Search Climate Insights Directory

The document analyzes the surge of foreign direct investment in African farmland and water, often termed 'land grabbing', highlighting the systemic lack of transparency and the violation of local land rights. It identifies three types of investors—food-insecure states, agribusinesses, and financial speculators—and examines the legal frameworks that often prioritize investor protections over community rights. The report advocates for a parliamentary role in ensuring social inclusion, promoting inclusive business models, and implementing the Maputo Declaration's agricultural goals. It concludes with a draft resolution calling for a moratorium on large-scale land acquisitions until a proper governance framework is established.

The document details the outcomes of a July 2011 seminar on foreign investment in African arable land and water. It identifies the drivers of 'land grabbing'—including biofuel demand and food insecurity in Gulf and Asian states—and analyzes the negative impacts on rural populations, particularly women. The report highlights a systemic lack of transparency in investment contracts and the weakness of national land laws, which often allow governments to allocate land despite existing community use. It proposes a parliamentary roadmap focusing on legislative oversight, the requirement of free, prior, and informed consent, and the potential for a moratorium on large-scale land acquisitions until robust governance frameworks are established.

The report examines 17 arbitral awards from ICSID, UNCITRAL, and SCC tribunals between September 2010 and October 2011. It highlights ongoing controversies over the definition of 'investment,' including the inclusion of sovereign debt and commercial contracts. It discusses the 'pick and choose' approach to Most-Favoured Nation (MFN) clauses, the high threshold for proving expropriation, and the broad interpretation of Fair and Equitable Treatment (FET) standards. The document also notes the rejection of jurisdiction in cases where investors failed to prove 'real economic activity' or where national investment laws lacked explicit consent to international arbitration.

The document analyzes the surge of foreign investment in African agricultural land and water, driven by global food and biofuel demand. It highlights systemic issues including the neglect of existing land rights, lack of community consultation, and failure to conduct environmental impact assessments. The author argues that parliamentarians must actively oversee investment contracts and treaties to prevent the prioritization of investor interests over local food security and environmental protection.

CIEL opposes the validation of the Coastal Gujarat Power Ltd. project, citing a failure to properly record local stakeholder concerns in the Project Design Document (PDD) and alleging that the project's use of a once-through sea water cooling system violates Indian environmental law and harms marine ecology.

The document argues that the international community's approach to Somali piracy has prioritised military deterrence and legal accountability over human rights, leading to a 'catch and release' policy or the rendering of suspects to regional courts with inadequate legal frameworks. It specifically examines Kenya's role as a primary prosecution hub, highlighting a lack of domesticated maritime law, systemic corruption, and appalling prison conditions. The author contends that these failures, combined with the failure to prosecute onshore sponsors of piracy, undermine the credibility of counter-piracy efforts and may fuel further instability.

The analysis concludes that the Safe Chemicals Act of 2011 (S. 847) provides the legal authority required for the U.S. to ratify the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), the LRTAP POPs Protocol, and the Rotterdam Convention. Key mechanisms include closing the TSCA export loophole and granting the EPA authority to prohibit the manufacture, use, and distribution of chemicals inconsistent with treaty obligations. The report also highlights the bill's ability to allow the U.S. to regulate persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic (PBT) chemicals independently of international consensus, potentially restoring U.S. global leadership on chemical safety.

The working paper by Elisa Morgera examines the legal and policy implications of climate change's impact on biodiversity and the effects of mitigation and adaptation measures. It specifically analyzes the 'unprecedented and far-reaching decisions' regarding climate change made during the CBD COP X in October 2010 in Nagoya, Japan, and discusses the resulting legal rapprochement between international biodiversity and climate change law.

A coalition of 13 NGOs argues that the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA) provides an inferior environmental regulatory regime compared to the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA). They call for the integration of mining under NEMA to ensure comprehensive environmental impact assessments, better public participation, and higher penalties for non-compliance. The submission also requests specific safeguards for environmentally sensitive areas and improved public access to mining application documents.

The report concludes that the Hong Kong Convention does not provide an equivalent level of control to the Basel Convention and therefore fails to ensure the environmentally sound management of shipbreaking. It argues that the Hong Kong Convention undermines key Basel protections through narrower scope, a weaker notification system that allows tacit consent, a lack of criminalization for illegal traffic, and the absence of a duty to re-import waste. Furthermore, the analysis finds that the Hong Kong Convention fails to sufficiently consider the interests of developing countries, where most shipbreaking occurs, by lacking funding mechanisms and mandatory minimum standards to phase out dangerous 'beaching' practices.

