Connect with us

Published

on

Welcome to Carbon Brief’s Cropped.
We handpick and explain the most important stories at the intersection of climate, land, food and nature over the past fortnight.

This is an online version of Carbon Brief’s fortnightly Cropped email newsletter. Subscribe for free here.

Key developments

Nature at COP28

BIODIVERSITY LINKS: COP28 came to a close last week and the interconnections between climate change and biodiversity featured heavily in the two-week summit. As Carbon Brief noted in an in-depth summary of the event, the global stocktake – the periodic global review of progress towards the aims of the Paris Agreement – contained eight references to “nature” and five to “biodiversity”. It also noted “the urgent need” to address climate change and biodiversity together and meet targets for both “in line” with the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, the landmark agreement of the 2022 COP15 biodiversity summit. COP28 president UAE and COP15 president China released a Joint Statement on Climate, Nature and People, where countries committed to aligning their national climate plans and their national nature plans ahead of COP30 and COP16, respectively.

FOCUS ON ECOSYSTEMS: The global stocktake also noted the importance of “ensuring the integrity of all ecosystems”, including oceans, mountains and the cryosphere. During the summit, the Guardian reported that, even if the world reaches a phase-out of fossil fuels, achieving the 1.5C target will be impossible if humanity fails to conserve nature, according to Prof Johan Rockström, a leading climate scientist. Speaking to Carbon Brief in Dubai, David Cooper, acting executive secretary of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), said that while nature has featured in many pledges and voluntary announcements at climate COPs in recent years, COP28 saw “more recognition in the actual official texts”. This included a greater focus on ecosystems, he said, adding: “What I’d like to see more is greater recognition of the role of ecosystems beyond their role as carbon sinks.”

ROAD TO COLOMBIA: Shortly after COP28 ended, the CBD confirmed that the next UN biodiversity summit, COP16, will be held in a yet-to-be-announced city in Colombia from 21 October to 1 November 2024. Cooper told Carbon Brief that he was “very excited” for Colombia to host the event, as it is a “megadiverse country, it has very strong Indigenous peoples’ organisations [and] a very strong scientific base”. Colombia’s environment minister, Susana Muhamad, said in a statement: “This event sends a message from Latin America to the world about the importance of climate action and the protection of life.” At COP16, governments will review the implementation of nature goals and targets and also update their national biodiversity plans.

Food at COP28

ROADMAP: COP28 “confronted” the question of balancing the need to reduce emissions and to feed a growing population “like never before”, wrote New York Times international climate correspondent Somini Sengupta. She cited a number of “small, but significant steps” made at the summit, from the leaders’ declaration on food systems – covered in the previous issue of Cropped – to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization’s first-ever roadmap to 1.5C. That roadmap is “the most significant nudge” of the summit, the New York Times said, but added: “Roadmaps, of course, are only that until someone starts following the directions.” Action Aid’s climate justice lead Teresa Anderson told Carbon Brief that the roadmap’s “big problem is that it can’t bring itself to name the real issues at stake” and by “failing to name chemical fertilisers, factory farming or industrialised agriculture as the major sources of emissions and deforestation, its recommendations boil down to protecting the status quo”.

WASTE NOT: Among the recommendations in the roadmap is the need to reduce food loss and waste by 50% per capita by 2030, and to integrate all such waste “in a circular bioeconomy” by 2050. According to the not-for-profit Modern Farmer, the US Department of Agriculture released a draft of its new national strategy on food loss and waste at COP28. The announcement was accompanied by an initial investment of $30m and sets out goals for the federal government, including preventing food loss and waste, increasing the recycling of organic wastes and “to support policies that echo those aims”.

TAKING STOCK: Another major outcome for food at COP28 was the inclusion of “resilient food systems” in the global stocktake. Ag Insider noted that, although the stocktake “urges” countries to implement solutions towards resilience, it did so “without setting goals for the sector that produces one-third of global greenhouse gases”. A report published by WWF that assessed COP28’s action on food systems noted that a stocktake “that directly calls for food systems transformation to mitigate climate change would likely lead to higher prioritisation and increased amounts of climate finance for food”. The report said the summit “[fell] short of delivering robust outcomes [for food] in the negotiating rooms”. But, WWF added, “there are still grounds for optimism”, such as “the breadth of stakeholders determined to drive change” in the agrifood sector. 

