, life on land and employment. We urge countries to work together over the coming two years to enable a strong decision at COP17 in 2026.
“Importantly, countries agreed to create caucuses for Indigenous Peoples and for local communities to formally bring their voices into the decision-making process — a notable development given how vital they are to sustainably managing land. And there were positive decisions on sustainable land use systems, integrating science into policy, addressing soil degradation of agricultural lands; and knowledge sharing, technology transfer, and innovation.
“The new finance commitments for land restoration and drought are welcome, though we now need to see much greater investment from both governments and the private sector.
“A major bright spot was the engagement from civil society and youth, who demonstrated numerous initiatives they are undertaking to restore land health, secure land rights, and unlock economic opportunities, especially for young people.
“Land degradation, biodiversity loss and climate change are intricately linked. Countries cannot address climate change nor biodiversity loss without acting on land degradation. That’s why countries should now integrate climate, biodiversity, and land issues into their national development plans — to secure a better future for people, nature and climate.”
Forest and Landscape Restoration land use land rights Indigenous Peoples & Local Communities WRI Africa pillar Climate Resilience Type Statement Exclude From Blog Feed? 0After a Tumultuous 2024, What’s Next for Cities?
2024 has been a tumultuous year: More than half the world’s population went to the ballot box — some voting for radical change — extraordinary weather events have devastated communities and countries have been rocked by continued violent conflict.
Given their unique position straddling local, national and global politics, cities will face new challenges navigating different levels of government and their own electorates. What does it all mean for how cities will address the climate challenge and equitable development, where leadership and action in urban areas are so important? What does it mean for building sustainable cities?
In April 2024, flood waters in Nairobi, Africa, displaced more than 40,0000 people living in informal settlements. Photo by Xinhua / Alamy Stock Photo.During the last quarter of the year, a series of high-profile international summits have begun to parse what lies ahead for urban priorities in 2025: from the UN Biodiversity Conference (COP16) in Cali, Colombia, to the World Urban Forum in Cairo, to the Urban20 Summit in Rio de Janeiro and to the annual UN climate summit (COP29) in Baku, Azerbaijan.
It’s time to assess the progress and setbacks cities faced this year and navigate the pathway to sustainable cities in 2025.
Elections: Shifting Electorates, Shifting Priorities2024 was a “super year” for elections, with dozens of major contests around the world. It was also a year where incumbents suffered. Whether left or right, ruling parties from South Africa, India, the United Kingdom and the United States took losses at the polls. This strong desire for change creates unique dynamics for cities.
US Cities and a New Trump AdministrationAfter Donald Trump’s reelection to lead the world’s largest economy, all eyes will be on U.S. cities, states and other local governments and organizations. Just a week after his November 5 win, many attending COP29 already felt the gravity of this decision, with fear that the U.S. would once again withdraw from the international Paris Agreement on climate change overshadowing negotiations.
In 2017, when Trump first announced the U.S. would pull out from the Paris Agreement, and federal support and resources were stripped from many national climate initiatives, efforts like America Is All In and the U.S. Climate Alliance brought together thousands of mayors, governors, university presidents and business leaders to continue meeting emissions-reduction targets. Those coalitions never went away and can now catalyze similar action to sustain climate targets from the city-level on up.
Former President Donald Trump won a second presidential term in November 2024. His reelection will likely mean less federal support for climate initiatives. However, there will be opportunities through organizations made up of city and local leaders to continue working on low-carbon priorities. Photo by JannHuizenga / iStock.Shifting voter bases in cities, however, could create bigger tensions in 2025 between Republican and Democratic priorities. New York City, for example, saw a notable 7% increase in the conservative vote share for president compared to 2020. In addition, each of the so-called “battleground” states voted Republican at the presidential level.
The good news is that President Joe Biden’s enormous push for green infrastructure development, which includes e-mobility, public transport and renewable energy has some bipartisan support, thanks to about 77% of total financial investments going to Republican districts. Much of this money also lies in the hands of states to distribute and cannot be pulled back.
Also, housing and workforce participation are two key overlapping objectives supported on both sides of the aisle that can contribute to low-carbon, resilient and inclusive communities. The housing crisis in the U.S. is severe, with tens of millions of households spending more than 30% of their income on housing (if they are able to find a home at all). This impacts individuals but also businesses and their ability to tap into the labor pool needed to grow the economy. Bringing jobs and more affordable housing closer together will be an attractive offer that can garner support in many cities, from Seattle and San Francisco to Phoenix, Houston and Miami.
Though the framing might differ, prioritizing affordable housing near infrastructure investments to support economic growth can still drive a low-carbon agenda in U.S. cities.
A New Political Economy for European CitiesAs significant as it is, the outcome of the U.S. elections should also be seen in the context of a global trend away from incumbents and the status quo, as well as away from globalization and toward nationalism. Europe’s shift to the right in the European Parliament and in national elections in the Netherlands, Italy, France and Germany (with snap national elections expected in February 2025), including a shifting voter base in cities, will continue to have repercussions.
While the dimensions and priorities of these electorates and their leadership have changed, the city priorities have not. A recent Eurocities survey of nearly 100 mayors identified 67% of mayors prioritizing climate action; 31%, social inclusion and equity; and 30%, affordable housing. What should the top priorities of the next European Commission be? Mayors from across the political spectrum said investing in sustainable urban mobility (55%), access to affordable housing (54%), and a long-term strategy for the EU and cities to work better together (49%).
A big challenge for mayors will be how to find unified support for what might look like a purely progressive agenda, but which simply aligns with fundamental urban dynamics: balancing scarce land and infrastructure, in densely populated centers, with relatively plentiful jobs and services.
Paris, under Mayor Anne Hidalgo, has implemented a proximity-based, “15-minute city” development strategy with great success. It’s become more walkable, bikeable and much more attractive to families with children by greening the city and by providing childcare and services at the neighborhood level. However, the idea has received fierce pushback from some on the right and even been caught up in conspiracy theories. How to continue implementing sustainable city efforts like these, while confronting people’s fears, will be a major challenge for Europe’s cities as heat and other hazards increase.
Housing: The New Lever for Climate and the EconomyAt this year’s World Urban Forum in Cairo, UN-Habitat's new Executive Director Anacláudia Rossbach called out the elephant in the room: An extraordinary number of people — just over 1 billion, or one-quarter, of all urban dwellers around the world — lack access to affordable housing and services.
With an additional 2.5 billion urban dwellers by 2050 due to population growth and people migrating from rural areas, 90% of which will be in Africa and Asia, one can only imagine how the city of the future could look like. This would not be a future of shiny towers and high-end apartment buildings, but one where perhaps half of the urban fabric might include informal settlements and low-income housing, with little to no access to city services. Without resolving access to housing and services in a way that is affordable and avoids locking in carbon-intensive lifestyles, it will be impossible to ever achieve local and national economic development and climate targets.
The housing crisis extends globally, and cities will have to respond to different demographic and economic contexts. In the U.S. and Europe, affordable housing has received support from across the political spectrum and might be the best bet to sustainably transform cities and related infrastructure.
In developing countries, addressing the housing crisis is essential to accelerating economic development. The urgency is clearly understood by Indonesia’s new president, Prabowo Subianto, who only one month into the job proposed an ambitious plan to build 3 million houses a year. With most of the Indonesian population living in coastal areas, a housing program cannot be implemented without climate-proofing nor embedding services that help low-income families tap into city resources and jobs.
REHOUSE, an alliance that brings together organizations with over 100,000 staff working in slums and informal settlements around the world, is a response to the need for scaled interventions to build resilient and equitable housing integrated with core urban services for all. More dedicated investments for housing might be the best lever to drive change in cities everywhere.
Adaptation: Prioritizing People’s Safety and HealthExtreme weather events continue to devastate many cities, with 2024 surpassing last year as the hottest on record.
Brazil’s southern state of Rio Grande do Sul experienced disastrous flooding in May, which impacted more than 2 million people, including those in the city of Porto Alegre; 172 people lost their lives and an astounding 80,000 people ended up in shelters. At the same time, Kenya and other areas of East Africa experienced a similar disaster. The staggering toll included 294 fatalities, affecting over 100,000 households. In Nairobi, over 40,000 households living in informal settlements were displaced, many of whom were living right up against the major rivers of the city.
Then in late October, a high-altitude isolated depression struck eastern Spain, bringing severe weather, torrential rainfall and flash floods that killed 224 people. The image of car wrecks in the historic streets of Valencia, piled on top of each other in a torrent of debris and mud, was a reminder that no city will escape the impacts of a changing climate.
The aftermath of severe weather in Valencia, Spain, in October 2024, left cars piled up in city neighborhoods. Photo by danr13/iStock.Alongside the floods was heat. A record-breaking heat wave in India impacted millions of people and entire urban economies. Districts in Delhi hit nearly 50 degrees C (122 degrees F) and nearly 80% of the Indian population was exposed to strong or very strong heat stress for more than 6 hours in the first 15 days of April. Even air conditioning struggled to keep up under the circumstances. Additionally, the extreme heat made deadly air pollution even worse. People in Indian cities had to change their work and life schedules in significant ways to adapt.
These health and economic impacts of climate change are challenges cities and residents are dealing with now. But WRI analysis of future climate hazards shows a world in which the intensity and frequency of impacts could increase much more dramatically in the future. Analyzing climate hazards for 996 of the world’s largest cities — home to 2.1 billion people (26% of the global population) — the projections show a sizable difference between 1.5 degrees C (2.7 degrees F) and 3 degrees C (5.4 degrees F) of warming for urban areas, underscoring the need for mitigation to reduce future warming, but also for city and national governments to begin planning more adaptation measures to help people deal with heat now.
Municipal leaders are already receiving pressure for more adaptation measures. Nairobi’s governor installed the Nairobi River Commission, for example, to rethink how the city’s rivers can be safer and reclaim their functions from the clogged, polluted hazards they have become. Cities will increasingly look at passive cooling solutions, too, such as increasing tree cover, greening roofs, painting roofs white and protecting waterbodies in and around cities to reduce the impact of heat.
During the April 2024 heat wave in India, a group of people walk near the banks of the Ganges River in Prayagraj, India. The extreme heat not just made it difficult to find relief but also contributed to worsening air pollution. Photo by Anil Shakya / Alamy Stock Photo.Yet too few cities have comprehensive adaptation strategies in place.
Nature-based solutions have a key role to play. For example, our teams calculated that a $5.2-million investment in nature-based solutions for Bogotá’s watershed could provide $42 million in returns for the city’s water supply. And research for Mumbai’s first-ever Climate Action Plan shows a strong correlation between vegetation cover and lower land surface temperatures. Indeed, at the UN Biodiversity Conference in Cali this year, cities and city organizations focused discussions on how to build climate resilience with nature within urban areas.
These developments point to a shifting relationship between cities and adaptation. Whereas national targets on greenhouse gas emissions reduction and phasing out fossil fuels may suffer from less ambitious efforts and negotiations on the global stage, adaptation will climb further as a top priority in local politics, where climate risks — along with people’s concerns about them — are rising.
Sustainable Transportation: Transforming the MarketplaceTransportation will be the biggest growth area among urban infrastructure by 2050, simply due to the level of demand. After China, India is leading the way. Its metro network is set to be among the world’s largest. How these investments integrate into the urban fabric and how to create first- and last-mile connectivity to and from transit remain critical questions for cities.
Transit-oriented development, built around public transport, is an example of how to provide access to as many people as possible, with as few emissions as possible, while driving economic development.
But India’s success at expanding public transport investment at such a large scale can’t be replicated in many developing countries, which are growing more slowly and have less creditworthiness. Increased finance for transport is direly needed with sufficient guarantees to crowd in private capital. Looking at the global climate finance landscape for transport, it is stunning to see that 72% is invested in private road transport. These investments are out of balance with what that data shows us: Most of the urban population in developing economies walk or are dependent on public transportation. Financing institutions must help steer cities away from fully car-dependent, carbon intensive, unhealthy patterns of growth, a mistake made with eyes wide shut in the 20th century that is proving very difficult to reverse.
