Search Climate Insights Directory

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) critiques the 'Zero Draft' of the UN binding treaty on transnational corporations (TNCs) and human rights, describing it as a 'setback' and 'way too weak'. FoEI argues that the draft fails to establish direct legal obligations for TNCs, lacks a robust definition of 'value chains', and does not sufficiently prioritize human rights over trade and investment agreements. The document calls for the creation of an International Court on TNCs and Human Rights to end corporate impunity, particularly in the Global South. It further denounces the European Union's disengagement from the process and the influence of corporate lobbies, such as the International Organization of Employers, which FoEI claims threaten to 'capture' the treaty process.

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) argues that the Zero Draft presented by the IGWG is too weak and fails to establish a robust mechanism to end the impunity of transnational corporations. The organization advocates for the primacy of human rights over trade and investment agreements, the establishment of an international tribunal for TNCs, and the inclusion of direct legal obligations for corporations rather than relying on voluntary principles or state-centric responsibilities. FoEI also criticizes the European Union for its lack of constructive participation and for favoring corporate interests over human rights.

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) argues that the 'Zero Draft' presented by Ecuador for the UN binding treaty on transnational corporations (TNCs) is too weak to end corporate impunity. FoEI advocates for the treaty to establish direct legal obligations for TNCs, prioritize human rights over trade and investment agreements, and create an international tribunal for corporate human rights violations. The document criticizes the European Union for its lack of substantive participation and warns against 'corporate capture' of the negotiation process, emphasizing the need for a gender perspective and the protection of human rights defenders.

The Center for International Environmental Law criticizes the Green Climate Fund (GCF) for decreasing transparency and hindering civil society participation, specifically citing a proposed ethics policy that acts as a 'gag order' and the practice of holding crucial policy discussions in closed-door 'informal' meetings.

The document is a statement by environmental organizations opposing amendments to California Senate Bill 488. These amendments seek to limit the California Insurance Commissioner's ability to issue data calls, specifically targeting the Climate Risk Carbon Initiative. Launched in January 2016, this initiative requires insurers with over $100 million in annual premiums to disclose investments in coal, oil, and natural gas, while encouraging voluntary divestment from thermal coal. The authors argue that such disclosures are essential for financial stability and transparency, citing risks of stranded assets and the necessity of accounting for carbon transition risk to protect institutional investors and fiduciaries.

The Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE) expresses concern that the TPP's legal frameworks, specifically Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) and Technical Barrier to Trade (TBT) provisions, may limit Canada's ability to implement essential climate mitigation and public health policies. The statement highlights risks such as corporate lawsuits over fossil fuel restrictions, increased pharmaceutical costs due to extended patents, and the potential for trade tribunals to override the precautionary principle in environmental health decision-making.

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) advocates for a binding UN Treaty to end corporate impunity. The proposal emphasizes the need for direct legal obligations for transnational corporations (TNCs) and their executives, the creation of a World Court on TNCs and Human Rights, and the primacy of human rights over investment treaties. FoEI highlights systemic failures in national courts and the harmful impact of Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanisms, calling for a process free from corporate lobbying that prioritizes the rights of affected communities and environmental defenders.

The document criticizes the trend of transforming the VGGT from a human rights-based framework into a corporate tool for risk management and 'greenwashing'. It argues that guides produced by entities like USAID and the G7 New Alliance shift state responsibilities to the private sector, legitimize land grabbing, and falsely equate the power of corporations with that of local communities. The signatories call for states to implement the VGGT in line with human rights obligations, establish a robust monitoring mechanism within the Committee on World Food Security (CSA), and adopt a legally binding instrument for corporations regarding human rights.

The document is a declaration by social movements and civil society organizations criticizing the trend of adapting the UN's Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure (VGGT) into business-centric tools. The authors argue that guides produced by entities like USAID, the G7 New Alliance, and the Interlaken Group transform a human rights framework into a corporate social responsibility (CSR) tool, effectively legitimizing land grabbing. They contend that these guides erroneously treat states and corporations as equal stakeholders and dangerously suggest that private investors can manage land rights recognition and conflict resolution—tasks that are the sole legitimate mandate of the state. The statement calls for states to implement the VGGT based on human rights obligations, for the FAO to provide technical support for state regulation of businesses, and for the adoption of a legally binding international instrument on multinational corporations and human rights.

