Search Climate Insights Directory

Earthjustice argues that the Supreme Court may use the 'major questions' doctrine in West Virginia v. EPA to limit the EPA's ability to combat climate change and regulate industrial air pollution, potentially undermining the regulatory authority granted by the Clean Air Act.

The polluter-pays principle (PPP) requires those who produce pollution to bear the costs of managing it to prevent damage to human health and the environment. While established in the European Union and OECD, it is not yet a customary international norm due to ambiguities in defining 'the polluter' and varying national implementations. In climate change law, the PPP informs debates on loss and damage and is indirectly present in the Paris Agreement through nationally determined contributions and climate finance. The document suggests that combining the PPP with the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR) could help the Global North absorb costs for environmental harms caused in the Global South.

The report examines the denial of amicus curiae status to CIEL and the Sociedad Cooperativa de Producción Pesquera Puerto Chale in the ICSID case UNCT/20/1, which concerns the Don Diego deep-sea mining project in Mexico. The author argues that the tribunal's majority decision ignored significant public interests, including environmental risks to the Gulf of Ulloa and the human rights of local fishers. By relying on discretionary power rather than an obligation to recognize public interest, the report contends that the tribunal undermined the legitimacy of the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) system and failed to integrate international environmental and human rights law into the proceedings.

The document analyzes the denial of third-party participation in the Odyssey v. Mexico case, arguing that the tribunal's discretionary power to exclude affected communities undermines the legitimacy of the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) system and ignores critical environmental and human rights considerations.

ClientEarth argues that the Council's position on the SAIO reform will prevent the EU from meaningfully monitoring its 2030 pesticide reduction targets. The briefing claims the Council is undermining the European Commission's proposal by delaying implementation until 2026, maintaining infrequent five-year data collection, and relying on voluntary surveys rather than mandatory professional records. Furthermore, the Council is accused of limiting the scope of 'agricultural activities', excluding non-approved active substances, and removing transparency guarantees related to the Aarhus Convention. ClientEarth asserts there are no legal grounds for the Council's reluctance to mandate the electronic collection of professional users' records.

ClientEarth asserts that compliance with the NFRD is extremely poor and that national competent authorities (NCAs) are failing to enforce reporting obligations. The document highlights data showing significant gaps in climate-related disclosures among large European companies and argues that without immediate enforcement action, the transition to the CSRD will be hindered by a lack of supervisory experience and lost time.

The document explores strategic litigation as a tool to bridge the gap between state-led anti-corruption efforts and environmental governance. It identifies three main trends: targeting corruption enforcement, improving NRM governance, and addressing transnational sustainability. While it can drive transparency and accountability, the author warns of risks including high costs, potential for abuse via SLAPP suits, and the challenge of enforcing court rulings in weak institutional settings.

The Centre for Environmental Rights, on behalf of the Life After Coal Campaign, submits a formal objection to the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy's draft Gas Master Plan Basecase Report. The submission argues that the plan is 'reckless and unnecessary', contradicting South Africa's constitutional obligations to protect citizens from climate change and ignoring energy modelling that suggests gas-to-power is not required for energy security.

The document examines the Forest Conservation and Management (Amendment) Bill, 2021, which seeks to remove the requirement for the Kenya Forest Service (KFS) to recommend petitions for the variation of public forest boundaries before they are forwarded to the National Assembly. While proponents argue that KFS has used its power to block legitimate petitions and that the Constitution does not require such recommendations, Natural Justice and other opponents warn that this change would politicize the process and remove mandatory safeguards, including Independent Environmental Impact Assessments and public consultation. The document asserts that such changes could exacerbate climate challenges like prolonged droughts and extreme heat by compromising forest integrity.

ClientEarth argues that the EU suffers from a persisting democratic deficit that hinders the implementation of the European Green Deal. The organization recommends four primary reforms: increasing transparency in decision-making (particularly in comitology and the EIB), granting the public direct access to the Court of Justice of the EU, ensuring EU accession to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) to close human rights gaps in climate and environmental governance, and expanding the ordinary legislative procedure to all environmental matters to remove Member State vetoes on critical issues like fuel taxation.

The report defines 'climate-washing' as a subset of greenwashing specifically targeting climate change claims and examines the rising trend of litigation used to hold state and non-state actors accountable. It categorizes misleading communications into three areas: corporate/governmental commitments (such as net-zero pledges), product attributes (such as labeling natural gas as 'clean'), and the disclosure of financial risks and investments. The authors highlight a gap between public climate pledges and actual emission reductions, noting that many companies continue to invest in fossil fuels while advertising clean energy. The document provides recommendations for companies, policymakers, NGOs, and lawyers to combat disinformation and increase transparency.

