The link between economic growth and carbon emissions remains a critical challenge for developing economies. The Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) suggests emissions rise with growth before declining as cleaner technologies emerge. However, in resource-dependent countries like Nigeria, emissions continue to rise due to reliance on fossil fuels and inefficient energy use.

Between 2011 and 2021, Nigeria’s GDP grew by 6.4%, while emissions increased by 14.7% ( Notre Dame Global Adaptation Initiative, 2024 ). The energy and transport sectors, especially the latter, which contributes 23% of CO₂ emissions ( International Energy Agency, 2022 ) remain carbon-intensive. Without targeted policies, this upward trend threatens climate resilience.

Although national frameworks like the Climate Change Act of 2021 and updated NDCs exist, subnational implementation is weak. Many states lack climate offices, adequate funding, and technical capacity. Misalignment between national and state policies further impedes progress. A transparent, structured system for tracking state-level performance is essential for achieving Nigeria’s climate goals.

Globally, subnational governments have been pivotal in advancing climate action. U.S. states like California and New York have led on carbon pricing and renewables, even in the absence of consistent federal policy. Brazil’s Amazon Fund and India’s state-level solar initiatives further demonstrate the power of decentralized climate governance. Nigeria can draw from these models by strengthening state-level accountability, improving access to climate finance, and adopting measurable emissions targets. The Climate Action Index (CAI) integrates such best practices to assess Nigerian states on policy implementation, financial efficiency, and environmental outcomes.

Limited climate finance remains a major bottleneck in Nigeria’s climate response, exacerbated by institutional and transparency challenges ( UNEP, 2023 ; Ojewale, 2022 ). According to the UNEP (2023) Adaptation Gap Report, developing nations need $140 - $300 billion annually for adaptation, yet Nigeria secures less than 5% of its climate finance needs ( World Bank, 2023 ). Key impediments include high perceived investment risk, inadequate domestic budget allocations, and financial opacity ( Ojewale, 2022 ). These deficiencies reduce investor confidence and weaken implementation capacity. The Climate Action Index (CAI) addresses this gap by introducing transparency-focused financial metrics, ensuring funds are directed toward high-impact adaptation and mitigation projects. By tracking state-level fund utilization and aligning budgets with NDC targets, the CAI fosters accountability and strengthens the business case for subnational climate investment.

Introduction to the Theoretical Framework

Effective climate governance demands a structured, evidence-based framework. The Climate Action Index (CAI) addresses this need by providing state-level performance metrics to monitor progress, guide resource allocation, and support low-carbon development.

Grounded in established climate and economic governance models, the CAI integrates the Theory of Change, Policy Alignment Mechanisms, Climate Finance Efficiency, and Outcome-Based Performance Assessment. These elements make the CAI not only a monitoring tool, but also a strategic instrument for driving measurable subnational climate action.

Theory of Change: A Roadmap for Climate Governance

The CAI adopts the Theory of Change (ToC) framework to map the pathway from climate interventions to long-term impact, aligning with best practices in transparent climate governance and multilateral cooperation ( IPCC, 2023 ; Hale, 2020 ) and also with established development planning models ( Weiss, 1995 ). It links state-level policy implementation, resource allocation, and accountability mechanisms to national climate goals and emission reduction targets.

The CAI’s ToC is structured around three interdependent pillars:

Policy Alignment—Effective alignment of subnational climate policies with national targets enables coherent governance and operational clarity.

Spending Efficiency—Strategic allocation of climate finance ensures investments are directed toward high-impact renewable energy, adaptation, and mitigation initiatives.

Outcome & Impact Transparency—Robust monitoring and accountability mechanisms foster iterative improvements and track decoupling of economic growth from emissions.

These pillars serve as evaluative metrics, ensuring climate action at the subnational level supports inclusive, low-carbon economic development.

The Three-Pillar Approach of the CAI

The Climate Action Index (CAI) is built on three interlinked pillars, reflecting international consensus on aligning subnational actions with national and global climate goals ( Hsu, Weinfurter, & Xu, 2020 ; Setzer & Nachmany, 2018 ). Translating Nigeria’s commitments under the Paris Agreement and SDG 13 into actionable state-level initiatives.

