Search Climate Insights Directory

The report examines how national investment laws handle dispute prevention, management, and settlement (DPMS). It finds that while most laws include DPMS provisions—particularly in Africa and Asia—the use of international arbitration, especially through 'advance consent,' exposes states to significant financial risks. The authors advocate for prioritizing national courts and non-adjudicative mechanisms, providing a structured framework for states to reform their investment laws based on specific national policy problems rather than generic international standards.

The document argues that a plastics treaty must include a clear mandate for implementation and compliance mechanisms, including the early creation of an Implementation and Compliance Committee. It recommends a combined approach that is primarily facilitative but allows for punitive non-compliance response measures. To ensure effectiveness, the brief proposes a dual reporting system: frequent reports on legal obligations and less frequent reports on broader implementation, impacts, and challenges.

The report examines the trend of incorporating GRP and IRC provisions into regional trade agreements (RTAs), with a detailed analysis of the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA). It highlights how the USMCA differs from other agreements like the CPTPP and CETA by making GRP provisions binding, prescriptive, and wide-ranging. The document specifically explores the USMCA's approach to stakeholder engagement and transparency, while warning developing countries about potential 'regulatory chill,' administrative strain, and the disproportionate influence of private sector lobbying.

The report examines the practices of international courts—including the ICJ, ITLOS, and human rights courts—regarding the award of compensation for state interference with private property. It contrasts these approaches with investor-state arbitration, highlighting the use of the 'full reparation' standard, the preference for restitution, and the application of equitable valuation techniques. The document suggests several reform paths for investor-state disputes, such as refining treaty language on reparation standards, increasing engagement with domestic mechanisms, and utilizing tribunal-appointed experts to reduce reliance on party-appointed experts.

The report examines framework climate laws in the UK, France, Mexico, Finland, Sweden, and Victoria (Australia), concluding that while such laws provide a critical political signal and a structured pathway for decarbonisation, most have struggled with implementation. Key failures include a lack of binding interim targets, overcomplexity in governance, and insufficient accountability mechanisms. The report recommends that future laws impose clear, enforceable duties on high-level government decision-makers, integrate independent scientific advisory bodies, and combine long-term goals with frequent short-term progress reporting to avoid 'paper tiger' legislation.

The report assesses the legal frameworks for artisanal gold mining in UEMOA member states, identifying significant gaps in strategic planning, institutional coordination, and regulatory alignment. It highlights that most national laws are reactive and out of touch with field realities, particularly regarding mechanization and environmental protection. The document recommends the creation of 'reserved gold mining zones' as an integrated approach to formalize the sector, introduce cleaner gravimetric processing technologies, and improve fiscal collection and social protections for vulnerable miners.

The document assesses the integration of the UNFCCC's Cancun safeguards into the national legal frameworks of Ghana, Liberia, and the Republic of Congo. It finds that while broad principles of participation and transparency exist in constitutions and forestry laws, they often lack practical procedural detail or consistent implementation. The briefing highlights a gap between high-level policy goals and the legal reality for local communities and indigenous peoples (LCIPs), particularly regarding land tenure and equitable benefit sharing. It suggests that REDD+ can act as a catalyst for legal reform, leveraging existing mechanisms like Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) and the EU's FLEGT-VPA initiative to strengthen forest governance.

The report identifies ten 'building blocks' for enabling community forestry laws, emphasizing the need for secure tenure, simple allocation processes, and inclusive governance. Through case studies of Nepal, the Philippines, and Tanzania, it argues that legal frameworks should be supportive rather than restrictive, iterative in design, and coherent across multiple sectors to ensure sustainable forest management and improved local livelihoods.

The document explains that while UK shareholders can successfully propose advisory resolutions on climate change reporting, Australian shareholders face significant legal barriers. In Australia, legislation and case law prevent shareholders from directly proposing resolutions that direct board action or express opinions on management powers, often requiring a 'special resolution' to amend a company's constitution first—a process that has not yet succeeded due to the 75% support threshold.

