Download Volume 1

Download Volume 2

Jason Channell

Aakash Doshi

Arkady Gevorkyan

Scott Gruber

P.J. Juvekar

Maximilian J Layton

Ryan Levine

Maggie Xueting Lin

Shreyas Madabushi

Eric G Lee

Francesco Martoccia

Anita McBain

Edward McKinnon

Edward L Morse

Benjamin Nabarro

Kate O’Sullivan

Eric B Petrie

Adam Phillips

Jack Shang, CFA

Georgina Smartt

Alastair R Syme

Stephen Trent

Anthony Yuen, Ph.D.

As world leaders trekked to COP26 in Glasgow in November 2021 there was a feeling of enthusiasm in the air. Commitments made under the Paris Agreement in 2015 were an important first step in addressing climate issues, but now it was time to turn promises into global action and recommit to tackling the climate crisis. At the same time, concerns over the COVID-19 pandemic were fading, economies were recovering, and there was a general feeling things were getting back to “business as usual.” By all accounts, COP26 was a success as ambitious targets were agreed to on reducing greenhouse gas emissions and funding climate action for developing countries. Consensus was forming around the idea that net-zero carbon could be achieved by 2050. And financing mechanisms were being put in place by developed countries to honor their $100 billion commitment to developing nations to help fund the Energy Transition. And just as it felt like things were going back to “business as usual,” the Omicron variant of COVID-19 took hold and the Russia-Ukraine conflict erupted. Suddenly we were spilling into a world of rising inflation, supply constraints in fuel and food, and a deteriorating political backdrop. Combined, these headwinds threatened to derail the push for decarbonization as governments focused on energy security and short-term economic issues. On the regulation side, three major economies — the U.S., the EU, and China — have taken action to significantly accelerate the Energy Transition: (1) The U.S. passed the Inflation Reduction Act in August 2022 with $369 billion in investment earmarked for energy security and climate change sectors; (2) the EU’s REPowerEU plan, unveiled in May 2022, forced an upgrade to its already ambitious Energy Transition goals from the prior “Fit-for-55” package; and (3) China reiterated its commitment to see peak CO2 levels by 2030 and net zero by 2060. Technology and innovation in energy storage systems; carbon capture, utilization, and storage; and alternative energy such as biofuels/sustainable aviation fuel, nuclear, and hydrogen, will drive energy security and independence. On the financial side, carbon pricing schemes and carbon credits for hard-to-abate sectors can help internalize the cost of pollution, thus giving an economic incentive to switch to more sustainable approaches. More importantly, multilateral development banks, and supranational institutions can step up to create blended finance at scale, can facilitate the Energy Transition in areas of the world that need it most. Given the scale of the issue, we have published Energy Transition in two volumes. Volume I — Mixed Momentum on the Path to Net Zero — looks at (1) where we are on the commitments agreed to last year at COP26 given recent geopolitical and climate events, and (2) what needs to be done to keep momentum on track in the Energy Transition. Volume II — Building Bridges to Renew Momentum — focuses on the funding requirements and tools required to ensure a successful Energy Transition.Authors:

<h3 class="">As world leaders trekked to COP26 in Glasgow in November 2021 there was a feeling of enthusiasm in the air. Commitments made under the Paris Agreement in 2015 were an important first step in addressing climate issues, but now it was time to turn promises into global action and recommit to tackling the climate crisis. At the same time, concerns over the COVID-19 pandemic were fading, economies were recovering, and there was a general feeling things were getting back to &ldquo;business as usual.&rdquo;</h3>
 By all accounts, COP26 was a success as ambitious targets were agreed to on reducing greenhouse gas emissions and funding climate action for developing countries. Consensus was forming around the idea that net-zero carbon could be achieved by 2050. And financing mechanisms were being put in place by developed countries to honor their $100 billion commitment to developing nations to help fund the Energy Transition. And just as it felt like things were going back to &ldquo;business as usual,&rdquo; the Omicron variant of COVID-19 took hold and the Russia-Ukraine conflict erupted. Suddenly we were spilling into a world of rising inflation, supply constraints in fuel and food, and a deteriorating political backdrop. Combined, these headwinds threatened to derail the push for decarbonization as governments focused on energy security and short-term economic issues. On the regulation side, three major economies &mdash; the U.S., the EU, and China &mdash; have taken action to significantly accelerate the Energy Transition: (1) The U.S. passed the Inflation Reduction Act in August 2022 with $369 billion in investment earmarked for energy security and climate change sectors; (2) the EU&rsquo;s REPowerEU plan, unveiled in May 2022, forced an upgrade to its already ambitious Energy Transition goals from the prior &ldquo;Fit-for-55&rdquo; package; and (3) China reiterated its commitment to see peak CO2 levels by 2030 and net zero by 2060. Technology and innovation in energy storage systems; carbon capture, utilization, and storage; and alternative energy such as biofuels/sustainable aviation fuel, nuclear, and hydrogen, will drive energy security and independence. On the financial side, carbon pricing schemes and carbon credits for hard-to-abate sectors can help internalize the cost of pollution, thus giving an economic incentive to switch to more sustainable approaches. More importantly, multilateral development banks, and supranational institutions can step up to create blended finance at scale, can facilitate the Energy Transition in areas of the world that need it most. Given the scale of the issue, we have published Energy Transition in two volumes. Volume I &mdash; Mixed Momentum on the Path to Net Zero &mdash; looks at (1) where we are on the commitments agreed to last year at COP26 given recent geopolitical and climate events, and (2) what needs to be done to keep momentum on track in the Energy Transition. Volume II &mdash; Building Bridges to Renew Momentum &mdash; focuses on the funding requirements and tools required to ensure a successful Energy Transition.Authors:

