wri.org news and views

Public Transit Is Struggling to Keep Pace with Aging Populations

alicia.cypress@wri.org — Wed, 27 May 2026 13:25:36 +0000

Public Transit Is Struggling to Keep Pace with Aging Populations alicia.cypress… Wed, 05/27/2026 - 09:25

As people live longer and more independently, many are finding that their city transportation systems are difficult to navigate: bus schedules don’t match the times they go out, payment platforms are harder to use or they’re physically unable to board buses or access subways.

This challenge is particularly urgent in China, where the aging population is rising rapidly. By 2035, 32% of the country’s population is projected to be 60 years or over; by 2050, that percentage is expected to increase to 40%.

In Beijing, the share of residents 60 years or older doubled between 2010 and 2024, where more than 16% of people are 65 years or older. Meanwhile in other major cities around the world — like Busan, South Korea; Osaka and Tokyo, Japan; Singapore; Helsinki and Barcelona — aging populations are also rising and confronting similar challenges.

By 2100, the global population 60 and older is projected to reach nearly 30%, marking a permanent shift to an aging society. This transformation is particularly acute in China, where the older population is expected to hit 52% by 2100.

In Beijing, the share of older residents doubled between 2010 and 2024, with more than 24% who are 60 years or older.

Transportation Habits of Beijing’s Older Adults

Public transportation systems are often built around working populations, offering increased service during morning and afternoon rush-hour commuting with lighter availability during the middle of the day, late evenings and weekends. But WRI’s study of Beijing’s rapidly growing population of seniors 60 years and older shows that even in retirement, older adults do not retreat from daily travel.

Instead, their average number of trips remained the same or slightly increased. Their behavior, however, shifted away from peak commuting hours, with late morning (after 9 a.m.) emerging as the most common travel window — mainly for leisure and grocery shopping, as well as for school pickups and other errands.

Compared to working and school-age populations, older adults tend to make shorter trips within their local neighborhood but the kinds of transportation they use is more diverse.

Between 2010 and 2024, walking was the most common way to travel across all generations in Beijing. Among older adults, private e-bike use grew sharply in recent years, suggesting a demand for a more comfortable, flexible and “point-to-point" convenient travel. Though older adults' total absolute bus ridership increases, buses have become less attractive option among their choices. This reflects some service, design and infrastructure barriers in the bus system that make it less age-friendly. The use of private cars, taxis and ride-sharing services also saw minor increases among older adults. Of all transportation options, the subway remained the least appealing, largely because of overcrowding and the lack of fare discounts.

Together, these trends highlight the need to move beyond basic accessibility toward inclusive, age-friendly public transportation systems that prioritize convenience, comfort, safety and service quality — especially for those with declining physical abilities — while supporting active aging and social participation.

Mobility Barriers in Beijing’s Transportation System

Some of the biggest public transportation barriers for aging populations we observed in Beijing are around service, street design and the digital platforms that are supposed to make navigating transit systems easier. They not only impact aging adults, but many other riders — especially people with disabilities. In fact, infrastructure that fails older adults can often create mobility bottlenecks for the broader public, including parents with strollers, travelers carrying heavy luggage and tourists navigating the city for the first time. By addressing these gaps, cities can enhance transportation for all residents, regardless of their physical ability or familiarity with the system.

Public Transportation Service and Design

Field studies in Beijing show that many bus stops could further improve age-friendly infrastructure — such as seating and weather shelters — as waiting for the bus to arrive can sometimes be physically demanding. Also, functional ramps or wheelchair lifts are still lacking throughout the bus system, making boarding difficult for people with physical limitations.

Boarding buses can sometimes be challenging for older adults without ramps or lifts. Photo by WRI.

Coordination between bus stops and street design could be further optimized. For example, many older stations face rigid physical limitations where the platform width is insufficient to support both furniture, like benches, while passengers move by. To guarantee safe movement and evacuation for elderly and vulnerable commuters, cities must prioritize unobstructed transit corridors, temporarily leaving no room for seating areas until smarter, integrated street designs are deployed.

Service reliability and the availability of real-time arrival information could likewise be further strengthened, helping to reduce uncertainty for passengers while waiting.

Challenges extend beyond bus service to subways, which are often crowded and more difficult to navigate. For example, some subway stations may lack elevators, require steep stair climbs to reach trains, involve long walks between transfer points and offer few places to sit — all of which can affect comfort and convenience for older riders. And unlike buses and ride-hailing, subways currently do not offer fare discounts for older travelers.

The Digital Divide

The rapid shift toward smartphone-based information and payment systems is creating a digital divide among older and younger generations. There’s a mismatch between fast-evolving technology and the physical/cognitive realities of aging, such as declining vision and reduced finger dexterity. This may also result in seniors experiencing more anxiety over privacy leaks or accidental mobile payments when interfaces change before they can adapt. As traditional services like manual ticketing and in-person inquiries fade, those who are less digitally confident are not just inconvenienced, they are increasingly left in a service vacuum in modern transportation systems where technology becomes a barrier rather than an enabler.

More seating areas and weather shelters around Beijing's bus stops can make waiting for the bus safer and more comfortable for aging populations. Photo by TkKurikawa/iStock.

How Can Cities Adapt to a More Age-Friendly Public Transportation?

Assessing a city’s public transportation system for age inclusivity requires placing older adults — as well as other vulnerable social groups such as people with disabilities — at the very center of the decision-making process. Their direct participation and voices must be included in every stage — from the early development of transport policies to the technical design of urban spaces and digital services. Integrating their experiences is as vital as the technical factors themselves. City planners should equally consider the following core elements:

Infrastructure inclusiveness, which evaluates whether older travelers can safely and comfortably complete the full physical journey. This includes walkway accessibility around bus and subway stops, waiting conditions (e.g., availability of seats, shelters and information displays), and on-board facilities (e.g., ease of step-free boarding and adequate priority seating).
Service satisfaction that reflects older passengers’ perceived experience, including accessing transportation, information and facilities while waiting, in-vehicle safety, comfort and service quality, as well as overall operations, including transfer convenience, service frequency and route accessibility.
Health benefits, which evaluates three critical areas of well-being: 1) active mobility, integrating transit with walking and cycling infrastructure — with unified payment and information systems — to encourage physical activities; 2) healthcare access, ensuring older adults easily reach hospitals and care facilities; and 3) social connectivity, expanding access to parks and community hubs to foster mental well-being through increased social participation.

By studying Beijing, we found some clear recommendations that cities can deploy to build a more inclusive public transportation system.

Public transportation service and street design should incorporate age-friendly infrastructure — such as weather shelters with seating at bus stops and functional boarding ramps on buses — to ensure the entire trip is accessible for people with limited mobility. Bus stops should also be designed to coexist with sidewalk trees and landscaping, leaving room for benches and waiting areas and offering shade to waiting passengers, while still allowing buses to pull flush to the curb and avoid dangerous boarding gaps.

For subway systems, a “silver-path” (a navigation system dedicated for older adults, that includes high-contrast, large-font floor decals and tactiles that provide direct, barrier-free routing to elevators and exits) should be installed. This will help reduce the physical pressures and cognitive overload that some seniors experience while navigating crowded stations. Subway systems should also include rest points and improve vertical accessibility by including continuous, stair-free routes — such as elevators, ramps and lifts — that allow people with mobility or physical limitations to move independently between different floor levels and reduce long walking distances. Finally, subway fare policies should align with bus services by offering standardized senior discounts, ensuring that cost does not become a secondary barrier to choosing a safe transit option.

Financially, the transportation system’s funding operations must be restructured so that government subsidies shift away from merely covering the operating losses of low-performance providers. Instead, performance-based incentives should be used to reward transit companies that proactively provide superior facilities and operational services tailored to the needs of older travelers.

To bridge the digital divide, public transport must adopt an inclusive design and a hybrid service model. Digital interfaces should be simplified into “senior modes” that feature high-contrast visuals and intuitive layouts to accommodate declining vision and dexterity, while also incorporating robust privacy safeguards to alleviate anxiety over mobile payments. Simultaneously, a combined digital and manual system is essential to support those less digitally confident. This includes maintaining traditional communication channels like telephone hotlines and community bulletins, alongside on-demand bus services accessible by phone. By integrating user-friendly technology with essential human-centric support, the system can ensure that technological advancement enables independent travel. Finally, collaborating with local communities and organizations to offer training that educates seniors on cybersecurity, data privacy, and online safety risks, will build the trust necessary for them to use digital services confidently.

Looking Forward: A City for All Ages

As cities prepare for the future and as their populations age, defining urban success must include a transportation system that moves from basic access to inclusive dignity.

Studying Beijing teaches us that an age-friendly public transportation system should solve both traditional infrastructure and service barriers, and bridge the digital divide that older generations might face — especially in the face of new artificial intelligence technologies.

WRI researchers Hua (William) Wen and Thet Hein Tun contributed to this article.

beijing-transit.jpg

In cities like Beijing with aging populations, design and infrastructure changes can help make public transit systems more accessible.

full_content_with_attribution

As populations age worldwide, public transportation systems built for commuters are falling short. Here's what cities can do to build a more inclusive transit system.

Cities

China

Urban Mobility

transportation

electric mobility

Type

Commentary

Exclude From Blog Feed?

Urban Mobility

Authors

Su Song

Yilin Ma

Jingyu Yan

Rwanda’s Food Waste Could Feed Millions. Small Businesses Are Showing How.

sarah.brown@wri.org — Tue, 26 May 2026 19:22:11 +0000

Rwanda’s Food Waste Could Feed Millions. Small Businesses Are Showing How. sarah.brown@wri.org Tue, 05/26/2026 - 15:22

Every year, nearly half of Rwanda’s food supply goes uneaten.

Inadequate food storage and processing, spoiled harvests and household waste result in a 40% loss of the country’s total food production every year, equal to 12% of its GDP. In Kigali alone, household food waste accounts for 164 kilograms per person per year (361 pounds). In a country where 19% of households are food insecure, this is a staggering loss.

