Search Climate Insights Directory

This executive summary from the Center for International Environmental Law argues that major fossil fuel companies are legally and ethically responsible for the climate crisis. It asserts that these companies were aware of the risks of their products as early as the 1950s but chose to protect their own assets while funding extensive disinformation campaigns to undermine climate science and stymie regulation.

This research paper compares the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) regimes of the United States, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, the European Community, the World Bank, and the EBRD. It analyzes these systems across the entire project lifecycle, from initial screening and scoping to preparation, public review, and final decision-making. Key distinctions are noted in who is responsible for preparing and paying for the assessments, the extent of public participation, and the requirement for post-decision monitoring, with NEPA (US) and the Czech/Slovak laws providing contrasting models of government versus proponent responsibility.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) submitted recommendations to the Adaptation Fund Board to strengthen its proposed Environmental and Social Policy, emphasizing the integration of human rights due diligence and robust accountability mechanisms for implementing entities.

This briefing by the Center for International Environmental Law analyzes the need to rebalance the WTO's Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) from a sustainable development perspective. It examines the outcomes of the Doha Ministerial Declaration, specifically regarding public health, the relationship between TRIPS and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), and the protection of traditional knowledge, while highlighting the interlinkages between the TRIPS Council and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).

This legal opinion by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) analyzes the obligations of OECD members regarding the trade of plastic wastes following the OECD's failure to reach a consensus on incorporating the Basel Convention's Plastic Waste Amendments into the OECD Decision on the trade of wastes. The analysis concludes that plastic wastes classified as "other wastes" under the Basel Convention fall outside the scope of the OECD Decision, meaning OECD members who are Parties to the Basel Convention must apply Basel's control and prohibition mechanisms. CIEL further argues that separate agreements, such as those between the US and Canada or within the EU, fail to meet the equivalence requirements of Article 11 of the Basel Convention and are therefore invalid for bypassing Basel controls.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) submitted comments to the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) and the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) arguing that proposed trade liberalization in the forest product sector could exacerbate forest degradation and loss. CIEL contends that the current U.S. environmental review process is inadequate and calls for the administration to halt negotiations until a comprehensive assessment, guided by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), is completed. The document emphasizes that trade liberalization can intensify negative impacts if countries lack robust forest protection frameworks, and suggests that developed nations provide technical and financial assistance to developing ones to establish sustainable management systems.

This briefing by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) provides guidance to developing country negotiators on how to operationalize the assessment of trade in services as mandated by paragraph 14 of the March 2001 GATS negotiating guidelines. It argues that a comprehensive assessment—incorporating both quantitative economic data and qualitative social and environmental indicators—is essential to determine if the GATS has delivered promised benefits and to inform future liberalization negotiations.

This amicus curiae brief, submitted by AIDA, CIEL, and Earthjustice to the Supreme Court of Justice of Panama, argues that the approval of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the Barro Blanco Hydroelectric Project violated international human rights and environmental standards. The brief contends that the State of Panama failed to conduct an adequate consultation process, failed to obtain the free, prior, and informed consent of the Ngäbe people, and approved an incomplete and improperly supervised EIA.

An open letter from various environmental organizations urging Basel Convention delegates to support a Norwegian proposal to increase controls on the transboundary movement of plastic waste by amending the Convention's annexes.

The document argues that plastics are fundamentally incompatible with a true circular economy due to their reliance on fossil fuels and their tendency to degrade into toxic microplastics. It warns that the plastics industry uses 'circularity' as a greenwashing tool to justify burning and recycling rather than reducing production. The author recommends capping plastics production by 2025, eliminating toxic chemicals via a global agreement, and prioritizing reuse and repair over downstream waste management.

A letter from Peter Mandelson, European Commissioner for Trade, to the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) regarding the disclosure of written submissions in the WTO dispute 'Brazil — Measures affecting retreated tyres'.

A letter from the WTO Panel Chairman to the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) stating that the first substantive meeting for the dispute 'Brazil— Measures affecting imports of retreaded tyres (DS332)' will be held in closed session, rejecting a request for the hearing to be webcast.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) submitted a request to the World Trade Organization (WTO) Dispute Settlement Panel on June 20, 2006, asking for the first panel hearing in the Brazil—Retreaded Tyres case (WT/DS332) to be web-cast to the public.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) provides comments to the International Finance Corporation (IFC) regarding the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) Pipeline Project. The report argues that the project's legal framework undermines the rule of law in host countries, fails to adequately address climate change, and violates IFC policies regarding public consultation and compensation for affected populations, particularly in Turkey.

This research paper by the Center for International Environmental Law and EURONATURA proposes a two-tiered compliance regime for the Kyoto Protocol, distinguishing between a facilitative approach during the first commitment period and an enforcement phase following it. The authors argue for a system that prioritizes capacity building and 'making the climate whole' through mechanisms like a Clean Development Fund and compliance reserves to address substantive non-compliance.

The memorandum argues that the World Trade Organisation (WTO) lacks internal transparency and fails to include developing countries in its decision-making processes. It identifies systemic issues such as the 'green room' process, 'chair-driven' negotiations, and the use of political pressure, proposing reforms to make meetings inclusive, ensure the neutrality of the Secretariat, and return decision-making power to the general membership.

A coalition of NGOs submitted a memorandum to the WTO calling for urgent reforms to internal transparency and the inclusion of developing countries in decision-making, arguing that current failures threaten the environment and global populations.

This annex provides an overview of perspectives from the insurance industry and legal practitioners regarding the risks that climate-related litigation poses to directors and officers (D&O) liability insurance coverage, focusing on increasing litigation risks and potential policy exclusions.

A public statement issued by FENACOCA in August 2007 opposing hydrocarbon exploration in proposed Cacataibo territorial reserves to protect the lives and integrity of Cacataibo people in voluntary isolation.

FENACOCA issued a public statement in August 2007 rejecting oil exploration in proposed Cacataibo territorial reserves in Peru, citing risks to those in voluntary isolation. The organization demanded the Peruvian state finalize the creation of these reserves, requested precautionary measures from the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, and conditioned negotiations with the company "PETROLIFERA" on a guarantee of non-entry into the reserves.