Search Climate Insights Directory

CAPE argues that the City of Calgary's pesticide toxicity report fails to list specific toxic products used in its IPM program, ignores epidemiological evidence regarding adverse health outcomes for children and pregnant women, and over-relies on a flawed federal registration process administered by Health Canada's PMRA.

Friends of the Earth Latin America and the Caribbean (ATALC) condemns the Brazilian government's use of military force to repress social mobilizations in May 2017, specifically the State of Emergency in Brasilia. The organization highlights the targeting of movements such as the Landless Workers Movement (MST) and reports a massacre of peasants in Pará State to protect agribusiness interests, arguing that these actions undermine food sovereignty and climate justice.

Friends of the Earth International criticizes the UN Convention on Biological Diversity's 2017 theme of tourism, asserting that mass tourism causes significant ecological devastation and human rights abuses. The statement contends that 'sustainable tourism' initiatives are often superficial and that the industry's growth—particularly in aviation—is incompatible with climate and biodiversity goals. It advocates for policies that prioritize the self-determination of local and indigenous communities over the interests of transnational corporations.

Friends of the Earth International criticizes the UN Convention on Biodiversity for promoting tourism as a tool for biodiversity conservation. The statement argues that mainstream tourism leads to the eviction of indigenous peoples, destruction of ecosystems like mangrove forests, and excessive resource consumption, including high water usage and food waste. It highlights that 5% of global emissions are linked to tourism and warns that the aviation industry's planned 700% growth by 2050, supported by REDD offsets, is unsustainable. The document calls for a fundamental change in the tourism business model and policies that prioritize the rights and self-determination of local communities over corporate profit.

Friends of the Earth International criticizes the UN Convention on Biological Diversity for promoting tourism to protect biodiversity, arguing that mass tourism leads to ecosystem destruction, water scarcity, and the displacement of indigenous peoples. The statement highlights that while community-based projects exist, the broader industry is characterized by corporate profit, high emissions, and human rights abuses.

The statement by Friends of the Earth International criticizes the Asian Development Bank (ADB) for investing over $3 billion in coal projects over the last decade despite recognizing climate change as a threat to poverty alleviation. It highlights the Tata Mundra Ultra Mega Coal plant in India as a primary example of environmental and social harm caused by ADB funding. The document demands that the ADB ban all coal funding and relinquish its legal immunity to allow affected communities to seek justice.

The statement criticizes the Asian Development Bank (ADB) for continuing to fund coal infrastructure despite acknowledging climate change as a threat to poverty mitigation. It highlights the Tata Mundra Ultra Mega Coal plant in India as a primary example of environmental and social harm and calls for the removal of the ADB's legal immunity to allow affected communities to seek justice.

The document critiques the OECD's proposed Total Official Support for Sustainable Development (TOSSD) metric, arguing it is a tool for wealthy nations to inflate their contributions to the Sustainable Development Goals without binding commitments. The author highlights concerns over the inclusion of non-concessional loans, in-donor costs, and the misappropriation of 'mutual benefit' rhetoric from South-South cooperation. It suggests that instead of a new composite measure, the OECD should focus on ensuring donors meet the 0.7% GNI target for ODA and improving statistical capacities in recipient countries.

The document asserts that public health and environmental safeguards must be based on peer-reviewed science to prevent human death and resource destruction. It specifically challenges claims by the EPA Administrator that carbon dioxide is not the primary driver of climate change and that human contributions to CO2 are unknown. Furthermore, it warns that proposed 2018 budget cuts to zero out government climate research and cancel NASA and NOAA spacecraft would eliminate the only impartial counterbalance to industry-funded research intended to debunk environmental science.

Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR) supports the March for Science, advocating for science that serves the common good rather than those in power. The organization criticizes the US government for suppressing climate science and ignoring evidence, while also warning against the power of large corporations and the fossil fuel industry to shape research agendas and undermine scientific evidence.

CIEL condemns ExxonMobil's application for a US sanctions waiver that would enable a $500 billion joint venture with Rosneft for offshore drilling in the Black Sea and Russian Arctic, arguing the project is 'climate-deadly' and rewards international aggression.