Momentum Stalled in 2022 A deteriorating economic and political backdrop in 2022 has slowed the process of decarbonization as the focus turns to one of energy security and short-term economic issues.




A deteriorating economic and political backdrop in 2022 has slowed the process of decarbonization as the focus turns to one of energy security and short-term economic issues.




Momentum Stalled in 2022

Sustainable Financing Is Also Slowing  Momentum in the Energy Transition was building ahead of the COP26 meeting in November 2021. Sustainable debt issuance (including for social and other areas not directly part of the Energy Transition) increased from $320 billion to $1.7 trillion from 2018 through 2021. However, momentum in 2022 has slowed, with volumes reaching just $740 billion in the first half of 2022, a 16.8% year-over-year decline.

Momentum in the Energy Transition was building ahead of the COP26 meeting in November 2021. Sustainable debt issuance (including for social and other areas not directly part of the Energy Transition) increased from $320 billion to $1.7 trillion from 2018 through 2021. However, momentum in 2022 has slowed, with volumes reaching just $740 billion in the first half of 2022, a 16.8% year-over-year decline.

Sustainable Financing Is Also Slowing 

Solutions to Accelerate the Energy Transition  Despite the slowdown in momentum, recent global events have increased the drive for energy security and independence, and will likely accelerate the uptake path to economic viability of many new and existing technologies, as well as innovative financial solutions.

Despite the slowdown in momentum, recent global events have increased the drive for energy security and independence, and will likely accelerate the uptake path to economic viability of many new and existing technologies, as well as innovative financial solutions.

Solutions to Accelerate the Energy Transition 

Fiscal Stimulus Required for Renewable Energy Supply and Infrastructure According to the Network for Greening the Financial System (NGFS), the total capital investment necessary to achieve a net zero future requires over $275 trillion by 2050. Given the staggering amount of investment capital necessary for the Energy Transition, fiscal stimulus to catalyze commercially viable renewable energy supply and infrastructure is essential.

According to the Network for Greening the Financial System (NGFS), the total capital investment necessary to achieve a net zero future requires over $275 trillion by 2050. Given the staggering amount of investment capital necessary for the Energy Transition, fiscal stimulus to catalyze commercially viable renewable energy supply and infrastructure is essential.

Fiscal Stimulus Required for Renewable Energy Supply and Infrastructure

As world leaders trekked to COP26 in Glasgow in November 2021 there was a feeling of enthusiasm in the air. Commitments made under the Paris Agreement in 2015 were an important first step in addressing climate issues, but now it was time to turn promises into global action and recommit to tackling the climate crisis. At the same time, concerns over the COVID-19 pandemic were fading, economies were recovering, and there was a general feeling things were getting back to “business as usual.” By all accounts, COP26 was a success as ambitious targets were agreed to on reducing greenhouse gas emissions and funding climate action for developing countries. Consensus was forming around the idea that net-zero carbon could be achieved by 2050. And financing mechanisms were being put in place by developed countries to honor their $100 billion commitment to developing nations to help fund the Energy Transition. And just as it felt like things were going back to “business as usual,” the Omicron variant of COVID-19 took hold and the Russia-Ukraine conflict erupted. Suddenly we were spilling into a world of rising inflation, supply constraints in fuel and food, and a deteriorating political backdrop. Combined, these headwinds threatened to derail the push for decarbonization as governments focused on energy security and short-term economic issues. On the regulation side, three major economies — the U.S., the EU, and China — have taken action to significantly accelerate the Energy Transition: (1) The U.S. passed the Inflation Reduction Act in August 2022 with $369 billion in investment earmarked for energy security and climate change sectors; (2) the EU’s REPowerEU plan, unveiled in May 2022, forced an upgrade to its already ambitious Energy Transition goals from the prior “Fit-for-55” package; and (3) China reiterated its commitment to see peak CO2 levels by 2030 and net zero by 2060. Technology and innovation in energy storage systems; carbon capture, utilization, and storage; and alternative energy such as biofuels/sustainable aviation fuel, nuclear, and hydrogen, will drive energy security and independence. On the financial side, carbon pricing schemes and carbon credits for hard-to-abate sectors can help internalize the cost of pollution, thus giving an economic incentive to switch to more sustainable approaches. More importantly, multilateral development banks, and supranational institutions can step up to create blended finance at scale, can facilitate the Energy Transition in areas of the world that need it most. Given the scale of the issue, we have published Energy Transition in two volumes. Volume I — Mixed Momentum on the Path to Net Zero — looks at (1) where we are on the commitments agreed to last year at COP26 given recent geopolitical and climate events, and (2) what needs to be done to keep momentum on track in the Energy Transition. Volume II — Building Bridges to Renew Momentum — focuses on the funding requirements and tools required to ensure a successful Energy Transition.Authors: Momentum Stalled in 2022 A deteriorating economic and political backdrop in 2022 has slowed the process of decarbonization as the focus turns to one of energy security and short-term economic issues.