Three decorated electric buses debut in New Delhi, India, at a February 2024 event where New Delhi officials announced the addition of 350 new electric buses to their fleet. India's growth of sustainable transportation options, including electric buses and railways, is among the fastest growing in the world. Photo by Sipa USA / Alamy Stock Photo.With new climate finance goals and money after the COP29 agreement, the question for 2025 is not only about the quantity of finance, but the quality of it. More roads alone will not lead to better mobility and healthier cities. It will be difficult to provide access to services in cities, in a clean and equitable way, when the obsessive focus on private fossil fuel transport continues to persist. Blended finance, which can reduce financial risk for private finance, should focus on active mobility, public transport and electric mobility, as new WRI research on access to climate finance shows.
A focus on market transformation for sustainable transportation can support the shift toward public transportation, active mobility and electric mobility. This includes de-risking vehicle purchases to incentivize market demand, in particular for electric 2- and 3-wheelers, which are quickly overtaking the streets of African and Asian cities, as well as setting up charging infrastructure. Aggregation and smart procurement is another lever to pull. India’s national e-bus program, aiming to procure more than 50,000 electric buses, was made possible by pooling demand from 169 cities across the country. It’s helped procure more than 10,000 vehicles already and drive down the costs of an e-bus 27% below the costs of a diesel bus.
There is an enormously dynamic finance landscape ahead to meet the massive transportation demands in growing cities. If done right, this economic development proposition can and will build low-carbon transport options for all, even in a changing global political context.
Driving Change from the Bottom UpIn a drastically changed political landscape and with faltering negotiations at COP29, the climate agenda is under pressure. We should be clear-eyed about the challenges ahead. Coordination between local and national governments — critical for cities to fully exercise their ambitions for sustainable development — may be more difficult in many places. Research from the Coalition for Urban Transitions shows that, globally, cities have the mandate and ability to achieve just a third of their emissions reduction potential on their own. The other two-thirds can only be achieved by working together with, or solely by, national governments.
But these trends are not universal. Indeed, Brazil, as one of the first countries to release its updated 2025 nationally determined contribution (NDC) to the Paris Agreement, stands as an exception. The updated climate plan creates a new instrument for coordinating climate action across cities, states and regions, and combines with existing policies and civil society networks to significantly strengthen the role of cities in Brazil’s NDC process.
As the climate world turns towards COP30 in Belem, Brazil, under the leadership of President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, Brazil has taken the lead in operationalizing the principles of the CHAMP Initiative, a partnership coordinated by Bloomberg Philanthropies, supported by WRI and endorsed by 76 countries to support improved multilevel partnerships in NDCs and climate action. With this momentum, there’s hope that Brazil’s leadership will inspire other countries and cities to push for partnerships to raise climate ambition.
There are pathways for cities globally to continue implementing elements of ambitious climate action as part of their core mandate to keep people safe, improve quality of life and drive local economic development. But to ensure cities get sufficient resources, urban transformation will need to be reframed on national and local agendas.
One way is to focus on climate as a co-benefit to economic gains, to keep people safe and provide services to the electorate. That certainly counts for cities in the U.S. and increasingly in Europe, but also for rapidly growing cities in Africa and South Asia, which have understandably been focused on creating jobs, providing housing and managing climate risks.
Nature-based solutions have proven to be much needed and effective in managing heat and water in cities while creating much better quality of life. Examples of market transformation for electric mobility are promising to achieve the scale needed, create jobs and attract more private capital. These solutions are less vulnerable to ideological agendas and provide more immediate benefits to residents. Demand for neighborhoods based on proximity and quality of life has also never been bigger, with surveys showing majority support even in car-dominant societies like the U.S.
Without being overly optimistic about the multiple crises facing the world at this moment, the urban agenda is more relevant and stronger than ever. It will prove to be resilient to political change, serving the entire political spectrum in halls of power around the world and both industrialized and industrializing country agendas.
Change will happen from the bottom up, and cities will be the missing piece of many puzzles that will drive positive change for people, nature and climate.
valencia-spain-hurricane-dana.jpg Cities Climate climate change extreme weather nature-based solutions adaptation health COP16 COP29 housing Urban Development Urban Efficiency & Climate Urban Mobility Featured Popular Type Commentary Exclude From Blog Feed? 0 Projects Authors Rogier van den BergSTATEMENT: 1,600+ More Electric School Buses to Hit the Road In Districts Across US
WASHINGTON (December 11, 2024) — Students in dozens of school districts across the U.S. will soon be breathing cleaner air thanks to $490 million in EPA grants for 1,634 electric school buses sought by school districts and local governments nationwide.
The Clean Heavy-Duty Vehicles Program, established through the Inflation Reduction Act, will fund electric school buses and trucks across the country in response to hundreds of millions of dollars in applications from local entities. Overall, the program awarded approximately $735 million in grants for zero-tailpipe-emission heavy-duty vehicles and related charging infrastructure, including electric school buses and vocational vehicles like box trucks and refuse haulers.
The demand for electric school bus and truck funds shows the continued enthusiasm for clean, reliable heavy-duty vehicles in communities across the country, building on the more than 8,000 electric school buses funded through the EPA’s Clean School Bus Program so far.
Following is a statement from Sue Gander, Director of WRI’s Electric School Bus Initiative:
“The dirty fumes of diesel school bus exhaust will soon be in the rearview mirror for more kids across the country. This new funding from the Clean Heavy-Duty Vehicle Program means thousands more children will be breathing cleaner air on their way to and from school.
“We know that diesel exhaust pollution is tied to asthma, which is a leading cause for absenteeism and is a concern for parents, teachers and communities. But with an electric school bus, kids can come to school ready to learn. This is especially important in underserved communities which already face higher levels of on-road air pollution.
“When you consider the health benefits, the thousands of dollars in operational cost savings and the potential for these buses to serve as a source of backup power in emergencies, it’s not surprising to see so many school districts, states and towns raise their hands for electric school buses.
“School districts and governments in states across the country — from North Carolina and Indiana to Utah and Washington — all applied for electric school bus funding. Now, they’ll be bringing clean rides to more children.”
Electric Mobility United States U.S. Climate Policy-Electric School Buses electric school bus series Type Statement Exclude From Blog Feed? 0RELEASE: WRI Welcomes Dr. Frannie Léautier and Yunli Lou to Global Board of Directors
WASHINGTON (December 11, 2024) — World Resources Institute (WRI) is pleased to announce two appointments to its Global Board of Directors. Dr. Frannie Léautier, Senior Partner and CEO of SouthBridge Investments, rejoined the Global Board this month, while Yunli Lou, Founder and Managing Partner of Milestone Capital Partners, has joined as a new member.
Yunli Lou has over two decades of experience in investment management, supporting entrepreneurs in the consumer, solar energy, healthcare, and electric vehicle sectors. She began her finance career at Goldman Sachs in the early 1990s and later oversaw Greater China direct investments at Merrill Lynch. A founding member of Harvard University’s Global Advisory Council, Yunli was born and raised in Beijing and earned her undergraduate degree in economics from Harvard College.
“I am thrilled to welcome Yunli as the newest member of WRI’s Global Board,” said Ani Dasgupta, President and CEO of WRI. “Yunli brings a deep understanding of the private sector and a wealth of experience in navigating complex markets in China and beyond. Her fresh perspective and eye for innovation will be invaluable in advancing WRI’s mission to accelerate the low-carbon transition in countries across the world.”
“The intersection of innovation and sustainability holds immense promise", said Yunli Lou. “Collaborating with WRI to champion entrepreneurial thinking and support solutions that transform today's urgent challenges into opportunities for both people and planet is incredibly exciting. I look forward to working with WRI’s talented team to turn ambitious ideas into meaningful progress that will benefit generations to come.”
Dr. Frannie Léautier, who previously served on the Global Board for two years, is a global finance and development expert with decades of experience leading and transforming organizations across private, public and nonprofit sectors. Currently based in Kigali, Rwanda, Dr. Léautier is Senior Partner and CEO of SouthBridge Investments. She spent 15 years at the World Bank, serving as Vice President, Chief of Staff to the President and Infrastructure Director. She also served as Senior Vice President at the African Development Bank and held several leadership roles at The Trade and Development Bank (TDB) Group, including Vice Chair of the Board, Special Advisor to the President and TDB’s first Chief Operating Officer. Dr. Léautier was born in Tanzania and earned a Master of Science and a PhD from MIT, along with honorary doctorates from North Central College and Lancaster University.
“Dr. Léautier's return to the Board is an exciting moment, building on her deep history with WRI”, said WRI's Board Chair, David Blood. “Frannie helped to shape WRI's New Climate Economy work as a key member of the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate, she has been a longtime advisor to our cities program and has provided critical leadership in scaling WRI's restoration efforts in Africa. I’m incredibly pleased to welcome her back to the Global Board, where she will help drive WRI's vision for an inclusive transformation that supports vital landscapes, thriving cities and the well-being of the communities that rely on them.”
“My return to the WRI Global Board feels like a homecoming,” said Dr. Frannie Léautier. “Confronting global challenges requires the strength of diverse perspectives and active engagement across all sectors. WRI’s exceptional convening ability and its strategic focus on people-centered solutions uniquely position it to drive transformative change. I am honored to rejoin WRI's Global Board and contribute to advancing its mission in ways that recognizes and empower those most impacted.”
Find a complete list of WRI’s Global Board Directors here.
About World Resources Institute
WRI is a trusted partner for change. Using research-based approaches, we work globally and in focus countries to meet people’s essential needs; to protect and restore nature; and to stabilize the climate and build resilient communities. We aim to fundamentally transform the way the world produces and uses food and energy and designs its cities to create a better future for all. Founded in 1982, WRI has nearly 2,000 staff around the world, with country offices in Brazil, China, Colombia, India, Indonesia, Mexico and the United States and regional offices in Africa and Europe.
Type Press Release Exclude From Blog Feed? 0Detroit Passed the First Law Giving Communities a Say in Development Projects. Here’s What Happened
In 2019 Stellantis (then known as Fiat Chrysler) announced a $2.5 billion plan to expand and modernize two of its auto assembly plants in Detroit. This triggered the city's Community Benefits Ordinance (CBO) — a unique law that requires companies launching major development projects to negotiate benefits for nearby residents.
In this case, Stellantis promised to create nearly 5,000 new jobs and invest $13.8 million in the local community, including in workforce development, education, youth programs, scholarships and more. It also committed to protect residents' quality of life and to comply with all federal, state and local laws.
This was in some ways a boon for the area, a low-income and majority Black community in Southeastern Detroit. The promise of new jobs generated hope and excitement among residents who had witnessed a significant drop in auto manufacturing jobs over the last two decades. Since its launch, they've seen funding flow in for workforce training and education.
But Stellantis did not fulfill all its promises.
After the Mack Avenue plant expansion was completed in 2021, locals started complaining about strong odors and air quality impacts — effects a state investigation linked to dangerous pollution from the facility. Michigan's government fined Stellantis several times for air quality violations. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency even opened an investigation into whether the state racially discriminated against residents by issuing the factory a permit.
But despite all this, the city of Detroit did not take action against Stellantis for breaking air quality laws — which clearly violated its agreement under the community benefits ordinance.
These outcomes, both good and bad, can offer critical lessons for similar efforts that are now underway across America.
Detroit Is an Early Mover in a Growing FieldWhile Detroit was the first U.S. city to roll out a city-wide community benefits ordinance in 2016, it's not alone in testing out such a system. Different kinds of community benefits frameworks have been cropping up nationwide in recent years, especially in the clean energy sphere.
Under the Biden administration, many project developers have been required to submit community benefits plans (CBPs), which lay out how they will engage with and deliver benefits to local communities, to receive federal funding. The future of this mandate is uncertain under the Trump administration; however, work around community benefits frameworks will likely keep gaining traction at the state and local levels. A few cities, including Cleveland, have already adopted community benefits ordinances like Detroit's. And a growing number of local governments are exploring similar laws for their jurisdictions. Interest in community benefits agreements (CBAs), which are legally binding agreements between developers and local communities, is also very high for clean energy projects.
Detroit is showing how giving communities a seat at the table can help shift long-standing paradigms of development. Its early experience offers valuable insights about how to center community voices and deliver real benefits through these frameworks, as well as how to ensure they're monitored and enforced. But it has also revealed pitfalls that need to be avoided.
WRI and Data for Progress took an in-depth look at Detroit's community benefits law to learn where it has succeeded — and where it falls short.