The statement criticizes recent guides developed by agencies like USAID and the Interlaken Group that frame the VGGT as a tool for corporate risk management and corporate social responsibility. The authors argue that this 'multi-stakeholder' approach wrongly transfers state duties—such as identifying tenure rights and resolving conflicts—to private investors, thereby legitimizing land grabs and ignoring power asymmetries. They call for states to enact laws regulating transnational corporations, ensure free prior and informed consent, and establish a robust monitoring mechanism within the UN Committee on World Food Security.

The document is a declaration calling for the end of fossil fuel exploration and extraction to address the climate crisis and mass extinction. It demands a just transition to a democratized, 100% renewable energy system, the removal of fossil fuel industry influence from policymaking, and the recognition of the rights of Indigenous and frontline communities.

Civil society organizations gathered at the World Social Forum in Tunis in March 2015 to oppose the G8's New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition in Africa. They argue the initiative promotes corporate-led agriculture, facilitates land grabbing, and undermines the rights of small-scale farmers. The statement calls for a shift toward food sovereignty, agro-ecology, and the protection of peasant seed systems, demanding that governments suspend New Alliance commitments and prioritize human rights-based agricultural systems.

The submission argues that TNCs operate with unprecedented economic and political power, often evading national laws through complex structures and benefiting from investment treaties that prioritize private profit over human rights. It proposes a binding UN treaty that establishes TNCs' obligations to respect all human rights, holds them civilly and criminally liable (including joint liability for subsidiaries and suppliers), and mandates that states regulate TNCs' extraterritorial activities. The document further calls for the legal supremacy of human rights over trade and investment agreements, the inclusion of international financial institutions like the IMF and World Bank in the treaty's scope, and the creation of a World Court on TNCs and Human Rights. Finally, it demands that TNCs be excluded from the negotiation process to prevent corporate influence from undermining the instrument's effectiveness.

The document is a statement from a coalition of civil society organizations opposing a proposed EU directive on trade secrets. The coalition argues that the directive's broad definition of trade secrets and inadequate safeguards would hinder the work of journalists and whistleblowers, restrict the mobility of professional workers, and allow companies in the health, environment, and food safety sectors to withhold critical public interest data. Specifically, it highlights risks to patient safety in pharmaceuticals, the violation of the Aarhus Convention regarding environmental emissions, and the lack of transparency in EFSA food safety assessments. The coalition also warns that similar protections being lobbied for in the US could be integrated into the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), potentially setting a restrictive global standard.

The document is a statement from various EU, U.S., and international organizations urging the U.S. Trade Representative and the European Commission to exclude chemicals—including pesticides and industrial chemicals—from the TTIP. The authors argue that regulatory cooperation frameworks, investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanisms, and harmonization efforts would freeze the development of stronger health-protective laws, empower corporations to challenge environmental regulations, and erode the EU's leadership on emerging issues like endocrine disruptors and nanomaterials.

The African Caucus warns the World Bank against ignoring its 'Stand-alone policy for Indigenous peoples' in Africa due to government objections to the term 'Indigenous', noting that the term is widely accepted by African regional bodies and national courts. The Caucus also criticizes the 'Billion Dollar Map' project—a $1 billion initiative to map Africa's mineral resources—for its lack of transparency and failure to include Indigenous representatives or mark traditional lands, which could lead to environmental degradation and social conflict.

An anti-fracking coalition in South Africa opposes Minister Susan Shabangu's plan for shale gas exploration in the Karoo, describing it as an extractive process that benefits a small elite while threatening the natural environment and ignoring the needs of local residents for agrarian transformation and basic services.

Friends of the Earth opposes the Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities Act (HR 3830/S 1900), arguing that its 'Fast Track' authority would shift power from Congress to the executive branch and rush the approval of the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). The organization contends that these agreements would allow corporations to sue governments for the costs of complying with environmental regulations and could undermine climate measures, such as efforts to block the Keystone XL pipeline or fossil fuel export terminals. Additionally, the document warns that the agreements could inhibit the use of the 'precautionary principle' regarding toxic chemicals and food safety, and potentially lead to the privatization of nature through patents on plants and animals.

Friends of the Earth U.S. supports the walkout of climate activists from COP19 in Warsaw, arguing that developed countries, particularly the U.S., have failed to take necessary action to combat the climate crisis and are instead protecting corporate polluters.

COPINH denounces the criminalization of its leaders, including Bertha Isabel Cáceres Flores, who face prison sentences and punitive measures due to lawsuits filed by the DESA corporation and the Honduran state. The organization argues these legal actions are racist and designed to protect private corporations building a hydroelectric project without consulting the indigenous Lenca people of Rio Blanco. COPINH demands the annulment of these sentences, the enforcement of ILO Convention 169, and an end to the military presence in Rio Blanco.