Beyond exacerbating food insecurity, food loss and waste carry significant environmental and economic costs. Resources such as land, water and energy are used to produce food that is never consumed, while farmers and businesses lose potential income. These inefficiencies directly affect smallholder farmers — the backbone of Rwanda’s food system.

And Rwanda isn’t alone. Post-harvest losses are a persistent challenge across Sub-Saharan Africa. Reducing food loss and waste can help ensure that growing populations don’t go hungry. One emerging solution is “circular food systems.”

What Are Circular Food Systems?

Instead of the traditional “produce–use–discard” approach, circular food systems are designed to keep resources in use for as long as possible, regenerate natural systems and minimize waste at every stage. Agricultural byproducts can be repurposed into new products. A coffee company, for example, can supply coffee pulp (the flesh removed from around the coffee bean) to a mushroom producer, where it becomes the nutrient mix on which mushrooms grow. Waste streams can also be transformed into valuable products such as compost, animal feed or fuel.

Circular food systems also reduce losses before they happen. This can be through better storage, improved post-harvest handling and more efficient logistics along the supply chain.

For Rwanda, transitioning to a circular food system can unlock new products and business models, create jobs and improve food security. Small businesses are at the center of this transition in Rwanda. Working with WRI’s Circular Food Systems for Rwanda (CIRF) project, they are transforming what was once considered waste into value.

Kigasali Coffee Company: Turning Husks into Revenue and Fertilizer

Kigasali Coffee Company in Kigali has been processing coffee for both local and international markets since 2016. Like most companies in coffee processing, Kigasali generates large quantities of coffee husks, the dry outer shells of the coffee beans removed during the hulling, or “deshelling,” stage.

Coffee husks account for approximately 12% to 15% of the total weight of coffee cherries, and Kigasali produces up to 500 metric tons of coffee husks annually. In most cases, these husks are sold cheaply to brick manufacturers, who use them as an additive in brick production. But more can be gained from the company’s waste.

With support from CIRF, Kigasali’s staff began to look at its operations differently, identifying multiple points in its process where waste could be turned into value. The company started producing cooking pellets from coffee husks, producing over 5,000 kilograms of eco-friendly cooking fuel. Within two months of launching its fuel pellet initiative, it generated approximately $1,000 from selling the pellets – extra revenue from materials that previously had little value. For a small business in Rwanda, that can represent a significant additional income stream.

Coffee husks being prepared for pellet making. Photo by KTG Strategy/WRI

Kigasali has also started producing organic fertilizer from coffee pulp through vermicomposting (a process that uses worms to break down organic matter into fertilizer). It also produces biogas from coffee waste, which it also sells, and treats wastewater so it can be reused in coffee processing. These initiatives are aimed at enhancing soil fertility, improving coffee productivity and reducing environmental impacts along the value chain.

“Waste is no longer waste, but a resource,” said Consolee Niyigena, Kigasali's project manager.

Africa Food Supply (AFS): Extending Crops’ Shelf Life

Africa Food Supply (AFS) produces fruits and vegetables for local markets across Rwanda. However, much of it is highly perishable and often goes to waste. Supported by CIRF, the company developed new ways to reduce post-harvest losses while creating new food products. AFS is now transforming some of its fresh crops into longer-lasting products such as pineapple juice, ginger tea, banana bread, sweet potato muffins and pancakes. By creating products with a longer shelf life, the company can reduce waste, reach new markets and buy more consistently from local farmers, helping provide them with a more reliable income.

“We now use our own fresh produce to create new products,” said Serge Ganza, the owner of AFS. “For example, we promote the orange-fleshed sweet potato, which we were accustomed to eating only boiled. Today, we have begun producing bakery items such as cookies and bread from it. This is true value addition.”

An Africa Food Supply employee tends to tomatoes. Photo by KTG Strategy/WRI

AFS is also tackling organic waste through composting. The company mixes leftover produce such as pineapple pulp with other food waste from their restaurant and coffee shop, repurposing the waste into animal feed and organic fertilizer, which it both sells to farmers and uses to grow more fruits and vegetables. Trials are also underway to safely convert human waste into compost.

From Business Practice to System Change

These businesses are not operating in isolation. Rather, they are part of a broader shift taking place across Rwanda.

The country has been steadily building a policy ecosystem that supports circular economy approaches. The national Strategic Plan for Agriculture Transformation puts strong emphasis on promoting circular economy models and de-risking investment in the sector.

And in November 2024, Rwanda’s Standards Board adopted two international circular economy standards to guide how circular practices are applied and measured. Businesses and regulators in Rwanda now have clear, globally aligned guidelines to help them adopt circular approaches. Without these standards, Rwandan businesses producing circular products could not credibly distinguish themselves in the market, certifiers had no common basis on which to assess them, and policymakers had no shared way for tracking progress. These changes signal that reducing food loss, improving soil health, and reusing resources are part of Rwanda’s core development strategy. For businesses and investors, this sends a strong message: Circular solutions are a national priority worth investing in.

Barriers to Adopting Circular Food Systems

Despite progress, challenges remain.

Finance remains a key constraint. Many businesses are still too small or early-stage to qualify for conventional bank loans. At the same time, adopting circular practices often requires upfront investment in equipment or process changes, which can be difficult without access to credit. Targeted financial solutions, including dedicated circular economy funds, blended finance mechanisms and loan products tailored to small businesses can help.

Certification and market access also present significant barriers. For businesses like Golden Insect, which produces vermicompost, it’s been difficult to grow. Owner and director Xavio Imbabazi says that Rwanda’s fertilizer certification process is prohibitive for organic compost producers like him because the lengthy and bureaucratic standards can’t easily be met by a small-scale producer. This is holding his company back from expanding by limiting investment and market access.

Xavio Imbabazi, owner of Golden Insects, inspecting compost at his farm. Photo by KTG Strategy/WRI

CIRF’s multi-stakeholder platform is giving small and medium-sized businesses like Golden Insect access to policymakers to raise these obstacles and work with them toward practical solutions. For example, a coalition formed through the platform developed certification guidelines for organic fertilizers and soil amendments in 2025, designed to accommodate small producers.

Sustaining progress will also require longer-term support structures. Establishing a permanent circular economy hub for agribusiness in Rwanda could be one solution, providing ongoing access to technical assistance, peer learning and market information, while also embedding circular economy concepts into vocational and higher education systems.

With policy foundations already in place, the next step is translating them into increased investment and alignment, moving circular approaches from pilot initiatives to broader, system-wide adoption.

Building a Circular Food System that Works

The experience in Rwanda shows that circular food solutions are not theoretical. They are practical, profitable, and already being implemented by small businesses. With the right support — technical, financial and institutional — circular food systems could help reshape how Africa produces, processes and values food.

Circular Food Systems for Rwanda (CIRF)

CIRF is funded by the IKEA Foundation and led by WRI in partnership with African Circular Economy Network (ACEN), Cleaner Production and Climate Innovation Centre (CPCIC), Resonance, and African Circular Economy Alliance (ACEA). Since 2021, CIRF has been working with SMEs and the Government of Rwanda to demonstrate circular solutions that can work in real businesses.

20240305-wri-cohort-1-kigasali-coffee-company-ktg-high-res-0815.jpg

Women sorting coffee at Kigasali Coffee Company

half_content

In Rwanda, small businesses are turning coffee waste, fruit pulp and food scraps into fuel, fertilizer and income. In doing so, they're building a blueprint for circular food systems across Africa.

Type

Vignette

Exclude From Blog Feed?

Authors

Eric Ruzigamanzi

Gloria Kantengwa

Tsion Issayas

Christo van Schalkwyk

The Ocean Can Play a Much Larger Role in Fighting Climate Change

margaret.overholt@wri.org — Fri, 22 May 2026 12:00:00 +0000

The Ocean Can Play a Much Larger Role in Fighting Climate Change margaret.overh… Fri, 05/22/2026 - 08:00

The effects of climate change are becoming increasingly apparent. The last 11 years have been the hottest on record, negatively affecting health, economies and ecosystems.

But one of the most promising areas for climate action has been largely overlooked and underinvested: the ocean.

Research commissioned by the High Level Panel for a Sustainable Ocean Economy found that ocean-based climate solutions can deliver over a third of the annual emissions cuts needed in 2050 to limit temperature rise to 1.5 degrees C (2.7 degrees F), a globally agreed target to avert the worst outcomes from climate change.

These solutions, such as offshore renewables and restoring mangroves and other “blue carbon” ecosystems, are ready to implement and economically viable today. Data shows that investing $1 in key ocean actions can yield at least $5 in global benefits, often more, over the next 30 years. They can also produce multiple co-benefits including job creation, habitat protection, food security and others.

But while investments in a sustainable ocean economy are profitable, finance for these solutions has been largely lacking. For example, less than 1% of global development funding goes to the ocean. Meanwhile, analysis shows that while 90% of coastal and island nations’ new climate plans (known as “nationally determined contributions,” or NDCs) include at least one ocean action, they’re largely missing solutions with the most potential to reduce emissions and generate new economic opportunities.

Here are seven key opportunities for ocean-based climate action that can deliver substantial emissions cuts alongside social, economic and environmental benefits for coastal communities:

1) Expanding Ocean-based Renewable Energy

Ocean-based renewable energy is a major area of opportunity, with ready-to-implement solutions including offshore wind as well as floating solar and tidal power. Ramping up offshore renewables could slash greenhouse gas emissions by up to 3.60 gigatonnes per year in 2050 — more than the E.U.’s emissions in 2021. Increasing deployment of renewables will also be critical to meeting global energy demand as the world works to increase electricity generation while phasing out coal and other fossil fuels.

This potential is more than theoretical. Investment in ocean-based renewables is already increasing. Global pledges in offshore wind now bring targeted deployment to up to 2,000 GW, enough to power approximately 1.5 billion homes annually by 2050.

Certain countries are leading by example. Norway, for instance, is home to the world’s largest fully operational floating offshore wind park, Hywind Tampen. It has also allocated areas for 30 GW of offshore wind power production by 2040 and announced a competition for offshore wind production in two areas on the Norwegian continental shelf: Sørlige Nordsjø II (3,000 MW) and Utsira Nord (1,500 MW). China currently leads the world in offshore wind capacity, with over half of all operational turbines.