CONTRADICTORY AGENDA: An editorial in Nature Food cast doubt on Brazil’s ability to drive a sustainable agenda on food and climate after the nation announced its intention to join the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (Opec+) at COP28. The piece noted that Brazilian president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (Lula) “has set the protection of the Amazon and Cerrado biomes as a priority” since regaining office. But the announcement that the country will join Opec+ in January, as well as its intention to auction several new blocks for oil drilling, “had a negative repercussion among environmentalists”. Nature Food noted that COP30 is set to be held in “the heart of the Amazon”, saying: “Domestically, this is an opportunity for Brazil to put itself on a different development pathway, fostering more sustainable food production and managing natural resources in a just and inclusive way.”

COP28 round-up

GLASGOW RECEIPTS: COP26 in Glasgow saw several major political declarations around deforestation. While deforestation was lower on the agenda this year, it achieved one notable first: the global stocktake was the first time the need for “halting and reversing deforestation and forest degradation by 2030” was enshrined in a major negotiated text under UN climate change. But, despite this, “countries are still no nearer to closing the ‘finance gap’ necessary to stop the destruction of rainforests”, Mongabay reported. The outlet added that the Democratic Republic of the Congo “says it has not seen any of the $500m pledged to it two years ago [at COP26] to protect the Congo Basin rainforest”. As Cropped editor Dr Giuliana Viglione reported at COP28, a group of NGOs released a call to create a “Glasgow Declaration Accountability Framework” to hold countries accountable for their deforestation pledges from COP26.

RESTORATION RECOGNISED: The global stocktake underlines the “vital importance of protecting, conserving, restoring and sustainably using nature and ecosystems” and encourages the implementation of nature-based solutions and ecosystem-based approaches, Carbon Brief reported. COP28 saw the announcement of updates to both the Mangrove Breakthrough and the Freshwater Challenge, two global commitments to restoring mangroves and rivers and wetlands, respectively. Another big outcome of the summit was the global goal on adaptation, a framework meant to help countries build resilience to climate change. The text included topics such as water, health and ecosystems, the Spanish outlet Climática reported. But, it added, the global goal on adaptation will not guarantee that 30% of ecosystems will be “maintained, improved or restored”, relying instead on targets such as “reach resilience” or “reduce impacts”.

INDIGENOUS RIGHTS: Despite being the UN climate summit with the largest delegation of Indigenous peoples ever, they remained marginalised in the discussions regarding financing, the Brazilian outlet InfoAmazonia reported. The outlet added that concerns about oil and gas auctions in the Amazon and the arrival of agricultural projects on Indigenous lands overshadowed the result of the summit. Carbon Brief reported that the global stocktake included nine mentions of Indigenous peoples; however, language in the text was considered weaker than hoped by experts. For example, the texts lack recognition of Indigenous people’s rights to give or withhold free, prior and informed consent to approve projects within their territories. 

METHANE ROUNDUP: Several voluntary pledges and finance pushes at COP28 focused on cutting methane emissions – and while many centred on fossil-fuel production, some homed in on food systems and agriculture. On 5 December, six major food companies, including Danone, Nestlé and Kraft Heinz, committed to release information on methane emissions within their dairy supply chains and to put in place methane action plans by the end of 2024. There were also several announcements of funds aimed at cutting emissions of the potent greenhouse gas, including more than $200m in public and private finance for research into reducing methane from livestock.

News and views

JUMBOS IN JEOPARDY: Drought has killed “at least 100 elephants” in Zimbabwe’s largest national park in recent ​weeks, the Associated Press reported. Conservation groups and wildlife authorities have attributed the deaths to “the impact of climate change and El Niño”, while authorities warn that “more could die as forecasts suggest a scarcity of rains and rising heat” in areas including the Hwange National Park. Separately, the Hindu Business Line reported that nearly 500 elephants in India have died from “unnatural causes” over the past five years, mainly due to electrocution and train collisions. India’s power ministry, while continuing to expand its infrastructure in elephant habitat, has issued an advisory to “mitigate the impact of power transmission lines and other power infrastructure on elephants and other wildlife”, the outlet said.

