Search Climate Insights Directory

This guide, prepared for the UNCTAD Biotrade Initiative in collaboration with the CAF and the Andean Community of Nations (CAN), provides a legal framework and recommendations for national biotrade programs in the Andean Region. It analyzes the international legalities surrounding the trade of biodiversity-related tangibles (genetic resources, endangered species, agricultural products) and intangibles (traditional knowledge, intellectual property, environmental services, and carbon emissions).

This briefing by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) and the Global Initiative for Economic, Social & Cultural Rights (GIESCR) reviews the 2023 activities of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) regarding climate change. It details the CRC's use of State review procedures to hold governments accountable for children's rights in the face of climate crises and analyzes the Committee's General Comment No. 26 (2023), which establishes the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment as implicit in the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

This synthesis note, published by the Center for International Environmental Law and the Global Initiative for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, examines how United Nations human rights treaty bodies (HRTBs) use their state reporting procedures to define the obligations of States to respect, protect, and fulfil human rights in the context of climate change. The report focuses on the work of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), and the Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) up to December 2017.

This report by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) and the Global Initiative for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (GI-ESCR) outlines the obligations of States under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) regarding climate change. It details how the CEDAW Committee addresses the disproportionate impact of climate change on women—particularly rural and older women—and emphasizes the necessity of gender-responsive climate policies, the participation of women in decision-making, and the mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions to protect women's human rights.

This report by the Center for International Environmental Law and the Global Initiative for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights examines how the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) interprets state obligations under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) in relation to climate change.

This report by the Center for International Environmental Law and the Global Initiative for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights examines how the Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) interprets state obligations under the 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC Convention) in relation to climate change, focusing on General Comments and Concluding Observations.

This briefing, produced by a coalition of climate litigation practitioners, provides structured 'Litigation Notes' to help lawyers apply the International Court of Justice's (ICJ) July 23, 2025, advisory opinion (AO) on States' climate obligations. Specifically, this note focuses on the ICJ's conclusion that the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment is a binding norm of international law and a necessary precondition for the enjoyment of other human rights.

This research paper examines the intersection of international environmental law and foreign direct investment (FDI), analyzing how emerging legal principles, multilateral treaties, and public financing standards influence private capital flows. It highlights the tension between global economic expansion and sustainable development, specifically addressing the risks of 'pollution havens' and the increasing trend of transnational environmental litigation against multinational corporations in their home country courts.

This briefing by the Center for International Environmental Law argues that the International Court of Justice (ICJ) should apply the full spectrum of international law—including human rights, the law of the sea, and customary law—to determine State obligations regarding climate change. It counters arguments from 'big polluters' who claim that the UN climate regime (UNFCCC and Paris Agreement) is the sole relevant legal framework and that its obligations are merely procedural. The document asserts that States have longstanding duties to prevent transboundary environmental harm and protect human rights, which necessitates a phase-out of fossil fuels and the provision of reparations for climate-related injuries.

This briefing by the Center for International Environmental Law examines how modern investment treaties and investor-to-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanisms can undermine environmental regulations and public health protections by allowing foreign investors to sue host states for 'indirect expropriation'.

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.

This legal briefing by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) argues that the export of pesticides banned or not approved in their countries of origin—specifically from Europe to Africa and Central America—violates international law, including the Basel Convention, the Bamako Convention, and the Central American Agreement, as well as international human rights obligations.

This briefing, based on a joint WWF-CIEL paper, examines the relationship between Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) and the World Trade Organization (WTO). It argues that current WTO negotiations focus on areas requiring the least clarification and proposes several practical measures to enhance compatibility between trade and environmental governance, while urging non-trade policymakers to ensure that trade rules do not undermine the jurisdiction or objectives of MEAs.

This research paper examines the conceptual and legal intersections between international human rights law and international environmental law, focusing on the Inter-American System of Human Rights. The author argues that while the two regimes historically differed in approach—human rights being anthropocentric and environmental law oscillating between anthropocentric and biocentric—they are increasingly integrated. The document analyzes how human rights tools, such as precautionary measures and state responsibility for the acts of third parties, are used to protect environmental rights and reviews regional jurisprudence from the Inter-American, African, and European systems to illustrate the environmental dimensions of the rights to life, property, and information.

This 1993 testimony submitted to the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works by the Center for International Environmental Law and the National Audubon Society argues that the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the United States Trade Representative (USTR) to prepare a legislative Environmental Impact Statement (LEIS) for the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). The authors contend that NAFTA constitutes a major federal action with significant environmental effects and that such a review is compatible with existing trade laws and the separation of powers doctrine.

This legal opinion by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) analyzes the obligations of OECD members regarding the trade of plastic wastes following the OECD's failure to reach a consensus on incorporating the Basel Plastic Amendments into the OECD Wastes Trade Decision. The analysis concludes that plastic wastes designated as "other wastes" under the Basel Convention have fallen outside the scope of the OECD Decision, requiring OECD members who are Basel parties to apply Basel's control and ban mechanisms. CIEL further argues that recent arrangements between the US and Canada, and within the European Union, fail to meet the requirements of Article 11 of the Basel Convention and are therefore invalid as alternatives to Basel controls.

This research paper by Claudia Saladin for the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) analyzes the Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (the Public Participation Convention) and argues that its transparency and accountability requirements should apply to export credit agencies (ECAs).

This briefing by the Center for International Environmental Law analyzes the trade provisions of the Montreal Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer. It details the different obligations for ordinary Parties, developing country Parties (Article 5), and non-Parties, specifically focusing on restrictions on the import and export of controlled substances and products containing them. The document also examines the financial mechanisms for developing countries, such as the Multilateral Fund, and discusses potential legal conflicts between the Protocol's trade restrictions and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT).

This report by the Center for International Environmental Law analyzes legal and procedural options to overcome the 'blockade' in listing hazardous chemicals under Annex III of the Rotterdam Convention. It evaluates the implications of amending the existing consensus-based listing procedure versus creating a new annex to enhance the Convention's effectiveness in facilitating the Prior Informed Consent (PIC) procedure.

This briefing argues that the UNFCCC is the appropriate venue for addressing international and transboundary drivers of deforestation and that doing so does not inherently violate World Trade Organization (WTO) regulations. The authors contend that joint action by UNFCCC Parties to reduce emissions from deforestation is consistent with both UNFCCC principles and WTO exceptions for environmental protection.