 Sustainable Financing Is Also Slowing  Momentum in the Energy Transition was building ahead of the COP26 meeting in November 2021. Sustainable debt issuance (including for social and other areas not directly part of the Energy Transition) increased from $320 billion to $1.7 trillion from 2018 through 2021. However, momentum in 2022 has slowed, with volumes reaching just $740 billion in the first half of 2022, a 16.8% year-over-year decline. Solutions to Accelerate the Energy Transition  Despite the slowdown in momentum, recent global events have increased the drive for energy security and independence, and will likely accelerate the uptake path to economic viability of many new and existing technologies, as well as innovative financial solutions. Fiscal Stimulus Required for Renewable Energy Supply and Infrastructure According to the Network for Greening the Financial System (NGFS), the total capital investment necessary to achieve a net zero future requires over $275 trillion by 2050. Given the staggering amount of investment capital necessary for the Energy Transition, fiscal stimulus to catalyze commercially viable renewable energy supply and infrastructure is essential.

Gaining Momentum on the Path to Net Zero

As world leaders trekked to COP26 in Glasgow in November 2021 there was a feeling of enthusiasm in the air. Commitments made under the Paris Agreement in 2015 were an important first step in addressing climate issues, but now it was time to turn promises into global action and recommit to tackling the climate crisis. At the same time, concerns over the COVID-19 pandemic were fading, economies were recovering, and there was a general feeling things were getting back to “business as usual.”

Energy Transition

Download

Citi GPS

Around the globe, nearly a third of us worry about where our next meal is coming from, and one in ten of us suffer from hunger or malnutrition. How is that possible in a modern society? While we are having high-level debates about the possible dystopian effects on society from advanced technology, artificial intelligence, and quantum computing, we seem to be missing a simple and embarrassing truth — we have failed in our moral responsibility to ensure no one goes hungry. It is easy to write off our current situation by pointing to a slew of one-off events that came together to create a “perfect storm” — droughts, armed conflict, skyrocketing inflation, supply chain issues. But even accounting for this tumultuous year, nearly a billion people around the world, some far away and some literally next door, have gone without food and experienced hunger for at least one day in 2022. Food insecurity has serious social and geopolitical implications and throughout history has been a driver of civil unrest and migration. It also carries a hefty price tag — the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization estimates the costs of malnutrition to the global economy to be as high as $3.5 trillion per year. And while finding a solution will also be costly, the economic benefits to society could reach $10.5 trillion per year. In the report that follows, we first look at what is driving the recent increase in food insecurity and find that although the Russia-Ukraine conflict fanned the flames of the crisis, it was not the sole cause. Environmental factors such as more frequent extreme weather events are making crop production more volatile and increasing the vulnerability of the agriculture sector. Higher energy prices have raised the cost of food production. Rising inflation has forced families to make trade-offs between food and other monthly expenses. And conflict in general has caused disruptions to supply chains and transportation hubs. Although some of these issues will fix themselves in 2023, there is a scenario where higher-than-normal agriculture prices persist with continued high fertilizer prices. The recent increase in protectionist trade policies, including export bans, is also exacerbating the problem. So how do we fix this? How do we ensure we are making out best effort to reduce the number of hungry people? The proposed solutions can be bucketed into four categories: social, technological, economic/financial, and governmental. Society can make small changes to eliminate food waste or shifting to a more plant-based diet, which would increase the amount of available food. Technological innovation in alternative proteins and indoor farming as well as automation and robotics can help in ensure food self-sufficiency for regions reliant on imports and improve the food ecosystem. Financing vehicles such as blended finance and hedging facilities can help facilitate investment in infrastructure. And government is needed to help push the agenda forward with targeted policy and regulation as well as provide humanitarian aid and sustained investment in global agriculture. Big problems take big solutions and big efforts. Authors: Jason Channell,Ying Qin,Elizabeth Curmi,Adam Bergman,Aakash Doshi,John B Finnigan,Emma Hampton,Dustin Oliver Ling,Julie Monaco,Harlin Singh Urofsky,Georgi Yordanov,