Wind turbines are assembled in Stord, Norway for delivery to a floating wind park. Increased use of offshore renewable energy is one of the most impactful ways to leverage the ocean for climate change mitigation at a global scale. Photo by teaa1946/iStock

To accelerate this transition at a global scale, countries must drastically increase their targets to augment the share of renewable power in the energy mix. They must also provide a stable and clear economic and regulatory framework to stimulate investments in supporting infrastructure for ocean-based energy. This includes reducing barriers in scaling up offshore wind turbines (both fixed and floating), as well as investing in new, innovative ocean-based energy sources, such as floating solar photovoltaics, wave power and tidal power. These technologies can help meet the world’s energy needs while minimizing harm to marine life.

2) Reducing Emissions from Ships

The international shipping industry carries about 80% of the world’s trade between nations; if counted as a country, it would be among the world’s 10 largest emitters.

While some progress has been made to decarbonize ocean-based transport over the last decade — primarily through energy efficiency measures such as redesigning and refurbishing ships to reduce fuel use — reducing the sector’s impact will require much more investment in both existing and emerging low-carbon shipping solutions.

Shipping companies must increase operational and logistical efficiencies, such as reducing the speed of vessels and taking weather conditions into account when planning routes. This can help save fuel and money. At the same time, companies and governments will also need to step up investments in new zero-emission fuel technologies, such as those made from hydrogen and ammonia, as well as supporting infrastructure like fuel storage and processing facilities. Taken together, these solutions could lower shipping emissions by up to 2 gigatonnes per year in 2050, equivalent to taking over 400 million cars off the road every year, while providing jobs.

The International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) Net Zero Framework aims to set a global fuel standard that requires ships to gradually reduce their pollution, as well as a pricing mechanism that will charge a fee on the greenhouse gases ships emit. Countries have yet to adopt the IMO’s Net Zero Framework after it was strongly opposed by the U.S. government in October 2025, but talks are set to resume in late 2026. Without this regulatory framework in place, shipping decarbonization is unlikely to fulfill its emissions-reduction potential.

3) Conserving and Restoring Coastal and Marine Ecosystems

Healthy “blue carbon” ecosystems such as mangrove forests, seagrass meadows and tidal marshes are powerful carbon sinks. They can store up to 5 times more carbon per area than tropical forests and absorb it from the atmosphere about 3 times as quickly. This makes them an important — though often overlooked — ally in tackling the climate crisis.

Beyond their ability to remove and store carbon from the atmosphere, these ecosystems also offer myriad co-benefits, particularly in vulnerable coastal areas. They sustain economies through fisheries and tourism, provide crucial habitat for diverse marine species and help enhance freshwater quality, all while buffering coastal communities from the impacts of increasingly extreme weather like cyclones.

Students plant mangrove seedlings in Situbondo, Indonesia. Protecting and restoring coastal ecosystems like mangroves, salt marshes and seagrass meadows can increase carbon removal and storage while helping protect nearby communities from climate impacts. Photo by Sam maulidna/Shutterstock

However, blue carbon ecosystems are disappearing at a rapid pace, driven by the “coastal squeeze” between climate-driven impacts (including sea level rise and extreme weather) and development of coastal areas. Action to address this degradation has been woefully inadequate.

Efforts to conserve, restore and sustainably manage blue carbon ecosystems can significantly reduce emissions, equivalent to shutting down 76 coal-fired power plants per year by 2050.

4) Expanding Sustainable Seafood

As the global population rises, so, too, will the need for food. The ocean can play a key role in meeting this need with a wide range of sustainable seafoods. Algae, fish and shellfish require fewer resources to produce than options like beef and lamb. Incorporating these “blue foods” into global diets not only diversifies protein choices, but could also reduce global emissions by up to 1.47 gigatonnes per year in 2050, comparable to removing 393 coal-fired power plants annually.

If well managed, global blue food production could sustainably grow by roughly 30–75% by mid-century, almost entirely from low-impact aquaculture and rebuilt fisheries, while delivering major nutrition and climate benefits.

However, while consumption of these foods is common in some cultures, awareness of their environmental and health benefits remains limited at a global scale. Prices are also sometimes prohibitively high for consumers. Governments and the food industry can do more to raise awareness, send clear policy signals (such as subsidizing these foods), and invest in the right enabling environments.

Farmers tend to a large seaweed farm in Jangheung-gun, South Korea. Ocean-based foods such as seaweed and fish are often less resource-intensive and more sustainable than land-based protein options like meat. Photo by Stock for you/Shutterstock

Some countries are starting to do this. Australia, for example, is investing AUD $70 million (US $45 million) in the Blue Economy Cooperative Research Centre. The initiative brings together expertise in aquaculture, marine renewable energy and marine engineering as part of a collaborative effort between industry, researchers and the community. It aims to develop innovative and sustainable offshore industries to increase Australian seafood and marine renewable energy production.

5) Leveraging the Ocean’s Potential for Carbon Removal and Storage

The latest climate science recognizes that, in addition to deep emissions cuts across all sectors, meeting global climate goals will require removing some of the carbon that’s already in the atmosphere. Alongside restoring blue carbon ecosystems which absorb CO2 naturally, ocean-based carbon removal approaches, including marine carbon dioxide removal and carbon capture and storage below the seabed, have sparked interest in recent years.

Carbon capture and storage involves harvesting carbon from the atmosphere through direct air capture or waste combustion and pumping the liquified carbon into chambers below the seabed, where it can be stored permanently. These methods are currently more mature than marine carbon dioxide removal techniques and could provide up to 1 gigatonne of emissions reductions by 2050 if current deployment trajectories continue.

Marine carbon dioxide removal includes a range of techniques. For example, ocean alkalinity enhancement involves adding alkaline minerals into the ocean to alter its chemistry and increase carbon uptake. Ocean nutrient fertilization spurs massive algal blooms that may absorb huge amounts of carbon. These strategies show promise, but are currently only at early stages of development. Prior to scaling marine carbon dioxide removal, thorough research on the ecological and socio-economic impacts must be conducted, in addition to addressing policy and governance questions.

While research into ocean-based carbon removal technologies should be accelerated, it should not be a reason to delay solutions that are already viable and ready to implement today, such as offshore wind, marine ecosystem conservation, and increasing low-carbon seafoods.

6) Decarbonizing Ocean Cruises

Coastal and marine tourism represents at least 50% of total global tourism. It constitutes the largest economic sector for most small island developing nations and many coastal ones, and it’s the largest single-employment sector in the ocean economy. While critical to these countries’ economies, cruise tourism is also a considerable polluter: One recent study found that a large cruise ship can have a carbon footprint greater than 12,000 cars. Cruise ships also emit other pollutants besides carbon dioxide — such as sulfur oxides, nitrous oxides and particulate carbon — that can harm marine ecosystems and human health.

A large cruise ship sails off the coast of Portugal with dark fumes emitting from its smokestack. Cruise ship pollution is harmful not only to the climate but also to human health and marine ecosystems. Photo by Amra Pasic/Shutterstock

Efforts to reduce emissions from ocean tourism should start with improving the efficiency of ships, such as through net-zero fuels and decreasing ship resistance in the water. Policies promoting fuel efficiency and the use of alternative fuels (such as liquefied natural gas and other bio and synthetic hydrogen-derived fuels) are also needed in the longer-term. Successfully decarbonizing cruise tourism could deliver 0.1 gigatonne of emissions-reduction potential by 2050, equivalent to the annual emissions of 251 natural gas-fired power plants.

7) Reducing Offshore Oil and Gas

The world cannot tackle the climate crisis without drastically reducing fossil fuel production and consumption. Phasing down offshore oil and gas offers the largest opportunity for ocean-based climate action, with the potential to eliminate up to 5.30 gigatonnes of greenhouse gases annually in 2050, equivalent to taking about 1.1 billion cars off the road each year. (This assumes that energy demand formerly supplied by fossil fuel generation can be met by a parallel increase in zero-emission energy sources, such as ocean-based renewables).

To help accelerate this transition, governments can withdraw fossil fuel subsidies in countries that currently provide them; enact legislation or regulations to ban routine flaring (a current practice for disposing of large unwanted amounts of petroleum gas); stop new licensing for offshore oil and gas extraction; and invest public finance in energy security and access for the most economically vulnerable communities.

Investing in the Ocean as a Climate Change Solution

These ocean-based climate solutions could potentially exceed one-third of the total emissions reductions needed to meet global climate goals. But perhaps even more compelling is the wide range of co-benefits that come with them — protecting coastal communities from storms, providing jobs, harboring wildlife and improving food security. For example, a recent study shows that employment in the sustainable ocean economy could grow by 51 million “blue jobs” by 2050.

However, these benefits can only be realized if governments and companies alike invest in the technology and infrastructure needed. Securing the ocean’s full emissions-reduction potential will require at least $1 trillion of additional finance between now and 2030, increasing toward $2 trillion between 2030 and 2050. However, the ocean currently receives less than 1% of official development and philanthropic spending. Investments fall significantly short of the estimated $550 billion required yearly to secure long-term ocean health.

We need a strategic shift in investment across each sector to maximize impact. Where finance is already available, such as offshore renewable energy, it needs to be fully directed toward the most impactful solutions. Where funding is scarce, such as for blue carbon restoration and conservation, de-risking, guarantees and blended finance can help make investing in these solutions more attractive.

Research commissioned by the Ocean Panel lays out how these ocean-based climate actions can be fully leveraged. To learn more, see: The Ocean As a Solution to Climate Change: Updated Opportunities for Action.

offshore-wind-farm-uk.jpg

full_content_with_attribution

Seven strategies can harness the world’s largest ecosystem to dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Ocean

Climate

National Climate Action

nature-based solutions

Type

Finding

Exclude From Blog Feed?