The Policy Alignment pillar evaluates the alignment of state policies, legislative frameworks, and institutional capacities with national climate goals. Key indicators include the adoption of Climate Action Plans, legislative consistency, and institutional capacity through climate units and enforcement mechanisms. A strong policy alignment ensures that climate targets are supported by concrete governance structures.

The Spending Efficiency pillar examines how effectively state-level climate financing is allocated to drive tangible outcomes. It considers budget alignment with NDC targets, investment transparency, and capital flows into renewable energy and green infrastructure. This pillar ensures climate funds are used efficiently, promoting fiscal accountability and maximizing impact.

By focusing on these interconnected pillars, the CAI ensures that Nigeria’s climate action is both effective and transparent at the subnational level, driving sustainable development in alignment with global climate goals.

This pillar focuses on tracking real-world climate improvements, ensuring that policy and financial investments translate into measurable environmental and social benefits.

Key Indicators

Verified Emission Reductions—Monitors carbon footprint reductions across key sectors (energy, transportation, agriculture, industry).

Resilience & Adaptation Impact—Evaluates whether states are implementing flood defenses, drought-resistant agriculture, and infrastructure to withstand climate shocks.

Community Benefits & Equity—Assesses the extent to which climate action improves social equity, benefiting vulnerable populations, women-led households, and indigenous communities.

By incorporating a targeted impact sub-metric, this pillar ensures that interventions are not just reducing emissions but also addressing regional vulnerabilities, fostering inclusive and sustainable development.

The CAI utilizes a data-driven framework to assess state-level climate performance, integrating national, subnational, and global datasets.

Emission & Economic Data:

Subnational Climate Data & Monitoring:

These diverse data sources drive continuous climate action improvements and align with global climate governance best practices.

Integrating Economic and Emission Data—Policy Implications: The CAI tracks GDP-emission correlations to identify decoupling opportunities, ensuring economic growth remains low-carbon. States with high emissions need urgent mitigation; low-emission, high-growth states serve as models for sustainable development.

Incorporating these data, the CAI serves as a strategic framework for integrating climate governance, financial accountability, and measurable outcomes. By using a Theory of Change and a structured evaluation framework, it empowers Nigerian states to bridge the gap between policy ambition and action, offering a scalable model to attract climate funding.

Identifying Gaps in Climate Action Research

Climate governance research has extensively explored national climate commitments, emissions reduction strategies, and policy frameworks. However, several critical gaps remain in subnational climate governance, financial accountability, and impact assessment models, particularly in developing economies like Nigeria. Despite Nigeria’s commitments under the Paris Agreement and Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), implementation at the state level remains uneven due to limited monitoring frameworks and weak institutional capacity. This section highlights key gaps in climate action research and policy implementation, with a focus on subnational governance, climate finance allocation, data transparency, and emissions tracking. The Climate Action Index (CAI) is designed to address these gaps by providing a structured, evidence-based tool for evaluating and enhancing state-level climate action.

The Gap between National Climate Policies and Subnational Implementation

A significant gap in climate action is the disconnect between national policies and subnational execution, a challenge documented across developing nations with decentralized climate responsibilities ( Hsu, Weinfurter, & Xu, 2020 ; Setzer & Nachmany, 2018 ). Despite Nigeria’s climate laws, states face challenges such as weak institutional capacity, inconsistent policy adoption, and limited coordination mechanisms, hindering effective climate action.

How the CAI Addresses This Gap: The CAI bridges this gap by providing a structured evaluation framework to track policy alignment, enforcement, and institutional capacity, ensuring that state-level actions align with national climate goals.

The Lack of Standardized Metrics for Subnational Climate Performance

Existing frameworks, like the Climate Change Performance Index and ND-GAIN Index, focus on national performance, leaving subnational actions untracked. This lack of metrics makes it difficult to assess regional progress, measure outcomes, and benchmark climate readiness.