<h3 class="">Around the globe, nearly a third of us worry about where our next meal is coming from, and one in ten of us suffer from hunger or malnutrition. How is that possible in a modern society? While we are having high-level debates about the possible dystopian effects on society from advanced technology, artificial intelligence, and quantum computing, we seem to be missing a simple and embarrassing truth &mdash; we have failed in our moral responsibility to ensure no one goes hungry.</h3>
 It is easy to write off our current situation by pointing to a slew of one-off events that came together to create a &ldquo;perfect storm&rdquo; &mdash; droughts, armed conflict, skyrocketing inflation, supply chain issues. But even accounting for this tumultuous year, nearly a billion people around the world, some far away and some literally next door, have gone without food and experienced hunger for at least one day in 2022. Food insecurity has serious social and geopolitical implications and throughout history has been a driver of civil unrest and migration. It also carries a hefty price tag &mdash; the UN&rsquo;s Food and Agriculture Organization estimates the costs of malnutrition to the global economy to be as high as $3.5 trillion per year. And while finding a solution will also be costly, the economic benefits to society could reach $10.5 trillion per year. In the report that follows, we first look at what is driving the recent increase in food insecurity and find that although the Russia-Ukraine conflict fanned the flames of the crisis, it was not the sole cause. Environmental factors such as more frequent extreme weather events are making crop production more volatile and increasing the vulnerability of the agriculture sector. Higher energy prices have raised the cost of food production. Rising inflation has forced families to make trade-offs between food and other monthly expenses. And conflict in general has caused disruptions to supply chains and transportation hubs. <img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-11389" src="/rcs/citigpa/storage/public/icpublic/Chart-for-website.png" alt="" width="100%" height="auto" /> Although some of these issues will fix themselves in 2023, there is a scenario where higher-than-normal agriculture prices persist with continued high fertilizer prices. The recent increase in protectionist trade policies, including export bans, is also exacerbating the problem. So how do we fix this? How do we ensure we are making out best effort to reduce the number of hungry people? The proposed solutions can be bucketed into four categories: social, technological, economic/financial, and governmental. Society can make small changes to eliminate food waste or shifting to a more plant-based diet, which would increase the amount of available food. Technological innovation in alternative proteins and indoor farming as well as automation and robotics can help in ensure food self-sufficiency for regions reliant on imports and improve the food ecosystem. Financing vehicles such as blended finance and hedging facilities can help facilitate investment in infrastructure. And government is needed to help push the agenda forward with targeted policy and regulation as well as provide humanitarian aid and sustained investment in global agriculture. Big problems take big solutions and big efforts.
&nbsp;
Authors: Jason Channell,Ying Qin,Elizabeth Curmi,Adam Bergman,Aakash Doshi,John B Finnigan,Emma Hampton,Dustin Oliver Ling,Julie Monaco,Harlin Singh Urofsky,Georgi Yordanov,

No Room for Complacency Around the globe, nearly a third of us worry about where our next meal is coming from, and one in ten of us suffer from hunger or malnutrition. How is that possible in a modern society? While we are having high-level debates about the possible dystopian effects on society from advanced technology, artificial intelligence, and quantum computing, we seem to be missing a simple and embarrassing truth — we have failed in our moral responsibility to ensure no one goes hungry.

Around the globe, nearly a third of us worry about where our next meal is coming from, and one in ten of us suffer from hunger or malnutrition. How is that possible in a modern society? While we are having high-level debates about the possible dystopian effects on society from advanced technology, artificial intelligence, and quantum computing, we seem to be missing a simple and embarrassing truth — we have failed in our moral responsibility to ensure no one goes hungry.

No Room for Complacency

A Perfect Storm A perfect storm of conflict, environmental, and social, political, and economic shifts is worsening global food insecurity. The Russia-Ukraine conflict highlighted the risk of depending on too few countries for food and on physical chokepoints for the transport of key commodities. While some effects may be alleviated in 2023, food prices may remain elevated for some time, even if further inflation looks less likely.

