Search Climate Insights Directory

The report finds that Mozambique lacks a functional, dedicated regulatory framework for protecting traditional knowledge associated with biological resources, though it possesses a fragmented system of biodiversity, forestry, and intellectual property laws. While Decree 19/2007 serves as the primary instrument for access and benefit-sharing (ABS), its implementation has been hindered by resource constraints and a lack of political impetus. The document highlights a current review of this decree and the potential for a new traditional knowledge database to address existing gaps. It also identifies significant barriers to community-led protection, including high poverty levels, weak community institutions, and a widespread lack of legal awareness among local populations.

The document examines the challenges of integrating informal land rights into South Africa's formal deeds registry, which is based on Western private property logic. It argues that simplistic titling efforts often fail or increase insecurity for the poor, and discusses the limitations of existing statutory protections and the potential of the Deeds Registries Amendment Bill of 2022.

The author argues that current international trade law is insufficient for managing the complexities of the digital economy, particularly regarding data-restrictive measures and the global data divide. The paper proposes a multi-layered approach combining binding treaties with soft law and multistakeholder cooperation to foster regulatory interoperability and digital inclusion.

The document examines the legal mechanisms of treaty amendments, annex modifications, adjustments, protocols, entry into force, and reservations within multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) to inform the development of the future plastics treaty. It highlights that while treaty text amendments are infrequent and slow, annex amendments are common and more agile. The brief notes that the current 'Compilation Draft' for the plastics treaty proposes a three-fourths majority for amendment ratification and a 50-state threshold for entry into force, while advising the INC to consider 'hard majority' adjustments and the potential for protocols if a framework convention is pursued.

The document argues that the climate crisis is a human rights crisis, creating a legal obligation for States and corporations to provide remedy and full reparation for loss and damage. It asserts that the right to remedy is already established under international law and does not require new norms, but rather the application of existing frameworks and the 'polluter pays principle' to hold fossil fuel industries accountable. The text criticizes the UNFCCC for failing to uphold the right to remedy through its reliance on voluntary approaches and calls for the restructuring of loss and damage mechanisms to align with human rights standards. Finally, it emphasizes that while the UNFCCC is insufficient, complementary legal strategies—including litigation in international, regional, and national courts—are essential for delivering climate justice.

The document clarifies that while COPs are often mandated to take 'any action necessary' to achieve treaty objectives, their power to act via decisions is limited. Decisions are typically suitable for guidance, budgeting, and coordination, but cannot fundamentally alter Party rights or obligations. Modifying obligations, creating new ones, or changing annexes generally requires formal amendments, which are subject to higher voting thresholds and lengthy ratification processes. The brief argues that relying on a general framework to be strengthened later via COP decisions is often ineffective, urging negotiators to secure strong provisions during the initial treaty adoption.

The document argues against a framework convention for the future plastics treaty, asserting that such a structure would delay concrete action. Instead, it recommends a substantive or hybrid treaty containing binding obligations and technical annexes. By comparing the successes of the Montreal Protocol with the perceived failures of the UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol, the author highlights that mandatory national targets and efficient amendment processes for annexes are critical for effectiveness. The briefing warns that voluntary provisions and a lack of voting mechanisms in the Conference of the Parties (COP) risk creating an ineffectual 'paper tiger' agreement.

The document analyzes how 'plastic recycling claims'—including circular loop symbols and statements like '100% recyclable'—misrepresent the limited efficacy of plastic recycling. It highlights that 91% of global plastic waste was not recycled in 2019 and that soft plastics are particularly difficult to recycle, often ending up as fuel or incinerated. The briefing concludes that such claims deceive the 'average consumer' and undermine the waste hierarchy, urging regulators like the UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) to require evidence based on 'real world conditions' to substantiate these claims.

ClientEarth's response to CP24/12 advocates for mandatory climate disclosures aligned with TCFD and ISSB standards, specifically calling for an 'atmospheric viability test' for mineral companies to prevent stranded asset risk. The organization argues against voluntary sustainability-labelled debt disclosures, urging for contractually binding commitments to prevent greenwashing, and cautions against reducing issuer liability for forward-looking climate statements.

ClientEarth advocates for a shift from siloed environmental policies to comprehensive, legally binding frameworks that integrate biodiversity into all sectors of governance. The briefing emphasizes the need for human rights-based approaches, particularly for Indigenous Peoples, and highlights the importance of accountability mechanisms and the role of strategic litigation and regulation, such as the EU's Nature Restoration Law and Deforestation-free Products Regulation, in achieving global biodiversity targets.

