Search Climate Insights Directory

This report by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) argues that the investment provisions of the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (Korea FTA) grant foreign investors substantive rights exceeding those of U.S. investors, thereby violating the Trade Act of 2002. The author contends that new tests for indirect expropriation and the expansion of arbitral jurisdiction over contract rights threaten the ability of governments to regulate for public health, safety, and the environment.

A joint statement from environmental, worker, and consumer organisations expressing disappointment and concern regarding the European Commission's Second Regulatory Review on Nanomaterials published on 3 October 2012. The signatories argue that the Commission's approach is inconsistent with its own analysis, ignores scientific evidence of nanomaterial toxicity, and fails to implement a precautionary approach to protect human health and the environment.

A statement by several NGOs, including the Center for International Environmental Law, criticizing the European Commission's working conclusions on transparency measures for nanomaterials. The authors argue that the Commission has ignored public consultation results and scientific concerns in favor of industry interests, and they strongly advocate for the creation of an EU-wide nanoregister to ensure public health, environmental safety, and consumer transparency.

A joint submission by 24 civil society organizations, including the Center for International Environmental Law, criticizing the International Finance Corporation's (IFC) proposed Approach to Responsible Exit. The submission argues that the IFC's current framework fails to ensure remedy for harms caused by its investments and lacks transparency, urging the institution to make remedy a prerequisite for exit and to implement rigorous pre-divestment due diligence and community consultation.

A briefing by Friends of the Earth International criticizing the climate-related goals in the first draft of the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework, specifically the target of mitigating 10 gigatonnes of CO2 equivalent.

A technical report by a coalition of climate justice organizations arguing that "net zero" targets are used by governments and polluting corporations to mask inaction, avoid responsibility, and potentially increase fossil fuel emissions through the use of distant goals and unproven technologies.

A briefing document by Friends of the Earth International regarding the COP27 climate summit in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, which critiques 'false climate solutions' and proposes alternatives for a just energy transition.

This briefing note by Friends of the Earth International critiques Target 8 of the first draft of the post 2020 Global Biodiversity Framework, arguing that the target prioritizes climate objectives over biodiversity conservation.

A fact sheet by Friends of the Earth International arguing that biodiversity offsets and credits are ineffective and potentially harmful mechanisms for biodiversity protection, advocating instead for transformational change to address the root causes of biodiversity loss.

This report by Friends of the Earth International critiques 'net zero' strategies, specifically 'nature-based solutions', 'natural carbon removal', and 'carbon offsetting', arguing that they threaten food sovereignty, land rights, and agroecology.

Friends of the Earth International (ATI) rejects the concept of Nature-based Solutions (SBN), arguing that the term is an opaque, overly broad framework used by governments and corporations to justify carbon neocolonialism, market mechanisms, and corporate greenwashing while facilitating land grabbing.

This report by Friends of the Earth International critiques the concept of 'No Net Loss' (NNL) of biodiversity, arguing that it serves as a greenwashing mechanism for corporations to continue destructive activities through biodiversity offsets.

A joint technical briefing by several climate justice organisations arguing that 'net zero' targets are used by governments and corporations to disguise climate inaction, greenwash business-as-usual, and shift the burden of carbon sequestration to the global South.

Friends of the Earth International rejects the concept of Nature Based Solutions (NBS), arguing that the term is too vague and is used by governments and corporations to facilitate greenwashing, neo-colonialism, and the dispossession of Indigenous Peoples and local communities.

This briefing by Friends of the Earth International critiques Target 8 of the first draft of the post-2020 global biodiversity framework, arguing that it prioritizes climate goals over biodiversity conservation.

Friends of the Earth International (ATI) rejects the concept of Nature-based Solutions (NbS), arguing that the term is overly broad and serves as a cover for carbon neocolonialism, market mechanisms, and corporate greenwashing.

This technical briefing, produced by a coalition of climate justice organizations including Friends of the Earth International and Action Aid, argues that 'net zero' targets are used by governments and polluting companies to mask political inaction and justify continued fossil fuel extraction.

SENE BUAË is a magazine documenting the third session of the 'Escuela de la Sustentabilidad' (School of Sustainability), organized by COECOCeiba and Amigos de la Tierra América Latina y el Caribe (ATALC) in July 2009. The publication compiles reflections from participants on political formation, the 'Buen Vivir' philosophy, and the struggle against neoliberal agro-industrial models, specifically focusing on the community of Juanilama in Costa Rica.

This report by Friends of the Earth International critiques the concept of "No Net Loss" (NNL) of biodiversity, arguing that biodiversity offsetting mechanisms serve as a "false solution" that allows the continued destruction of nature by treating biodiversity as interchangeable assets within a financial accounting framework.

This report by Friends of the Earth International critiques the international climate negotiation process leading up to COP 17 in Durban. It argues that rich industrialized nations are avoiding their historical responsibility by promoting voluntary pledges and carbon market mechanisms rather than legally binding emission cuts. The document calls for a systemic shift away from neoliberal economic models toward climate justice, demanding radical domestic emission reductions, public financing for the Global South, and the protection of indigenous and local community rights.