High Level Panel for a Sustainable Ocean Economy

Authors

Katie Wood

Oliver Ashford

A Turning Point for Europe's Seas: How Sustainable Ocean Plans Can Help the EU Ocean Act Succeed

alicia.cypress@wri.org — Thu, 21 May 2026 12:30:11 +0000

A Turning Point for Europe's Seas: How Sustainable Ocean Plans Can Help the EU Ocean Act Succeed alicia.cypress… Thu, 05/21/2026 - 08:30

Europe’s seas are under mounting pressure. From intense fishing and shipping traffic to expanding offshore renewable energy and the urgent need to protect marine ecosystems –– demands on the ocean are growing fast. But, under current governance structures, policies and protections are managed in silos, lacking coherent coordination across competing priorities. This is resulting in cumulative impacts that current systems are ill-equipped to address.

In response, the European Commission launched the EU Ocean Pact last year to create a more unified and strategic approach to governing the national waters of the 22 EU member states with a coastline. As part of this effort, the Commission proposed the EU Ocean Act — a new legal framework intended to help manage Europe’s seas.

The EU Ocean Act offers a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to improve how Europe’s seas are governed, looking to improve coherence across marine policies within the regions waters. To do this, the EU created an Ocean Board — of which WRI is a member with other NGOs, trade and business associations, think tanks and academic institutions — to advise on relevant issues and foster dialogue. And the EU has set clear directives around ocean observation and data sharing, marine protected areas (MPAs) and fisheries investments, among others. However, effectively delivering on these goals will require stronger coordination across sectors, policies and member states.

One way to achieve this would be to require all EU countries to develop and implement Sustainable Ocean Plans (SOPs), which bring together maritime spatial planning, fisheries, conservation, shipping, offshore energy and ocean data into a single umbrella framework ensuring 100% sustainable ocean management within a country’s national waters.

Planning for Success

Pioneered by the High Level Panel for a Sustainable Ocean Economy (Ocean Panel) and created by its secretariat hosted at WRI, SOPs have already been adopted by 29 countries accounting for over 1.5 million square kilometers (about 580,000 square miles) of ocean. SOPs are supported by practical guidance, including a practitioners’ handbook as well as groups like Ocean Action 2030 that provide the technical and financial assistance for countries to create SOPs.

These plans have also been recognized more widely by key institutions like the Commonwealth’s Ocean Declaration as well as the Political Declaration at the 2025 UN Ocean Conference. In parallel, UNESCO’s Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission launched its first strategy on sustainable ocean planning, embedding the approach in the international scientific community.

Currently two EU members — France and Portugal — are developing or have already published SOPs as part of their commitment as members of the Ocean Panel. As SOPs are already tested and supported internationally, integrating them into the EU Ocean Act would reduce implementation risks while providing a ready-made framework supported by existing guidance, training and national experience.

Examples already exist in-situ where SOPs could clearly help alleviate strains on projects across various EU countries. For example, in the North Sea, countries working through the North Sea Energy Cooperation aim to deploy 300 gigawatts of offshore wind by 2050, yet delivery risks are falling short without stronger cross-border coordination of spatial planning, grid infrastructure and environmental safeguards. At the same time, persistent overfishing in European waters shows how fragmented governance can undermine sustainability despite frameworks like the Common Fisheries Policy.

The Ocean Act could therefore include an SOP-style overarching requirement that would help EU countries across four key objectives:

Governance and Conflict Resolution: SOPs help governments to communicate clearer long-term governance strategies and identify opportunities for cross-border collaboration. A key issue within EU waters is rising competition for space and resources, and insufficient tools to anticipate and resolve them. In sectors like fishing, shipping and tourism, SOPs can help strengthen governance across the ocean economy by reducing fragmented coordination between sectors and integrating existing management tools such as marine spatial plans and MPAs.
Climate and Biodiversity Objectives: SOPs could also help EU countries better align ocean governance with their international commitments, such as the Paris Agreement and the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. By embedding these climate and biodiversity objectives directly into marine planning processes, SOPs would enable EU countries to make more climate and biodiversity-smart decisions about how ocean space is used. For example, by identifying suitable areas for offshore renewable energy while safeguarding vital carbon-storing habitats, such as seagrass meadows and salt marshes.

Noting that the ocean is one interconnected system, SOPs would also support the strategic expansion and effective management of MPAs, strengthen ecosystem restoration efforts and help safeguard biodiversity hotspots across Europe’s seas. In doing so, they would ensure that the growth of Europe’s blue economy contributes to climate mitigation, resilience and restoration efforts, rather than placing additional pressure on already vulnerable marine ecosystems.
Sea-Basin Coordination: Europe’s marine ecosystems and ocean industries span across several sea basins, including with non-EU members, making regional cooperation essential. By embedding SOPs within the EU Ocean Act, member states would increase their ability to coordinate ocean management across shared sea basins such as the North Sea, Baltic Sea and Mediterranean Sea.

This would support more coherent decision-making on issues such as fisheries management, shipping routes, offshore energy development and marine conservation. By strengthening collaboration at the sea-basin level, SOPs would help ensure that actions taken by one country complement sustainability efforts across the wider region.
Ocean Observations: Managing the ocean sustainably requires reliable data to monitor changes to the ocean ecosystem over time. Implementing SOPs would strengthen the role of ocean observations in EU governance –– increasing capacity to collect data needed to understand the state of the ocean, predict and mitigate the impacts of climate change, enhance the competitiveness of economic activities at sea and contribute to maritime security, by standardizing data collection procedures, monitoring and reporting systems into marine planning and management processes.

A more coordinated approach to ocean data would help reduce fragmentation between national monitoring efforts and sectoral datasets, improving the consistency and accessibility of information used for decision-making. This approach aligns with the EU’s recently announced Ocean Eye initiative, which aims to enhance and integrate ocean observation systems across Europe through improved coordination of satellite data, in-situ monitoring platforms and ocean modelling. SOPs could help further this effort through embedding data baselines, and implementing the monitoring and reporting architecture needed for standardization.

A useful model for how this kind of coordination can work is emerging through the Pacific-led Unlocking Blue Pacific Prosperity (UBPP) initiative. Bringing together more than 20 Pacific Island countries and territories, UBPP applies a shared regional approach to 100% sustainable ocean management that mirrors the principles SOPs. By aligning national priorities, strengthening regional data systems and fostering collaboration across borders, the initiative is helping the Pacific Islands to manage transboundary challenges such as fisheries, climate impacts and marine conservation more effectively.

This approach highlights how the EU could similarly benefit from embedding SOPs within a regional framework, enabling member states to move beyond fragmented and siloed governance toward a more integrated, cooperative model that delivers stronger environmental outcomes and greater economic resilience.

This once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to rethink how Europe governs its seas will be crucial to secure the long-term resilience of Europe’s coastal communities, food systems, and clean energy future, while safeguarding the marine ecosystems that provide essential environmental and economic benefits.

Now, the EU must seize this opportunity to position Europe as a global leader in sustainable ocean governance and demonstrate how ambitious ocean policy can deliver for people, nature and the climate.

europort-sustainable-ocean-euoceanact.jpg

full_content_with_attribution

Type

Technical Perspective

Exclude From Blog Feed?

Authors

Tom Pickerell

STATEMENT: Honoring Rafe Pomerance, a Pioneer of Climate Action

darla.vanhoorn@wri.org — Thu, 21 May 2026 09:37:14 +0000

STATEMENT: Honoring Rafe Pomerance, a Pioneer of Climate Action darla.vanhoorn… Thu, 05/21/2026 - 05:37

Rafe Pomerance was one of the first to understand that climate change is the defining challenge of our time. He spent his life demanding we treat it that way. Today, we mourn his passing.

Over the last five decades, Rafe worked tirelessly to put climate action on the political agenda —inspiring countless environmental advocates in the process. He lobbied policymakers, forged coalitions, and pushed for concrete targets when the political will to act on climate was scarce. Among his many achievements, he helped organize the landmark 1986 U.S. Senate hearings on the greenhouse effect, a notable turning point in public awareness of climate risks. He was a key architect of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, the world’s first major effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. His critical work orchestrating climate action in the U.S. and beyond was documented in the book Losing Earth.

WRI was privileged to call Rafe a colleague from 1986-1993, but we were just one of many organizations made better by his leadership — Friends of the Earth, the Woodwell Climate Research Center, the Polar Research Board, Arctic 21, American Rivers, the U.S. government and more.

"Much has been written and will be written about Rafe, as his contribution to the climate movement cannot be overstated,” said Christina DeConcini, WRI’s Director of Government Affairs. “He was a delightful person, who drew people in with his contagious positive energy, his indefatigable passion to push new ideas forward and his generous spirit. I feel privileged to have had him as a colleague, mentor and most importantly, a friend.”

We are grateful to have been part of Rafe's journey. His vision, persistence and integrity will continue to guide our work and the many changemakers he inspired. For those who knew Rafe or were shaped by his work, we invite you to share a memory or reflection.

full_content_with_attribution

Climate

Type

Statement

Exclude From Blog Feed?

What is the 'Like-for-Like' Approach in Carbon Dioxide Removal?

alicia.cypress@wri.org — Tue, 19 May 2026 18:40:36 +0000

What is the 'Like-for-Like' Approach in Carbon Dioxide Removal? alicia.cypress… Tue, 05/19/2026 - 14:40

As companies and countries work toward net-zero targets, many will still face residual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions — those that are too difficult or costly to abate with current technologies or practices. Achieving net zero will therefore require counterbalancing these emissions with carbon dioxide removal (CDR). A central challenge is determining how different types of residual emissions should be matched with different forms of CDR. The “like-for-like” concept is one proposed framework.

What is the Like-for-Like Concept?

The like-for-like concept holds that the type of CDR used to counterbalance residual GHG emissions should reflect the properties of those emissions.

One formulation focuses on atmospheric lifetime. Carbon dioxide (CO2), which persists in the atmosphere for centuries to millennia, would need to be counterbalanced by removals with comparable durability, such as direct air capture with geologic sequestration. These are often referred to as high-durability removals.

In contrast, methane (CH4) — which has a much shorter atmospheric lifetime (approximately 10 years) — could be addressed through lower-durability approaches, such as reforestation, which carry a higher risk of reversal over time.

