Search Climate Insights Directory

The document analyzes the persistent land-use conflicts between farmers and pastoralists in Tanzania, specifically focusing on the Pawaga division. It identifies historical evictions, 'green grabbing' for conservation, large-scale agricultural investments like SAGCOT, and a biased legal framework as primary drivers of hostility. The author argues that Tanzania's formal land dispute machinery is inadequate and often politicized, failing to protect pastoralist rights. As an alternative, the paper highlights a successful pilot project by the Tanzania Natural Resource Forum (TNRF) that established a coalition of farmers and pastoralists in Pawaga to resolve disputes through dialogue and joint bylaws.

The Centre for Environmental Rights informs the South African Department of Environmental Affairs that a court ruling now requires climate change impact assessments (CCIA) as part of environmental impact assessments (EIA) for coal-fired power stations. The document outlines the minimum requirements for a CCIA, warns that existing authorizations without such assessments may be legally vulnerable, and urges the Department to establish formal guidelines for conducting these assessments.

The document examines the application of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (UCPD) to corporate 'deforestation free' pledges, arguing that such commitments can be legally challenged if they are used in commercial practices to mislead consumers. It details the criteria for 'misleading' claims, the role of 'codes of conduct', and the enforcement mechanisms available in EU Member States.

Carbon Market Watch calls for the curtailment of free carbon allowances in the EU ETS following a court ruling requiring ArcelorMittal to return wrongfully received permits. The organization warns that current trialogue negotiations may result in the allocation of an additional 300 to 775 million free permits for heavy industry, contradicting the 'polluter pays' principle. The text advocates for increased auctioning of permits, the inclusion of importers in emission costs, and the potential introduction of a carbon tax to drive industrial decarbonization.

The document outlines Denmark's EUTR framework, noting that the Danish Environmental Protection Agency serves as the Competent Authority. It details a penalty regime involving fines, confiscation of profits, and potential detention, while highlighting a trend of increasing checks from 2013 to 2016. The brief identifies significant challenges for NGOs in pursuing substantiated concerns due to a lack of formal decision requirements and limited appeal options.

The document argues that the TCMF Proposal contains wording and targets that may conflict with and weaken the protections of the Nature Directives and the MSFD. It recommends aligning the TCMF's objectives with the requirement to maintain or restore 'favourable conservation status', clarifying the distinction between 'incidental' and 'deliberate' bycatch based on CJEU case law, and ensuring that bycatch and habitat targets are measurable and consistent with existing Union and international standards.

The document analyzes the controversial application of most-favoured-nation (MFN) clauses in investment treaties, specifically how interpretations by arbitral tribunals since 2000 have allowed investors to import favorable provisions from third-party treaties, potentially undermining the bilateral nature of state commitments.

The document argues that many LGPS funds are failing their fiduciary duties by ignoring climate risk or incorrectly delegating its management. It identifies five misconceptions: that climate change is not a financial risk, that delegation to managers is sufficient, that delegation to the LAPFF is sufficient, that pooling removes the need for fund-level consideration, and that taxpayers bear all the risk. The authors request that TPR investigate these issues, issue guidance, and engage with Defra for an Adaptation Report.

ClientEarth broadly supports the TCFD's industry-led guidance but identifies three critical deficiencies: the potential to confuse voluntary recommendations with existing mandatory legal duties in G20 jurisdictions, the misstatement of the Paris Agreement's objectives by suggesting a 2°C scenario is sufficient for alignment, and a lack of prescriptive requirements for organisations to publish the assumptions underpinning their scenario analyses.

The report criticizes the European Commission's 2016 proposal for EDC identification criteria, arguing that limiting these criteria to pesticides and biocides violates the 7th Environmental Action Programme's mandate for harmonized, hazard-based criteria. The authors contend that this sector-specific approach creates legal uncertainty, risks inconsistent identification of chemicals across different regulatory frameworks (such as REACH and the Cosmetics Regulation), and may lower overall health and environmental protections. They recommend that the Commission adopt horizontal criteria based on the UN Globally Harmonised System (GHS) and the CLP Regulation, utilizing three hazard categories based on the strength of evidence: known, presumed, and suspected EDCs.

The document explains that 'site integrity' under the Habitats Directive necessitates achieving 'favourable conservation status' for both Annex I habitats and their associated 'typical species'. For sandbanks, this includes a range of invertebrates and fish, some of which are commercially valuable. In the UK, these sites are at high risk from bottom-towed fishing gear, which inhibits the recovery of static communities and biogenic reefs. The author argues that the precautionary principle requires prohibiting such gear unless it is proven to have no adverse effect, challenging 'partial protection' management plans that lack robust scientific data. A case study of The Wash demonstrates how protecting Sabellaria worm reefs and their buffer zones supports commercial fish species like plaice, dab, and sole.