TRILLION APOLOGIES: At COP28, ecologist and former chief scientific adviser to the UN’s Trillion Trees Campaign Prof Thomas Crowther “begg[ed] environmental ministers to stop planting so many trees”, Wired reported. Crowther’s 2019 study that suggested “global tree restoration as our most effective climate change solution to date” sparked a global “tree-planting craze by companies and leaders…from Shell to Donald Trump” who were “keen to burnish their green credential”, but not cut actual emissions, the story said. Crowther told Wired his “message was misinterpreted”. He added that he brought results from a new paper on preserving existing forests to COP28 in an attempt to “kill greenwashing”. One scientist on Twitter commented that Crowther should “retract the [original trillion trees] paper instead of doing PR”. 

START YOUR ENGINES: Tractors took over the streets of Berlin as hundreds of farmers protested against German government plans to get rid of some agricultural subsidies and tax breaks, Reuters reported. The plans are part of wider federal government efforts to fill a €60bn hole in the country’s 2024 budget, the newswire said. The government said it will remove a partial tax refund on diesel for farm machinery and a tax exemption for agricultural vehicles, Reuters noted – adding that this is something “farmers said would threaten their livelihood”. The newswire said that the plans are aimed to reduce emissions from the agricultural sector, which amounted to “55.5m metric tonnes of greenhouse emissions last year, roughly 7.4% of the country’s total”. 

TO BEE OR NOT TO BEE: Indigenous peoples in south-east Mexico are calling for the recognition of bees as legal persons, with Mayan communities as their guardians, the Spanish-language version of Wired reported. This came after rainforests in the region experienced “devastation” due to soya agriculture and the excessive use of pesticides, leading to “more and more” bees dying. Indigenous communities criticised the state for not yet granted such recognition. The outlet said that protecting bees “for their intrinsic value” is an “idea [that] comes naturally” to Indigenous peoples. This would not be the first time that nature received legal recognition, as the constitutions of Ecuador and Bolivia both consider nature as a separate and living entity.

DIET IMPACTS: Halving meat and dairy consumption alongside reducing fertiliser use and food waste are some of the best ways to cut agricultural nitrogen pollution in Europe, a new report found. The report – produced for the UN by the UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology and other researchers – said that significant amounts of the nitrogen used to boost crop growth ends up leaking into the air, water and soils. The researchers looked at 144 scenarios and outlined ways to reduce these losses, which included halving the amount of meat and dairy the average European eats.

Watch, read, listen

IMPROVING CONNECTIVITY: El Espectador looked at how the movement of 26 bird species helped scientists identify key sites for conserving ecological connectivity in Colombia’s protected areas.

BIODIVERSITY PATTERNS: What makes a place more biodiverse? Jaron Adkins, a scientist at Utah State University, explored this question for Utah Public Radio.

KEEPING PACE: In her newsletter, Sustainability by numbers, Dr Hannah Ritchie examined whether agricultural innovation can keep up with climate change.

ROAD REVAMP: Ben Goldfarb, writing for Yale Environment 360, looked at “green roads” – a way of redesigning roads to reduce floods and catch excess water for irrigation.

FORAGING THROUGH FEAR: Writing for Vittles, anthropologist Dolly Kikon and writer Joel Fernandes connected the dots between land rights, new climate laws, conflict and foraging in landscapes of loss in India’s north-eastern state of Nagaland.

New science

COP28 initiatives will only reduce emissions if followed through

Climate Action Tracker

A new analysis of COP28 pledges found the “plausible” impact of its food and agriculture declaration on global emissions to be around 500m tonnes of CO2-equivalent by 2030. Climate Action Tracker assessed the emissions-reduction potential of five non-binding pledges made at COP28 and the extent to which those pledges overlap with already-promised reductions. The lack of “quantifiable targets in the initiative text” and “targets directly targeting emissions reductions”, result in a commitment “so vague as to risk becoming another talking shop”, the authors wrote. On deforestation, the assessment found that funding declarations in the hundreds of millions of dollars, as opposed to the billions needed to end deforestation in this decade, “are not truly new” and represent a “repeat of the commitments already made at COP26 in Glasgow”. 

Towards equity and justice in ocean sciences

npj Ocean Sustainability

A new review article examined progress towards equity in the ocean sciences and presented a pathway to addressing the gaps that remain in the field. A group of ocean scientists examined dozens of scientific papers on ocean equity and justice. They found that while the community has begun to identify and tackle existing power imbalances in ocean sciences over the past few years, “many issues still need to be addressed”. The authors called for “honest and transparent dialogue”, accompanied by “a significant shift in institutional cultures and norms” from scientists, professional societies, funders and other groups.

Are climate neutrality claims in the livestock sector too good to be true?