A second formulation of like-for-like focuses on the source of emissions rather than the gas itself. Under this approach, emissions from land use could be counterbalanced by land-based removals, like forest restoration, which are generally less durable. In contrast, emissions from geologic sources — such as fossil fuels or cement production — would be counterbalanced by removals that include geologic sequestration.

Across both formulations, CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion would need to be counterbalanced by high-durability removals, such as those with geologic or geochemical carbon sequestration. However, emissions from deforestation or CH4 are treated differently depending on the framework. In some cases, there is not yet a clear consensus on the most appropriate form of CDR to address specific GHGs or emissions sources.

Why Is the Like-for-Like Approach Being Proposed?

The like-for-like approach aims to provide guidance on how different CDR types should be used to achieve net zero, with the goal of ensuring that climate benefits match climate impacts and that net zero can be sustained in the long term.

One aspect is to avoid overreliance on nature-based removals. These approaches generally carry a higher risk of reversal — meaning that stored CO2 may be released back into the atmosphere — and offer shorter storage durations (typically decades to a century) compared to high-durability CDR methods. As a result, they are not well suited to counterbalance CO2 emissions that persist in the atmosphere for centuries.

There are also limits to how much CO2 can be sequestered through land-based approaches. The capacity of ecosystems to sequester carbon is finite and declining due to climate change and ongoing land-use change. As such, it’s difficult to project the stability of these carbon sinks over time. Relying on these approaches to counterbalance emissions from geologic sources can create an imbalance between carbon cycles operating on different timescales.

This distinction can be understood in terms of the “fast” and “slow” carbon cycles. The fast carbon cycle moves carbon between the atmosphere, ecosystems and oceans over relatively short timescales, while the slow carbon cycle describes the long-term movement of carbon between the atmosphere and Earth’s interior. Using fast-cycle removals to counterbalance slow-cycle emissions risks saturating the capacity of ecosystems to sequester carbon.

Relatedly, because a large share of historical and current emissions originates from fossil fuel combustion, some argue that continued fossil CO2 emissions should be counterbalanced primarily with removals that return carbon to geologic storage. This concept is often referred to as “geologic net zero.”

What Would be the Implications of a Like-for-Like Approach?

Global emissions in 2023 were approximately 50.7 GtCO2e, of which just under 75% (37 Gt) was CO2. The remainder consisted of non-CO2 gases, including CH4 (9.8 Gt), nitrous oxide (2.8 Gt) and fluorinated gases (1.4 Gt).

Under global net-zero scenarios assessed by the IPCC, CO2 represents a smaller share of residual emissions, while non-CO2 emissions — particularly CH4 — make up a larger proportion. In scenarios limiting warming to 1.5 degrees C with overshoot, the median level of residual emissions at net zero total about 15 Gt and are roughly evenly split between CO2 (7.4 Gt) and non-CO2 gases (7.5 Gt), with CH4 comprising approximately 4.4 Gt of the latter (around 30% of total residual emissions).

If like-for-like is implemented based on atmospheric lifetime, a portion of required removals — at least 25% globally — could be met with lower-durability approaches such as reforestation. However, most removals would still need to have high durability.

In the United States, emissions today and at net zero show a similar pattern to global emissions. Total emissions in 2024 were 5.2 GtCO2e, with 75% from CO2 and 13% from CH4. The 2021 U.S. Long-Term Strategy outlines a pathway to net zero by midcentury, with roughly 0.7 Gt of CO2 and 0.4 GtCO2e of CH4 remaining.

Where Has the Like-for-Like Approach Been Proposed?

The like-for-like approach has been proposed in state and federal legislation in the United States, as well as in the European Union.

At the U.S. federal level, a proposed carbon border adjustment bill introduced in 2025 includes provisions allowing industrial emitters to reduce liability through the purchase of carbon removal. The extent of liability reduction depends on the durability of the removal, resembling a form of like-for-like matching.

In California, Senate Bill 285 (introduced in 2025) proposed guidelines for matching the durability of CDR used to counterbalance residual emissions under the state’s 2045 net-zero target. The bill would have required matching removal types either to the source of emissions or to the atmospheric lifetime of the emitted GHGs. Emissions from fossil fuels or mineral sources (such as cement production) would require durable CDR, while emissions from biological sources and short-lived climate pollutants could be addressed through land-based removals. This approach effectively combines both like-for-like formulations. The bill also defined “permanent” storage as lasting more than 100 years, allowing forest restoration to qualify as durable under specific conditions.

In the EU, the European Parliament’s position on the Green Claims Directive includes a requirement that companies use permanent removals to counterbalance fossil emissions, although the directive has not yet been finalized. As the EU considers integrating CDR into its Emissions Trading System, the role of like-for-like is also under discussion.

While these efforts differ in design, they reflect growing interest in incorporating durability and equivalence into carbon removal and other climate-related policy.

What Are Some Complexities of the Like-for-Like Approach?

Despite its intuitive appeal, the like-for-like approach raises several challenges.

One key issue is how to convert non-CO2 gases into CO2-equivalent terms to determine the required level and type of CDR to counterbalance them. The choice of conversion metric — such as global warming potential over 20 years (GWP20) or 100 years (GWP100) — has significant implications.

CH4 illustrates this challenge. It has a short atmospheric lifetime but a strong near-term warming effect, in contrast to CO2’s long atmospheric lifetime and sustained warming impact. Using GWP100, CH4 is approximately 28-30 times more potent than CO2, as its short-term warming is averaged over a longer period. Using GWP20, CH4 is estimated to be 81 to 86 times more potent, reflecting its stronger impact over a shorter timeframe and more closely matching CH4’s actual lifetime in the atmosphere.

If GWP20 is used, more CDR would be required to counterbalance each metric ton of CH4, but that removal could be shorter in duration. This allows for closer temporal alignment between the warming impact of emissions and the cooling benefit of removals.

Another limitation is that natural systems cannot indefinitely absorb carbon. Even though CH4 is short-lived, relying on biospheric sinks to counterbalance CH4 over time risks exceeding their capacity. This suggests that, in the long run, less than 100% of CH4 — and potentially other short-cycle emissions — can be addressed through lower-durability CDR.

Another complexity is how and when like-for-like requirements would be implemented. For example, such requirements could apply only at net zero, be phased in gradually, or be required in the near term.

Finally, like-for-like has been criticized for implying that emissions and removals are interchangeable. In practice, emissions should be reduced or eliminated wherever possible, and CDR should be reserved for residual emissions that cannot be avoided.

What’s Next?

The like-for-like approach provides one framework for guiding how CDR is used to achieve net-zero goals. While current CDR deployment remains far below projected needs, developing a shared understanding of how to appropriately match emissions and removals will be critical to ensuring credible and durable net-zero outcomes.

climework-large-scale-performance-testing-facility.jpg

full_content_with_attribution

Climate

carbon removal

carbon removal legislation & policy

GHG emissions

net-zero emissions

Type

Technical Perspective

Exclude From Blog Feed?

Carbon Removal

Authors

Katie Lebling

Dan Lashof

Energy Leaders Speak: Renewable Power Is the Answer to Rising Costs and Demand

shannon.paton@wri.org — Tue, 19 May 2026 18:00:25 +0000

Energy Leaders Speak: Renewable Power Is the Answer to Rising Costs and Demand shannon.paton@… Tue, 05/19/2026 - 14:00

The world is facing its second energy crisis this decade.

The Iran conflict is sending the cost of oil and natural gas through the roof, with oil prices now exceeding $100 per barrel. Meanwhile, the rapid expansion of data centers is increasing demand for new power generation at record pace, triggering electricity price spikes in many regions of the United States. Consumers are feeling the budgetary pinch, governments are scrambling to stabilize energy supplies, and companies are facing rising operating costs.

Fortunately, renewable power is primed to meet this moment.

Renewable Power Offers Several Advantages

Renewable power is electricity generated from natural resources that are unlimited over time. These include solar, wind, hydro and geothermal. For all the talk about energy abundance, renewables are the truly “abundant” energy source.

What makes renewable power fit this moment of crisis is not its environmental credentials, but rather its economic and security ones. Renewables such as wind, solar and hydro have zero fuel costs. Once the power generating system is built, the fuel is free — forever. Fossil fuels like coal, oil and natural gas can’t say that. Rather, they suffer from price volatility in international markets.

Renewables are homegrown. Every country has access to at least some combination of renewable energy sources. As we pointed out in a recent article, the sun shines and the wind blows just about everywhere at some point. Many nations have access to hydro and geothermal resources, as well. Again, fossil fuels can’t say that.

Finally, the costs of generating electricity from renewables have dropped considerably over the past two decades. For example, the lifetime generation cost of utility-scale solar has fallen a whopping 90% from 2010 to 2024.

This combination of zero fuel cost, secure domestic supply, and massively reduced equipment and generation costs means that renewable power is a cheaper option than fossil-fired power generation in many parts of the planet.