A perfect storm of conflict, environmental, and social, political, and economic shifts is worsening global food insecurity. The Russia-Ukraine conflict highlighted the risk of depending on too few countries for food and on physical chokepoints for the transport of key commodities. While some effects may be alleviated in 2023, food prices may remain elevated for some time, even if further inflation looks less likely.

A Perfect Storm

Global Implications While this is, first and foremost, an immediate human tragedy, the economic and social/geopolitical implications of food insecurity have material macroeconomic impacts. Disruptions in food production have employment consequences while the economic impact from malnutrition could be as high as $3.5 trillion per year. In particular, history suggests high food prices can lead to civil unrest and displacement, e.g., the Arab Spring in 2011.



While this is, first and foremost, an immediate human tragedy, the economic and social/geopolitical implications of food insecurity have material macroeconomic impacts. Disruptions in food production have employment consequences while the economic impact from malnutrition could be as high as $3.5 trillion per year. In particular, history suggests high food prices can lead to civil unrest and displacement, e.g., the Arab Spring in 2011.



Global Implications

Potential Solutions Although imperfect, we propose an integrated approach to ease food insecurity, hunger, and malnutrition in the short-medium term, and aim to eradicate it in the longer term. Key actors — the public, private, and financial sectors, as well as civil society — all play a role in tackling these challenges.

Although imperfect, we propose an integrated approach to ease food insecurity, hunger, and malnutrition in the short-medium term, and aim to eradicate it in the longer term. Key actors — the public, private, and financial sectors, as well as civil society — all play a role in tackling these challenges.

Potential Solutions

Around the globe, nearly a third of us worry about where our next meal is coming from, and one in ten of us suffer from hunger or malnutrition. How is that possible in a modern society? While we are having high-level debates about the possible dystopian effects on society from advanced technology, artificial intelligence, and quantum computing, we seem to be missing a simple and embarrassing truth — we have failed in our moral responsibility to ensure no one goes hungry. It is easy to write off our current situation by pointing to a slew of one-off events that came together to create a “perfect storm” — droughts, armed conflict, skyrocketing inflation, supply chain issues. But even accounting for this tumultuous year, nearly a billion people around the world, some far away and some literally next door, have gone without food and experienced hunger for at least one day in 2022. Food insecurity has serious social and geopolitical implications and throughout history has been a driver of civil unrest and migration. It also carries a hefty price tag — the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization estimates the costs of malnutrition to the global economy to be as high as $3.5 trillion per year. And while finding a solution will also be costly, the economic benefits to society could reach $10.5 trillion per year. In the report that follows, we first look at what is driving the recent increase in food insecurity and find that although the Russia-Ukraine conflict fanned the flames of the crisis, it was not the sole cause. Environmental factors such as more frequent extreme weather events are making crop production more volatile and increasing the vulnerability of the agriculture sector. Higher energy prices have raised the cost of food production. Rising inflation has forced families to make trade-offs between food and other monthly expenses. And conflict in general has caused disruptions to supply chains and transportation hubs. Although some of these issues will fix themselves in 2023, there is a scenario where higher-than-normal agriculture prices persist with continued high fertilizer prices. The recent increase in protectionist trade policies, including export bans, is also exacerbating the problem. So how do we fix this? How do we ensure we are making out best effort to reduce the number of hungry people? The proposed solutions can be bucketed into four categories: social, technological, economic/financial, and governmental. Society can make small changes to eliminate food waste or shifting to a more plant-based diet, which would increase the amount of available food. Technological innovation in alternative proteins and indoor farming as well as automation and robotics can help in ensure food self-sufficiency for regions reliant on imports and improve the food ecosystem. Financing vehicles such as blended finance and hedging facilities can help facilitate investment in infrastructure. And government is needed to help push the agenda forward with targeted policy and regulation as well as provide humanitarian aid and sustained investment in global agriculture. Big problems take big solutions and big efforts. Authors: Jason Channell,Ying Qin,Elizabeth Curmi,Adam Bergman,Aakash Doshi,John B Finnigan,Emma Hampton,Dustin Oliver Ling,Julie Monaco,Harlin Singh Urofsky,Georgi Yordanov, No Room for Complacency Around the globe, nearly a third of us worry about where our next meal is coming from, and one in ten of us suffer from hunger or malnutrition. How is that possible in a modern society? While we are having high-level debates about the possible dystopian effects on society from advanced technology, artificial intelligence, and quantum computing, we seem to be missing a simple and embarrassing truth — we have failed in our moral responsibility to ensure no one goes hungry. A Perfect Storm A perfect storm of conflict, environmental, and social, political, and economic shifts is worsening global food insecurity. The Russia-Ukraine conflict highlighted the risk of depending on too few countries for food and on physical chokepoints for the transport of key commodities. While some effects may be alleviated in 2023, food prices may remain elevated for some time, even if further inflation looks less likely. Global Implications While this is, first and foremost, an immediate human tragedy, the economic and social/geopolitical implications of food insecurity have material macroeconomic impacts. Disruptions in food production have employment consequences while the economic impact from malnutrition could be as high as $3.5 trillion per year. In particular, history suggests high food prices can lead to civil unrest and displacement, e.g., the Arab Spring in 2011.

