Although international aviation contributes approximately 2.4% of global annual carbon dioxide emissions, fuel used in this sector is rarely taxed. A tax on aviation fuel could support the sector’s climate targets by promoting greater fuel efficiency, encouraging the uptake of sustainable aviation fuels, and ensuring fairer competition with less emission-intensive transport modes. 

The 1944 Convention on International Civil Aviation (Chicago Convention), applicable to all International Civil Aviation Organization member states, does not prohibit the introduction of aviation fuel taxes. However, legal barriers may arise from bilateral and multilateral ASAs. 

This report examines 32 ASAs concluded between COFFIS member states to determine the necessary steps before implementing a tax on the uptake of aviation fuel. None of the reviewed ASAs restricts the taxation of fuel for domestic aviation. The ASAs are categorized into four groups based on their treatment of fuel taxation. Only two categories require reform prior to implementing a tax for international flights: (i) agreements containing a full tax prohibition and (ii) those imposing non-discrimination or similar clauses. 

For European Union (EU) member states, legal barriers primarily stem from the EU Energy Taxation Directive (ETD). However, if the EU enters an international agreement that introduces different fuel tax rules, such an agreement would prevail over the ETD, opening the door for aviation fuel taxation across all EU member states. 

The most effective way to overcome these legal barriers, for EU and non-EU states, is through a Joint Agreement among a coalition of the willing. States have used similar approaches to successfully amend large numbers of bilateral treaties in other areas, such as investment and tax law. 

This report also quantifies emissions associated with three ASAs concluded by the United Kingdom and estimates the tax revenue potential if a fuel tax were implemented for these routes.

This publication explores the global resurgence of industrial policy with a focus on green industrial policy that aims to combine economic competitiveness with environmental sustainability. It defines green industrial policy as government intervention to restructure economies toward low-carbon and resource-efficient systems while maintaining prosperity and jobs. The publication reviews the historical evolution of industrial policy, from early import-substitution/export-promotion strategies to the Washington Consensus and its rejection of state intervention, before charting the return of industrial policies driven by climate imperatives, geopolitical rivalry, and supply chain disruptions. 

Through case studies of China, the United States, the European Union, Canada, Brazil, and South Korea, the report highlights diverse national approaches, their successes and setbacks, and the tensions they create in global trade. The analysis emphasizes both the economic opportunities and risks of unequal benefits and adverse impacts on trading partners, as well as the environmental and competitiveness gains. The report concludes with key questions for national and international policy-makers, stressing the need for transparent, equitable, and cooperative frameworks to maximize global welfare while ensuring fair opportunities for developing countries.

Kisumu County, on the shores of Lake Victoria, faces growing climate and environmental pressures. Floods, droughts, soil erosion, declining fisheries, and inadequate sanitation are undermining agriculture, food security, and public health. Runoff and invasive species further degrade the lake's ecosystem, deepening inequalities and weakening resilience. 

To address these challenges, Trust 2 Impact is piloting the NBI transformation program in the Nyando catchment. The program combines agroforestry and reforestation; riparian restoration; water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) management; and fish hatcheries to restore ecosystem health, improve water quality, reduce deforestation, and provide new livelihood opportunities. 

The NBI Global Resource Centre conducted a SAVi assessment of the program, in collaboration with Trust 2 Impact, to assess the initiative's performance compared to a business-as-usual baseline. Four NBI scenarios were evaluated: one combines all interventions, and three focus individually on agroforestry, WASH, and fisheries. 

The results confirmed that NBI is both cost-effective and transformative. Over 26 years, the integrated scenario could generate nearly USD 940 million in net benefits, equivalent to about USD 3 in value for every dollar invested. Sanitation measures could avoid nearly USD 480 million in health costs, fisheries interventions could deliver the highest return per dollar invested, and agroforestry and reforestation could generate steady revenues from crops, fruits, and carbon storage. Carbon valuation could add USD 62.85 million, surpassing capital expenditures and highlighting the potential of carbon credits as a financing tool. 

By linking ecological restoration with health, food security, and investment opportunities, the NBI transformation program offers a scalable model for climate resilience in Kenya and across East Africa.