What Others Are Saying

But it isn't just us saying this. Leaders across the U.S. energy sector say so, too. Here are just a few examples:

“Renewables have grown exponentially over the last five years because they have become the cheapest form of bulk electricity production in almost every market around the world.”
– Connor Teskey, CEO of Brookfield Asset Management, to Institutional Investor (Feb. 2025)

“You need a whole lot of renewables because they just are cheaper. If you took away all the subsidies, they’d still be cheaper than gas.”
– Doug Lewin, President of Stoic Energy Consulting, to the Houston Chronicle (Mar. 2025)

“Renewables now are economic.”
– Chris Womack, CEO of Southern Company, to Bloomberg (Jan. 2026)

“There is a critical but often overlooked energy fact that is key to understanding why developing and financing sustainable energy projects makes sense. The fact is that energy efficiency and renewable energy assets are the most cost-effective and quickest to deploy energy resources that we have.”
– Bob Hinkle, President and CEO of Metrus Energy, to the Business Council for Sustainable Energy and BloombergNEF (Feb. 2026)

“[Renewable energy is growing] quicker than ever in the U.S. We foresee that this trend will still continue, because it's the cheapest source of energy.”
– Hakan Agnevall, CEO of Wartsila, to Reuters (Feb. 2025)

“We expect and we know that we need more gas-fired generation to get completed. We're fully supportive of an all-of-the-above approach. But if you pull out the renewables piece of that, which is one of the lowest-cost solutions, you're going to increase the costs to consumers, and that's going to have a negative effect.”
– Andrew Flanagan, CEO of RWE Clean Energy, to Axios (Mar. 2025)

“If you take renewables and storage off the table, we’re going to force electricity prices to the moon.”
– John Ketchum CEO of NextEra Energy, to New York Times (Mar. 2025)

“Nowhere in the U.S. have wind and solar expanded as rapidly as they have in Texas. And to the extent that they continue to expand, they tend to keep average prices down over time.”
– Ed Hirs, energy economist at the University of Houston, to Politico (Oct. 2025)

“Variable resources like wind and solar, when they’re operating during these cold weather periods, they’re actually helping to keep a lid on prices.”
– Katie Dykes, Commissioner of Connecticut’s Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, as quoted in Canary Media (Feb. 2026)

“AI is not going to wait for 2030 to come. It is going to be won or lost in the next few years. And the things you can build today are wind, solar and storage.”
– Joshua Rhodes, Energy Researcher at the University of Texas in Austin, to the Houston Chronicle (Mar. 2025)

“The clear message is that grid developers and investors should continue investing only in clean, renewable energy and storage, as it drives down electricity prices.”
– Mark Jacobson, Director of the Atmosphere/Energy Program at Stanford University, to Reuters (Apr. 2026)

Take it from Them

Renewable power can provide energy security because it is homegrown. Renewable power can provide price stability because there are no fuel costs. And renewable power can provide electricity affordability because its cost is now so low. You don’t need to take our word for it. Take theirs!

texas-solar-panel-installation.jpg

Technicians install a solar panel in Texas, United States. Photo by harhar30/Shutterstock

full_content_with_attribution

Don’t take our word for it – take theirs.

Energy

Type

Expert Take

Exclude From Blog Feed?

Authors

Craig Hanson

Xixi Chen

Yusra Abdelmeguid

STATEMENT: US Surface Transportation Draft Bill is Step Backwards from an Affordable, Modern Transportation System

nate.shelter@wri.org — Mon, 18 May 2026 16:58:54 +0000

STATEMENT: US Surface Transportation Draft Bill is Step Backwards from an Affordable, Modern Transportation System nate.shelter@wri.org Mon, 05/18/2026 - 12:58

Washington, DC (May 18, 2026) — Yesterday the U.S. House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure released the draft text for the surface transportation reauthorization bill, also referred to as “the highway bill.”

Unlike the 2021 bipartisan infrastructure law, this new bill does not prioritize the clean transportation programs that support communities with the highest pollution burden, while protecting public health and incentivizing American manufacturing.

The bill includes a new federal fee on electric and hybrid vehicles, which is going in the wrong direction. Moreover, the bill does not include funding to modernize the electric grid or electrify more school buses, ports and ferries.

Following is a statement from Sue Gander, Director, U.S. Transportation, World Resources Institute:

“While merely the first step in what will undoubtedly be a long process, this initial draft is way off track for helping us build a more sustainable, affordable and modern 21st century transportation system. America deserves more.

“Transportation is the second-highest household expense in the U.S. As families struggle with affording their everyday needs and rising gas prices, Congress should prioritize proven measures that lower costs and improve global competitiveness.

"Congress has an opportunity in this reauthorization to build on its recent investments in electric vehicles and other clean, affordable mobility options — or further cede our competitive advantage to other countries.

“As our lawmakers debate the contours of this bill, we urge them to seize this opportunity, which only comes up every five years, to make transportation more affordable for communities across the country who are struggling with rising costs, while positioning U.S. workers and automakers for success in an electric automotive future."

###

Note: This statement was updated on May 19, 2026 to reflect the inclusion of funding for electric vehicle chargers.

full_content_with_attribution

U.S. Climate

United States

transportation

U.S. Climate Policy-Electric Vehicles

Type

Statement

Exclude From Blog Feed?

African Cities Use Nature to Fight Floods and Climate Change

sarah.brown@wri.org — Mon, 18 May 2026 13:58:41 +0000

African Cities Use Nature to Fight Floods and Climate Change sarah.brown@wri.org Mon, 05/18/2026 - 09:58

When torrential rains hit Kinshasa in April 2025, the city of 20 million came to a standstill. Floodwaters submerged more than half the city as the Ndjili River and smaller streams overflowed, quickly overwhelming the city’s drainage capacity. Lives were lost and thousands displaced, with more than 1,000 homes destroyed.

Those living in shanties at the city’s periphery were particularly hard hit. Kinshasa is Africa’s third-largest city and one of its fastest-growing. Urban planners simply can’t keep up as the city’s borders push farther and farther into the hinterlands.

As African cities expand into surrounding land, fewer natural buffers remain to absorb extreme weather. Photo by Guylain Kipoke/Pexels

It’s a common situation. Across many African cities, urban expansion — and the roads, buildings and concrete that come with it — is paving over natural spaces and leaving people more vulnerable to the consequences of extreme weather. Less green space means trapped heat, increased storm runoff and dirtier air. Climate change is worsening these challenges. Research shows that by 2100, up to 950 million urban Africans could be exposed to extreme heat waves intensified by the urban heat island effect. Floods and heavy rainfall are increasingly destroying homes and disrupting transport and other essential services.

Built infrastructure like seawalls, dams and reservoirs is both expensive and insufficient to keep pace with ever-more-extreme weather. That’s why cities are rethinking what counts as infrastructure.

Many are expanding their definition to include wetland parks, rain gardens, urban forests and other “nature-based solutions.” From 2012 to 2022, the number of nature-based infrastructure projects in Africa grew about 15% every year.

From green corridors and urban parks to restored wetlands and watersheds, four African cities show how integrating nature can be one of communities’ strongest defenses against climate change.

From smallholder farms in Africa to the busy streets of Bogota, communities are reshaping the way the world designs its cities, uses energy and produces food. These examples show not just what could work, but what already does. Learn more about the series.

Green Corridors Help Clear Addis Ababa’s Air

The population in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, is growing fast. Official estimates put the city’s growth rate at 3.7% per year. As a result, the city is seeing a rapid expansion of concrete and asphalt for streets and housing — materials that trap heat.

At their hottest, the city’s busiest neighborhoods — Merkato Market, Jacros and Ayer Tena, in particular — now register temperatures of more than 40 degrees C. Rising heat, paired with Addis Ababa’s daily motor traffic, worsens air quality: data from 2021 to 2023 puts Addis Ababa’s average PM2.5 index at around 27.5, more than five times the WHO’s recommended limit.

But things have started to change since Addis Ababa introduced green corridors in 2024.

The city implemented linear strips of greenery on its biggest thoroughfares, linking urban parks, riversides, public plazas and landscaped open spaces into a connected system. Since 2024, the city has upgraded more than 58 kilometers of roadsides and riverbanks, re-greening an area more than 10 times the size of Central Park in New York City. Many of these green corridors hold new bicycle lanes and dedicated walkways, improving both walkability and reducing traffic.

Paired with mobility interventions, Addis Ababa’s green corridors are set to improve livability as well as the city’s long-term resilience to climate impacts. Photo by Abener Eyuel/WRI/ICLEI

Today, Addis Ababa’s PM2.5 levels are 4.6 points lower than they were in 2023. With technical guidance from WRI, the city has reintroduced 80 indigenous tree species, setting Addis Ababa on a path to recover its biodiversity. And by 2030, when new trees have matured, green corridors are expected to deliver cooling benefits.

To help spread these benefits across the rest of the city, WRI is piloting a new rapid assessment tool to identify priority areas where nature can reduce heat, mitigate floods or restore biodiversity.

Restoring Lost Wetlands in Kigali

Kigali, the capital of Rwanda, sits within a basin of 37 wetlands covering more than 10% of its surface area. They’re important for absorbing rainwater in the steeply sloped city — especially as climate change intensifies heavy rainfall. The city’s low-lying districts are particular at risk of recurrent flash floods.

Yet wetlands’ intrinsic value has historically gone unrecognized in Kigali. Encroachment from informal settlements, agriculture, sand mining, brick-making and unregulated industrial activity had, by the mid-2010s, destroyed many of the city’s wetlands, compromising their ability to prevent floods and pollution.

A lake within Kigali's Nyandungu Urban Wetland Eco-Tourism Park. The park is part of the city's effort to restore wetlands that absorb floodwaters and support biodiversity. Photo by Anna K Mueller/Shutterstock

Today, these low-lying areas are being restored as hydrological hotspots.

Kigali’s Nyandungu Eco-Park, a 121-hectare site comprising both restored wetland and forest, opened in 2022 across from Kigali International Airport. It contains 13 catchment ponds, solid waste traps, a 10-hectare lake and more than 60 kilometers of walking and cycling paths. The National Environmental Protection Authority is also restoring the neighboring wetlands of Gikondo and Kibumba, creating what the World Bank has described as “the largest citywide urban wetland rehabilitation programme in Africa.”

The city’s restored wetlands are already helping to absorb stormwater and filter pollutants before they enter the region’s major river systems, the Nyabugogo and Nyabarongo. But those aren’t the only benefits. The Nyandungu pilot alone reintroduced 17,000 indigenous trees, supports more than 100 bird species and over 60 native plant species, and has created an estimated 4,000 green jobs, predominantly for youth and women.

These returns have attracted further investment: Kigali and international partners have committed an additional $32 million to rehabilitate five interconnected wetlands across the city by 2026. Rwanda’s government is now looking to scale these solutions in other cities. Its Ministry of Infrastructure is developing a pipeline of bankable nature-based projects.

Removing Invasive Species Helps Revitalize Johannesburg’s Rivers

In Johannesburg, invasive plants have degraded areas around the city’s Jukskei River. Pines, black wattle, eucalyptus, bugweed and other invasives monopolize nutrients and outcompete local flora.