Environmental Research Letters

A number of scientific studies have “distorted understanding of the climate impact of livestock production”, a new “perspective” paper suggested. The researchers focused on the use of global warming potential (GWP) metrics, which standardise different greenhouse gases into one CO2-equivalent (CO2e). The “policymakers who wrote the Paris Agreement text” based its goals on “emissions pathways aggregated using GWP100”, the authors explained, which accounts for the warming caused by GHGs over a 100-year period and “does not differentiate between long-lived climate pollutants (LLCPs) and short-lived climate pollutants (SLCPs)”. However, some recent studies “claiming that ruminant livestock sectors in developed economies are, or could readily be, climate neutral” have used the GWP* metric, which “accounts for the effect of changes in the rate of SLCP emissions on warming over time”. While the GWP* is a “useful complement” to other metrics, the claimed states of climate neutrality in specific sectors based on its use are “temporary and are not aligned to the wider outcomes of the Paris Agreement”, the paper concludes.

In the diary

Cropped is researched and written by Dr Giuliana Viglione, Aruna Chandrasekhar, Daisy Dunne, Orla Dwyer and Yanine Quiroz. Please send tips and feedback to cropped@carbonbrief.org

The post Cropped 20 December 2023: COP28 special edition appeared first on Carbon Brief.

Cropped 20 December 2023: COP28 special edition

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Carbon credit auditors suspended for failures in sham rice-farming offsets

Published

on

Carbon credit registry Verra has suspended activities by four auditors related to carbon credit projects they vetted in China which claimed bogus emission reductions.

In an unprecedented move, TÜV Nord, China Classification Society Certification Company, China Quality Certification Center and CTI Certification will be prevented from auditing agriculture and forestry offsetting schemes on Verra’s registry. For German certification giant TÜV Nord, the measures will only apply to its operations in China. It is the first time Verra has taken such measures.

The auditors certified the activities of 37 programmes that aimed to slash planet-heating methane gas releases from rice fields across China, resulting in the generation of millions of carbon offsets. But Verra revoked the projects in August 2024 after a 17-month review found a string of integrity failures that the auditors had failed to identify.

Before this week’s suspension, Climate Home previously reported on ten of these projects closely linked to energy company Shell and revealed evidence raising serious doubts over whether any emission-cutting activities had been carried out on the ground at all.

Nearly 2 million worthless carbon credits produced by the projects – and partly used to offset emissions from Shell’s gas business – still need to be compensated.

Auditors fail to course-correct

As it axed the projects last year, Verra told the four auditors to produce a “strong” action plan that would prevent similar failures from happening again. But Verra said on Tuesday the responses had proved to be inadequate, prompting it to slap suspension measures on the certifiers.

How Shell greenwashed gas with sham Chinese carbon credits

The suspension will be lifted only if the auditors address the issues and meet Verra’s reinstatement requirements.

“This decision was not made lightly, but Verra’s commitment to integrity means upholding the highest standards of quality and trust, and maintaining market confidence must come first,” Justin Wheler, Verra’s chief program management officer, said in a written statement.

Blowback for other projects

Voluntary carbon market standards like Verra rely heavily on external auditors to assess projects and their compliance with the rules, while the registry only gives the final stamp of approval. But auditors are picked and paid directly by project developers, something that, experts say, raises the risk of conflicts of interest.

Verra’s suspension will have immediate repercussions for projects that had contracted the services of any of the four auditors.

Verra said that it will not accept project registrations or requests to issue credits that rely on audits done by the certifiers affected by the measure. Those that have already undergone an audit carried out by suspended auditors will have to repeat the process with a new entity. A spokesperson for Verra told Climate Home at least 57 projects will be directly affected.

Hidden cost: How keeping climate data classified hurts developing countries

“While we recognize the impact of this suspension on affected projects, ensuring rigorous and credible validations and verifications is critical,” said Verra’s Wheler.

TÜV Nord is one of the world’s largest certification companies and, according to its website, it has vetted thousands of carbon credit projects both in the voluntary market and the United Nation’s Clean Development Mechanism. Climate Home has approached the company for comment.

China Classification Society Certification Company, China Quality Certification Center and CTI Certification are among China’s biggest certifiers of products and services, including emission reduction programmes.

Phantom credits still not compensated

Meanwhile, Verra has still been unable to obtain compensation for the 1.8 million worthless credits generated by ten rice farming projects that Shell directly supported in China. As Climate Home previously reported, the energy giant abandoned the projects soon after being informed that the sham offsets would need to be paid back.