Mobilizing finance for climate action—including private sector investment—is essential to achieving the goals of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement. This report explores eight innovative financial instruments with strong potential to attract private finance for adaptation and mitigation in developing countries and LDCs. It assesses each instrument's strengths, limitations, and enabling conditions, with a focus on how public finance can be used to scale their application. The instruments include the following:

• Adaptation Benefit Mechanism
• biodiversity credits
• carbon taxes
• carbon trading mechanisms
• credit guarantees
• debt-for-nature/climate resilience swaps
• pooled investment funds
• sovereign green and sustainability-linked bonds

Each offers a distinct pathway to leverage private sector engagement in climate-resilient development.

At the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP 26) in Glasgow, 39 countries and public finance institutions signed the CETP, committing to end international public finance for fossil fuels by the end of 2022 and to fully prioritize finance for clean energy. With Norway and Australia joining at COP 28 and the United States leaving the commitment in February 2025, the partnership now consists of 40 members. 

This report analyzes CETP signatories' international finance for fossil fuels and clean energy in 2024—2 years since the implementation deadline. The report finds the following:

• Most signatories continued to cut fossil fuel finance in 2024. In line with trends from 2023, members reduced international support for fossil fuels by up to 78% in 2024, to USD 4.7 billion. This progress demonstrates the tremendous power and positive impact of the CETP as a vehicle of the clean energy transition.
• Only 10 out of 17 high-income signatories have fully aligned their energy finance policies with the CETP pledge. To fully implement the CETP, signatories should close loopholes that allow continued fossil fuel financing.
• Progress on scaling up clean energy finance remains slow. CETP finance for renewable energy increased by only USD 3.2 billion in 2024 compared with 2019–2021, meaning less than one-fifth of the funds shifted from fossil fuels were redirected to clean energy.
• Despite the momentum in winding down fossil fuel finance, the initiative is facing significant headwinds. Rising geopolitical tensions and the United States' exit in 2024 make CETP gains more fragile. 

To safeguard current progress, signatories should adopt a collective target of at least USD 42 billion for scaling clean energy finance in emerging markets and developing economies under the CETP Clean Energy Action Plan and adopt institutional or whole-of-government policies and strategies to ensure this finance is fair, advances a just transition, and prioritizes transformative subsectors, such as grids and storage.

MEL systems are a critical component of both the NAP process and the NAP document. They are designed to assess whether adaptation strategies are achieving their intended outcomes, understand how and for whom they are effective and inform necessary adjustments based on evidence. 

Not only is MEL a dedicated phase of NAP processes, but these systems also support accountability and institutional learning across the four phases of the iterative adaptation cycle: impact, vulnerability, and risk assessments, planning, implementation, and MEL. It also contributes to strengthening the overall effectiveness of climate resilience efforts while helping to minimize the risk of unintended consequences. Moreover, MEL systems for NAP processes also generate essential information for international climate reporting under the Paris Agreement. 

This first synthesis report by the NAP Global Network reviews how 62 countries have integrated MEL into their NAP documents, based on the information provided in their NAP submissions to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change as of June 30, 2025. It provides a snapshot of how countries describe the status and design of their MEL systems across the four phases of the iterative adaptation cycle. The report also identifies common trends, gaps, and emerging good practices, with case studies illustrating promising approaches to strengthening MEL design and implementation.

This is the fifth edition of The Production Gap report, which was first issued in 2019. It tracks the misalignment between governments' planned fossil fuel production and global production levels consistent with limiting global warming to 1.5°C or 2°C. The report, which is externally peer reviewed, represents a collaboration of several research and academic institutions, including inputs and reviews from more than 50 experts spanning all parts of the globe. This year's publication updates the analysis presented in the 2023 edition, profiling the plans and projections of 20 major fossil fuel-producing countries, representing a mix of the world's largest producers, large producers with readily available data, and producers with strongly stated climate ambitions.

The accelerating climate and energy crises make it urgent to expand renewable energy and boost energy efficiency. For many developing countries, the challenge is twofold: moving away from fossil fuels while also ensuring affordable, reliable energy reaches populations. Achieving the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C target means tripling renewable energy capacity and doubling energy efficiency gains by 2030. Yet, investment in green energy remains uneven. Most private capital flows to low-risk, mature markets, leaving many emerging and developing economies grappling with limited fiscal space, high debt, and policy uncertainty. 