The Water Tribunal dismissed an appeal by the Escarpment Environmental Protection Group and Wonderfontein Environmental Committee against a water use licence granted to Exarro Coal (Pty) Ltd. The Tribunal ruled that the appellants lacked locus standi based on a strict, literal interpretation of section 148(1)(f) of the National Water Act 36 of 1998, concluding that a liberal interpretation would improperly usurp legislative powers.

The report analyzes Belgium's 2002 Model BIT, finding that it follows a traditional European model that prioritizes extensive investor protection over host-state regulatory autonomy. It highlights significant risks in the treaty's broad definitions of 'investment' and 'investor', the lack of transparency in investor-state dispute settlement, and the aspirational nature of its environmental and labour clauses. The author argues that Belgium needs to modernize its model to safeguard its right to regulate and to ensure that investment treaties support sustainable development.

The document analyzes recent trends in the annulment of awards under the International Convention for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID). It reviews seven publicly available decisions from 2009-2010, evaluating how ad hoc committees interpret the narrow grounds for annulment provided in Article 52. The analysis highlights the high threshold for successful annulment, the discretion of committees, and the distinction between the non-application and erroneous application of law.

The document analyzes the Fair and Equitable Treatment (FET) clauses in 68 Indian International Investment Agreements (IIAs). It finds that 66 of these agreements include FET obligations, though most fail to define the normative content of the term, leaving interpretation to arbitral tribunals. The author categorizes these provisions into model-IIA, modified-model IIA, and content-indicative types, noting that only a small minority link FET to the customary international law minimum standard of treatment.

The document examines the proliferation of South-South bilateral investment treaties, noting that while their number has grown significantly—accounting for approximately 26 per cent of all BITs—they largely replicate the 'old North-South template' designed to protect investor assets. While some exceptions exist where developing nations have introduced policy space elements or omitted certain guarantees, the author concludes that most South-South BITs still follow traditional Northern models due to limited negotiating capacity and the mirroring of North-South power dynamics between more and less developed Southern partners.

The document argues that investment treaty arbitration is a high-stakes gamble for developing states because the system is structurally biased toward investors. While states may successfully defend claims on the merits, they rarely recover the substantial costs of arbitration, which often amount to several million dollars. The author highlights a disparity in cost allocation: successful investors are more likely to have their costs covered by the state than successful states are to recover costs from investors. This risk is further exacerbated for states because they cannot utilize 'no win no fee' arrangements or third-party financing, as they have no damages to claim.

The report details a forum held in Kampala, Uganda, where negotiators from 40 developing countries discussed the risks of traditional Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) and the need for regulatory space to pursue sustainable development. Key discussions focused on the 'African Mining Vision', the dangers of 'land grabbing' in agriculture, and the systemic biases of investor-state arbitration. Participants advocated for a shift toward regional cooperation, the use of 'police powers' exceptions in treaties to protect public interest, and the implementation of domestic laws that prioritize national economic policies over investor demands.

The document analyzes the legitimacy crisis in investor-State arbitration caused by the 'dual role' of individuals acting as both impartial arbitrators and partisan counsel. It reviews the arbitration rules of ICSID, UNCITRAL, ICC, and SCC, finding that while they require independence, their application is inconsistent and often lacks transparency. The paper highlights specific cases where concurrent service led to challenges, and compares these to stricter standards in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). It concludes by recommending a clear proscription against concurrent service, suggesting reforms through rule amendments, institutional interpretations, revised IBA Guidelines, or express provisions in International Investment Agreements (IIAs).

The report analyzes the surge in foreign acquisitions and long-term leases of agricultural land and water, driven by food and energy security concerns and the 2008 food crisis. It highlights a critical lack of transparency and public contracts, which obscures the impact on local communities. The authors argue that a complex interplay between national laws, investment contracts, and International Investment Agreements (IIAs) often prioritizes foreign investor protections over the rights of local users and the regulatory autonomy of host states, potentially hindering sustainable development and public health measures.

The document examines the framework for industry self-regulation under the Ecodesign Directive, arguing that while these measures are not legally binding at the EU level, they must meet rigorous ex-ante and ex-post criteria to be admitted as alternatives to legislation. It emphasizes the need for representativeness, civil society consultation, and robust monitoring to avoid the failures seen in previous voluntary agreements, such as those regarding CO2 emissions from passenger cars.