 Potential Solutions Although imperfect, we propose an integrated approach to ease food insecurity, hunger, and malnutrition in the short-medium term, and aim to eradicate it in the longer term. Key actors — the public, private, and financial sectors, as well as civil society — all play a role in tackling these challenges. 

Tackling the Current Crisis and Building Future Resilience

Food Security

Elizabeth Curmi

Ying Qin

Amy Thompson

At the UN Climate Change Conference (COP26) in November 2021, world leaders came together and set a global agenda on a path to net zero emissions. Pledges were made to further cut carbon dioxide emissions, reduce the use of coal, lower methane emissions, and stop deforestation. Importantly, an actionable framework was put around the promises made in the Paris Agreement. There are volumes of literature explaining why the world needs to focus on lowering greenhouse gas emissions. Countless experts list the devastating effects rising global temperatures will have on weather, crops, biodiversity, migration, and health. And a continuous stream of politicians and public figures tell us how important it is to support a green agenda. But unfortunately, there has been little focus on what is likely the most important subject — how do we pay for global action on climate change? In the report that follows, we aim to answer two questions: (1) What investment is needed in different regions and countries for climate mitigation and adaptation? and (2) How can we mobilize this investment efficiently to enable the world to reach its climate goals while still growing in population and developing the economy? Overall, it is estimated that $125 trillion will be needed for the world to reach net zero by 2050. From 2021-25, that equates to $2.6 trillion per year, rising to $3.8 trillion from 2026 through 2030. Although climate finance has increased over the past decade, it is still significantly below the levels required for us to be on the path to net zero. Average annual climate finance flows in 2016-20 were estimated at between $600 billion and $900 billion meaning there is a $1.7 trillion gap between what the world has been delivering each year towards climate financing and what is required through 2025. Alarmingly, no single country or region is currently on track to meet its individual climate financing targets. Mobilizing climate financing is a challenge as there is no one global solution. The public sector, including governments and development finance institutions, has played an extremely important role in mobilizing finance and the private sector has contributed 49% of investment funds. Unlocking private sector capital for climate finance is crucial as private actors could provide 70% of the $2.6 trillion needed in investment every year (on average in 2021-25) to put the world on a path to net zero by 2050.[1] Financial instruments, such as blended finance, in conjunction with development finance institutions can increase private sector investment in developing economies. And green banks, which develop clean project pipelines, are using innovative financing to accelerate the transition to clean energy. Collaboration — between developed and developing economies as well as the public and private sectors — is key to making this a just transition. [1] UNFCCC Race to Zero campaign with support and analysis from Vivid Economics, “Financing Road Maps,” accessed November 2, 2022.Authors: Elizabeth Curmi,Jason Channell,Ying Qin,Amy Thompson,

<h3 class="">At the UN Climate Change Conference (COP26) in November 2021, world leaders came together and set a global agenda on a path to net zero emissions. Pledges were made to further cut carbon dioxide emissions, reduce the use of coal, lower methane emissions, and stop deforestation. Importantly, an actionable framework was put around the promises made in the Paris Agreement.</h3>
 There are volumes of literature explaining why the world needs to focus on lowering greenhouse gas emissions. Countless experts list the devastating effects rising global temperatures will have on weather, crops, biodiversity, migration, and health. And a continuous stream of politicians and public figures tell us how important it is to support a green agenda. But unfortunately, there has been little focus on what is likely the most important subject &mdash; how do we pay for global action on climate change? In the report that follows, we aim to answer two questions: (1) What investment is needed in different regions and countries for climate mitigation and adaptation? and (2) How can we mobilize this investment efficiently to enable the world to reach its climate goals while still growing in population and developing the economy? Overall, it is estimated that $125 trillion will be needed for the world to reach net zero by 2050. From 2021-25, that equates to $2.6 trillion per year, rising to $3.8 trillion from 2026 through 2030. Although climate finance has increased over the past decade, it is still significantly below the levels required for us to be on the path to net zero. Average annual climate finance flows in 2016-20 were estimated at between $600 billion and $900 billion meaning there is a $1.7 trillion gap between what the world has been delivering each year towards climate financing and what is required through 2025. Alarmingly, no single country or region is currently on track to meet its individual climate financing targets. <img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-11404" src="https://www.citivelocity.com/citigps/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Climate-Finance-Gap.png" alt="" width="775" height="442" /> Mobilizing climate financing is a challenge as there is no one global solution. The public sector, including governments and development finance institutions, has played an extremely important role in mobilizing finance and the private sector has contributed 49% of investment funds. Unlocking private sector capital for climate finance is crucial as private actors could provide 70% of the $2.6 trillion needed in investment every year (on average in 2021-25) to put the world on a path to net zero by 2050.<a href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1" data-link-source="tiny">[1]</a> Financial instruments, such as blended finance, in conjunction with development finance institutions can increase private sector investment in developing economies. And green banks, which develop clean project pipelines, are using innovative financing to accelerate the transition to clean energy. Collaboration &mdash; between developed and developing economies as well as the public and private sectors &mdash; is key to making this a just transition. <a href="#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1" data-link-source="tiny">[1]</a> UNFCCC Race to Zero campaign with support and analysis from Vivid Economics, &ldquo;<a href="https://www.gfanzero.com/netzerofinancing/" data-link-source="tiny">Financing Road Maps</a>,&rdquo; accessed November 2, 2022.Authors: Elizabeth Curmi,Jason Channell,Ying Qin,Amy Thompson,