The use of tax incentives to attract green investment 

To attract investment, governments have increasingly turned to green tax incentives, ranging from tax rate reductions and accelerated depreciation to customs duty exemptions. These tools can redirect capital toward climate-aligned projects. But poorly designed or isolated measures can erode public revenue and fail to generate meaningful investment, raising both efficiency and equity concerns. 

This report examines how 35 emerging and developing economies design and implement green tax incentives. It explores the trends shaping their use and identifies opportunities to make them more effective.

This report offers the most recent and comprehensive estimates of the extensive financial support for LNG exports provided by the Government of BC and the Government of Canada. It quantifies existing and forthcoming public financial support of LNG facilities and the pipelines directly feeding them. Because several annual subsidies apply only once projects are operational, the report includes a projection of cumulative financial support to the end of 2030. LNG sector support from the federal government includes CAD 1.62 billion in public finance and CAD 151.95 million in infrastructure funding. By 2031, the BC government will have provided around CAD 2.16 billion in support to the LNG sector through foregone revenue, reduced electricity rates, and enabling infrastructure. 

Government support for LNG has been provided via public financing, direct transfers, favourable tax rules, preferential electricity rates, infrastructure development, carbon tax exemptions, and a project-specific waiver on anti-dumping steel tariffs meant to protect Canadian manufacturing. If current policies remain unchanged, by 2031, total federal and provincial support for the sector will amount to CAD 3.93 billion. 

LNG development in BC was first proposed as a gateway to Asian energy markets to provide relief from declining U.S. demand and low North American prices. Current trade tensions have given new life to these arguments, but the actual public benefit of expanding LNG production demands greater scrutiny. A projected glut of LNG supply over the coming decade is expected to drive down global prices. Comparatively expensive Canadian LNG may struggle to compete, raising the risk of projects becoming unviable stranded assets. A closer look is vital due to the scale of government financial support, the uncertainty of LNG markets, and the questionable long-term economic viability of Canadian LNG in a world transitioning away from fossil fuels. 

Key recommendations

• Implement the federal government's 2022 commitment to eliminate all domestic finance for fossil fuels and update the Inefficient Fossil Fuel Subsidies Framework to exclude funding for LNG infrastructure.
• Enforce the BC government's requirement for LNG facilities to be fully net-zero by 2030.
• Exclude LNG facilities from receiving funding under the Clean BC Industry Fund.
• Strengthen the provincial output-based pricing system, removing exemptions for new entrants and fugitive emissions.
• Charge LNG projects the full cost of grid electricity.
• All projects under consideration should undergo a robust economic analysis ensuring economic viability under provincial and federal climate policy-compliant scenarios.
• Phase out tax subsidies, including provincial sales tax deferrals on construction costs and the Natural Gas Tax Credit.
• Increase transparency of reporting on government funding to enable full accounting of the economic costs of LNG development.

This report measures government support by quantifying energy subsidies, public sector undertakings for fossil fuels, electricity transmission and distribution, renewable energy, biofuels, and electric vehicles between FY 2020 and FY 2024. The report also quantifies the government's energy revenues in Chhattisgarh from different types of energy. This is the first time a report has quantified the combined value of Union and state government support in Chhattisgarh's energy sector. 

We identified four times more subsidies for coal, oil, and gas than for clean energy. Overall, fossil fuel subsidies have doubled since FY 2020. 

Key recommendations include the following:

• The Chhattisgarh Chief Minister's Office has prepared a vision document that sets a target of 66% of renewable energy in the state's energy mix by 2047. The state's vision document outlines a renewable-led generation plan but can do more by establishing clear state-level net-zero targets that help transition government support from fossil to clean energy.
• Better targeting of electricity subsidies to low-income households can help control growing fiscal expenditure. The savings can be redirected into rooftop solar, solar pumps, small-scale wind, and repurposed thermal assets. 
• Diversify revenue beyond coal, oil, and gas by enhancing production of minerals like iron ore, bauxite, and limestone, and align industrial development with the state’s long-term decarbonization goals. 
• Establish a state-led coordination committee with key departments and stakeholders to design social support mechanisms for coal-dependent workers and communities. Collaborating with the Ministry of Coal and coal firm Southeastern Coalfields Limited to diversify operations and create alternative employment can drive just transition planning in the state.