The International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) is an independent policy research institute (think tank) whose stated mission is to "build a fairer, more sustainable world, using evidence, action and influence in partnership with others." Its director is Dr Andrew Norton.IIED is one of a small group of independent, not-for-profit organisations that has provided core concepts and methods for thinking about sustainability and social change. IIED's main way of working is through partnership with like-minded organisations in Africa, Asia and Latin America. The institute's work is currently divided into four main areas: natural resources, climate change, human settlements and sustainable markets.IIED is based in central London on High Holborn and has an office in Edinburgh. It formerly had offices in Dakar, Senegal (now an independent organisation IED-Afrique) and Buenos Aires, Argentina (also an independent sister institution, IIED-America Latina). There was also an office in Washington DC, USA (until IIED North America merged with the World Resources Institute in 1988).The International Institute of Environment and Development has more than 140 employees and researchers from 16 countries. The organisation's Board of Trustees are all volunteers, currently 12 representatives from nine different countries. The working budget of the IIED, £18.4 million in 2019/20, is achieved through donations, grants and mutually beneficial partnerships.
The ocean is essential for humanity1-3. Yet, inequity in ocean-based activities is widespread and accelerating4-8. Addressing this requires governance approaches that can systematically measure equity and track progress9. Here we present the Ocean Equity Index (OEI)-a framework for assessing and improving equity in ocean initiatives, projects and policies. We apply the index, which scores twelve criteria, to case studies at local, national and global scales. We show that the OEI can generate structured data to support evidence-based decision-making across ocean sectors and scales. As a theoretically robust and widely applicable tool, the OEI can guide the design of more equitable ocean initiatives, projects or policies, ensuring better outcomes for coastal people and marine ecosystems.
PurposeThis study investigates the acceptability of wildlife tourism joint ventures (JVs) among rural communities in northern Tanzania’s Wildlife Management Areas (WMAs). These partnerships between communities and external investors aim to conserve biodiversity and deliver sustainable socioeconomic benefits. Guided by the Cognitive Hierarch Model (CHM), the research examines how values, beliefs and contextual experiences shape community judgements of JVs.MethodsWe employed a mixed-methods approach, including household surveys with 548 respondents across nine villages (three from each of the Burunge, Enduimet and Randilen WMAs) and 20 Key Informant Interviews. The surveys captured respondents’ perceptions of JV benefits, conservation-related factors and demographic information, while key informant interviews provided deeper contextual perspectives on wildlife tourism partnerships. We analyzed the quantitative data using an ordinal cumulative link mixed model and applied thematic analysis to the qualitative data to determine the acceptability of JVs in WMAs.ResultsWe found that community acceptability of JVs is positively influenced by perceived socio-economic benefits, including financial opportunities, support for public infrastructure, access to employment in tourism facilities and support for local microenterprises. However, limited recognition or awareness of investor contributions to wildlife protection can reduce community willingness to accept and support JVs. Education and positive expectations of tourism growth further enhance acceptability, while negative experiences related to conservation foster skepticism. Observed variations across WMAs and among households highlight the need for place-based governance and locally tailored approaches to ensure that JV outcomes align with community priorities.Discussion/originalityThis study offers a novel application of CHM to the context of wildlife tourism, moving beyond socioeconomic impact assessments to explore psychological and contextual drivers of community acceptability of JVs. Our findings inform policy, conservation and investment strategies aimed at fostering household-level engagement strategies that can ensure equitable access to benefits, strengthen trust and sustainable wildlife tourism JVs, with implications for enhancing rural community participation, economic growth and conservation outcomes.
There is a large finance gap between what countries and regions need for climate change adaptation and what is being supplied. Meeting regional adaptation needs is likely to require significant reform to subnational financing arrangements. In this context, institutions are developing new approaches, but these remain underexplored in the literature. In the mainstream climate finance discourse, the development of Adaptation Investment Planning (AIP) processes is emerging as a key focus for national governments-with methods emerging to translate high level ambitions into programmatic sets of bankable projects. Yet despite the importance of subnational governments in implementing adaptation, there has been little attention given to developing similar approaches at this level. In the face of accelerating climate change risks, Europe is fostering new and innovative solutions to mobilise resources. To date, European subnational adaptive management cycles have had limited focus on addressing financing barriers. We highlight that by employing a welfare economics lens, it is possible to identify barriers to adaptation financing, and design dedicated AIP processes to address these. Drawing on the results of the Path-ways2Resilience project and building on a review of 14 adaptation planning processes, we have developed a subnational Adaptation Investment Cycle and are currently testing this with 100 regions in Europe. The cycle links adaptation planning and decision-making with public financial management, investment management and development planning. We argue that this will enable subnational governments to build pipelines of adaptation investments and strengthen enabling environments, whilst also improving governance and facilitating wider financial reform. We conclude by evaluating limitations and recommending areas for further research.
The access to building materials in informal settlements impacts housing resilience and sustainability. This article presents research conducted with Slum Dwellers International’s (SDI) affiliates in Freetown, Sierra Leone, and Harare, Zimbabwe, exploring the governance conditions that enable or constrain the value chain of building materials, and how these conditions shape access to more affordable, resilient and sustainable housing. Through a co-produced methodology, the research identifies three dimensions that intersect with the decision-making around building materials in informal settlements: tenure and risk thresholds; livelihoods and hazards; and infrastructure and poverty penalties. Based on these findings, the article reflects how access to more sustainable materials in informal settlements can be promoted, while ensuring a fairer distribution of climate change burdens and responsibilities. It highlights governance rather than purely technology solutions, prioritises immediate action for slum upgrading, and acknowledges the existence of trade-offs to the advancement of climate justice. This article brings to the forefront the experiences of informal settlement dwellers and a justice perspective into current debates about decarbonising the construction industry in global South cities.