The report concludes that the Polish Draft Act on the Capacity Market constitutes State aid and is incompatible with EU law. Key issues include the exclusion of foreign capacity providers, potential environmental harm through subsidies for high-emission units, and a lack of competitive pricing mechanisms. The report estimates that the capacity market will cost end users approximately EUR 16.8 billion (PLN 73.5 billion) between 2021 and 2035. Furthermore, the Draft Act conflicts with the EU's 'Winter Package' proposal, particularly regarding decarbonisation goals and the requirement for cross-border participation.

The policy brief identifies a 'normative vacuum' and legal inconsistencies that hinder the conversion of environmental fines into preservation and recovery services in Brazil. It highlights that while Decree 6.514/2008 allows for such conversion, a lack of procedural rules and technical capacity at Ibama prevents its application. The authors specifically argue that Article 42 of the 2012 Forest Code contains a drafting error that makes its fine conversion program legally impossible to implement as written.

The document examines the controversial role of Most-Favoured-Nation (MFN) clauses in bilateral investment treaties (BITs), specifically the trend of investors importing more favourable provisions from third-party treaties. It details the divergence in tribunal rulings regarding the import of procedural rules—such as circumventing domestic court requirements—and the import of substantive protections. The guide highlights the risks of 'treaty-shopping' and the creation of 'super-treaties' that undermine state sovereignty. It concludes with strategies for states to mitigate these risks, including the use of 'like circumstances' criteria, explicit exclusions of dispute settlement mechanisms, and the adoption of positive lists for pre-establishment liberalization.

The document examines the Most-Favoured-Nation (MFN) clause in investment treaties, focusing on the legal uncertainty created by divergent interpretations from arbitral tribunals. It specifically analyzes the controversy surrounding the 'importation' of substantive and procedural rules from third-party treaties, the distinction between pre- and post-establishment treatment, and the risk of 'treaty shopping.' The guide concludes with strategic recommendations for states to protect their sovereignty and regulatory space by refining the drafting of MFN clauses or omitting them entirely in future treaties.

The Institute for Policy Integrity defends the EPA's 2016 supplemental finding on the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS), asserting that the agency correctly considered regulatory costs and benefits, including indirect and unquantified benefits, in accordance with legal and economic standards.

The EU Timber Regulation (EUTR) in Austria is implemented via the Holzhandelsüberwachungsgesetz (HolzHÜG), with the Bundesamt für Wald overseeing imported timber and district administrative authorities managing domestic timber. Enforcement is characterized by low financial administrative penalties, such as fines up to €15,000 for placing illegal timber on the market, and a significant disparity in checks between domestic (505) and imported timber (14) between March 2013 and February 2015. While NGOs can file criminal complaints for fraud or money laundering, they face substantial legal hurdles in challenging the Competent Authority's inaction on substantiated concerns.

The briefing explains that under Article 6 of the Habitats Directive, 'site integrity' necessitates achieving a favourable conservation status for both designated Annex I reef habitats and their associated 'typical species'. It advocates for the creation of buffer zones around reefs to prevent accidental damage and support population expansion, citing a case study from Lyme Bay where restricting dredging allowed reef-associated species to expand into adjacent sandy and cobble grounds.

The report examines the transition of the exhaustion of local remedies (ELR) rule from a customary international law requirement to one that is largely waived in modern investment treaties. It analyzes how tribunals interpret silence in treaties as a waiver and explores the legal distinctions between ELR as a jurisdictional versus procedural requirement. The document also details how ELR is applied as a substantive standard in denial of justice and expropriation claims, and concludes with recommendations for states to explicitly define ELR requirements and exceptions in their treaties to safeguard state sovereignty.

The document analyzes the 'exhaustion of local remedies' (ELR) rule, which requires foreign investors to seek redress in a host state's domestic courts before initiating international arbitration. It notes that while ELR is a cornerstone of customary international law and human rights law, it has been largely bypassed in international investment law, where silence in treaties is often interpreted as a waiver. The guide details various treaty practices—including explicit requirements, time-limited exercises of remedies, and express waivers—and reviews jurisprudence on whether ELR is a jurisdictional or procedural requirement. It concludes by providing policy recommendations for states wishing to reintroduce ELR to protect national sovereignty and strengthen domestic legal systems.