Carbon Market Watch urges the end of the UN's Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) following a European Commission study by the Öko-Institut. The study indicates that 85% of analyzed projects and 73% of the potential credit supply from 2013 to 2020 are unlikely to provide real, measurable, and additional emission reductions. Such credits could potentially increase global greenhouse gas emissions by over 3.5 billion tonnes of CO2. The organization specifically warns against the aviation industry using these ineffective credits through the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA) to avoid greenwashing.

Carbon Market Watch criticizes the Green Climate Fund's approval of three large hydro dam projects in Nepal, Tajikistan, and the Solomon Islands, arguing that such investments contradict the fund's goal of promoting a paradigm shift and risk repeating the human rights and environmental failures seen in the Barro Blanco project in Panama.

The author contends that the 'feed the world' slogan used by industrial agriculture masks a system that exacerbates poverty and environmental degradation. The text argues that industrial farming fails the FAO's four criteria for food security—availability, accessibility, resilience, and quality—by promoting monocultures, seed concentration, and market speculation. It highlights how European agricultural subsidies and exports can destroy local rural economies in developing nations. As an alternative, the document promotes agroecology and peasant farming, which emphasize endogenous development, crop diversity, and ecological interaction to achieve genuine food sovereignty.

The author contends that the 'Feed the World' narrative used by agribusiness multinationals masks a system that exacerbates hunger and poverty. Industrial agriculture is criticized for destroying the natural resources it depends on, promoting dependency through food dumping and seed monopolies, and contributing significantly to greenhouse gas emissions. The text asserts that food insecurity is primarily caused by poverty rather than structural shortages. It proposes a shift toward endogenous development, intercropping, and agroecology to ensure a resilient, high-quality, and accessible food system.

The report argues that California's carpet stewardship program, led by the industry-controlled Carpet America Recovery Effort (CARE), has failed to meet recycling goals and instead increased the incineration of carpet waste. It contends that incineration—including Waste-to-Energy (WTE), cement kilns, and Carpet as Alternative Fuel (CAAF)—is a wasteful practice that violates the California Public Resources Code's waste management hierarchy. The document highlights significant environmental and health risks, noting that burning carpets containing PVC releases dioxins and unregulated nanoparticles. Financially, it claims WTE is the most expensive energy generation method in the U.S. and can lead to municipal bankruptcy. From a climate perspective, it cites CalRecycle data showing that WTE incineration adds approximately 26,000 metric tons of CO2, whereas recycling saves about 36,000 metric tons. The authors recommend that CalRecycle reject CARE as the stewardship organization and mandate an industry-funded program with enforceable recycling targets.

A coalition of 272 organizations argues that large hydropower projects do not meet the Green Climate Fund's (GCF) investment criteria due to greenhouse gas emissions, lack of innovation, and negative social and environmental impacts. The letter specifically calls for the rejection or removal of three projects from the GCF pipeline: the Qairokkum Hydropower Rehabilitation in Tajikistan, the Upper Trishuli-1 in Nepal, and the Tina River Hydro Project in the Solomon Islands.

The document argues that large hydropower projects fail to meet GCF Investment Criteria due to greenhouse gas emissions, lack of innovation, negative environmental and human rights impacts, and vulnerability to climate change. It specifically opposes GCF support for the Qairokkum Hydropower Rehabilitation in Tajikistan, Upper Trishuli-1 in Nepal, and the Tina River Hydro Project in the Solomon Islands, urging the GCF to instead support the diversification of energy mixes in countries over-dependent on hydro.

The We Mean Business coalition criticizes a US Executive Order that undermines the Clean Power Plan (CPP) and the broader clean energy agenda. The coalition argues that the CPP provides significant economic benefits, including estimated net economic gains of US$26-45 billion and support for over 3 million jobs in 2016. Despite the policy shift, the coalition asserts that the transition to low-carbon energy is inevitable, citing support from over 1,000 companies and investors via the 'Business Backs Low Carbon USA' statement and the continued global commitment to the Paris Agreement.

The World Resources Institute argues that President Trump's Executive Order undermines U.S. public health, economic competitiveness, and global leadership by rolling back methane regulations, coal leasing limits, and the Clean Power Plan.