Climate co-benefits refer to the mitigation or adaptation benefits generated by projects, schemes, or policies whose primary objective may not be to address climate change. These co-benefits can emerge in two broad ways. First, they may result from a climate-focused action that targets one dimension of climate action—mitigation or adaptation—and also generates positive impacts on the other. For example, a mitigation project aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions may also enhance climate resilience, thereby creating adaptation co-benefits, and vice versa. Second, climate co-benefits can arise from non-climate-oriented actions, where programmes designed to achieve objectives such as improving resource efficiency, strengthening forest management, enhancing agricultural productivity, promoting water security, or generating employment inadvertently contribute to climate mitigation or adaptation outcomes. In both cases, climate co-benefits represent the additional climate value created beyond the primary intent of the intervention.

The roadmap provides a phased strategy to institutionalise the Climate Co-benefits (CCoB) assessment methodology within Urban Forestry (UF) interventions, ensuring systematic measurement, reporting, and integration into planning processes.

The urban forestry methodology assesses a comprehensive set of climate co-benefit parameters spanning both mitigation and adaptation dimensions. It evaluates carbon sequestration, recognising the critical role trees play in absorbing carbon dioxide through photosynthesis and thereby reducing atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations. It also examines urban heat island reduction, as increased tree cover and green spaces provide shade, lower surface and ambient temperatures, and enhance evapotranspiration, contributing to improved thermal comfort in cities. In addition, the methodology considers improvements in groundwater recharge, acknowledging that tree cover enhances infiltration and supports local water availability, which strengthens resilience to climate-induced hydrological stress. Flood and stormwater management is another key parameter, with tree systems helping to reduce runoff, prevent soil erosion, and mitigate flood risks. Finally, the methodology captures biodiversity enhancement, as urban forests create habitats, improve ecological connectivity, and support species diversity, thereby reinforcing overall ecosystem resilience.

Yes. The tool allows users to generate summary outputs and calculation sheets that can be downloaded for reporting, internal review, or submission to authorities.

Climate co-benefits refer to the mitigation or adaptation benefits generated by projects, schemes, or policies whose primary objective may not be to address climate change. These co-benefits can emerge in two broad ways. First, they may result from a climate-focused action that targets one dimension of climate action—mitigation or adaptation—and also generates positive impacts on the other. For example, a mitigation project aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions may also enhance climate resilience, thereby creating adaptation co-benefits, and vice versa. Second, climate co-benefits can arise from non-climate-oriented actions, where programmes designed to achieve objectives such as improving resource efficiency, strengthening forest management, enhancing agricultural productivity, promoting water security, or generating employment inadvertently contribute to climate mitigation or adaptation outcomes. In both cases, climate co-benefits represent the additional climate value created beyond the primary intent of the intervention.

The roadmap provides a phased strategy to institutionalise the Climate Co-benefits (CCoB) assessment methodology within Urban Forestry (UF) interventions, ensuring systematic measurement, reporting, and integration into planning processes.

The urban forestry methodology assesses a comprehensive set of climate co-benefit parameters spanning both mitigation and adaptation dimensions. It evaluates carbon sequestration, recognising the critical role trees play in absorbing carbon dioxide through photosynthesis and thereby reducing atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations. It also examines urban heat island reduction, as increased tree cover and green spaces provide shade, lower surface and ambient temperatures, and enhance evapotranspiration, contributing to improved thermal comfort in cities. In addition, the methodology considers improvements in groundwater recharge, acknowledging that tree cover enhances infiltration and supports local water availability, which strengthens resilience to climate-induced hydrological stress. Flood and stormwater management is another key parameter, with tree systems helping to reduce runoff, prevent soil erosion, and mitigate flood risks. Finally, the methodology captures biodiversity enhancement, as urban forests create habitats, improve ecological connectivity, and support species diversity, thereby reinforcing overall ecosystem resilience.

Yes. The tool allows users to generate summary outputs and calculation sheets that can be downloaded for reporting, internal review, or submission to authorities.

Climate co-benefits refer to the mitigation or adaptation benefits generated by projects, schemes, or policies whose primary objective may not be to address climate change. These co-benefits can emerge in two broad ways. First, they may result from a climate-focused action that targets one dimension of climate action—mitigation or adaptation—and also generates positive impacts on the other. For example, a mitigation project aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions may also enhance climate resilience, thereby creating adaptation co-benefits, and vice versa. Second, climate co-benefits can arise from non-climate-oriented actions, where programmes designed to achieve objectives such as improving resource efficiency, enhancing agricultural productivity, promoting water security, or generating employment inadvertently contribute to climate mitigation or adaptation outcomes. In both cases, climate co-benefits represent the additional climate value created beyond the primary intent of the intervention.

The roadmap provides a phased strategy to institutionalise the Climate Co-benefits (CCoB) assessment methodology from the SUP ban under the Plastic Waste Management Rules, 2016, ensuring systematic measurement, reporting, and integration into planning processes.

The SUP ban methodology assesses both climate mitigation and adaptation impacts across multiple parameters. It estimates net emission reduction due to the SUP ban implementation from reduced lifecycle emissions associated with the extraction of its raw materials, production, and disposal, while also considering the additional emissions generated from production and disposal of its sustainable alternatives. The methodology further quantifies adaptation co-benefits, including the reduction of blockages in stormwater drains, since SUPs constitute a significant share of plastic waste that clogs drainage systems, causing urban flooding. Similarly, it accounts for the prevention of SUP entering into water bodies, given that plastic marine litter is responsible for 92 per cent of entanglement and ingestion cases, and decreases marine ecosystem resilience to climate change. Additionally, the methodology captures employment generation in the sector of sustainable alternatives to the banned SUPs, as the shift creates new livelihood opportunities that can enhance the climate resilience of vulnerable communities.

Yes. The tool allows users to generate summary outputs and calculation sheets that can be downloaded for reporting, internal review, or submission to authorities.