They also worsen flooding, especially in Johannesburg’s riverside informal settlements like Alexandra and Soweto. Invasive plants’ roots push out deeper-rooted indigenous species, destabilizing the soil around riverbanks. When rain hits these riverbanks, loose soil and sediment flow into the river, reducing its ability to absorb and slow floodwaters.

Aggressive invasive roots also damage drainage pipes and culverts, multiplying flood impacts. Shifts in climate and rainfall patterns are further exacerbating the problem: as temperatures increase, invasives thrive, densify and spread.

Working with local communities, initiatives like WRI’s SUNCASA project are removing invasive plants to prevent flooding and loss of biodiversity while supporting livelihoods. So far, the project has cleared invasive plants from more than 133 hectares along the Jukskei’s riverbanks while creating more than 100 jobs in the process. Workers are also reintroducing indigenous species like African olive and white stinkwood. The trees’ sturdy roots will stabilize the Jukskei’s riverbanks, increase local biodiversity and reduce the impact of flooding.

Johannesburg is also developing a Transformative Riverine Management Program, a framework and business model for investors and corporations to get involved in rehabilitating the city’s rivers, starting with the Jukskei.

Project Spotlight: SUNCASA

The Scaling Urban Nature-based Solutions for Climate Adaptation in Sub-Saharan Africa (SUNCASA) project is a multi-city initiative to enhance resilience, gender equality, social inclusion and biodiversity protection in urban communities in Ethiopia, Rwanda and South Africa. Through nature-based solutions targeting the restoration and conservation of upstream watershed areas and urban tree planting, SUNCASA will benefit 2.2 million people living in high flood-risk areas in Dire Dawa, Ethiopia; Kigali, Rwanda; and Johannesburg, South Africa. Funded by Global Affairs Canada through the Partnering for Climate program and delivered by the International Institute for Sustainable Development and WRI, SUNCASA is implemented with a wide array of local partners.

Watershed Restoration Tackles Dire Dawa’s Flooding at the Source

Dire Dawa, Ethiopia’s flood risk begins upstream. Like other fast-growing secondary cities across Africa, the clearing of trees for farms and new settlements has left the surrounding watershed increasingly degraded. As vegetation is lost, the landscape’s ability to slow and absorb rainfall disappears with it.

During heavy rains, the Dechatu River surges down from the surrounding mountains with few trees or greenery to slow its path, flooding homes and killing people. The worst disaster occurred in 2006, when floods in the night cost the city hundreds of lives and millions of dollars in infrastructure damage. In 2020, more than 250 households were affected.

Dire Dawa has begun to look more closely at its watersheds to stop flooding at its source. Working with the SUNCASA project, local groups are restoring the city’s upstream landscapes by planting more than 1.2 million trees across the watershed. More trees can prevent floods, restore biodiversity and help recharge groundwater. By planting trees that are also fruit-bearing — avocados, mangoes and other crops that farmers can sell — these restoration efforts benefit both the landscape and household incomes.

Mohammed Musa, a farmer in Dire Dawa, looks out over his papaya orchard. Working with farmers like Mohammed, the SUNCASA project is helping bring nature back to Dire Dawa’s degraded watershed. Photo by Hararghe Catholic Secretariat/SUNCASA

The city is also establishing buffer zones to slow the flow of the river. By re-establishing grasses and ground cover to prevent erosion, shrubs to slow runoff, and trees to stabilize riverbanks and provide shade along the Dechatu River, these buffer zones help reduce the speed and sediment volume of flash floods.

Putting Nature at the Heart of Urban Planning

Taken together, these cases reflect a broader shift in how African cities approach urban planning. Nature-based solutions are gaining traction alongside more traditional built infrastructure, enhancing their effectiveness and durability. While a drain or a flood barrier addresses a single problem, nature-based solutions offer a way to address multiple challenges simultaneously. A restored wetland or a green corridor can tackle climate adaptation, biodiversity loss and social challenges such as unemployment and livability.

The timing of this shift matters. As African cities absorb a growing share of the world’s urban population, their development pathways carry global implications. Integrating nature into urban planning is a growth model more adaptive to uncertainty. For cities interested in these pathways, tools like the Strategic Nature-based Solutions Framework have already enabled cities like Addis Ababa and Kigali to identify flood risks, heat islands, water supply and biodiversity needs.

What is unfolding across Addis Ababa, Kigali, Johannesburg and Dire Dawa points to strong outlook for what happens when cities invest in landscapes that perform multiple functions: absorbing water, moderating heat, supporting livelihoods and shaping urban life for the better. This is how to build cities that can thrive in a changing climate.

jlp-suncasa-previews-03.jpg

Established invasives are difficult to remove, often requiring heavy equipment and hard labor. Through the SUNCASA project, workers are removing invasives and replacing them with indigenous tree species that are better for the environment.

half_content

From Kinshasa to Dire Dawa, cities across Africa are discovering that wetlands, trees and parks could be their strongest defense against climate change.

nature-based solutions

Featured

Popular

Type

Vignette

Exclude From Blog Feed?

Authors

What Is the EU Deforestation Regulation? 8 Key Questions, Answered

sarah.brown@wri.org — Sat, 16 May 2026 02:24:00 +0000

What Is the EU Deforestation Regulation? 8 Key Questions, Answered sarah.brown@wri.org Fri, 05/15/2026 - 22:24

The world is losing 11 football (soccer) fields of tropical primary forest every minute; much of it is the result of clearing for farms, pastures and tree plantations.

As a major buyer of commodities largely responsible for fueling deforestation — such as palm oil, cocoa, coffee, soy, cattle and timber — the European Union has both a responsibility and an opportunity to help shift global markets toward more sustainable supply chains. The landmark EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR), adopted in 2023, requires businesses to demonstrate that the products they sell or export to the EU do not come from land that was recently deforested or degraded.

The EUDR is a key step in fighting back against deforestation and supporting national forest protection policies. Yet despite its promise, the regulation has faced delays and pushback, threatening its timely implementation.

Just weeks before the EUDR was to go into force on Dec. 30, 2025, the European Parliament voted to delay application until Dec. 30, 2026 for large corporations and until June 30, 2027 for small businesses. Along with the delay, new amendments weakened the regulation by simplifying requirements for certain businesses to show proof of deforestation-free products; and remove printed products, such as books and publications, from the regulation’s scope.

At a time when forests are increasingly under threat, it’s more urgent than ever to understand the regulation and ensure its full implementation. Here, we dive deeply into the legislation's details and potential impacts.

What Is the EUDR?

The EUDR is a landmark law that came into force in June 2023. Its goal is to ensure that certain products sold in or exported to the EU do not come from land that was deforested or degraded after Dec. 31, 2020. The regulation is designed to prevent EU consumer demand from driving further forest loss or damage, while also reducing the region’s contribution to greenhouse gas emissions and global biodiversity decline.

The EUDR covers timber and six key agricultural commodities: cattle, cocoa, coffee, oil palm, rubber, soy, as well as products made from them such as beef, furniture and chocolate (printed products such as books and newspapers were removed from the scope of the regulation in December 2025). To be sold in or exported from the EU market, these products must meet the following three conditions:

Products are deforestation-free.
Products are produced in compliance with the relevant laws of the country of origin.
Products are covered by a due diligence statement, showing that the company has checked the origin and ensured the products meet EUDR requirements.

This means businesses must demonstrate that any EUDR-covered commodities were not produced on land that was deforested nor did they contribute to forest degradation after the Dec. 31, 2020 cutoff date. Although the regulation is legally in place, companies are not required to start complying until Dec. 30, 2026, for large corporations and June 30, 2027, for small enterprises.

Why Is the EUDR Important?

The EUDR offers a major opportunity for the EU to reduce its role in global deforestation and biodiversity loss, as well as help create deforestation-free supply chains. It supports the commitment made by the 144 countries that signed the Glasgow Leaders’ Declaration in 2021 to halt and reverse forest loss and land degradation by 2030. It can also serve as a model for other major consumer markets looking to lower their environmental footprints.

Since 2014, the EU has been the second-largest importer of goods linked to tropical deforestation after China. In 2017 alone, it accounted for 16% of global deforestation tied to international trade — equal to 203,000 hectares of forest.

More recently, in 2025, the EU was among the world’s top five importers of the six agricultural commodities covered by the EUDR and the largest importer of cocoa beans, coffee, rubber and soy worldwide. Globally, 34% of tree cover loss resulted in deforestation between 2001 and 2025, with agricultural commodity production accounting for roughly 94% of this deforestation.

Among all the agricultural products the EU buys, beef, cocoa and palm oil were linked to the most deforestation in the countries they came from. In fact, out of 160 agricultural commodities imported by the EU, just six — beef, palm oil, soy, cocoa, coffee and rubber, as covered by the EUDR — made up 58% of the estimated forest loss tied to EU imports.

By reducing the EU’s forest-loss footprint and tackling deforestation risks in its supply chains, the EUDR could help reverse deforestation worldwide. In 2025, the world lost 4.3 million hectares of primary tropical forests, an area roughly the size of Denmark. Despite a notable decline from a record high in 2024 following a year of extreme fires, the world is still losing an equivalent of 11 football (soccer) fields every minute. Agricultural expansion is the leading driver of tree cover loss across the tropics.

What Challenges and Setbacks Has the EUDR Faced?

The rollout of the EUDR has faced repeated delays. In December 2024, the EU postponed the start of EUDR compliance by 12 months to give companies more time to prepare. By September 2025, the EU Commission signaled another potential one-year delay, citing problems with the EUDR platform companies must use to submit due diligence statements.

The EU Commission later proposed simplifying requirements for micro and small primary operators, as well as downstream businesses, delaying the application date for those companies.

Then, on Dec. 17, the European Parliament formally approved a one-year delay: Large companies would not be held accountable until a Dec. 30, 2026 start date, while small companies with less than 50 employees and earning less than 10 million euros ($11.7 million) in sales would not need to comply until June 30, 2027.