How the CAI Addresses This Gap: The CAI introduces Nigeria’s first state-level climate performance index, tracking:

Inadequate Transparency and Accountability in Climate Finance Allocation

Misallocation and lack of transparency in climate finance hinder effective climate action. Studies show less than 5% of required climate finance is secured, with international donors reluctant to invest due to corruption concerns.

How the CAI Addresses This Gap: The CAI implements financial tracking mechanisms to ensure funds are efficiently allocated and promote fiscal accountability, boosting confidence among domestic and international investors.

Limited Use of Data-Driven Decision-Making in Climate Governance

Many states lack access to high-resolution climate data, hindering informed policy decisions. Emissions tracking is often inaccurate, and climate risk assessments are rarely integrated into economic planning.

How the CAI Addresses This Gap: The CAI integrates satellite imagery, ground sensors, and stakeholder surveys to provide real-time, high-resolution climate data, enabling evidence-based decision-making.

The Need for a Performance-Based Incentive Model for Climate Action

States often lack motivation to prioritize climate action due to the absence of direct financial incentives or penalties. Nigeria’s climate policies lack enforcement mechanisms.

How the CAI Addresses This Gap: The CAI introduces a performance-based evaluation system, rewarding high-performing states with more climate finance and investment, while offering targeted support to lagging states.

Bridging the Knowledge and Policy Gaps

The CAI addresses gaps in climate governance by:

As a strategic tool, the CAI offers a clear, evidence-based roadmap for improving and financing state-level climate governance.

The Climate Action Index (CAI) is designed as an evidence-based tool to evaluate climate governance at the subnational level. Its methodology integrates quantitative and qualitative data to assess how well Nigerian states align with national climate goals, efficiently utilize climate finance, and achieve measurable environmental outcomes.

The CAI is structured around a three-pillar evaluation framework that translates national climate ambitions into state-specific performance metrics. Each pillar is assigned a weight based on its relative importance in achieving Nigeria’s climate targets.

Each thematic area is divided into specific sub-metrics, scored on a standardized 0 - 3 scale, where:

3 = Full implementation

2 = Partial implementation

1 = Minimal effort

0 = No effort

A. Policy Alignment (40%) (see Table 1 )

B. Spending Efficiency (30%) (see Table 2 )

C. Outcome and Targeted Impact Transparency (30%) (see Table 3 )

Assessment Matrix (see Table 4 )

The weighting of Policy Alignment (40%), Spending Efficiency (30%), and Outcome Transparency (30%) is based on the relative impact of each pillar on climate governance effectiveness (see Table 5 ). Policy Alignment holds the highest weight as it sets the regulatory and institutional foundation. Spending Efficiency is allocated 30% due to its direct link to resource allocation, while Outcome Transparency is equally weighted at 30% to ensure accountability and verifiable progress.

Calculating the Pillar Averages

Step 1: For each pillar, Policy Alignment, Spending Efficiency, and Outcome Transparency calculate the average score of its sub-metrics. For example, if a state’s scores for Policy Alignment sub-metrics average to A, for Spending Efficiency to B, and for Outcome Transparency (including Targeted Impact) to C (with each score on a 0 - 3 scale).

Step 2: Multiply each pillar’s average score by its respective weight

(Here, the weights are in percentage points that sum to 100.)

Step 3: Add the weighted scores

Raw Score = (A × 40) + (B × 30) + (C × 30)

The maximum possible raw score occurs when

A = B = C = 3A = B = C = 3A = B = C = 3:

Max Raw Score = (3 × 40) + (3 × 30) + (3 × 30) = 120 + 90 + 90 = 300

Step 4: Convert to a Percentage

The overall CAI percentage score is then:

CAI Percentage = (Raw Score/300) × 100)

Example Calculation: Assume a state has the following pillar averages:

Policy Alignment (A): 2.5

Spending Efficiency (B): 2.0

Outcome Transparency (C): 2.0

Using the direct weighted average method:

Raw Weighted Score = (2.5 × 40) + (2.0 × 30) + (2.0 × 30) = 100 + 60 + 60 = 220

Overall Score on 0-3 Scale = 220/100 = 2.2

CAI Percentage = 2.23 × 100 ≈ 73.3%

This means the state achieves an overall CAI score of about 73.3% relative to the best possible performance.