A mural surrounding the Stellantis Jeep plant in southeast Detroit. The company's expansion of two auto assembly plants promised new jobs and millions in local investment, but ended up compounding dangerous air pollution in an already polluted, majority Black neighborhood. Photo by Jim West/Alamy Stock Photo How Detroit's Community Benefits Ordinance WorksDetroit's CBO applies to any development project that is valued at or above $75 million and receives at least $1 million in financial support from the city. Once the CBO process is triggered, Detroit's Planning and Development Department determines the project's "impact area" — which includes all census tracts or census block groups in which a project is located — and sends a public meeting notice to its residents.
Learn More About Detroit's CBO
For more detail on Detroit's unique CBO process and a deeper analysis of its outcomes, see WRI's new working paper.
Nine people from the impact area are then selected to serve on a neighborhood advisory council (NAC), a group of community representatives that meets with city officials, the developer and community members to discuss project impacts and negotiate potential benefits. To serve on an NAC, people must be over 18, live within the project's impact area and be nominated by other residents.
Once the NAC and the developer have agreed on a final benefits package, it must be approved by the City Council before the project can move forward. The entire process — from the CBO being triggered to an agreement between the NAC and developer — typically happens over two to three months, with NAC meetings often occurring weekly. After an agreement is formalized, the Planning and Development Department holds annual public update meetings with the NAC and developer, at least for the first two years of the project.
The fact that developers enter into a formal agreement with the city sets Detroit's CBO apart from traditional community benefits agreements, which are forged directly between developers and the community. Some see this as a drawback: Advocates of community benefit agreements say direct negotiation gives communities power and self-determination that is lacking in a CBO.
In Detroit's CBO, the city is also tasked with tracking and enforcement. Its Civil Rights, Inclusion and Opportunity Department monitors all projects subject to the law and publishes biannual reports on companies' progress. If projects aren't hitting targets, the department labels them "off track" and notifies the company, giving it a chance to address the issue.
However, this department doesn't have the power to penalize developers when they are off track; it can only report a developer to the City Council and recommend enforcement action. The City Council ultimately decides whether to impose penalties, such as canceling land transfers or sales, requiring developers to pay fees or repay subsidies, or even suing them for breach of contract.
5 Lessons from Detroit's CBO — and the People It ImpactsDetroit's ordinance has had many positive impacts over the last eight years. Across 11 projects subject to the law so far, communities have won investments in jobs, education, training, affordable housing, green space, childcare, scholarships and home improvement. Community members and other stakeholders see the law as having given them a seat at the table, one that they did not have before.
But the system is not perfect. Detroit — and all cities and states — can learn from its shortcomings and continue to improve community benefits frameworks for the clean energy transition.
Here are five key takeaways from our analysis of the CBO and interviews with community members who have engaged in benefits negotiations:
1) Negotiating groups need to accurately represent the local community.One major community concern with Detroit's ordinance is whether local people are truly represented in the negotiating process. While all nine members of an NAC come from a pool of people nominated by impact area residents, only two are directly elected by them. The remaining members are selected by the city's Planning and Development Department and city council members. Some see these appointees as reflecting the city's or developer's point of view more than the community's.
Residents interested in serving on the NAC also have to appear and make their case at an in-person meeting. There are concerns that this selection process skews membership, as some may not be able to attend or participate in-person due to language barriers, childcare or work obligations, and other factors. Some interviewees in Detroit called for expanding the number of negotiators directly elected by community members and improving the accessibility of the CBO process to address these concerns.
In all cases, benefits agreements should be created by a representative and diverse group of stakeholders, including (but not limited to) labor unions, environmental groups, community members, faith organizations, community groups and local businesses. Accurate representation can help ensure that the resulting benefits framework truly reflects community needs and is not just "the last checkbox that [developers and the city] need to check off," as one interviewee put it.
Communities must also be met where they are through trustworthy liaisons and leaders. And materials and information need to be in languages and locations accessible to all community members.
SUVs built at Stellantis' Jefferson North Assembly Plant await transport to dealers. Jefferson North was one of two auto plants updated in Stellantis' project under the city's community benefits ordinance. Photo by Jim West/Alamy Stock Photo 2) Communities need better resources to level the playing field with developers.Some former NAC members we interviewed felt undercut during the negotiating process, especially in the Stellantis project. They didn't feel they had enough information to know what types of benefits they could ask for or how to quantify those benefits into a monetary ask for a developer. With an average of three months spent on negotiations, they also reported feeling rushed through the process.
In Stellantis' case, the city of Detroit and the company agreed to complete the community benefits process on an expedited timeline, within just 60 days of announcing the project. By giving Stellantis the freedom to walk away during the CBO process and forcing the NAC to make rapid decisions — without sufficient time to look into potential environmental and human health impacts — this agreement made some members feel like they were at a significant disadvantage.
Resources for Negotiators
Tools like the WRI and Data for Progress' U.S. Community Benefits Frameworks resources, the Fair Shake Environmental Legal Service's community benefits resources, Reimagine Appalachia's Community Benefits website, the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law's community benefits agreements database, or Jobs to Move America's Community Benefits Agreements Resource Center can help communities engage more effectively with project developers during negotiations.
Beyond having enough time to understand a project and negotiate, communities need added capacity and resources to level the playing field with developers. They should have access to legal experts who can help craft sound agreements and third-party experts who can help educate them on the technical aspects of projects, identify specific benefits tailored to their needs, and share best practices from previous agreements. Philanthropies, developers and governments could pay into a "community benefits fund" to cover the cost of legal aid, third-party experts and compensation for residents who participate in benefits negotiation processes.
3) Monitoring and enforcement are essential for follow-through.Several interviewees felt that the city fell short in enforcing Stellantis' commitments. In several of its progress reports, Detroit's Civil Rights, Inclusion and Opportunity Department marked Stellantis "off-track" for violating federal and state air quality laws. But it didn't refer the company to the City Council for punitive action, instead relying entirely on the state for enforcement. In the eyes of the local community, this is evidence that the CBO's enforcement mechanisms are ineffective, or not always fully brought to bear.
Unlike in a traditional community benefits agreement, where the community and the developer both hold enforcement power, the city is often the enforcement authority in a community benefits ordinance like Detroit's. That means its effectiveness hinges on whether a city has robust enforcement tools and is willing to deploy them.
But lax enforcement isn't just a problem in Detroit. Even though many community benefits frameworks are legally binding, their monitoring and enforcement provisions can be weak. It can be difficult to enforce agreements if they are written poorly or lack explicit, measurable accountability mechanisms.
All benefits agreements should be carefully drafted to include explicit details on monitoring, measuring and implementing developers' commitments. Agreements should also establish strong procedures and penalties for noncompliance, like binding arbitration, and make clear who will be responsible for tracking and enforcing commitments.
4) Benefits frameworks should incorporate racial and environmental justice tools to assess project impacts and fairly distribute benefits.From the get-go, Stellantis' Mack Avenue expansion was expected to increase air pollution in the surrounding area — a majority Black community with high asthma rates. To get the project approved under the Clean Air Act, Stellantis had to reduce emissions from another facility within greater Metro Detroit to avoid increasing overall pollution in the metro area. It did so — by reducing emissions at its plant in a predominantly white community in nearby Warren. This was possible in part because Detroit's CBO does not incorporate racial or environmental justice frameworks to identify, assess and address inequitable and unjust impacts.
"Race plays such a critical role in how [agreements] are negotiated. Who deserves to have a say and what the community deserves is all complicated by race and class." -Community representative in DetroitExisting environmental justice screening tools, such as Michigan's MiEJScreen and the federal government's Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool, can help avoid such outcomes. These combine population and environmental data to identify communities that face the greatest health burdens, whether from cumulative pollution or other factors, such as high poverty and unemployment.
While not always perfect, environmental justice tools can be used in the context of community benefits frameworks to understand how projects may exacerbate existing inequities, how risks can be mitigated, and how additional benefits can be targeted to historically marginalized communities as a means of restorative justice. For instance, if access to affordable housing is a concern in a particular community, then a project should be assessed for impacts on nearby home values and rents. Or, if a particular community is already facing high pollution burdens, then permits for new or expanded facilities should address pollution impacts within that same community.
In the words of one representative from a community-based organization, "Race plays such a critical role in how even CBAs are negotiated. Who deserves to have a say and what the community deserves is all complicated by race and class."
Emissions stacks at Stellantis' Jefferson North Assembly Plant. Photo by Jim West/Alamy Stock Photo 5) Governments and other stakeholders should consider partial or full community ownership of projects.In our conversations with Detroit stakeholders, we found that community members often mistrust both project developers and the local government when it comes to infrastructure projects. Full or partial community ownership of projects can be one way to help mitigate this.
Community ownership, especially for infrastructure projects that serve the public good and receive public dollars, can be explored through cooperative ownership and limited liability corporations. For example, a project could be run by an elected board of community members and workers, through which the community would help determine the project's scope, location and benefits. A city or local community development finance institution (CDFI) could also provide upfront capital to community-based organizations to enable these groups to take an equity stake in projects. Other financing tools, such as industrial bonds, could be used to earmark funds for public ownership; to directly finance projects; and to pass returns to the community in the form of public services, goods and benefits.
More research is needed to understand how such arrangements work best in practice. The research and policy community, including stakeholders engaged in developing community benefits frameworks, should analyze pathways to community ownership via CBOs and other frameworks. This analysis should compare cases where community ownership has or has not been implemented to identify the advantages, finance flows, legal frameworks and performance of different ownership models.
Done Right, Benefits Frameworks Are Good for Communities and the ClimateA full-scale shift to clean energy in the U.S. will only succeed if it balances infrastructure development with the needs of local communities. That includes accounting for historic inequities and ensuring that projects benefit people who need it most.
Detroit's CBO has made strides toward a new model of development, but reforms are needed to better engage communities and reach the law's full potential. This will require work and buy-in from developers, policymakers and residents alike. As one interviewee shared, "Detroit is a love story. So regardless of what happens, I'm always gonna be pro-Detroit and make sure that Detroit is benefiting from policy decisions that impact it."
As states, cities, businesses and civil society move forward with ambitious and equitable climate action, they can build on these lessons to develop more robust community engagement — and ensure developers are held accountable to their promises.
This article was written in collaboration with Data for Progress.
detroit-auto-plant-assembly.jpg U.S. Climate United States climate policy U.S. Climate Equity & Governance Climate Equity development Type Vignette Exclude From Blog Feed? 0 Projects Authors Devashree Saha Catherine Fraser Evana Said Grace Adcox Charlotte Scott Margo KenyonIndigenous Knowledge Is Key to Better Ocean Management
Communities like the Makahs, Yakamas and Puyallup lived in harmony with the rivers and coasts of the U.S. Pacific Northwest for generations. They revered the salmon, relying on it for food, livelihoods and cultural traditions. Waterways and salmon populations thrived — and so did native communities.
But beginning in the mid-1800s, everything changed.
The government restricted local communities’ fishing rights, dammed the rivers and expanded the commercial fishing industry. Commercial agriculture grew. Pesticides from nearby farms polluted waterways. Salmon populations plummeted.
The Makahs and others fought back through the “Fish Wars” of the 1960s, eventually earning back the right to fish their ancestral waters, though disputes linger to this day. Local communities now largely co-manage waterways such as the Columbia River with the Washington state government. They work to protect and restore salmon habitats by implementing fishing seasons and installing “fish ladders” to help fish navigate dammed waterways. While discussions on how best to manage the rivers continue, salmon populations have started to increase.
The case of the Pacific Northwest is just one example of how Indigenous communities play an integral role in sustainably managing waterways. Yet too often, they’re excluded from policymaking or denied their rights to steward the ecosystems they coexist with and depend upon.
A new Ocean Panel Blue Paper makes the case for governments to co-produce ocean management policies with Indigenous communities — not just to right historical wrongs, but to ensure that marine ecosystems are managed sustainably and equitably.
Fishing platforms in Stevenson, Washington. Local communities have won back many of their fishing rights, though disputes remain. Photo by GarysFRP/iStock Ocean Policies Often Disadvantage Indigenous Knowledge HoldersThere’s a longstanding legacy of inequitable distribution of ocean management strategies’ benefits and opportunities. Research shows Indigenous and local communities are often disadvantaged, with policies denying their fishing rights, restricting their access to coastal areas due to growing tourism and economic development, and excluding them from ocean decision-making.
These inequities persist due to active political and economic marginalization, reinforced by legal and governance frameworks. Policymakers also tend to prioritize economic and scientific views over Indigenous and traditional knowledge systems.
Not only are these realities unjust, they are in direct conflict with sustainable and equitable ocean planning.