Climate Finance Gap Climate-related projects mobilized between $600 billion and $900 billion on average annually in 2016-20. The IEA Net Zero Scenario estimates $125 trillion is required to reach net zero over the next 30 years. Therefore, getting on a path to net zero requires an additional annual investment of $1.7 trillion in 2021-25 in mitigation alone. Developing countries especially need support as they do not have the fiscal capacity to invest in climate action.

Climate-related projects mobilized between $600 billion and $900 billion on average annually in 2016-20. The IEA Net Zero Scenario estimates $125 trillion is required to reach net zero over the next 30 years. Therefore, getting on a path to net zero requires an additional annual investment of $1.7 trillion in 2021-25 in mitigation alone. Developing countries especially need support as they do not have the fiscal capacity to invest in climate action.

Climate Finance Gap

Substantial Investment Scale Is Needed Across All Regions Current climate investment flows need to be scaled up substantially as no region is currently on track to deliver enough investment to meet their climate finance needs. For example, investments need to reach $170 billion in Africa, $1.1 trillion in Asia Pacific, and $500 billion in North America annually between 2021 and 2025 in order to build low-carbon economies and adapt to climate change, with even higher needs in 2026-30. In all three regions, current investment flows are substantially below what is needed.

Current climate investment flows need to be scaled up substantially as no region is currently on track to deliver enough investment to meet their climate finance needs. For example, investments need to reach $170 billion in Africa, $1.1 trillion in Asia Pacific, and $500 billion in North America annually between 2021 and 2025 in order to build low-carbon economies and adapt to climate change, with even higher needs in 2026-30. In all three regions, current investment flows are substantially below what is needed.

Substantial Investment Scale Is Needed Across All Regions

Making It Happen Mobilizing climate finance is challenging, but we need to start looking at climate action as an opportunity versus a cost. Making this happen will require mobilizing the private and public sectors to work together, to create projects that are bankable, and to ensure a just transition. Since not one solution applies to all countries, we outline which key actors and financial institutions can scale up climate finance for countries at different levels of economic development.

Mobilizing climate finance is challenging, but we need to start looking at climate action as an opportunity versus a cost. Making this happen will require mobilizing the private and public sectors to work together, to create projects that are bankable, and to ensure a just transition. Since not one solution applies to all countries, we outline which key actors and financial institutions can scale up climate finance for countries at different levels of economic development.