The document contends that requiring social grant recipients in South Africa to prove they are actively seeking work is an ineffective policy that ignores the structural nature of the country's unemployment. It argues that such conditions would exclude millions in need, impose high administrative and compliance costs, and violate constitutional rights to social assistance. The author specifically critiques proposals from the World Bank, National Treasury, and political parties (DA and Rise Mzansi) to replace the Covid-19 Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant with a conditional work-seekers' grant, noting that the cost of job searching (approximately R1469 for youth) far exceeds the grant value (R370).

The author analyzes the friction between national data regulations and international trade agreements, proposing four key lessons for future rule-making: developing a balanced narrative beyond the 'free flow vs. data sovereignty' dichotomy, understanding the limits of trade law in solving complex policy issues, integrating the perspectives of developing countries to combat 'data colonialism', and adopting a multi-layered governance framework that combines binding treaties with soft law and multi-stakeholder cooperation.

The AfCFTA Protocol on Digital Trade (DTP), adopted in February 2024, establishes a comprehensive framework to facilitate digital trade across Africa through 52 articles covering market access, data governance, and digital inclusion. While it aims to unlock a digital economy potentially worth USD 712 billion by 2050, its success depends on the finalization of eight pending annexes and the ability of member states to overcome significant infrastructure gaps and regulatory fragmentation. The protocol emphasizes digital inclusion and capacity building, though critics argue its data flow and source code provisions may favor large tech firms over local technology transfer.

The author analyzes the tensions between the free flow of digital data and national regulatory interests, such as privacy and cybersecurity. The paper argues that current international trade frameworks are insufficient for addressing the 'global data divide' and the dominance of big tech. It proposes a multi-layered governance model combining binding agreements with non-binding standards and regulatory interoperability to foster an inclusive digital economy.

The document argues that the EU has failed its legal deadline to end overfishing by 2020 and calls for 2025 Total Allowable Catches (TACs) to be set well below scientific advice to build ecosystem resilience against climate change. It specifically recommends stricter management for the Western Mediterranean, depleted stocks with zero-catch advice, and deep-sea species, while urging the full implementation of the Landing Obligation through remote electronic monitoring.

The document analyzes the 'stabilized text' of the JSI e-commerce agreement, which aims to establish a global benchmark for digital trade rules. It details enabling regulatory obligations, a moratorium on customs duties for electronic transmissions, and specific flexibilities for developing countries and least developed countries (LDCs), such as extended implementation timelines and technical assistance. The author highlights significant challenges, including the low participation of LDCs and African nations, disagreements among key members like the US and China, and a broader legal debate over whether plurilateral agreements can be formally incorporated into the WTO's consensus-based treaty system.

The memorandum argues that while South African law does not yet have a specific statute requiring directors to prepare for climate change, existing fiduciary duties, the duty of care and diligence, and emerging legislation like the Climate Change Act 22 of 2024 create a legal basis for accountability. It highlights that South African courts are increasingly relying on non-binding governance standards, such as the King IV Report, and international obligations to interpret directors' duties. The document outlines several avenues for liability, including derivative actions under section 165 of the Companies Act, piercing the corporate veil under section 20(9), and criminal liability under the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA). It concludes that directors should proactively manage climate risk to avoid potential litigation as legal frameworks evolve.

The report analyzes the CS3D, highlighting gaps in its scope of companies, value chain coverage, and the definition of environmental impacts compared to international standards like the OECD Guidelines and the CSRD. It argues that the current framework is too narrow, particularly regarding downstream activities and the financial sector. The authors provide 20 specific recommendations for Member States to strengthen the directive during transposition, focusing on expanding the scope of impacts, enhancing the effectiveness of climate transition plans, empowering supervisory authorities with proactive investigative powers, and broadening civil liability to better protect victims and the environment.

ClientEarth asserts that the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) is a sound framework but suffers from systemic failures in implementation and enforcement. The organization argues that the EU has missed the 2020 deadline to end overfishing in all European sea basins and calls for the strict application of maximum sustainable yield (MSY), the landing obligation, and the integration of environmental legislation. Key recommendations include the deployment of remote electronic monitoring (REM) to combat illegal discards, the use of transparent social and environmental criteria for quota allocation, and the redirection of the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) away from harmful subsidies toward small-scale, low-impact fisheries.

The report identifies several areas for reform in ISDS compensation, including the definition of compensable loss, the treatment of future profits, and the use of valuation techniques. It suggests that states can limit tribunal discretion by specifying protected interests, capping compensation at the amount invested, or excluding speculative income-based valuation methods like discounted cash flow (DCF). Additionally, it proposes incorporating balancing factors—such as the public interest or the respondent state's GDP—and reforming evidentiary processes to reduce bias from party-appointed experts. The report concludes that these reforms can be implemented through national model treaties, bilateral agreements, or multilateral forums like UNCITRAL Working Group III.