The significant role of Indigenous and traditional knowledge systems in stewarding the ocean cannot be ignored. Many Indigenous Peoples have a deep connection to their surrounding environment that has been developed and verified over millennia. Indigenous knowledge systems often reflect a holistic and systematic way of thinking based on intimate relationships between humans and other species. These aspects of co-existing with the marine environment are essential for halting extractive or overly exploitive approaches to ocean governance.
There’s Growing Recognition of Indigenous Knowledge Systems in Ocean PlanningBut things are starting to change. Today, as many countries grapple with their colonial histories, there is growing recognition that co-producing ocean plans with Indigenous knowledge holders can lead to better laws and policies.
In Canada, for example, the concept of “Two-Eyed Seeing” is emerging. Mi’kmaq Elders Murdena and Albert Marshall define it as “the gift of multiple perspective treasured by many aboriginal peoples . . . it refers to learning to see from one eye with the strengths of Indigenous knowledges and ways of knowing, and from the other eye with the strengths of Western knowledges and ways of knowing, and to using both these eyes together, for the benefit of all.”
In New Zealand, the Whakatōhea Māori Trust Board partnered with the Moana Project, a large multidisciplinary ocean modeling research program which focuses on understanding marine heat waves, the connectivity of marine species and cross-cultural knowledge exchange. Indigenous knowledge and scientific data contributed to the development of the Whakatōhea Moana Plan, an Indigenous-led approach to management of the coastal and marine area. The Plan aims to enhance fisheries and ecosystems while expanding the benefits that the Whakatōhea people earn from the marine economy, among other goals.
A fishing boat in Banten, Indonesia. A constitutional amendment recognizes customary communities' rights to manage marine areas and fisheries. Photo by Tom Fisk/Pexels Integrating Knowledge Systems for Effective Ocean Management PlansAs part of their commitment to the High Level Panel for a Sustainable Ocean Economy, many national governments are currently in the process of developing Sustainable Ocean Plans, which act as an umbrella for ocean governance. The ultimate goal is to ensure 100% of a country’s national waters are sustainably managed in a way that delivers on international commitments and builds a resilient economy that benefits future generations.
However, how these plans are developed and by whom is of critical importance.
Specifically, governments have an opportunity to co-produce their Sustainable Ocean Plans in ways that engage individuals, communities and policymakers in a shared vision of ocean stewardship. This can allow ocean governance to be tailored to local contexts, as Indigenous and traditional knowledge is deeply rooted in specific ecosystems, landscapes and cultural understandings of nature. Co-producing Sustainable Ocean Plans with Indigenous and traditional knowledge-holders is also essential for achieving equity, restorative justice and decolonization in ocean governance.
There are many examples showing that including Indigenous knowledge and rights in policymaking can yield positive results, which can serve as inspiration for countries’ Sustainable Ocean Plans. For example, a 2000 amendment to the Indonesian constitution recognized “customary communities and their traditional rights.” The Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries now recognizes 24 coastal communities as “masyarakat hukum adat” (translated as “customary law community”), giving these communities the legal right to participate in the planning, use and management of their marine areas and fisheries. Such recognition builds on customary institutions such as Awig-awig that govern fishing and coral reef uses in Lombok and Bali, which have also been officially recognized by laws.
Meanwhile, in Australia, First Nations people have sustainably cared for their “sea country” for more than 65,000 years. For them, the ocean holds deep cultural and spiritual significance, and they have therefore balanced their economic aspirations with respectful stewardship of the marine environment for countless generations. Australia recognized the power of this enduring connection in its Sustainable Ocean Plan, establishing a dedicated national sea country First Nations reference group. The group, consisting of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with years of lived experience, provides strategic advice on culturally appropriate and respectful engagement with First Nations people. It also ensures First Nations’ perspectives and aspirations from around Australia are central in the plan’s development.
Ocean Planning with Indigenous CommunitiesRecognizing Indigenous Peoples' and traditional communities’ rights in ocean governance is first and foremost an issue of equity. Respecting knowledge plurality and establishing equitable partnerships based on trust and care must be at the heart of ocean policymaking. When done correctly, producing Sustainable Ocean Plans through true partnership provides pathways to restoring not only people’s relationship with the ocean, but with each other.
For more information, read the Ocean Panel's paper "Co-producing Sustainable Ocean Plans with Indigenous and Traditional Knowledge Holders."
bali-fisherman.jpg Ocean Indigenous Peoples & Local Communities Ocean Type Finding Exclude From Blog Feed? 0 Projects Authors Lisa Hiwasaki Maui Hudson Jacky Kosgei Mia Strand Micheline KhanCommunity Benefits Snapshot: Tallgrass-Bold Alliance CO2 Pipeline Community Benefits Agreement
Tallgrass is converting the existing 392-mile Trailblazer natural gas pipeline into a carbon dioxide (CO2) pipeline stretching across Nebraska, Colorado and Wyoming. The $1.5 billion project will transport CO2 from ethanol production in Nebraska to be sequestered underground in Wyoming. In 2024, Tallgrass signed a first-of-its-kind community benefits agreement with Bold Alliance, which establishes a series of community initiatives as well as creates landowner rights protections throughout the pipeline’s life cycle, from early project development through easement negotiations, operations and decommissioning. One such initiative, which is unique in the development of CO2 pipeline infrastructure, is Tallgrass’ agreement to pay a 10-year, two-part, shared value program, where landowners and a community foundation both receive an annual endowment — equal to $0.10 per ton of CO2 sequestered on the system annually.
Context- Project title: Trailblazer CO2 Pipeline
- Location: Beatrice, Nebraska to Eastern Wyoming
- Sector: Storage and transport for CO2 generated by ethanol plants
- Developer: Tallgrass
- Type of agreement: Community benefits agreement
About the project and involved stakeholders: Tallgrass is converting its existing 392-mile Trailblazer natural gas pipeline into a carbon dioxide (CO2) pipeline to decarbonize Nebraska’s ethanol industry. The $1.5 billion project will transport CO2 from ethanol production in Nebraska to be sequestered underground in Wyoming. The pipeline will be capable of storing 10 million metric tons of CO2 a year — the equivalent of removing 2 million passenger vehicles from the road every year. CO2 pipelines are an essential part of the carbon capture and storage, and carbon removal technologies advanced by the Biden administration to reduce CO2 emissions from industrial facilities and power plants.
In 2024, Tallgrass signed a first-of-its-kind community benefits agreement (CBA) with Bold Alliance, a group that builds unlikely partnerships to protect the environment — including property rights and water–and ensures the communities who shoulder energy projects are full partners. The CBA establishes a series of community initiatives as well as creates landowner rights protections throughout the pipeline’s life cycle, from early project development through easement negotiations, operations and decommissioning. Bold Alliance has served landowners in Nebraska since 2010 and has since expanded to help landowners nationwide fight fossil fuel projects on their properties and in their communities. Bold Alliance was instrumental in halting the Keystone XL Pipeline in Nebraska, South Dakota and Montana.
EngagementIn 2022, Tallgrass publicly announced the Trailblazer project to use the pipeline to sequester the CO2 byproduct of ethanol production in Nebraska, facilitating the continuation of the biofuels industry in a net-zero future. Around this time, several proposed CO2 pipelines in the Midwest had been canceled or postponed due to a combination of local opposition and state permitting decisions. Farmers and other landowners opposed these projects and viewed the process of securing project rights-of-way as a violation of their rights. In many of these cases, locals felt that concerns around safety were minimized by the pipeline companies rather than directly addressed. In one instance, local opposition delayed a project by more than two years and more than doubled its initial cost.
At the same time, the ethanol industry is a central component of Nebraska’s economy, supporting 6,000 full-time jobs and adding $4.5 billion to the state’s annual GDP. Decarbonizing the ethanol industry was, therefore, viewed by some as critical to create a viable future for the biofuel and sustainable aviation fuel industries overall, and ethanol in particular.
Bold Alliance approached Tallgrass in 2023 to propose the idea of putting protections and benefits into a formal CBA that included the concerns shared by dozens of other local organizations during Tallgrass’ engagement over the previous 18 months. Tallgrass determined that negotiating such an agreement could provide assurances to a broad swath of stakeholders. Representatives from Bold Alliance and Tallgrass said in interviews that reaching a CBA was a more financially and strategically prudent move than either failing to properly address concerns or potentially fighting years-long court battles over the pipeline.
Tallgrass is the first pipeline company to proactively engage with local communities to ensure benefits for landowners and successfully negotiate and execute such a written agreement. Its successful execution was informed by the company’s broader community engagement efforts, which included eight open houses, over a dozen community roundtables and nearly 1,000 stakeholder engagements, including direct engagement with large agricultural trade associations who represent the vast majority of landowners in the state. This proactive engagement, independent of the CBA, allowed Tallgrass to better understand and contextualize the perspectives raised by Bold Alliance, which contributed significantly to the company’s willingness to commit to the terms brought forth by Bold Alliance.
This engagement also informed the developer’s commitments within and outside the CBA, and demonstrated the developer’s commitment to safety, landowner rights and accountability. According to interviewees, for a CBA to be successful, the developer must authentically engage with groups who may be opposed to the project and be willing to commit to project changes to address community and stakeholder concerns.
While the CBA was signed by Tallgrass and Bold Alliance, it was also endorsed by 11 Nebraska-based organizations, including the Nebraska Farm Bureau, Nebraska Farmers Union, Nebraska Corn Growers Association, Nebraska Cattlemen, Nebraska Soybean Association, Nebraska Sorghum Producers, Nebraska State Dairy Association, Nebraska Pork Producers Association, We Support Agriculture, Nebraska State Volunteer Firefighters Association, and Renewable Fuels Nebraska. By endorsing the CBA, these groups expressed their support for the CBA, but are not legally party to the CBA.
BenefitsBold Alliance agreed to not oppose the project so long as Tallgrass abided by the terms of the CBA.
Tallgrass agreed to substantial investments and efforts related to landowner protections, public safety and community investment.
Key benefits of the CBA include:
1) Landowner ProtectionsLandowner protections outlined within the CBA span from initial pipeline surveying work through pipeline easement negotiation, construction and decommissioning. For surveying, landowners are provided a standard 48-hour notice before their property is surveyed and, if a landowner gives survey permission, but the property is ultimately not used for the project, the landowner receives a $500 payment. As it relates to the easement negotiation process required to secure a right-of-way agreement, Tallgrass agreed to make any easement purchase offers at fair market value and to not use eminent domain until after a 90-day good-faith-negotiation period with landowners. Tallgrass agreed to view eminent domain as an option of last resort and to ensure any potential use of eminent domain was clearly communicated to landowners in writing. This solves for an ongoing issue identified by Bold Alliance in pipeline easement process where land agents often use threatening tactics that do not allow a fair negotiations process.
Tallgrass also agreed to offer landowners the option to choose between the traditional up-front lump-sum or an annual payment option for their easement payments. Over the last 14 years, Bold Alliance found that a large, upfront easement payment comes with a significant tax burden for landowners.
Additionally, Tallgrass established a 10-year royalty program —a first in the industry — which is set at 10 cents per metric ton of CO2 sequestered on the system, which at maximum pipeline capacity could result in $1 million a year flowing back to landowners along the right-of-way. Each landowner’s share will be determined by the linear length of the pipeline on that landowner’s property relative to the entire pipeline.
One of the key pieces Bold Alliance included in the CBA was a provision for decommissioning at the end of the project’s life. This allows landowners to decide to leave the pipeline in place on their land and to be compensated an additional $15,000, or to request Tallgrass to remove the pipe and have the land reclaimed.
2) Public SafetyTo protect the public from health risks, such as headaches, nausea, increased heart rate and suffocation, associated with potential CO2 leaks, Tallgrass agreed to initially provide $400,000 to equip and $200,000 to train first responders on CO2 pipeline incident response. In addition, Tallgrass will expand its engagement with Local Emergency Planning Commissions and support their annual trainings for first responders in the counties associated with the project’s right-of-way. They also committed to provide additional funding of up to $40,000 a year to replace or replenish emergency equipment as needed.
To address concerns for residents who may be unaware of the pipeline, Tallgrass will mail annual public safety notices to all landowners within a three-mile radius of the pipeline. Finally, Tallgrass will work with the Nebraska Department of Emergency Management and provide $100,000 to develop a regional CO2 emergency alert system.
