Search Climate Insights Directory

The document argues that New York's Draft Scoping Plan (DSP) relies too heavily on industry-biased accounting and voluntary measures. It recommends prioritizing forest preservation over harvesting, eliminating forest-based carbon offsets, implementing mandatory methane regulations for large concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), and adopting specific statewide targets for soil health practices.

The fact sheet contends that S.3512 is a threat to public health and safety because it lacks firm deadlines for state permit programs, fails to mandate engineering standards for coal ash ponds, and strips the EPA of its authority to regulate the nation's second largest industrial waste. The author asserts that the bill ignores the 2008 Kingston disaster and discourages recycling by permitting the continued use of water-based ash ponds. Furthermore, the document highlights a lack of public participation guarantees and the potential for utilities to withhold groundwater monitoring data as 'Confidential Business Information'.

A fact sheet by Friends of the Earth International critiquing biodiversity offsets and credits as ineffective and harmful mechanisms for biodiversity protection and financing.

This fact sheet by Friends of the Earth International critiques 'Nature-based Solutions' (NbS) and soil carbon markets, arguing that these concepts are tools for corporate co-optation of environmental and food policies rather than viable solutions for climate change, biodiversity loss, or hunger.

This fact sheet from Friends of the Earth International critiques biodiversity offsets and biocrédits, arguing that these market-based mechanisms often lead to social and environmental harm rather than effective conservation.

This report by Friends of the Earth International critiques the use of "net zero" pledges and carbon offsetting by corporations and governments, arguing that these mechanisms are used to obscure climate inaction and avoid the necessary phase-out of fossil fuels.

A report by Friends of the Earth International and collaborators presented at COP16 in Cali, Colombia, which critiques biodiversity offsetting and crediting as market-based schemes that fail to address the biodiversity crisis and undermine the rights of Indigenous Peoples.

The report critiques the 'agribusiness investment model' promoted through bilateral investment treaties and free trade agreements, asserting that these frameworks prioritize corporate profits over human rights and environmental health. It highlights how mechanisms like Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) prevent governments from implementing public health and environmental protections. The document advocates for food sovereignty and agroecology, noting that small-scale farmers produce 70-80% of food in the developing world and that agroecological methods can significantly increase crop yields while regenerating natural resources.

The report critiques the impact of bilateral investment treaties and free trade agreements on national sovereignty, specifically highlighting how mechanisms like Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) prevent states from implementing environmental and social protections. It argues that the agro-industrial model leads to land grabbing, biodiversity loss, and increased hunger, while proposing that investing in small-scale agroecology can double food production in critical regions and improve climate resilience.

The document critiques soil carbon sequestration markets, asserting they allow major polluters to avoid real emission reductions while increasing corporate control over agriculture. It highlights how these systems favor large-scale industrial farms, marginalize smallholders, and rely on unreliable measurement methods. The text further details the role of governments and corporations, such as Yara, in promoting these mechanisms despite scientific evidence suggesting that 'climate-smart' practices do not significantly increase soil carbon storage.

The briefing by Friends of the Earth International critiques carbon trading and offsetting, specifically the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), as mechanisms that lock in fossil fuel dependency and facilitate human rights abuses. It warns that proposed expansions at COP 17—including sectoral crediting, soil carbon markets, and the inclusion of carbon capture and storage (CCS)—will further undermine global climate goals. The author advocates for a systemic transition to renewable energy and the provision of public, additional climate finance instead of market-based mechanisms.

The document critiques the 'new' Green Revolution in Africa, which it describes as a corporate takeover driven by multinational agribusinesses and philanthropic foundations. It highlights the risks of genetically modified (GM) crops and synthetic fertilisers, contrasting these with the benefits of agroecology. The report argues that small-scale farmers, who produce 80% of the food consumed in Africa, are the key to food security and should be supported through policy reforms that prioritise public goods and ecological sustainability over private corporate profit.

The report contends that mega-regional trade agreements and the World Trade Organization (WTO) framework obstruct climate action by protecting fossil fuel interests and limiting the regulatory capacity of governments. It highlights the role of Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanisms in allowing corporations to sue governments over environmental protections. The document criticizes 'false solutions' like carbon trading and REDD+, advocating instead for a democratic economic approach based on local resources, agroecology, and corporate accountability.

The report 'Regulated Destruction' by Friends of the Earth International critiques biodiversity offsetting as a mechanism that enables corporate pollution and habitat destruction. It argues that by framing nature as 'natural capital' or 'ecosystem services', these instruments allow companies to circumvent environmental protections through promises of restoration or protection elsewhere. The document examines national implementations in India, Uganda, Canada, Colombia, Brazil, and Costa Rica, and highlights the role of the World Bank's IFC Performance Standard 6 in driving these practices. It further contends that offsetting leads to 'double land grabs' and is used by the aviation and agro-industry to maintain a social license to operate despite ongoing deforestation and emissions.

The report critiques biodiversity offsetting as a mechanism of 'regulated destruction' that replaces strict environmental limits with flexible, market-based compensation. It contends that these systems—including biodiversity banks and carbon credits—often lead to a net increase in environmental damage, facilitate land grabbing from indigenous and local communities, and provide a veneer of sustainability for destructive industries such as mining, agribusiness, and aviation. Through case studies in India, Uganda, Canada, Colombia, Brazil, and Costa Rica, the document demonstrates how the promise of future restoration is used to justify immediate, irreversible ecological loss.

The document critiques the EU-ETS for its failure to deliver necessary CO2 cuts due to over-allocation of permits, price volatility, and the use of offsetting. It argues that the system has become a profit-making tool for industry while increasing energy costs for consumers. Friends of the Earth Europe proposes replacing or supplementing the EU-ETS with binding national climate laws, mandatory energy savings targets, higher renewable energy goals, and a shift toward CO2-based taxation and direct public financing for emissions reductions.

The document critiques soil carbon farming as a mechanism for corporations and governments to offset emissions without making deep cuts. It contends that these schemes entrench industrial farming, facilitate corporate data grabbing, and marginalize smallholder farmers and traditional knowledge. The author asserts that soil carbon sequestration is technically unreliable, often overestimated, and cannot compensate for the long-term impact of fossil fuel combustion.

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) provides a detailed critique and set of proposals to amend the first draft of the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework. FoEI argues for more ambitious targets, such as increasing the goal for ecosystem area gain from 15% to 20% and reducing invasive species introduction by 90% instead of 50%. The organization emphasizes the need to halt biodiversity loss entirely rather than just slowing its rate, and advocates for the explicit inclusion of human rights, the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLCs), and the phasing out of highly hazardous pesticides. FoEI also proposes a new 'Goal E' focused on a comprehensive implementation mechanism and suggests that financial resources for biodiversity should be significantly increased, citing a need to address 4-6 trillion USD in harmful incentives.

The document examines the contradiction between the EU's reluctance to support a binding international mechanism for corporate accountability and its promotion of the Investment Court System (ICS) and a proposed Multilateral Investment Court (MIC). It details how the EU has hindered UN Treaty negotiations through procedural complaints and budget challenges while entrenching investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanisms in agreements with countries such as Canada, Mexico, and Chile.

Global Witness critiques COP26 as a failure that lacked urgency and accountability, noting that the summit allowed fossil fuel lobbyists significant access while excluding many affected communities. The organization highlights the inadequacy of voluntary pledges on deforestation and the failure to secure comprehensive agreements on phasing out oil, gas, and fossil fuel subsidies, concluding that the commitments made are insufficient to keep global warming below 1.5 degrees.