The article defines “climate finance justice” as a framework for analysing how financialised climate action shapes equity, power, and outcomes. It critiques climate finance mechanisms, including UNFCCC processes and voluntary carbon markets, and argues for justice-centred approaches that address historical responsibility, governance, and uneven impacts.

The report argues that limiting warming to 1.5°C is no longer realistic and may hinder preparedness. It calls for acknowledging higher warming scenarios, accelerating mitigation, and adopting disruptive policy, financial, and governance approaches to manage climate and nature risks in a likely 2°C-plus world.

The report analyses US climate-driven mortgage risk, showing floods as the dominant driver of post-disaster foreclosures. Rising insurance costs, coverage gaps and falling property values create hidden credit losses. It argues climate risk should be treated as a sixth core credit assessment factor.

The report outlines the EU’s White Paper on European Defence and the ReArm Europe Plan, targeting defence readiness by 2030 through closing capability gaps, strengthening the defence industrial base, and mobilising over €800 billion via public, EU, and private funding mechanisms.

Bpifrance’s European Defence Bond Framework defines principles for issuing use-of-proceeds bonds financing eligible defence-sector projects, mainly SMEs, to support European sovereignty. It details eligibility criteria, exclusions, ESG safeguards, governance, reporting, and proceeds management, while stating the bonds are not ICMA-aligned sustainable instruments.

The report analyses global financial links to arms production, showing significant funding for weapons despite rising conflict. It contrasts this with values-based banks, particularly GABV members, which largely exclude arms financing, arguing divestment supports peace, reduces risk, and aligns finance with social and environmental objectives.

The report outlines practical frameworks for integrating climate adaptation into financial decision-making, linking physical risk assessment to credit, investment, sovereign risk and financial products. It promotes the ABC framework, data transparency and adaptation-inclusive transition plans to improve resilience, pricing and capital allocation.

GARP benchmarks 13 vendors’ asset-level climate physical risk models, finding wide dispersion in hazard and damage estimates due to differing data, assumptions and methods. The report stresses due diligence, transparency and improved asset data when selecting vendors.

The report assesses energy financing by 65 major banks (2021–2024), finding fossil fuel finance more than double sustainable power supply. The energy supply financing ratio stagnates around 0.42:1, far below net-zero benchmarks, with regional disparities and weak translation of climate commitments into financing shifts.

The report examines how climate-related data are used in investment decision-making, highlighting limitations in availability, consistency, and comparability. It reviews greenhouse gas metrics, evolving global disclosure standards, and regulatory milestones, and outlines practical strategies for investors managing imperfect climate data.

The report distinguishes planetary, economic and financial climate risks, clarifying their differing scopes, timeframes and responsible actors. It argues that conflating these risks weakens policy and investment responses, and calls for clearer delineation to improve risk assessment, accountability and targeted climate action.

The report reviews approaches to modelling portfolio changes in long-term climate stress tests, comparing static portfolios with macro, ex ante, and ex post adjustments. It outlines trade-offs, shows results are sensitive to assumptions, and argues approach choice should match supervisory objectives.

This report argues that insurability is a strategic indicator of financial viability in a climate-disrupted economy. It explains how insurance, risk modelling, resilience investment, and policy alignment shape access to capital, asset values, and transition finance, urging leaders to embed insurability into decision-making.

The report reviews 109 financial institutions with policies excluding nuclear weapon producers, assessing policy scope and implementation. It finds 55 institutions apply comprehensive exclusions, while others retain gaps or exposures, reflecting growing financial-sector alignment with the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.

The article argues that while climate disclosure and green finance initiatives have expanded since Mark Carney’s “tragedy of the horizon” speech, they have failed to shift capital at the scale required to address climate and nature risks. It contends that deeper structural reforms to financial valuation, incentives and capital allocation are needed to move beyond managing symptoms toward financing real-world solutions.

Climate X is a climate risk analytics company providing asset-level physical climate risk data and scenario analysis. It supports financial institutions, insurers and corporates with decision-making, stress testing and regulatory alignment using proprietary climate models and geospatial intelligence.