3) Community InvestmentTallgrass will make an initial $500,000 donation to a community fund to support counties along the right-of-way. This is in addition to an annual community endowment of up to $1 million per year based on the total volume of CO2 sequestered. Grants from the foundation are allocated by a neutral third party. Neither Tallgrass nor Bold Alliance are responsible for the dispersal of grants to the community. Instead, the community gets to decide who benefits.
Oversight and EnforcementBold Alliance hired a full-time staff member to oversee the implementation of the CBA. Community members can call Bold Alliance if they believe a violation has occurred, and Bold Alliance will work with Tallgrass to ensure the concern is addressed.
The CBA is legally binding, and non-compliance could result in a lawsuit to enforce the provisions. If either party breaches the agreement, there will be a 60-day written notice period to resolve the issue. Some provisions are in effect until the project begins commercial operations, while others will last the lifetime of the project.
Strengths of the CBAAll parties to the agreement were engaged and active participants in the local community. Bold Alliance has deep local ties and relationships with the Nebraska community and the fact that the CBA was endorsed by 11 community organizations is a testament to its organizational reputation. Tallgrass also has a strong local reputation because of its 18 months of proactive community engagement before the CBA negotiations began, its existing presence and track record via its natural gas operations and its local presence, with more than 100 employees living in Nebraska. According to an interviewee from Bold Alliance, these factors helped give assurances that Tallgrass was serious about community engagement and reaching a strong agreement.
Tallgrass and Bold Alliance each had one lead negotiator, facilitating the establishment of a strong relationship and trust between both parties. Both sides were able to educate the other on the difficulties they faced on pipeline projects and provide a new perspective on provisions in the agreement.
The CBA provided tailored, concrete community benefits, ensuring the CBA will improve the lives of affected landowners through direct payments and a new community foundation. Previous projects had made broad promises of job creation and local tax revenue that community members said couldn’t be seen, so Bold Alliance prioritized tangible and direct benefits. Additionally, interviewees highlighted how these benefits were tailored to the community, stressing that future developers and community groups cannot just follow a generic CBA template, but instead must customize it to fit local needs.
Endorsements from 11 local community organizations showed the magnitude of support. Getting validation from all sides of the ideological spectrum allowed greater buy-in from local residents. Interviewees shared that Tallgrass’ engagement with stakeholders other than Bold Alliance led to broad support for and endorsement of the CBA. Highlighting the importance of Tallgrass’ broad engagement, one interviewee said:
“We had nearly a dozen statewide NGOs endorse the agreement …They themselves had things they wanted to see, like some last-minute provisions related to liability and emergency response. It was an interesting negotiation process, because it was more or less with a dozen different parties. But I think that's what helped make it a really valuable document with all the different perspectives that were in there. And I think it was really refreshing for them to see an infrastructure company, after some of their other experiences, that would come in and say ‘I know that this bothered you, and we're going to address it in writing and make sure it doesn't happen again.’”
The CBA established an in-community “accountability partner” in Bold Alliance, with Bold Alliance well-situated in the community to respond to any violations of the CBA. Tallgrass encouraged a high degree of specificity within the CBA to include clear accountability metrics to ensure it upholds what it agreed to. As a result, the CBA clearly lays out the terms of monitoring, reporting and enforcing provisions of the agreement.
The CBA was just one component of Tallgrass’ engagement with the community. Tallgrass held more than 600 stakeholder engagements in 2023 and will hold more than 1,000 in 2024. Tallgrass engaged with corn growers, cattlemen, trade associations, first responders, emergency managers, and other community members well before a CBA was proposed and has continued to communicate with stakeholders after it was signed. Tallgrass has three full-time employees tasked with engaging with public officials, community organizations, landowners and more. Beyond the CBA, Tallgrass worked with individual stakeholders and other organizations to address concerns and build trust. An interviewee highlighted the importance of ongoing community engagement, of which the CBA was just one small part, saying:
“And [the CBA’s] an element of an overall, broader community engagement effort, right? A company shouldn't think that they can do a CBA and then, all of a sudden, they've checked the box and done their community engagement. The CBA is, to us, a very small, very important, and impactful piece. But if that's all we focus on, or if that's all a company focuses on, that should not be what they take away from this case. Again, [the CBA’s] an element that is indicative of the need for broader engagement throughout the life of a project.”
Challenges and Gaps of the CBABold Alliance conducted limited community engagement in the development of the CBA. Despite Bold Alliance’s organizational reputation and that the CBA was supported by several local organizations, some community members said they felt left out of Bold Alliance’s process because the organization only involved the community with the CBA near its completion. However, with nearly two decades of experience fighting pipeline projects, Bold Alliance said it was already aware of the key community and landowner protections to include in an agreement and was positioned to negotiate a CBA on behalf of the local community.
Tallgrass would not agree to not use eminent domain to secure its right of way in the CBA, though, Tallgrass has generally worked with landowners and rerouted the pipeline to avoid the use of eminent domain. The use of eminent domain, according to interviewees, is often fiercely opposed by landowners, but Tallgrass would not commit to never using it. Bold Alliance agreed to compromise on this issue (and won all its other priority community protections and benefits). The CBA includes a provision that a notice of eminent domain would not occur until after a 90-day good-faith-negotiation period. An interviewee from Bold Alliance noted that other pipeline and right-of-way projects may continue to face concerns around the use of eminent domain, and this case reveals the challenges of attempting to ban the use of eminent domain outright.
In Nebraska, state protections do not require or encourage community engagement, as Nebraska has no authority over CO2 pipelines. These pipelines are operated under the federal jurisdiction and regulations of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), but there is no additional state regulation governing siting and decommissioning of CO2 pipelines. Instead, the safety and protection of landowner rights are left to the communities themselves. As a result, developers must willingly come to the table and engage with communities.
Tallgrass’ CO2 pipeline is based on converting existing infrastructure, making the CBA negotiation relatively simpler compared to negotiations related to new infrastructure projects. According to interviewees from both Bold Alliance and Tallgrass, new infrastructure projects that involve new rights-of-way would likely be more difficult to negotiate a CBA around while guaranteeing the same degree of benefits to landowners. However, large portions of the Trailblazer project still required new infrastructure and the permitting of new rights-of-way for the new pipelines to ethanol plants, which can provide insights for other right-of-way infrastructure projects being built around the country.
Further Resources- Tallgrass, Bold Alliance Community Benefit Agreement
- Tallgrass, Bold Alliance, and Key Agricultural and First Responder Organizations Announce a Community Benefits Agreement (Bold Alliance)
Three Takeaways on Green Infrastructures and Nature-Based Solutions for Urban Resilience
Governments, organizations, world leaders and financiers are increasingly recognizing the potential for nature-based solutions to advance climate adaptation. But what do these solutions look like in practice, and how can they be implemented and scaled up for the benefit of people, nature and climate?
Scaling Urban Nature-based Solutions (NbS) for Climate Adaptation in Sub-Saharan Africa (SUNCASA), an initiative jointly managed by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) and WRI, is answering these questions. SUNCASA aims to enhance resilience, protect biodiversity and advance gender equality and social inclusion through nature-based solutions in three African cities: Johannesburg, South Africa; Dire Dawa, Ethiopia; and Kigali, Rwanda.
IISD and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (ICUN) recently highlighted SUNCASA in the fifth installment of their monthly NAture-based Solutions for climate Adaptation (NAbSA) Dialogue Series. This series takes an in-depth look at NbS and climate adaptation, covering topics such as how to incorporate gender equality into NbS, the importance of biodiversity and ecosystem evaluation. In this particular session, the conversation focused on the role of green infrastructure and NbS for urban resilience.
Here are three main takeaways from the NAbSA dialogues:
1. African cities must grapple with both too much and too little water.Many sub-Saharan African cities are faced with the double threat of water insecurity and flooding risk. Over 60% of urban areas in sub-Saharan Africa lack basic water and sanitation. At the same time, climate change is worsening flood risk in many cities. In Kenya, for example, catastrophic floods earlier this year affected more than 100,000 households and killed almost 300 people. In the capital of Nairobi, informal settlements were hit particularly hard, with the flooding displacing over 40,000 people.
Climate change has exacerbated these challenges, but they are not new. In 2006, a devastating flood stemming from the Dechatu River in Dire Dawa, Ethiopia, caused significant fatalities and damage throughout the city. Since then, the Dechatu River catchment has experienced ecosystem degradation — erosion, most notably — and is further strained by rapid urbanization. The dialogues spotlighted SUNCASA’s work in Dire Dawa. The project is addressing flood risk, water stress, erosion and urban heat through land restoration and improved land-use practices around the catchment. It also utilizes tree planting, buffer zone development around the Dechatu River and agroforestry in the city, exemplifying how NBS can be a win-win for nature and cities alike.
2. Well-being for people and nature go hand in hand.A hallmark of SUNCASA is the project’s gender-responsive approach to NbS. In each of the three cities where SUNCASA is active, the project has partners focused on gender equity and social inclusion (GESI) — and for good reason. Research shows that NbS interventions require the incorporation of critical community-level stakeholders, which often includes women, to be successful.
Ndivile Mokoena, Project Coordinator for Gender CC South Africa, a local SUNCASA partner in Johannesburg, put it best: “There’s still a gap in how women and other underrepresented groups are engaged in NbS, despite their acute role in protecting and managing natural resources...In integrating the GESI approach, we ensure that our activities are not only effective, but also equitable.”
For gender-responsive nature-based solutions to be effective, they must also be intentional. Project developers need to ensure the right conditions for enabling gender-responsive approaches at all stages, from design all the way to implementation, monitoring and maintenance.
According to Vedaste Uwayisenga, Ag. Director of the Construction Permitting One Stop Centre Unit for the City of Kigali, the first step of this approach is connecting with the right stakeholders. “I would consider, first, to challenge ourselves [in] having a sense of ownership and awareness...people must be aware to have this kind of inclusive participation,” he noted in the dialogue.
3. Similar challenges need distinct, contextual solutions.While the three SUNCASA cities are all confronting climate and water-related challenges, each one has unique risk factors, causes and solutions. Johannesburg, for instance, deals with pollution and solid waste dumping, while the focus in Kigali is floods, landslides and agricultural challenges. Even when cities face similar challenges, the appropriate solution, and specific NbS inverventions, may differ. While all three cities face risks from flash floods, for example, Dire Dawa needs agroforestry and urban tree planting to reduce runoff and urban heat, Kigali needs vegetated buffer zones to stabilize gullies and prevent riverbank encroachment, and Johannesburg needs to clear invasive species and reintroduce indigenous plants.
“The circumstances in Johannesburg are very different from Kigali and from Dire Dawa,” said Janina Schnick, Project Lead for IISD. “In our project, we’re trying to go and do very localized assessments: What needs to be done, who are the groups that need more access to water resources, and how can they be involved in the process?”
To Schnick’s point, in addition to the contextual differences in the challenges and solutions themselves, different actors will need to be involved on different issues and at different stages.
“There is no silver bullet and no one-size-fits-all to address these issues,” added Tony Nello, Senior Programme Officer for Cities at IUCN. “Certainly, there will be a need of combining approaches such as regulation, initiatives, (and) market-based instruments to address these issues... One single city government cannot address this alone.”
To learn more about SUNCASA and hear from the experts directly, explore the full recording and slide deck from this fifth session of the NAbSA Dialogue series.
nabsa.jpg Cities Africa nature-based solutions Cities adaptation Type Project Update Exclude From Blog Feed? 0 Projects Authors Alemakef Tassew Sadof AlexanderKey Outcomes from COP29: Unpacking the New Global Climate Finance Goal and Beyond
After two weeks of fraught negotiations at the UN climate summit (COP29) in Baku, Azerbaijan, delegates eked out an agreement on a new climate finance goal.
The new goal of at least $300 billion annually by 2035 is triple the amount of the previous target, aiming to mobilize much-needed finance for developing countries to cut emissions and address the mounting impacts of climate change. But while the new target is an important down payment for a safer, more equitable future, it is far less than developing countries need to pursue low-carbon development and protect their citizens from increasing droughts, floods and wildfires.
In addition, countries failed to reach consensus on how or whether to acknowledge the outcome from last year's climate summit, which calls for nations to transition away from fossil fuels. The issue was ultimately punted to future negotiating sessions.
Many developing country representatives left the summit deeply disappointed and frustrated that wealthier countries didn't put more money on the table. "Once again, the countries most responsible for the climate crisis have failed us," said the Least Developing Countries Group in a statement. "We leave Baku without an ambitious climate finance goal, without concrete plans to limit global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees C, and without the comprehensive support desperately needed for adaptation and loss and damage."