The report finds that most agreements between Sámi reindeer herding districts and developers in Sweden provide limited benefits and introduce significant risks, often reflecting 'manufactured consent' due to a lack of alternatives. While some agreements include protections for reindeer wellbeing or revenue sharing, many contain harmful clauses such as 'gag orders' (confidentiality) and open consent for undefined projects, particularly in the wind power sector. The authors argue that Sámi districts should broaden their negotiation goals beyond simple economic compensation to include veto rights and project closure conditions, drawing on examples from Australia and Canada.

The Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) has increased its focus on climate change in State reviews, shifting from a primary focus on developing nations to a balanced approach including developed countries. Key areas of concern include adaptation, child participation, and a growing emphasis on mitigation obligations, specifically targeting fossil fuel subsidies and emissions in the transport and aviation sectors. The CRC is also increasingly scrutinizing the role of financial institutions in funding fossil fuels. Legally, the CRC established in the Sacchi et al. v. Argentina, Brazil, France, Germany, and Turkey case that it has jurisdiction over transboundary harm if a causal link exists between a State's emissions and the impairment of children's rights abroad, although the specific claim was dismissed on procedural grounds for failing to exhaust domestic remedies.

The report analyzes the 2020-2021 outputs of seven UN Human Rights Treaty Bodies (HRTBs), noting a significant increase in climate-related references despite COVID-19 disruptions. It highlights a shift toward questioning developed nations on mitigation and fossil fuel extraction, alongside a consistent focus on adaptation and the participation of vulnerable groups. The document also examines key individual communications, such as Teitiota v. New Zealand and Sacchi et al. v. Argentina et al., which establish precedents for climate-induced human rights violations and extraterritorial jurisdiction.

The report examines the legal and operational challenges facing Community Protected Areas (CPAs) in Cambodia. It highlights critical issues such as insecure land tenure, complex and slow establishment processes, limited economic opportunities, and a lack of clear mechanisms for dispute resolution and benefit sharing. The document argues that while the legal framework recognizes community roles, it often lacks the specificity and flexibility needed to empower local and indigenous communities effectively, leaving them dependent on NGOs and vulnerable to powerful private interests.

The document opposes the renewal of the Title V permit for the Miami-Dade County Resources Recovery Facility (Covanta Incinerator). It argues that the draft permit fails to include necessary emission limitations from previous State Implementation Plan (SIP) and Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permits, lacks adequate monitoring for pollutants and odors, and contains unlawful 'director discretion' provisions. The authors emphasize that the facility is located in an environmental justice community where 92% of the population are people of color and 36% live below the poverty line, exacerbating health risks from toxic emissions and greenhouse gases.

ClientEarth has issued a formal letter to Deloitte alleging that the firm is failing to demonstrate how it incorporates material climate risks into its audits of listed companies. The document asserts that existing standards from the IASB, IAASB, and FASB already require the consideration of climate-related matters. Referencing a report by Carbon Tracker and the Carbon Accounting Project, ClientEarth claims that Deloitte and other auditors are habitually failing to provide evidence of climate risk assessment, creating an information gap for investors and risking legal liability in jurisdictions such as the UK and US. The letter calls on Deloitte to review its audit practices, ensure consistency between financial statements and narrative climate commitments, and adopt Paris-aligned accounting assumptions.

ClientEarth asserts that KPMG and other auditors are failing to incorporate material climate-related financial risks into company audits, despite clear guidance from standard-setters like the IFRS Foundation and IAASB. Referencing a Carbon Tracker report, the letter highlights a systemic lack of transparency regarding climate-sensitive assumptions and a failure to align accounts with the Paris Agreement. ClientEarth warns that this creates a material information gap for investors and exposes KPMG to regulatory sanctions and legal liability in the UK and US.

ClientEarth asserts that EY and other auditors are failing to incorporate material climate-related financial risks into company audits, despite clear guidance from standard-setters like the IFRS Foundation and IAASB. Referencing a Carbon Tracker report, the letter highlights a systemic lack of transparency regarding climate-sensitive assumptions in financial statements. ClientEarth warns EY of potential legal and regulatory liabilities in the UK and US and calls for a comprehensive review of its audit practices for carbon-intensive firms.

ClientEarth has issued a formal letter to PwC alleging systemic failures in the audit of climate-related financial risks. The document asserts that existing IFRS, US GAAP, and IAASB standards already require the consideration of material climate risks, yet a report by Carbon Tracker indicates that PwC and other auditors frequently fail to demonstrate this scrutiny. ClientEarth warns that such failures create an information gap for investors and expose PwC to regulatory sanctions, shareholder claims, and potential criminal liability. The letter calls for a comprehensive review of PwC's audit practices for carbon-intensive companies and a commitment to using Paris-aligned accounting assumptions.