The carbon credit registry sanctioned the project developer Hefei Luyu after the Chinese company failed to reply to Verra’s emails and compensate for the credits. But, in contrast, Verra has not taken any action against Shell – the world’s largest buyer of carbon offsets.

Shell used at least half a million credits produced by the Chinese rice farming projects to claim that shipments of liquefied natural gas (LNG) sold to clients were “carbon neutral”.

The post Carbon credit auditors suspended for failures in sham rice-farming offsets appeared first on Climate Home News.

Carbon credit auditors suspended for failures in sham rice-farming offsets

Continue Reading

Climate Change

The Indigenous Climate Hub Launches New Podcast Series Amplifying Indigenous Voices on Climate Action

Published

on

The Indigenous Climate Hub is proud to launch its new podcast series—a powerful digital storytelling platform designed to elevate, empower, and honour Indigenous climate change leadership across Turtle Island. Available now on Spotify (http://creators.spotify.com/pod/show/indigenous-climate-hub), this podcast series shares stories of Indigenous Peoples leading climate change adaptation and mitigation efforts, engaging in environmental stewardship, and applying traditional and ecological knowledge to address the climate crisis in their homelands.

With new episodes continuing throughout 2025, the podcast offers a growing collection of compelling interviews and narratives, highlighting the diverse and resilient responses of First Nations, Inuit, and Métis communities to climate-related challenges. These stories are deeply personal and powerful — and belong to the individuals and communities who share them.

“We are excited to create a podcast where Indigenous knowledge keepers, youth, land defenders, scientists, and community members can share their experiences in their own words,” says Indigenous Climate Hub podcast co-host Dr. Shyra Barberstock. “This podcast is about amplifying the voices of Indigenous Peoples on the frontlines of climate change — and those whose leadership offers solutions rooted in generations of wisdom.”

Call for Participants

The Indigenous Climate Hub podcast team is actively seeking Indigenous interviewees who want to share their stories of:

  • Climate change adaptation and mitigation
  • Environmental and land stewardship
  • Traditional and ecological knowledge
  • Community-based solutions and innovation
  • Climate and land-based education

Sharing Indigenous stories through this podcast series is an opportunity to reach a national audience, inspire others, and contribute to a growing archive of Indigenous-led climate solutions. It’s also a chance to be part of a supportive network that values Indigenous voices, land-based knowledge, and leadership.

Join the Conversation

Your perspective matters whether you’re from a northern fly-in community or a southern urban centre. We want to hear from you if you’re an Indigenous person with a story to share.

To participate in the podcast or learn more, visit https://indigenousclimatehub.ca/podcast/. Follow us on Spotify to listen to new episodes and help amplify these vital stories by sharing them with your networks.

About the Indigenous Climate Hub

The Indigenous Climate Hub supports Indigenous Peoples and communities across Canada by providing tools, resources, and knowledge-sharing opportunities focused on climate change. The podcast is one of many initiatives designed to connect Indigenous voices and leadership in the face of the global climate crisis.

For media inquiries or to express interest in being featured on the podcast, please contact us using our Contact Form.

– The Indigenous Climate Hub

The post The Indigenous Climate Hub Launches New Podcast Series Amplifying Indigenous Voices on Climate Action appeared first on Indigenous Climate Hub.

The Indigenous Climate Hub Launches New Podcast Series Amplifying Indigenous Voices on Climate Action

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Hidden cost: How keeping climate data classified hurts developing countries 

Published

on

Rachel Santarsiero is the director of the National Security Archive’s Climate Change Transparency Project in Washington, D.C.

The U.S. intelligence apparatus has long monitored how climate change will affect U.S. national security interests in the coming decades.

Relying on a broad consensus of open-source scientific studies, modeling, and forecasts, the spy community has intermittently let the public in on its climate change agenda. In large part, however, its work on climate has been kept secret, leading to the disproportionate harm of the most vulnerable populations living in developing countries.

Last month, the Climate Change Transparency Project, an effort dedicated to tracking U.S. climate policy at the National Security Archive, a government watchdog nonprofit, reported on a climate change intelligence assessment that the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) has kept classified for 17 years.