While the outcome did demonstrate that countries are still committed to working together on climate action — even if imperfectly — more ambition is essential, especially in the run-up to COP30 in Belém, Brazil.
Here, we offer a deeper dive on the key outcomes from COP29 and what lies ahead:
- Climate Finance
- Implementing the Global Stocktake
- National Climate Commitments
- Carbon Markets
- Adaptation
- Loss and Damage
- Cooperative Initiatives
As expected, finance was the center of attention at COP29. The stakes were high, given how crucial external finance is for enabling all developing countries to transition to a low-carbon and climate-resilient path, and the close relationship between ambition and finance. Against the backdrop of an Olympic-sized stadium, negotiators thrashed out their significantly different starting positions and crossed the finish line with a way forward.
The cornerstone of the new agreement is an upgraded finance goal of at least $300 billion annually by 2035, replacing the previous goal of $100 billion annually by 2020 and through 2025. This goal is comprised of public finance, plus private finance that is specifically leveraged by that public finance. But while $300 billion is triple the previous target, it is below the target that could have been reached and far from sufficient to meet the total needs of developing nations. This left many around the world understandably angry and frustrated.
As with the previous goal, developed countries will take the lead on mobilizing finance. Unlike the previous goal, however, the new agreement allows for developing countries' contributions to multilateral climate finance and their own bilateral finance to be voluntarily counted towards the goal. Even though they can opt out, this is a notable shift in the willingness of certain developing nations to officially and voluntarily contribute to the goal. Since previously only 70% of MDB finance was counted toward the $100 billion goal — reflecting the proportion of capital provided by developed countries — the $100 billion and $300 billion goals can't be compared as apples to apples.
Recognizing the need for further funds, the COP29 outcome also called on all actors to work toward enabling $1.3 trillion in finance for developing countries by 2035, encompassing the $300 billion as well as finance from other sources, such as significant private sector flows. This $1.3 trillion number is much closer to the level of finance needed by developing countries to protect themselves from escalating climate impacts and get on a low carbon pathway. Parties agreed to launch a "Baku to Belém Roadmap" on how to muster the additional trillion.
In addition to raising more finance, the adoption of the new goal was also an opportunity to try to address finance quality and access. For some developing nations, the type of finance — for example, grants versus loans and how easy it is to access — was just as important as the amount. Some also felt that the distribution of funds should be a central focus to ensure that finance reaches the poorest and most vulnerable countries.
The final decision text is light on addressing these issues. It does mention the special circumstances of Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and small island developing states (SIDS) and urges easier access to finance through, for example, simplified application and disbursement processes. It also calls for a special assessment of access to climate finance. However, the agreement stays away from some of the more concrete demands, such as setting specific finance targets based on regions, income levels or types of spending (for example, for adaptation). This left some nations concerned that they will continue to struggle to receive enough finance.
To track progress, the new goal turns to the existing enhanced transparency framework of the Paris Agreement and establishes a progress report for 2028. Its implementation will also be considered as part of the Global Stocktake before 2035, including a revision in 2030.
What's next?As countries look to COP30 in Belém, the next year will be crucial for delivering existing international public finance commitments. The current goals to double adaptation finance and provide $100 billion in climate finance annually will both come to an end in 2025. Countries must continue to follow through on these commitments while setting their sights higher moving forward.
Countries can also explore ways to build on the $300 billion goal, including working with international financial institutions on further reform, using innovative finance and capital enhancement, and engaging through the Global Solidarity Levies Task Force (which aims to explore feasible options for climate levies). Next year also offers opportunities to deepen discussions on debt in low- and middle-income countries, including through the Expert Review on Debt, Nature and Climate, which will publish its final report in spring 2025.
Much work is needed to ensure that the full financial system — including the private sector, countries' own resources and national development banks — scale and align their financial flows with the goals of the Paris Agreement. The last Sharm el-Sheikh dialogue on how to carry out Article 2.1c (which entails aligning the whole financial system with global climate mitigation and adaptation needs) will take place ahead of COP30.
Aerial view of a large solar plant in Garissa, Kenya. The new climate finance goal set at COP29 will play an important role in financing climate action in developing countries. Photo by Xinhua/Alamy Stock Photo Implementing the Global Stocktake OutcomeWhat happened?At COP28 in Dubai, the first Global Stocktake (GST) assessed collective progress against the Paris Agreement and laid out next steps for implementation. The summit's most notable outcomes included a historic call for countries to transition away from fossil fuels, together with goals on scaling up renewable energy, cutting transport emissions and protecting forests.
All of this was meant to inform the next generation of national climate plans (known as "nationally determined contributions," or NDCs), due in 2025 ahead of COP30.
Discussions at COP29 centered on how to take these groundbreaking outcomes forward, primarily under the framework of the United Arab Emirates dialogue. However, divergent views emerged over the dialogue's scope. Some countries argued that discussions should focus exclusively on scaling up finance, while many others insisted on addressing the full range of GST outcomes, including the transition away from fossil fuels.
Another flashpoint was whether the draft COP29 decision text on the UAE dialogue sufficiently reiterated the GST's energy and nature outcomes, particularly on the fossil fuel transition. Several countries argued that omitting explicit references to fossil fuels would be a troubling setback. Despite efforts by the COP29 presidency to bridge divides, negotiators failed to achieve consensus and deferred these discussions to next year.
What's next?Discussions will resume at the UNFCCC intersessional talks in Bonn, Germany in June 2025, with the aim of reaching a resolution by COP30 in November 2025. The deferral also extended to other mitigation-related agenda items, including elaborating features for countries' new NDCs.
Despite this setback, countries now have a critical opportunity to take forward key mitigation objectives in their NDCs, which are meant to be informed by the Global Stocktake outcomes — including incorporating economy-wide emissions reductions for all greenhouse gases (GHGs), transitioning away from fossil fuels, and taking significant action on renewable energy, transport and forests.
National Climate Plans (NDCs)What happened?Countries' next round of NDCs, due early next year, will set their emissions-reduction targets for 2035 (ideally, alongside strengthened targets for 2030) and highlight measures they will implement across specific sectors. Some countries set this process in motion by unveiling their new NDCs at COP29, including:
- The United Arab Emirates (UAE) was the first to submit a new NDC, committing to cut GHG emissions 47% by 2035 relative to 2019. The pledge also highlights sectoral targets (such as for power, industry and transport) that could help deliver its topline emissions-reduction goal. While both are important steps forward for the UAE, the new 2035 target is undermined by a relatively unambitious target for 2030 and current policies that perpetuate fossil fuel production.
- The United Kingdom announced its target to reduce GHG emissions at least 81% by 2035 compared to 1990. If fully implemented, this new target makes a credible contribution to the global goal of holding temperature rise to 1.5 degrees C, according to analysis from the U.K.'s Climate Change Committee, and charts a steep trajectory to reach net-zero emissions, building on a relatively strong 2030 target. Achieving these targets, however, will require the U.K. to strengthen its current policies and investments, particularly those focused on rapidly reducing fossil fuel use.
- Brazil's new NDC commits to cut emissions 59%-67% from 2005 levels by 2035. Achieving a 67% reduction in GHG emissions would place Brazil on a pathway to net zero and signal its willingness to tackle the climate crisis head-on, while delivering the lower end of this range would call the country's ambition into question. The Brazilian NDC is also notable for improving coordination with cities and other subnational actors, which are critical for overcoming the climate crisis, through projects such as the CHAMP initiative.
A coalition of both developed and developing countries — including Canada, Chile, the EU, Mexico, Norway, Panama, Switzerland and U.K. — pledged at COP29 to submit NDCs featuring topline, economy-wide targets that chart a steep path to their own net-zero targets. Notably, when joining the group, Mexico became the last G20 nation to commit to achieving net-zero emissions by 2050.
In addition, at the G20 Summit and during the second week of the COP, Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto expressed optimism that his country's GHG emissions would reach net zero by 2050 — a full decade earlier than previously announced. He also said Indonesia will aim to phase out all fossil fuel power plants, including its large fleet of coal plants, within the next 15 years. However, replacing that electricity will require much more than the 75 GW in renewable energy the country has promised by that time.
What's next?All countries must come forward with new climate commitments ahead of COP30. (Although NDCs are officially due in February 2025, some will realistically come later in the year.)
The focus should be on major emitters, which must lead efforts to dramatically cut emissions. This includes setting robust near-term targets that put net-zero goals within reach. Crucially, countries should also embed climate action at the core of their economic and sectoral strategies — including in their NDCs — with decisive efforts to rapidly transition away from fossil fuels and towards a zero-carbon, climate-resilient future.
An Indigenous man paddles his canoe down the Amazon River. Brazil, home to some of the world's most valuable ecosystems, was one of the first countries to unveil a new 2025 climate commitment at COP29. Photo by Sebastien Lecocq/Alamy Stock Photo Carbon MarketsWhat happened?After years of negotiation, COP29 took some key steps towards operationalizing the Paris Agreement's Article 6 on carbon markets. These include agreeing on guidelines for the provisions in Article 6.2, which involve carbon trades between countries (known as Internationally Traded Mitigation Outcomes, or ITMOs), and for the Article 6.4 provisions that involve carbon crediting between a country and another entity under the Paris Agreement Crediting Mechanism (PACM), usually considered a successor to the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM).
COP29 started with an agreement on the first day to move forward a set of standards adopted by the PACM Supervisory Body, including ones involving carbon removals, methodologies for crediting, and social and environmental safeguards. However, countries requested that the Supervisory Body elaborate on the standards and return to next year's COP in Belém with an update.
Countries also agreed to some additional technical but important guidelines that will allow Article 6 to enter into operation. One of these related to ITMOs between countries, stipulating that once a credit has been traded, the authorization of that credit cannot be changed by the issuing country without prior agreement (in other words, trades cannot be retroactively changed). In addition, negotiators agreed that if inconsistencies are found between the information provided about credits and a review by a technical body, then countries cannot use those credits toward achievement of their NDCs.
What's next?Following the decision on the PACM standards on the first day of the COP, the Supervisory Body for the Article 6.4 mechanism must now further clarify these standards. A few issues still remain for countries to iron out in future years, including technical guidance on corresponding adjustments in case of single- and multiple-year NDCs, and matters related to emissions avoidance.
Despite the scope for further work, Article 6 can now enter into effect and countries can begin taking steps to trade credits. Scrutiny will be critical to ensure that credits are credible, result in emissions reductions, and adhere to environmental and social safeguards.
AdaptationWhat happened?The Paris Agreement established a goal to enhance adaptation, strengthen resilience and reduce vulnerability to climate change. But this "Global Goal on Adaptation" (GGA), as it's called, still hasn't been implemented. COP28 yielded some results when countries agreed to a framework for global climate resilience that included a range of targets, and established a two-year work programme to determine which indicators would be used to measure progress against the global adaptation goal. Negotiators were meant to make further progress at COP29 by selecting indicators, but discussions were derailed.
Negotiations quickly got mired in whether there should be indicators for "means of implementation," which refers to capacity-building, technology transfer and financial support. Some developing countries advocated for means-of-implementation indicators while some developed nations argued against them. Ultimately, a compromise was reached to develop "enablers of implementation" for adaptation, which are not quantifiable. Such enablers include means of implementation but also refer to things like governance and transparency.
Delegates agreed to include the GGA on the agenda for future meetings.
National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) were also a key topic for discussion. NAPs allow countries to set out plans for how they will adapt to the impacts of climate change by reducing vulnerabilities and building resilience. Although considerable progress was made during the negotiations, countries failed to reach agreement on key issues, and new text on NAPs was ultimately not included in the final COP29 decision. The draft text worked on at COP29 will form the basis for debates in Bonn in June.
Outside the negotiations, the Adaptation Fund, which has struggled to meet its yearly target of $300 million since 2022, got a boost when Germany announced a new pledge of €60 million ($63 million). The new funds bring the total amount to around $124 million.
What's next?A hybrid technical workshop is planned for mid-2025 to facilitate experts' work on the GGA, with the aim of developing a set of no more than 100 globally and nationally applicable indicators to be considered at COP30. This is meant to help build an inclusive, data-driven and transformative adaptation framework, with minimal reporting burdens and accommodating diverse national contexts. Additionally, a special event will take place at the 2025 climate talks in Bonn, where the IPCC will provide an update on its work in this area, including the ongoing revision of its 1994 technical guidelines for assessing impacts and adaptations.