The initial phase establishes a comprehensive climate performance benchmark for all 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT). This includes:

To ensure accountability and transparency, CAI scores are updated and published annually:

To bridge policy implementation gaps, the CAI facilitates targeted capacity-building programs:

The CAI emphasizes inclusive, multi-stakeholder collaboration to ensure climate policies remain effective and adaptable:

To maintain global credibility and coherence with climate commitments, CAI implementation is aligned with:

The CAI serves as a long-term policy advisory tool, providing:

The CAI implementation process is designed to be dynamic, transparent, and action-oriented, ensuring that climate progress is measurable, adaptable, and aligned with Nigeria’s long-term sustainability goals. By integrating data-driven insights, stakeholder collaboration, and continuous policy refinement, the CAI provides a structured pathway for achieving subnational climate resilience and low-carbon development.

Alignment with Global Standards

The Climate Action Index (CAI) is designed not only to drive state-level climate action in Nigeria but also to meet and exceed internationally recognized standards. By aligning with global frameworks, the CAI enhances its credibility, facilitates cross-country comparisons, and reinforces Nigeria’s commitment to its international climate obligations. Specifically, the CAI operationalizes the following global standards:

Paris Agreement ETF

The CAI complies with the Transparent, Accurate, Comparable (TACCC) principles of the Paris Agreement, reflecting best practices in multilateral frameworks for climate cooperation ( Hale, 2020 ; IPCC, 2023 ). This ensures that all emission data and related metrics are reported in a manner that meets international standards, fostering transparency and comparability.

Nigeria’s MRV Framework

The CAI is fully integrated with Nigeria’s Measurement, Reporting, and Verification (MRV) Framework, linking subnational data directly to the National Climate Registry. This alignment guarantees that state-level performance is both consistent with national reporting requirements and traceable for international review.

SDG 13 (Climate Action)

By tracking key indicators related to climate resilience and emissions reductions, the CAI directly supports Sustainable Development Goal 13. This integration not only ensures that Nigeria’s progress is in line with global climate targets but also provides actionable insights for achieving sustainable, climate-resilient development.

Broader Implications for Nigeria and Africa

The Climate Action Index (CAI) is not merely a tool for subnational accountability, it is a catalyst for redefining climate governance across Nigeria and, by extension, Africa. By transforming national climate ambitions into actionable, state-specific metrics, the CAI offers a practical pathway to achieve measurable climate outcomes while reinforcing economic resilience.

Enhancing Climate Governance and Economic Resilience Across Nigeria

In Nigeria, the CAI directly addresses the challenge of decoupling economic growth from rising greenhouse gas emissions. By linking state budgets to specific, measurable climate outcomes, the CAI enables:

Targeted Policy Reforms

States with robust climate policies and strong institutional capacity can be identified and supported, ensuring that national goals such as a 47% emissions cut by 2030 are met with coherent local action.

Efficient Investment

By tracking spending on renewable energy, adaptation, and mitigation projects, the CAI highlights where investments can replace fossil fuel subsidies, thereby reducing carbon lock-in and redirecting financial flows toward clean technologies.

Improved Accountability

Through real-time monitoring and detailed outcome metrics, the CAI provides clear benchmarks that help local governments align their actions with national targets. This transparency not only builds trust but also informs adjustments in policy and practice, enhancing Nigeria’s overall climate resilience.

For Africa: A Replicable Model for Subnational Climate Governance

The CAI has broader implications for the African continent:

Scalable Governance Framework

The CAI’s state-specific metrics can be adapted to reflect the diverse governance challenges across African nations. By focusing on clear, measurable outcomes, the CAI provides a model that other countries can use to track their progress toward international climate commitments.

Cross-Border Collaboration

As African nations work toward shared climate and sustainable development goals, the CAI can serve as a common framework for benchmarking and collaborative policy reform. This facilitates access to international climate finance and promotes coordinated regional efforts.

Driving Continental Transformation

By improving local-level accountability and transparency, the CAI not only supports Nigeria’s transition to a low-carbon economy but also positions the country as a leader in climate governance, a role that can inspire similar initiatives across Africa.