“Forgotten” fragile states unite to end climate-finance blind spot

In 2008, a panel of intelligence officers produced a National Intelligence Assessment (NIA) which evaluated the “National Security Implications of Global Climate Change to 2030,” and was one of the intelligence community’s first ever climate-focused assessments, a departure from its usual research on more “traditional” national security threats like state violence and terrorism.

Despite the assessment’s reliance on open-source resources, as outlined in a testimony given to Congress by lead study author Dr. Thomas Fingar, the National Intelligence Council (NIC) mandated its classification. In Fingar’s testimony to Congress, Democrats and Republicans alike advocated for the assessment’s declassification, with Democrats arguing that the report could inform government agencies and private industries about the risks of climate change, and Republicans arguing that its reliance on open-source information didn’t contribute anything new to the body of knowledge on climate change.

At the time, several representatives of key House select committees also pushed for declassification on grounds beyond the impacts to U.S. national security: “Information about the likely impact of climate change in other countries should be made available to help those countries prepare and direct their resources appropriately.”

The power of climate intelligence

Reports generated by intelligence agencies like the NIC and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) help predict specific vulnerabilities of various regions around the world – like which cities are most at risk from flooding or which agricultural zones may soon face extreme heatwaves. If made available to all nations, this information could help governments and humanitarian organizations take proactive steps, design better policies, and protect these more vulnerable populations.

Unfortunately, classified reports like the 2008 NIA are still shrouded in secrecy- in part, at least, to maintain strategic U.S. advantage. Intelligence officials who worked on the report, like Fingar, maintain that the 2008 NIA should remain classified because it calls out countries most vulnerable to climate change: if specific countries were named in the report, what would stop them from using it to press the U.S. and other developed countries to provide additional aid and assistance for climate-related threats?

But this argument is moot given the level of climate intelligence already out in the open. Specifically, the NIC released a National Intelligence Estimate in 2021 that names two specific regions and 11 countries as particularly vulnerable to climate change through 2040. It predicted that these countries – Afghanistan, Burma, India, Pakistan, North Korea, Guatemala, Haiti, Nicaragua, Colombia, and Iraq – will experience climate-related and exacerbated events that will strain governments and civil societies.

Despite the age of the 2008 National Intelligence Assessment, it is imperative that this report is declassified to complement the already available climate data. In interviews with other former top intelligence officials, we heard the 2008 NIA is “far superior” to the 2021 NIE and could potentially provide a better roadmap for countries to mitigate against the worst impacts than the available data does.

Why developing countries suffer the most

It is troubling that much of this intelligence remains classified and out of reach for policymakers, scientists, and citizens alike in places where the impacts of climate change are being felt most acutely.

Take, for example, small island states in the Pacific, which are already seeing the impacts of sea level rise yet remain unsure of how quickly these changes will accelerate or what measures they can take to mitigate future risks. Similarly, countries in sub-Saharan Africa, where agriculture is heavily dependent on climate conditions, face the double threat of droughts and unpredictable rainfall patterns.

At-risk nations have limited capacity to produce or analyze their own climate data, and access to accurate global climate intelligence would enable them to understand shifts happening in their regions and to secure funding for adaptive infrastructure.

The case for climate transparency

U.S. national security concerns must be weighed against the global nature of climate change, which affects all nations regardless of geopolitical standing. By withholding key climate data, wealthy countries are not only perpetuating environmental inequality but also undermine global efforts to curb the impacts of climate change. Providing developing nations with the same level of climate intelligence that wealthier ones receive would enable them to make better-informed decisions, prioritize resources, and act more swiftly in response to emerging climate threats.

Trump’s aid cuts make Malawians more vulnerable to climate change

Declassifying the 2008 National Intelligence Assessment could also strengthen regional cooperation between mentioned nations, which developing countries may increasingly look to as the current Trump administration continues to withdraw from previous environmental international commitments, including the Paris Agreement and the new Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage. As the United States abdicates its responsibility as a global climate leader, countries like China and India will most likely step up – and developing countries may choose to rely more heavily on them as a partner in mitigation and adaptation measures.

Climate change is a global issue that demands a coordinated response. If certain nations hoard climate intelligence, they not only hinder the adaptation efforts of developing countries but also undermine the collective action necessary to lessen future climate impacts. The sharing of climate data can foster trust and collaboration, enabling countries to work together to create a more resilient global climate framework.

The post Hidden cost: How keeping climate data classified hurts developing countries  appeared first on Climate Home News.

Hidden cost: How keeping climate data classified hurts developing countries 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com