Construction of a new sea wall in Devon, England to protect against coastal flooding. Countries around the world need to rapidly step up their actions to adapt and build resilience to climate impacts. Photo by Jay OSullivan/Alamy Stock Photo Loss and DamageWhat happened?Countries conducted a review of the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage (WIM), which takes place every five years. The WIM has three main purposes in supporting responses to "loss and damage," or the impacts of climate change that are so severe they cannot be adapted to. These include:
- enhancing knowledge and understanding of risk management;
- strengthening dialogue, coherence, coordination and synergies among relevant stakeholders;
- and enhancing action and support (such as finance, technology transfer and capacity building).
At COP29, countries were not able to agree on key issues of the WIM's review, such as voluntary guidelines on incorporating loss and damage in NDCs or details of a proposed "state of loss and damage" report. Negotiators punted these issues to Bonn.
Beyond the negotiations, it was particularly notable that more countries and subnational entities announced pledges to the Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage (FRLD), established in 2023 to help developing countries address losses and damages. Australia, Austria, Luxembourg, New Zealand, South Korea and Sweden pledged funds, as well as Wallonia, a region in Belgium. These pledges add $85 million to the $674.4 million already pledged to the fund — still a far cry from the $580 billion in yearly losses and damages anticipated by 2030. It will be important to verify that these pledges represent new and additional finance, rather than repackaging previous commitments.
What's next?At the Bonn climate talks, countries will once again review the WIM and attempt to achieve consensus. Countries should also make good on their pledges to the FRLD as soon as possible as well as add more funds.
Cooperative InitiativesWhat happened?The last few years have seen a rise in "cooperative initiatives" launched during COPs, which provide opportunities outside the formal negotiations for governments, the private sector, cities and others to work together to fight climate change. This was also true at COP29, with the COP29 Presidency launching several pledges and governments and other stakeholders signing on, including:
- Thirty countries — representing nearly 50% of all methane emissions from organic waste — signed the COP29 Declaration on Reducing Methane from Organic Waste. Delivering on this pledge will require addressing food loss and waste and elevating it as a political priority. The 2024 declaration builds on the Global Methane Pledge launched at COP26 in Glasgow, which now has 159 signatories and has delivered 100 national plans with methane targets and committed $2 billion in grants for methane abatement.
- More than 100 countries agreed to increase global energy storage sixfold. This builds on the outcomes from COP28's Global Stocktake on increasing renewable energy and energy efficiency, completing "the trifecta of global goals we need to build the clean, secure, resilient power system."
- The COP29 Presidency also launched several "continuity coalitions" to bring together previous COP presidencies and other international organizations, with the purpose of ensuring that sectoral pledges build upon one another and do not duplicate efforts. These continuity initiatives include work with UN-Habitat on urban climate action, with the World Health Organization on climate and health, and with the UN Food and Agriculture Organization on the role of farmers in addressing climate change, among others.
As the scale of climate challenges grows, a recent WRI progress report shows efforts in areas like energy, halting forest lost, transforming food systems and shifting to low-carbon transport are largely off-track to achieve climate goals. New pledges, declarations and initiatives can be helpful in spurring action, but only if they lead to real change. As WRI events at COP29 highlighted, collaborative efforts should embrace regular reporting of progress towards goals, laying out how their efforts are contributing to the initiative's goals as well as challenges limiting further cooperative action.
Building on Baku's OutcomesThe climate finance agreement reached in Baku sets an important, albeit modest, foundation to help developing countries transition to a low-carbon future and protect their citizens from climate impacts. The hard work continues — from Baku to Belém and beyond — to scale up public climate finance and align wider finance with the Paris Agreement's goals, sending a signal to developing countries on likely investment flows as Parties prepare their next NDCs.
The next year will also test countries' willingness to rapidly slash emissions and build climate resilience. Global emissions need to be cut 60% below 2019 levels by 2035; countries should rise to this level of ambition in their NDCs, backed by sectoral commitments, strong and effective policies, investment signals, and society-wide efforts to combat climate change and protect people from its impacts. As we head toward COP30, these steps are essential to accelerating progress toward a safer, more prosperous future for all.
cop-29-outcomes.jpg Climate Climate COP29 Finance climate finance International Climate Action UNFCCC National Climate Action NDC adaptation Type Explainer Exclude From Blog Feed? 0 Projects Authors David Waskow Gaia Larsen Melanie Robinson Natalia Alayza Sophie Boehm Jamal Srouji Subrata Chakrabarty Gabrielle Swaby Nate Warszawski Miriam Garcia Rebecca Carter Nathan Cogswell Rhys Gerholdt Frances Molesworth Yifa Yaakov Klara Nilsson Katie McCoshan Beth Elliott Schuyler Null Jennifer LaykeSustainable Cities Challenge: Semi-Finalists to Innovate Detroit's Eastern Market Announced
The Toyota Mobility Foundation announced the 10 semi-finalists for its Sustainable Cities Challenge in Detroit, Michigan. Developed in partnership with the City of Detroit, Challenge Works and World Resources Institute (WRI), the Challenge sought global innovators to present solutions to decrease fossil fuel use and reduce costs of freight operations in Detroit’s Eastern Market.
One of the oldest and largest urban food production and distribution centers in the United States, the bustling hub serves as Detroit’s center for food production, processing, packaging and distribution, playing a vital role in feeding millions. Eastern Market is a cornerstone of Detroit’s food economy, selling over $360 million of wholesale food annually, with exports to international markets nearly doubling that figure. The market organizes a complex ecosystem of farmers, wholesalers, logistics operators and distributors into activities designed to move food efficiently.
As part of the two-stage, three-year $9 million global Challenge, Sustainable Cities Detroit launched in May 2024 and attracted 72 innovator entries from around the world.
The semi-finalists are:
- Automotus: Automotus helps cities reduce emissions, safety hazards and traffic with artificial intelligence (AI) cameras that automate curb management. Their solution would use AI solar cameras to automate the management of loading and unloading areas around Detroit's Eastern Market to reduce traffic and emissions.
- BizFleets: A full-service fleet management company that uses data to identify tangible opportunities for cost savings, emissions reductions and operational improvements, BizFleets would aggregate vehicle data from multiple sources into a single system to evaluate vehicle use and determine how to increase efficiency and sustainability.
- Civilized Cycles: Civilized Cycles is a Detroit-based design and engineering firm that builds light electric vehicles for commercial cargo transportation. Its electric cargo bikes could be utilized at Eastern Market to deliver produce to local businesses, reducing pollution and costs.
- Ecosphere Organics: The sustainability-focused Ecosphere Organics leverages technology to transform organic food waste into valuable raw materials (like pigments, dyes, fertilizer, bioplastics and gels) for reuse in various industries. The company’s solution aims to utilize organic waste conversion units at key food production locations throughout Eastern Market, converting food waste into innovative materials like animal feed and natural soil amendments, while collecting real-time data to optimize waste logistics and reduce fossil fuel consumption.
- ElectricFish Energy, Inc.: A minority-founded company building energy infrastructure, ElectricFish proposes a battery-integrated fast electric vehicle charger which would charge electric vehicles, minimize peak energy costs and provide backup energy for on-site Eastern Market facilities.
- Emissionless: By utilizing software and electric trucks to provide faster, more efficient, zero-emission freight operations, Emissionless aims to decarbonize ground freight transportation. Emisionless would streamline deliveries to and from Eastern Market to support the Market’s needs while simultaneously eliminating emissions.
- Interplai: This forward-thinking logistics platform is dedicated to revolutionizing last-mile delivery. Their route optimization software would provide an opportunity for Eastern Market’s operators to collaborate on logistics.
- Joule Labs, Inc.: Joule Labs provides electric vehicle charging solutions, leveraging cutting-edge automation, robotics and AI to deliver flexible and scalable automated charging systems and services to meet the needs of autonomous and conventional electric fleet operators. Their mobile charging solutions could support the growing electrification of vehicles serving Eastern Market’s operations while reducing operational downtime.
- Neology: This Swiss clean-tech startup aims to advance sustainable energy with its Ammonia-to-Hydrogen Generation System. This system enables clean, on-demand hydrogen production, ideal for powering fuel-cell solutions at construction sites, remote heavy industries and other off-grid applications. Their compact, on-site hydrogen production system could provide clean fuel for zero-emission vehicles at Eastern Market.
- Orange Sparkle Ball: This innovation and impact accelerator is focused on moving public and private organizations’ initiatives forward. Its solution would use a data-driven micrologistics platform to organize first- and last-mile freight logistics in and out of Eastern Market.
The Challenge evaluated entries based on their potential to reduce fossil fuel use, introduce innovative solutions for Eastern Market freight, demonstrate business adoption potential and showcase mature technology. The proposed innovations also needed to exhibit scalability and strong delivery capacity.
“We are thrilled to announce Detroit’s top 10 semi-finalists for the Sustainable Cities Challenge,” said Tim Slusser, Chief of the City of Detroit’s Office of Mobility Innovation.
“Eastern Market is essential to our food distribution network, and with these semi-finalists we have a unique opportunity to collaborate with the Eastern Market Partnership and Michigan’s Office of Future Mobility and Electrification to pioneer sustainable freight solutions that reduce fossil fuel use and lower operating costs.”
Semi-finalists will each receive a $50,000 implementation grant to help the teams refine and localize their solutions for Detroit's Eastern Market. They will also participate in the Challenge’s Innovator Academy, which will provide them with resources and guidance for their solutions. “The selection of 10 semi-finalists for the Sustainable Cities Challenge Detroit marks an exciting step forward,” said Ryan Klem, Director of Programs at the Toyota Mobility Foundation. “These teams are tackling challenges in Eastern Market, an iconic and essential part of Detroit’s infrastructure, with innovative solutions that will benefit local businesses and the environment. We look forward to supporting their efforts as they develop approaches that could serve as a model for cities worldwide.”
Kathy Nothstine, Director of Cities and Societies at Challenge Works, added, “With 10 outstanding semi-finalists now selected, Detroit is ready to embrace fresh ideas from innovators around the world. Detroit has already made strides in creating a more efficient transportation network, and these teams offer promising solutions to further reduce fossil fuel consumption and streamline freight operations in Eastern Market, ensuring year-round reliability for the market and its vendors.”
Eastern Market has been a cornerstone of Detroit for over 150 years. “It’s inspiring to see 10 semi-finalists now working toward solutions that will support its future,” said Ben Welle, Director of Integrated Transport and Innovation at WRI Ross Center for Sustainable Cities. “Innovation is essential for cities to adapt and thrive, and the solutions from this Challenge can help not only Detroit but serve as a model for sustainable city logistics everywhere.”
For more, visit SustainableCitiesChallenge.org
detroit.jpg Cities North America Urban Mobility Cities Type Project Update Exclude From Blog Feed? 0 Projects Authors Thet Hein TunEurope’s Cities Should Prepare for Hotter, More Hazardous Days Ahead
Europe is the world’s fastest warming continent, which is severely impacting cities and leading to tens of thousands of deaths, rising hospitalizations, school closures and people adjusting their lives to avoid inhospitable outdoor conditions.
The oppressive heat is being felt across the continent from cities along the Mediterranean, to cities in Northern European cities, where homes are primarily designed to withstand cold seasons. London, for example, faced a record-breaking temperature of 40 degrees C (104 degrees F) in July 2022, triggering widespread fires and marking the London Fire Brigade’s busiest day since World War II.
Europe is currently on a trajectory that could see a rise of approximately 3.1 degrees C (5.6 degrees F) of warming above pre-industrial levels by 2100, unless significant actions are taken to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, according the most recent UN Emissions Gap Report. Temperatures for August, and throughout much of 2024, already exceeded 1.5 degrees C (2.7 degrees F) above pre-industrial levels, a threshold that scientists warn will bring more dangerous impacts from climate change.
London workers find a way to beat the heat during the 2022 heat wave. New WRI data shows that European cities like London may see more frequent and intense heat waves if global temperatures rise to 3 degrees C. Photo by Clickpics / Alamy Stock PhotoSo, what can Europe’s cities expect? New data from WRI finds that at 3 degrees C (5.4 degrees F) of global temperature rise, these cities will likely see longer, more frequent and more intense heat waves, skyrocketing energy demand for air conditioning and increasing heat-related deaths, compared to 1.5 degrees C of global warming.