Unlocking Policy and Economic Opportunities

The CAI’s rigorous, data-driven approach creates significant opportunities:

Enhanced Investor Confidence

Transparent, performance-based metrics boost the credibility of states in attracting both domestic and international climate finance.

Informed Policy Interventions

Detailed, state-specific data helps policymakers identify priority areas for intervention whether it’s in decarbonizing key sectors, improving renewable energy investments, or enhancing community resilience.

Balanced Growth:

By ensuring that economic expansion does not come at the expense of the environment, the CAI fosters a sustainable development model where growth and climate action reinforce each other.

Risks and Mitigation ( Table 7 )

Sustainability of the Climate Action Index (CAI)

Ensuring the long-term viability of the Climate Action Index (CAI) requires a structured and multi-pronged approach that integrates the project into local governance, financing mechanisms, policy frameworks, and community engagement structures. By embedding the CAI within institutional mandates, funding mechanisms, and legal frameworks, its sustainability can be guaranteed beyond short-term project cycles or changes in political leadership. The following key components outline a comprehensive sustainability strategy for the CAI.

Institutional Integration for Long-Term Ownership

To ensure the CAI’s continuity, it must be anchored within a reputable institution with an existing climate or sustainability mandate. This institutionalization safeguards its operation beyond political transitions.

Effective implementation also requires cross-sectoral collaboration, given climate action’s overlap with finance, infrastructure, agriculture, and energy. Establishing inter-agency teams will help align the CAI with broader development agendas, minimize duplication, and embed climate governance into national and subnational planning frameworks.

Steady Funding & Resource Mobilization

The CAI’s long-term viability requires a diversified funding strategy beyond government or donor dependence. Sustainable financing should combine public budget allocations, international donor support (e.g., World Bank, AfDB, Green Climate Fund), private sector investments (e.g., green bonds), and philanthropic contributions.

To incentivize progress, performance-based funding mechanisms can link state-level allocations to CAI scores rewarding high-performing states and fostering ongoing commitment.

Capacity Building & Knowledge Transfer

Sustaining the CAI requires ongoing capacity development through structured training and a “training-of-trainers” approach, enabling local officials and technical staff to manage data collection, analysis, and reporting effectively.

Digital platforms, e-learning tools, and automated reporting software should support seamless knowledge transfer and ensure continuity in CAI implementation across changing personnel.

Policy & Legal Anchoring

To ensure CAI’s permanence, it must be legally embedded in national and state climate policies. This includes mandating its use through legislation or executive orders, allocating dedicated budgets, and requiring annual reporting.

Public disclosure of CAI results will enhance transparency, enabling civil society and local communities to monitor progress and drive accountability in climate governance.

Robust Governance & Oversight Mechanisms

Establishing a multi-stakeholder steering committee composed of government officials, civil society representatives, private sector actors, and development partners will enhance oversight and decision-making. This committee should oversee project milestones, troubleshoot challenges, and approve adjustments to CAI metrics as needed.

To further strengthen credibility, periodic independent audits should be conducted. Third-party verification of CAI data and implementation progress will improve transparency, build trust, and ensure data accuracy.

Stakeholder Engagement & Local Buy-In

For the CAI to achieve lasting impact, it must be embraced beyond government. Community engagement, civil society partnerships, and private sector collaboration ensure climate action is inclusive and participatory.

Mechanisms such as public forums, digital dashboards, advocacy partnerships, and co-developed private sector initiatives foster broad ownership and sustain momentum, even amid leadership transitions.

Given the evolving nature of climate data and risks, the CAI must remain flexible. Regular annual or biannual reviews, along with updates to indicators, methodologies, and data collection tools, will help maintain relevance.

Leveraging emerging technologies such as AI analytics, remote sensing, and real-time monitoring can enhance precision, reduce costs, and improve responsiveness.

To safeguard the CAI’s continuity, robust risk mitigation is essential. This includes cross-party political support, institutionalizing CAI processes beyond individuals, and creating contingency funding buffers.

Such resilience strategies ensure the CAI remains functional and effective, even in the face of political, economic, or funding-related disruptions.