Making It Happen

At the UN Climate Change Conference (COP26) in November 2021, world leaders came together and set a global agenda on a path to net zero emissions. Pledges were made to further cut carbon dioxide emissions, reduce the use of coal, lower methane emissions, and stop deforestation. Importantly, an actionable framework was put around the promises made in the Paris Agreement. There are volumes of literature explaining why the world needs to focus on lowering greenhouse gas emissions. Countless experts list the devastating effects rising global temperatures will have on weather, crops, biodiversity, migration, and health. And a continuous stream of politicians and public figures tell us how important it is to support a green agenda. But unfortunately, there has been little focus on what is likely the most important subject — how do we pay for global action on climate change? In the report that follows, we aim to answer two questions: (1) What investment is needed in different regions and countries for climate mitigation and adaptation? and (2) How can we mobilize this investment efficiently to enable the world to reach its climate goals while still growing in population and developing the economy? Overall, it is estimated that $125 trillion will be needed for the world to reach net zero by 2050. From 2021-25, that equates to $2.6 trillion per year, rising to $3.8 trillion from 2026 through 2030. Although climate finance has increased over the past decade, it is still significantly below the levels required for us to be on the path to net zero. Average annual climate finance flows in 2016-20 were estimated at between $600 billion and $900 billion meaning there is a $1.7 trillion gap between what the world has been delivering each year towards climate financing and what is required through 2025. Alarmingly, no single country or region is currently on track to meet its individual climate financing targets. Mobilizing climate financing is a challenge as there is no one global solution. The public sector, including governments and development finance institutions, has played an extremely important role in mobilizing finance and the private sector has contributed 49% of investment funds. Unlocking private sector capital for climate finance is crucial as private actors could provide 70% of the $2.6 trillion needed in investment every year (on average in 2021-25) to put the world on a path to net zero by 2050.[1] Financial instruments, such as blended finance, in conjunction with development finance institutions can increase private sector investment in developing economies. And green banks, which develop clean project pipelines, are using innovative financing to accelerate the transition to clean energy. Collaboration — between developed and developing economies as well as the public and private sectors — is key to making this a just transition. [1] UNFCCC Race to Zero campaign with support and analysis from Vivid Economics, “Financing Road Maps,” accessed November 2, 2022.Authors: Elizabeth Curmi,Jason Channell,Ying Qin,Amy Thompson, Climate Finance Gap Climate-related projects mobilized between $600 billion and $900 billion on average annually in 2016-20. The IEA Net Zero Scenario estimates $125 trillion is required to reach net zero over the next 30 years. Therefore, getting on a path to net zero requires an additional annual investment of $1.7 trillion in 2021-25 in mitigation alone. Developing countries especially need support as they do not have the fiscal capacity to invest in climate action. Substantial Investment Scale Is Needed Across All Regions Current climate investment flows need to be scaled up substantially as no region is currently on track to deliver enough investment to meet their climate finance needs. For example, investments need to reach $170 billion in Africa, $1.1 trillion in Asia Pacific, and $500 billion in North America annually between 2021 and 2025 in order to build low-carbon economies and adapt to climate change, with even higher needs in 2026-30. In all three regions, current investment flows are substantially below what is needed. Making It Happen Mobilizing climate finance is challenging, but we need to start looking at climate action as an opportunity versus a cost. Making this happen will require mobilizing the private and public sectors to work together, to create projects that are bankable, and to ensure a just transition. Since not one solution applies to all countries, we outline which key actors and financial institutions can scale up climate finance for countries at different levels of economic development.

Mobilizing the Public and Private Sector to Ensure a Just Energy Transition

At the UN Climate Change Conference (COP26) in November 2021, world leaders came together and set a global agenda on a path to net zero emissions. Pledges were made to further cut carbon dioxide emissions, reduce the use of coal, lower methane emissions, and stop deforestation. Importantly, an actionable framework was put around the promises made in the Paris Agreement.

Climate Finance 

download

This report focuses on ocean degradation and makes the case for (1) increased attention and action from businesses and financial institutions, and (2) a more integrated approach across climate change, biodiversity loss and ocean degradation. It starts by examining the significance of the ocean from environmental, economic and social perspectives and the current state of play. This is followed by a deep dive into the root causes of negative impacts on oceans, which is then mapped to industries – both marine and land-based. Almost all industries contribute to ocean degradation through one or more of three key “stressors”: climate change, pollution, and land/sea use change & direct exploitation. We then discuss the risks and opportunities for businesses and financial institutions, as well as relevant regulations and initiatives that are in place and on the horizon. The note concludes with a set of recommendations for the private, public and finance sectors.

This report focuses on ocean degradation and makes the case for (1) increased attention and action from businesses and financial institutions, and (2) a more integrated approach across climate change, biodiversity loss and ocean degradation. It starts by examining the significance of the ocean from environmental, economic and social perspectives and the current state of play. This is followed by a deep dive into the root causes of negative impacts on oceans, which is then mapped to industries &ndash; both marine and land-based. Almost all industries contribute to ocean degradation through one or more of three key &ldquo;stressors&rdquo;: climate change, pollution, and land/sea use change &amp; direct exploitation. We then discuss the risks and opportunities for businesses and financial institutions, as well as relevant regulations and initiatives that are in place and on the horizon. The note concludes with a set of recommendations for the private, public and finance sectors.

The neglected SDG that could sink them all

This report focuses on ocean degradation and makes the case for (1) increased attention and action from businesses and financial institutions, and (2) a more integrated approach across climate change, biodiversity loss and ocean degradation.

Ocean Degradation

Food Security

Climate Finance

Energy Transition

Subscribe

Sign up to receive the latest news from Citi.

About Us

Businesses

Our Impact

Investors

News

Careers, Contact Us, and Regulatory Disclosures