About this data
Global climate models often don’t produce data granular enough to be usable at a local level. For this article, we produced a global data set that includes data on 14 heat- and precipitation-related climate hazards for the 996 cities with populations greater than 500,000 people using a new statistical modeling method (designed by WRI) that makes it easier to project city-scale impacts from global climate models.
- [Read more]
In consultation with city-level decision-makers from cities we work with, we chose these hazards for their relevance to public health, livelihoods, infrastructure and economic productivity. Average hazard magnitudes were calculated based on three climate models for each city (chosen based on best fit with historical data) for three global warming scenarios (1.5 degrees C, 2 degrees C and 3 degrees C), plus a recent historical reference period (1995-2014). For the sake of brevity, in this article we describe findings for the 1.5 and 3 degree C scenarios from only some of the hazard indicators, and we only report estimates from the best of the three models per city (based on historical correlation). Data from all three models are in the accompanying dataset. Our data are all based on models. And like all models, there are limitations and unavoidable uncertainty. Here are some of the important limitations to our data:
Inherent uncertainty in climate models. Climate models are built on the research community’s most current understanding of how the climate works and will evolve, but they are far from perfect. The complexity of Earth’s systems and our inability to predict important factors like future greenhouse gas emissions mean that all climate models contain unavoidable uncertainty. The data we provide are estimates based on probability models, not definitive predictions. The full dataset includes estimates and uncertainty measures for three independent climate models used for each indicator, for each city.
Spatial resolution. Our data and the models we use have the same spatial resolution: approximately 25 km by 25 km pixels. While an improvement over earlier work, the resolution is still coarser than is ideal for urban climate planning. The estimates we provide are averages over areas more than 600 square kilometers. Therefore, our data likely underestimate extremes that might arise from more granular built environment differences: Very hot locations (locations that are warmer than average within their grid cells) will appear cooler, and cool locations will appear warmer.
Urban heat island effect. Because of pavement, building materials and relative lack of vegetation, cities tend to be warmer than rural areas. This is the urban heat island effect, and although we do include a bias correction step to partially mitigate the problem, the climate models do not account for it. Many locations in cities are therefore likely to be even warmer than is reflected in our data. Estimates of future heat wave frequency and duration and number of extreme-temperature days are likely to be low.
We are constantly refining our methods, and we expect to reduce uncertainty and improve our estimates as we gain access to better climate models. For now, our advice for interpreting these data is to understand the inherent uncertainty in this modeling work and consider our findings as a possible future, based on some of the best existing global models, as uncertain as they may be.
To prepare for more frequent, intense heat waves, European cities and governments will need to invest in early warning systems, climate adaptation plans and resilient infrastructure — especially in low-income areas, which are most vulnerable. Nature-based solutions, like green roofs and urban trees, will also be critical in helping cities prevent some of the worst impacts from excessive heat.
The Difference Rising Temperatures in Europe Could MakeDeadly summer heat waves in Europe have become the norm over the last several years. Studies found that in 2022, intense heat waves led to more than 61,000 deaths across Europe. In 2023, more than 47,000 deaths were related to excessive heat. Accounting for 2024 is not available yet, but the year is on track to be the warmest on record. Temperatures in some European cities this year have soared past 45 degrees C (113 degrees F), putting huge pressure on municipalities to keep vulnerable populations, such as children, the elderly and people with respiratory illnesses and disabilities, safe.
As part of a global study, WRI analyzed potential climate hazards for 89 of Europe’s largest cities — currently home to 165 million people, or 22% of the continent’s population — using estimates based on downscaled global climate models for 1.5 degrees C of global warming and 3 degrees C of global warming. These projections do not account for pavement, buildings and other drivers of the urban heat island effect, so the data are almost certainly an underestimate of what cities may experience.
Here are some of our key findings:
Longer, More Frequent Heat WavesAt 3 degrees C of warming, cities across Southern and Eastern Europe could experience an average increase of 10 days per year with temperatures above 35 degrees C (95 degrees F). In addition, a significant number of European cities could face month-long heat waves1, and more frequent heat waves, than at 1.5 degrees C of warming.
For example, the longest heat wave each year in Naples, Italy, may double from 25 days in a 1.5 degree C scenario to 50 days at 3 degrees C of warming. And for many cities across Europe, summer temperatures above 40 degrees C (104 degrees F) could become increasingly common.
In a 3 degree C scenario, cities in Spain, like Madrid and Seville, could see an extra month per year with temperatures above 35 degrees (95 degrees F) — up to 52 and 77 days per year, respectively. In Madrid, there were news reports during the summer of 2022 of temperatures inside nursing homes exceeding 32 degrees C (90 degrees F).
Increased Energy DemandThe potential for relentless summer heat conditions is exacerbated by the lack of air conditioning throughout Europe. In 2022, only 19% of homes and businesses had air conditioning, as opposed to the U.S., where the penetration rate is 90%, according to the International Energy Agency.
Across Europe, our analysis projects a 32% increase in the demand for energy needed to cool buildings (measured using cooling degree days2) under 3 degrees C of warming scenario compared to 1.5 degrees C of warming.
The increase in cooling demand would pose particular challenges to cities used to temperate climates, such as Dublin, Ireland; Helsinki, Finland; Birmingham, England; and Oslo, Norway, as well as in lower-income urban areas that may not be able to afford air conditioners. This would continue a longer-term trend; in Germany, for example, the amount of energy needed during heat spikes has increased more than fivefold since 1979.
Such increased energy demand will put further pressure on Europe’s electricity infrastructure and decarbonization goals. Mechanical cooling drives 10% of global electricity use and contributes nearly 4% of annual greenhouse gas emissions today. The International Energy Agency projects that demand for air conditioning will triple by 2050.
Mortality and HeatThe difference between 1.5 and 3 degrees C has life or death consequences. In a 3 degree C warming scenario, projections by the EU Joint Research Center show heat-related mortality in Europe could triple with respect to today. This highlights the costly impact of delaying climate action. Heat-related deaths, now six times more frequent in Southern Europe than in Northern Europe, could occur 9.3 times more frequently in the south than in the north. By 2050, the EU’s hotspots for heat-related mortality will likely be in Spain, Italy and Greece, but could also include a substantial part of France.
City ScenariosTo understand what extreme heat looks like on the ground, here is a look at how cities across Europe might be impacted:
Barcelona will likely experience longer, hotter heat wavesLonger, hotter heat waves and increased temperatures throughout the year may increase the demand for cooling in Barcelona by 60%. The number of heat waves in Barcelona — temperatures at or above the 90th percentile of historic temperatures (28 degrees C or 82 degrees F) — is estimated to increase from 4.3 heat waves at 1.5 degrees C of global warming to as many as 6 heat waves under a 3 degree C warming scenario. The longest duration of these heat waves may increase from a modeled average of 22 days at 1.5 degrees C of global warming to over 32 days under a 3 degree C warming scenario. Barcelona is already investing in heat shelters that residents should be able to reach within a 5-minute walk and is adding green spaces.
Amsterdam’s demand for cooling may rise by 20%Even cities in more temperate climates like Amsterdam could experience more extended periods of hot weather. The demand for cooling in Amsterdam could increase by nearly 20% under a 3 degree C warming scenario, and the city could hit 42 degrees C (108 degrees F) periodically by 2050, according to national climate scenarios. A big challenge for cities in Northern and Western Europe will be water management, both periods of excess rainfall and too little rainfall. Already today, one in eight Europeans live in areas potentially prone to river floods, and around 30% of people in Southern Europe face permanent water stress. Amsterdam is therefore investing in rooftop gardens and green spaces for cooling buildings as well as water retention.
Istanbul may experience 40% more days above 29 degrees CIstanbul’s heat is already exacerbated by the large amounts of traffic exhaust, making conditions especially uncomfortable on its hottest days. The average duration of the longest heat waves in Istanbul — where the 90th percentile temperature is 27 degrees C (80 degrees F) — may increase from a modeled average of 18 days at 1.5 degrees C of global warming to 33 days under a 3 degree C warming scenario. The number of days during the year when the temperature is above 29 degrees C (84 degrees F) could increase by 40% to 84 days under a 3 degree C warming scenario. These conditions mean the demand for increased mechanical cooling could go up by 44%.
How Europe’s Cities Can Prepare for More HeatAll these data points are a wake-up call for city and national governments in Europe to prepare for more frequent, longer heat waves, to build resilient urban environments and to strengthen efforts to reduce emissions.
A recent survey among hundreds of European mayors shows that climate action is their top priority for 2024, and there are many examples of European cities already taking action using nature-based solutions. In 2019, in response to heat waves, Paris pledged to "significantly green" schoolyards and public spaces, aiming to plant 170,000 trees by 2026. Innovative ventures are transforming rooftops into green terraces and naturally cool buildings. The Mayor of London pledged 3.1 million pounds ($3.9 million) for tree planting to cool the city after 2022’s record-breaking heat. The city also staged a real-life exercise last summer to test preparedness for extreme heat.
Paris is seeing more green roofs, where trees and plants on top of the city’s buildings are helping to reduce the surrounding air temperature. Photo by Bruno Giuliani/iStockEuropean cities, however, cannot achieve these efforts to reduce people’s vulnerability to climate impacts alone. As national governments and the EU bloc submit new national climate plans (known as nationally determined contributions or NDCs) before the spring of 2025, European governments have an opportunity to demonstrate higher ambitions to limit global heating.
As new WRI guidance outlines, ambitious, city-inclusive NDCs should:
- Double down on policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions: National governments must come up with ambitious climate implementation policies and action plans aligned with the international Paris Agreement on climate change; cities can set targets and adopt policies to contribute to meeting these goals.
- Boost climate adaptation plans and funding to support resilient infrastructure, especially in low-income neighborhoods: Investments in nature-based solutions are essential for safeguarding health and enhancing urban resilience. Solar reflective surfaces, particularly “cool roof” materials and green roofs can reduce air temperature through reducing the amount of heat absorbed and released by buildings and pavements. Early-warning systems and cooling centers for vulnerable people are also essential.
- Improve collaboration with cities: Multi-level partnerships and coordination, such as through the Coalition for High Ambition Multilevel Partnerships (CHAMP) for Climate Action, are key to tackling greenhouse gas emissions and enhancing resilience at the pace and scale required to save and improve people’s lives.
- Take a data-driven approach: Climate-hazard estimates for cities can help them focus on the most likely and urgent climate-related risks while informing targeted investments and policies. City-scale, city-relevant data should be at the center of planning and budgeting for climate adaptation and resilience.
A 3 degrees C future is not a foregone conclusion, but to avoid the worst impacts of climate change, cities around the world need to both double down on efforts that reduce the buildup of greenhouse gas emissions in the atmosphere and enhance their resilience to weather extremes.
The full global data set this analysis is based on, including 14 climate hazards, calculated for 996 cities, is available here. For this article, unless noted otherwise, we used the data only from the single best-performing of nine climate models for each location (the model that best matches the historical meteorological record for each city in the time periods where they overlap), but the dataset includes data from the three best-performing models. The data also include standard deviations for our estimates, as well as estimates and standard deviations of probabilities that the hazard magnitude exceed certain thresholds. The methods underlying our estimates of average hazard magnitudes and threshold-exceedance probabilities are detailed in this technical note. The methods we used to model warming scenarios and our definitions of the 14 climate hazards are detailed in this technical note.
The dataset is formatted to be of most use to data analysts equipped with statistical-analysis software.
Footnotes:1 There is no universally applied definition of “heat wave.” For this project, we defined it as three or more consecutive days on which the high temperature equals or exceeds the local 90th percentile of daily high temperature, as determined from the ECMWF ERA5 dataset over the 40-year period 1980–2019.
2 Cooling degree days are the annual sum of positive daily average temperature deviations from a threshold temperature, and a commonly used indicator of energy demand for cooling. Specifically, we calculated CDD21, the annual sum of daily positive deviations from 21 degrees C.
london-heat-wave-water-fountain.jpg Cities Europe Climate Energy climate change health Cities Urban Development Urban Efficiency & Climate Featured Popular Type Finding Exclude From Blog Feed? 0 Related Resources and Data City-Scale, City-Relevant Climate Hazard Indicators Under 1.5°C, 2.0°C, and 3.0°C of Global Warming Projects- Urban Heat and Passive Cooling
- Integrated Climate Action
- Urban Development
- Urban Efficiency & Climate