Search Climate Insights Directory

The Legal Resources Centre (LRC) and a coalition of civil society and community organisations are urging the South African National Assembly to reject the Mining and Petroleum Resources Development Amendment Bill 15B of 2013. Following President Zuma's referral of the bill back to Parliament, the LRC argues that the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) and provincial legislatures failed to facilitate reasonable public participation, violating sections 72 and 118 of the Constitution. The LRC specifically highlights that the bill removes community participation in mining and eliminates requirements for addressing socio-economic needs. They contend that the bill was influenced by 'lobbying and influence peddling' from the mining industry and the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR) outside of parliamentary processes. The LRC demands a fresh start to the legislative process to ensure meaningful consultation with affected mining communities, particularly regarding living customary law and the principle of community consent.

The author contends that the crisis of globalized liberalism has erased the differences between traditional productivist parties, leaving ecology as the only force proposing necessary systemic transformations. The text criticizes the French Green party (EELV) for subordinating itself to the Socialist Party (PS), which it claims led to electoral decline and a failure to influence government policy. To recover, the author advocates for a 'Green New Deal' implemented through 'contractual autonomy'—where alliances are based on specific programmatic agreements rather than 'left-right' labels—and a return to a 'cooperative' structure that integrates party militants and civil society. This strategy is proposed as a means to resist the rise of national-populism and prepare for the 2017 national elections.

The document argues that the Port of Seattle improperly used a SEPA categorical exemption to avoid environmental review for an interim lease of Terminal 5 to Foss Maritime. The authors contend that using the terminal as a home port for Shell's Arctic drilling fleet—including vessels like the Noble Discoverer—would change the site's use from a container terminal to a shipyard, risking toxic runoff and water pollution that could harm threatened Puget Sound Chinook salmon. The letter further highlights Shell's poor safety record in the Arctic and the broader climate implications of Arctic oil exploration.

The document criticizes the cosmetics industry's efforts to gain more direct influence in TTIP negotiations, warning that the agreement seeks the 'lowest common denominator' in safety standards rather than elevating protections. It highlights the disparity between EU and US chemical bans and argues that the secrecy of the negotiations excludes civil society while allowing industry to draft text that could undermine public health and environmental laws.

The document examines the evolution of African continental court structures, focusing on the 2014 Malabo Protocol. It argues that the protocol's creation of an 'Expanded Court' with jurisdiction over 14 international crimes is undermined by Article 46 A bis, which grants immunity to serving heads of state and senior government officials. The author contends this is a response to the perceived bias of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the use of universal jurisdiction by European states, ultimately serving to protect political elites rather than victims of human rights violations.

The document critiques the 'Green Economy' and the financialization of nature, specifically the creation of markets for environmental services. It argues that by dividing nature into measurable units, these markets allow corporations to use 'offsetting' as a 'permit to pollute or destroy' in one area by promising protection elsewhere. The author contends that this process ignores the complex, dynamic nature of ecosystems and the social, cultural, and spiritual values of land. The report highlights the negative impacts on indigenous peoples, who lose control over their territories through restrictive contracts, and provides examples of the failure of biodiversity offsets in the EU, Australia, Brazil, and Costa Rica.

The document critiques the 'green growth' paradigm and the financialization of nature, specifically the creation of markets for ecosystem services. It argues that these mechanisms, such as biodiversity offsets and carbon credits, do not stop environmental degradation but instead provide corporations with a 'social license to destroy' by allowing them to compensate for damage in one area by protecting another. The report highlights the negative impacts on Indigenous territories, the failure of existing offset programs in the EU and Australia, and the risk of 'devaluation' when economic priorities shift, as seen in Costa Rica. It concludes that these financial tools are instruments for capital accumulation and cost reduction rather than genuine ecological protection.

The document critiques the 'Green Economy' and 'green growth' frameworks, asserting that they redefine nature as a collection of 'ecosystem services' to create new financial markets. It argues that these markets, particularly biodiversity and carbon offsets, serve as cost-cutting tools for corporations to bypass environmental regulations and maintain industrial production. The report highlights the risks to indigenous and traditional communities, including loss of territorial control and the imposition of opaque contracts. It provides examples of failed offsetting programs in the EU, Australia, Brazil, and Namibia, concluding that financialization is a 'false solution' that exacerbates ecological crises.

Friends of the Earth International and its signatories critique the Lima Conference for producing weak pre-2020 mitigation pledges and failing to secure binding commitments on finance, adaptation, and loss and damage. The statement asserts that the outcome shifts responsibility to the Global South, protects polluting corporations, and risks expanding carbon markets at the expense of land rights. It calls for a systemic transformation away from fossil fuels toward community-controlled renewable energy and agro-ecological solutions.