The document evaluates how Brazil's Forest Code (Law No. 12.651/2012) compares to the land-use and forest protection laws of six other top agricultural exporters. It focuses on two main areas: riparian buffer zones and biodiversity conservation. The analysis finds that Brazil maintains some of the most stringent rules for private lands, particularly regarding mandatory no-harvest riparian zones and the requirement for all private properties to set aside land for biodiversity (Legal Forest Reserves) without compensation. While other countries use a mix of voluntary easements, financial incentives, and targeted zoning, Brazil's approach is more universally mandatory across private rural properties, though the report notes that the effectiveness of these rules depends on full implementation and enforcement.

The report compares forest and land use policies in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, and the United States. It finds that Brazil's Forest Code (Law No. 12.651/2012) maintains more stringent requirements for private landowners than the other reviewed nations, particularly regarding mandatory riparian buffer zones and the requirement to set aside land for biodiversity protection without compensation. While other countries utilize voluntary incentives, easements, or specific species-at-risk policies, Brazil's framework imposes broad, mandatory obligations across all rural properties.

The study compares forest and land use laws in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, and the United States, focusing on riparian Permanent Preservation Areas (APP) and biodiversity conservation. It finds that Brazil maintains some of the most stringent rules for private land, specifically regarding mandatory native vegetation reserves without financial compensation, although the 2012 Forest Code relaxed some parameters for areas consolidated before July 2008.

The document examines the tension between South Africa's constitutional mandate to redress apartheid-induced inequalities through black economic empowerment (BEE) and its commitments under first-generation bilateral investment treaties (BITs). It analyzes the South African government's decision to terminate these treaties in favor of the Promotion and Protection of Investment Bill (PPIB), noting that this unilateral approach creates reputational risks and potential legal inconsistencies with customary international law. By comparing South Africa's experience with India and Indonesia, the author argues that emerging economies can successfully carve out policy space within the international framework rather than abandoning it. The paper concludes that South Africa should leverage its unique history to influence the development of third-generation investment agreements while maintaining the signaling power and investor certainty provided by international regimes.

The report finds that while civil society usage of PAIA for strategic advocacy has increased, the performance of information holders has declined, characterized by a high rate of 'deemed refusals' and a lack of affordable appeal mechanisms.

The report analyzes comparative water legislation from countries including Canada, Germany, China, and the US to establish common legal principles. It argues that water is traditionally a public asset subject to government control, public ownership, and permanent regulation. Key principles identified include the 'doctrine of effective and beneficial use,' the requirement for environmental impact assessments, and the state's power to amend water rights ex-post to protect public health and the environment. The author suggests that grounding water management in these shared national legal principles can help states resist claims in investment arbitration when enacting new environmental or efficiency regulations.

The report examines the evolution of public utility regulation, contrasting legal-based regulation with contract-based concessions. It argues that contract-based systems, particularly in water and sanitation, are prone to opportunistic bidding, under-investment, and frequent renegotiations. The author advocates for the application of common principles of law—including efficiency, good faith, and the ability to implement ex-post regulation—to protect public interests and ensure service sustainability, noting a significant gap between these national regulatory standards and the decisions of international investment arbitration courts.

The document examines the risks of 'TRIPS-plus' intellectual property standards being imposed on SADC countries through EPAs, using the CARIFORUM EPA as a model. It highlights concerns regarding digital copyright, geographical indications, and stringent enforcement mechanisms that may hinder development and public access to knowledge.

The document analyzes the fragmented nature of U.S. export laws for hazardous substances, noting that there is "no single, unified approach" across different statutes. It details specific requirements for notification, consent, labelling, and reporting under acts such as TSCA, RCRA, and FIFRA, while also outlining the restrictions on exporting unapproved new drugs and radioactive materials. Additionally, it includes an appendix on the Basel Convention's framework for transboundary movements of hazardous waste.

The report provides a comparative analysis of community forestry laws across five Congo Basin countries, detailing the legal basis, duration, surface area, and allocation processes for community forests. It highlights significant systemic weaknesses, including the lack of recognition for customary land rights, complex bureaucratic procedures, and the risk of elite capture, which hinder the effectiveness of community-led forest management in the region.