Challenges also came from new proposals which called on the EU Commission to revise its benchmarking classification system designed to help EU businesses and enforcement authorities conduct due diligence and enforce compliance. The risk levels indicate the percentage of checks on shipments, with greater scrutiny given to higher-risk countries.

Some countries have suggested adding a “no-risk” category to exempt certain countries from due diligence requirements; another suggestion proposed removing the system altogether. But changes like these could create loopholes and ultimately weaken the regulation’s effectiveness. The European Parliament already rejected a similar idea in 2024 for that very reason.

The EUDR was initially agreed upon following a lengthy negotiation between EU institutions and member states, as well as impact assessments and extensive consultations. Derailing its implementation penalizes producer countries and companies that have already invested in compliance, and it would create confusion and uncertainty in the EU market. The regulation may not be perfect, but it’s a necessary step toward deforestation-free supply chains. Many companies have already shown that EUDR compliance is possible, and several have urged the EU to uphold the legal text and stick to implementation timeline.

Since adoption, the EUDR has faced criticism from both inside and outside the EU. Most concerns focus on cost and complexity of compliance, as well as fairness, particularly for smallholder farmers. In response, the European Commission, EU member states and other development institutions have ramped up investment in EUDR preparedness by issuing resources and guidance, with a particular emphasis on preventing smallholder exclusion from the EU market.

What Counts as Deforestation and Degradation Under the EUDR?

The regulation's definition of a forest largely follows the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) which defines it as land larger than 0.5 hectares with trees taller than 5 meters and a canopy cover of at least 10% that is not primarily used for farming or urban development.

Under the EUDR, deforestation refers to clearing forest to make way for agriculture. The key factor is the conversion of land that was forest in 2020 into farmland — such as pastures or soy plantations. It’s a complete land-use change: the forest is no longer a forest.

If that forest is cleared — whether by people or natural events like fire — and then converted into farmland, such as pastures for raising cattle or fields for soy or palm oil, it is considered deforestation.
However, if a forest is cleared, for example by fire (whether from human activity or natural causes) and is not used to produce any of the six EUDR-covered agricultural commodities, it is not considered deforestation under the regulations.
Forests used for wood production are not considered deforestation unless they’re also used for agriculture, for example, cattle grazing under the tree canopy.

The EUDR also covers degradation. Land that was forest in 2020 can be used for wood production and remain classified as a forest, even if it’s temporarily unstocked, according to EUDR definitions. A forest used for wood production is not considered degraded unless there's a specific structural change, such as:

Converting primary forest (native, untouched forest) into other wooded land (trees have 5%-10% canopy cover) or into plantation or planted forest.
Converting naturally regenerating forest (which has largely grown back on its own) into other wooded land used or plantation forest.

Who Does the EUDR Affect?

The EUDR affects any company that imports, produces or exports specific products, and their derivatives, to or from the EU market. This includes operators (those placing products on the market or exporting them from the market) and traders (those distributing and selling products).

It applies to companies based in the EU and internationally, and to businesses of all sizes, from micro and small enterprises to large corporations. However, larger businesses face stricter reporting requirements than smaller ones.

The EUDR spans multiple sectors, from food and beverage (such as companies sourcing cocoa and coffee) to wooden furniture to the healthcare industry (products such as latex gloves).

How Are Countries and Companies Preparing for the EUDR?

Under the EUDR, companies must prove that products linked to deforestation or degradation after Dec. 31, 2020, are not entering the EU market. This requires a due diligence process: collecting supply chain information (including geolocation), assessing the risk of deforestation and taking steps to eliminate any identified risk before the product can be put on the market.

Country-level efforts

Many producer countries are already taking concrete steps to prepare for the EUDR, from adopting national plans to developing traceability systems and improving data transparency. For example, Indonesia, Ghana and Vietnam are investing in government-led efforts to make information available to companies that must comply with the regulation. Delaying enforcement or altering the regulation’s scope could undermine these leading producer countries.

Vietnam stands out as a strong example of how the EUDR is reinforcing national policies to combat deforestation. As a top exporter of rubber and coffee, the country has shifted its focus from illegal logging to broader deforestation risks in agriculture since the regulation’s introduction. In 2023, the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development adopted a national action plan prioritizing sustainable agricultural transformation. The following year, it launched a traceability system for coffee farms, piloting geospatial verification (such as satellite images) in key producing provinces. Developed through public-private collaboration, the system cross-references land-use maps and registration data to ensure EUDR compliance. Plans are also underway to expand it to rubber and cocoa.

Vietnam’s progress shows how the regulation can act as a catalyst for stronger policy alignment between global market demands and local sustainability goals.

EU member states are also preparing by using satellite and aerial earth observation data, such as forest maps from 2020 (the EUDR cutoff year) to detect deforestation, alongside other monitoring solutions and tools.

Private-sector efforts

Companies across supply chains are ramping up EUDR preparations, sparking a wave of innovation in monitoring and traceability. Many are developing satellite-based systems to verify deforestation-free sourcing, training smallholder farmers to meet EUDR requirements and partnering with governments and civil society organizations to improve data sharing and risk assessment.

For example, Unilever and Meridia are working together to map smallholder farmers in Indonesia, making it possible to trace palm oil from plantation to mill. The Global Platform for Sustainable Natural Rubber has created a system to help companies follow sustainability practices and demonstrate EUDR compliance. Open-source platforms like WRI’s Global Forest Watch are also supporting companies in verifying supply chains.

These kind of efforts shows how the EUDR is already driving unprecedented action — transforming compliance from a burden into an opportunity to build more responsible and transparent supply chains. The challenge now is scaling these solutions across all commodities and regions.

What's Next for the EUDR?

In the latest EUDR simplification review, the European Commission published a formal report analyzing the compliance cost reduction by the simplified measures, alongside updated FAQs and guidance on how the rules should be applied. The review also includes a draft Delegated Act to adjust the product scope; notably, the Commission proposes removing leather and retreaded tires from the regulation while potentially adding instant coffee and certain palm oil derivatives. This draft is now open for public consultation until June 1, 2026.

Through this review, the Commission also made clear that its goal is to help companies implement the simplified rules before the December 30 deadline, rather than introduce further legislative changes to the EUDR’s core text, ensuring regulatory certainty.

The Commission is also updating the user friendliness of the EUDR Information System that companies use to submit their due diligence statements and incorporating the December amendments. Specifically, these updates introduce a simplified form for small businesses, updated automated interfaces (APIs) and a contingency plan to ensure reliability as the December deadline approaches.

What’s the Path to Full EUDR Implementation?

The EUDR represents a major milestone in the fight against commodity-driven deforestation, and its effectiveness depends on maintaining its ambition without dilution or delay. The EU must stand firm in its commitment to not reopen the legal text and continue its support to businesses, governments and national enforcement bodies as the implementation deadline nears.

With the ground rules now in place, the focus shifts squarely to implementation. Companies need to move quickly and use the remaining months to continue aligning their compliance systems and supply chains. The EUDR is not only a necessary response to the crisis of forest loss, but also a vital tool to support and complement producer country efforts to halt deforestation by 2030.

14244777628_a88be761e2_k.jpg

half_content

The EUDR requires companies to prove products are deforestation-free. Here's what it means for forests, businesses and global trade.

corporate sustainability

Type

Explainer

Exclude From Blog Feed?

Authors

wri.org news and views

Public Transit Is Struggling to Keep Pace with Aging Populations

Transportation Habits of Beijing’s Older Adults

Mobility Barriers in Beijing’s Transportation System

Public Transportation Service and Design

The Digital Divide

How Can Cities Adapt to a More Age-Friendly Public Transportation?

Looking Forward: A City for All Ages

Projects

Rwanda’s Food Waste Could Feed Millions. Small Businesses Are Showing How.

What Are Circular Food Systems?

Kigasali Coffee Company: Turning Husks into Revenue and Fertilizer

Africa Food Supply (AFS): Extending Crops’ Shelf Life

From Business Practice to System Change

Barriers to Adopting Circular Food Systems

Building a Circular Food System that Works

The Ocean Can Play a Much Larger Role in Fighting Climate Change

1) Expanding Ocean-based Renewable Energy

2) Reducing Emissions from Ships

3) Conserving and Restoring Coastal and Marine Ecosystems

4) Expanding Sustainable Seafood

5) Leveraging the Ocean’s Potential for Carbon Removal and Storage

6) Decarbonizing Ocean Cruises

7) Reducing Offshore Oil and Gas

Investing in the Ocean as a Climate Change Solution

Projects

A Turning Point for Europe's Seas: How Sustainable Ocean Plans Can Help the EU Ocean Act Succeed

Planning for Success

STATEMENT: Honoring Rafe Pomerance, a Pioneer of Climate Action

What is the 'Like-for-Like' Approach in Carbon Dioxide Removal?

What is the Like-for-Like Concept?

Why Is the Like-for-Like Approach Being Proposed?

What Would be the Implications of a Like-for-Like Approach?

Where Has the Like-for-Like Approach Been Proposed?

What Are Some Complexities of the Like-for-Like Approach?

What’s Next?

Projects

Energy Leaders Speak: Renewable Power Is the Answer to Rising Costs and Demand

Renewable Power Offers Several Advantages

What Others Are Saying

Take it from Them

STATEMENT: US Surface Transportation Draft Bill is Step Backwards from an Affordable, Modern Transportation System

African Cities Use Nature to Fight Floods and Climate Change

Green Corridors Help Clear Addis Ababa’s Air

Restoring Lost Wetlands in Kigali

Removing Invasive Species Helps Revitalize Johannesburg’s Rivers

Watershed Restoration Tackles Dire Dawa’s Flooding at the Source

Putting Nature at the Heart of Urban Planning

Projects

What Is the EU Deforestation Regulation? 8 Key Questions, Answered

What Is the EUDR?

Why Is the EUDR Important?

What Challenges and Setbacks Has the EUDR Faced?

What Counts as Deforestation and Degradation Under the EUDR?

Who Does the EUDR Affect?

How Are Countries and Companies Preparing for the EUDR?

Country-level efforts

Private-sector efforts

What's Next for the EUDR?

What’s the Path to Full EUDR Implementation?