The Lima Declaration, issued during the Peoples Summit on Climate Change in December 2014, rejects market-based climate solutions and the 'capitalist-patriarchal system'. It demands the recognition of territorial property rights for indigenous and peasant communities, the reparation of 'historical ecological debt' owed by developed countries to the global South, and a transition to a communal, feminist economy based on food sovereignty and agro-ecology. The document specifically denounces the influence of transnational corporations on the UNFCCC and calls for the cessation of extractive industries and agrofuel production.

The document details a discussion on the failure of Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) projects to provide sustainable development, highlighting human rights violations and the lack of social safeguards. It specifically cites the Reliance Sasan Ultra Mega Power Plant in India for violating additionality and stakeholder consultation rules, and coal mining in Colombia for causing coercive displacement and killings. The report emphasizes the urgent need for a grievance mechanism within the CDM and introduces the CDM Benefit Tracker to monitor discrepancies between promised and actual project benefits in India.

The statement criticizes developed nations, specifically Japan, for using climate finance to fund coal-fired power plants in developing countries like Indonesia. It highlights a lack of coherent rules for the Green Climate Fund (GCF) and argues that current international climate agreements, including the US-China deal, are insufficient and non-binding. The author demands that climate finance be restricted to renewable energy and that developed countries fulfill their 'climate debt' through public finance and technology transfers.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) submitted written comments on December 1, 2014, regarding the Draft Regulations for financial provision for the rehabilitation, closure, and post-closure of mining operations in South Africa. While the CER views the draft as a "welcome improvement" over previous systems, it argues that the regulations are too narrow in scope, lack sufficient definitions for 'rehabilitation' and 'specialist', and contain loopholes regarding trust deeds and the duration of 'care and maintenance' periods.

The author contends that 'corporate capture' of the UN and EU has prioritised profit over climate action, leading to ineffective market-based policies and rising emissions. The text advocates for a binding international agreement based on scientific evidence and historical responsibility, rather than political compromise. It calls for the abandonment of coal—which accounted for 43% of CO2 emissions from fuel combustion in 2012—and the adoption of 'energy sovereignty' through decentralized, democratically controlled renewable energy. The author argues that the EU should lead by replacing market mechanisms like the EU-Emissions Trading Scheme with regulation, taxation, and subsidies to achieve necessary emission cuts.

The document critiques the 'financialization of nature,' where biodiversity is converted into financial assets and commodities. It argues that assigning prices to nature ignores its intrinsic value, marginalizes indigenous and local communities, and allows corporations to continue destructive activities through 'offsetting' mechanisms. The author calls for the protection of biodiversity through strong legislation and community-led governance rather than market-based instruments.

Carbon Market Watch criticizes EU leaders for adopting a 2030 climate deal that it argues weakens emission reductions to 31% due to excess permits and provides up to €300 billion in subsidies to industry. Separately, the organization highlights human rights abuses and lack of consultation affecting indigenous communities in Guatemala associated with the UN-registered Santa Rita hydroelectric project.

Carbon Market Watch warns that the leaked 2030 Council Conclusions could reduce the effective EU greenhouse gas reduction target from 40% to 26% due to the potential banking of 'hot air' (surplus allowances). The organization criticizes the 40% target as postponing urgent action, opposes the use of EU ETS allowances to meet non-ETS targets, argues against including transport in the EU ETS, and condemns the dynamic allocation of free pollution permits as an industry subsidy.

A coalition of organizations requests UN intervention regarding the Santa Rita hydroelectric project in Guatemala, alleging severe human rights abuses, including extrajudicial killings and state-sponsored violence, and criticizing the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) for registering the project despite a lack of genuine indigenous consultation.

The document is a formal request to the UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to address serious human rights abuses linked to the Santa Rita hydroelectric dam in Guatemala. The authors argue that the project, registered under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) in June 2014, has been imposed without the free, prior, and informed consent of the Q’eqchí and Poqomchí indigenous communities. They report a pattern of violence, including the deaths of seven people, including two children, and state-sponsored repression involving the deployment of 1,500 police officers in August 2014. The document calls for the Government of Guatemala to provide information on its plans and for the CDM Board to investigate and potentially withdraw the project's registration due to non-compliance with consultation standards.

The document critiques the REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) mechanism, asserting that it prioritizes private finance and corporate interests over indigenous rights and genuine climate mitigation. Through case studies in Indonesia, Mozambique, and Peru, it demonstrates how REDD projects can exacerbate land conflicts, threaten food security, and fail to achieve carbon reduction goals. The report concludes that REDD is a 'false solution' that allows industrial polluters in the Global North to continue emitting via carbon offsets. It proposes an alternative based on community-led forest management, the resolution of land tenure issues, and a systemic reduction in the consumption of resources by rich countries.