Search Climate Insights Directory

The report argues that a rapid transition to a 1.5°C pathway is more economically beneficial than a slow one, as renewable energy costs are now lower than fossil fuels. It proposes three policy pillars—speed, steering, and simplification—to mobilize private capital and align economic development with climate goals. Key recommendations include establishing national carbon budgets, mandating transition plan disclosures, reforming carbon pricing, and utilizing blended finance and guarantees to reduce risks for investors, particularly in emerging markets.

The Climate Bonds Initiative (CBI) introduces the 'AAA' framework—comprising Ambition, Action, and Accountability—to evaluate corporate transition plans. The guidance emphasizes that credible plans must include quantitative targets aligned with 1.5°C scientific pathways, robust financial and action plans, strong board-level governance, and transparent annual disclosures. It specifically warns against the over-reliance on carbon offsets and the use of national NDCs as primary decarbonization pathways.

The document provides a scientific and legal basis for the European Court of Human Rights to assess State due diligence regarding climate change. It emphasizes the urgency of limiting warming to 1.5°C to avoid irreversible damage and tipping points, noting that current global emissions trends are insufficient. It highlights severe health risks in Europe, including heat-related mortality, and argues that under the Paris Agreement and the UNFCCC, States have a 'best efforts' obligation to pursue the highest possible ambition in emissions reductions. ClientEarth asserts that failure to meet international climate commitments constitutes a prima facie violation of human rights obligations, and that adaptation measures cannot substitute for necessary mitigation.

The Canadian Climate Institute outlines a proposed framework to integrate oil and gas projects into the Sustainable Finance Action Council's (SFAC) climate investment taxonomy. To maintain scientific credibility and avoid 'greenwashing,' the report argues that only decarbonization projects within existing facilities should be eligible for the 'transition' label. It proposes a three-step eligibility process: general corporate requirements (net-zero targets), project-specific requirements (existing facility status and emission intensity alignment with 1.5°C pathways), and 'do no significant harm' criteria. A key proposal is a 50% threshold for downstream Scope 3 emissions to identify projects where demand-side risk is the primary transition risk. The report emphasizes that new oil and gas installations must be excluded to prevent carbon lock-in and align with global net-zero goals.

The COP30 Week 2 debrief details the adoption of the 'Global Mutirão' cover decision, which calls for tripling adaptation finance by 2035 but omits references to fossil fuels and deforestation. Key outcomes include the recommendation for a Just Transition mechanism (BAM) to be operationalized in 2026, the transfer of $26.8 million to the Article 6.4 PACM, and the adoption of the Belém Gender Action Plan. However, significant tensions persisted regarding unilateral trade measures, the 1.5°C temperature goal, and the lack of concrete targets in climate finance and the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA).

The document outlines the evolution of the Just Transition Work Programme (JTWP) from its establishment at COP27 through the outcomes of COP30 in Belém. It highlights the transition from a period of gridlock to the adoption of a decision to create a new Just Transition mechanism, while noting the exclusion of unilateral trade measures and the inclusion of references to the 1.5ºC temperature goal. The briefing concludes with a timeline for the development of the mechanism's draft decision at SB64 in June 2026 and its formal adoption at COP31.

The Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor (CCRM) 2025 finds that corporate climate action is frequently treated as a marketing exercise rather than a business model redesign. While some companies like Inditex and Adidas have improved their target setting, the report highlights widespread 'creative accounting' and greenwashing. Key issues include the use of unbundled Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) in tech and fashion, the conflation of land-based carbon removals with emission reductions in agrifood, and the use of unsubstantiated carbon credits to claim carbon neutrality. The document argues that voluntary standards are insufficient and calls for stringent government regulation, specifically citing EU directives like the CSRD and CSDDD, to mandate transparent reporting and ban product-level carbon neutral claims.

The document argues that current climate policies focus too heavily on demand-side restrictions and must be supplemented by a binding global treaty to constrain the production and supply of fossil fuels. It highlights that fossil fuels have contributed nearly 80% of carbon dioxide emissions since the industrial revolution and that air pollution from their combustion caused nearly one in five global deaths in 2018. The authors call for an equitable transition where wealthier nations reduce production faster and provide financial and technological support to poorer countries.

A statement by youth leaders demanding a binding global Fossil Fuel Treaty to end the expansion of and phase out existing production of coal, oil, and gas. The signatories argue that fossil fuels are the primary cause of the climate crisis and call for a just transition that protects marginalized people and Indigenous rights.

The fact sheet advocates for a Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty to stop the expansion of coal, oil, and gas, specifically proposing that the Amazon become the first such zone. It highlights the environmental and social damage caused by extraction in the region and calls for the suspension of new hydrocarbon research, the protection of indigenous rights through prior consultation, and a just energy transition supported by the Global North.

The fact sheet advocates for a Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty to stop the expansion of coal, oil, and gas, specifically proposing that the Amazon region become the first zone to prohibit such activities. It highlights the severe environmental and social impacts of extraction in the Amazon, noting that a significant percentage of the biome in several countries overlaps with oil blocks, with Ecuador having the highest proportion at 51.5%. The document calls for the suspension of new hydrocarbon exploration, the protection of indigenous rights through prior consultation, and a just transition to a new energy model supported by international financial cooperation.

The briefing asserts that the omission of fossil fuel production and consumption from NDCs undermines the 1.5°C temperature limit and may constitute a breach of international law. Citing the International Court of Justice, it argues that NDCs are binding obligations requiring 'highest possible ambition' and due diligence. The document calls for 2025 NDCs to include comprehensive packages addressing production, consumption, exploration licenses, and subsidies, while ensuring a just transition and policy coherence between supply and climate goals.

The report asserts that fossil fuels are the primary driver of climate change and air pollution, negatively impacting every UN Sustainable Development Goal (SDG). It highlights specific failures, such as the $5.9 trillion spent on fossil fuel subsidies in 2020 and the 8.7 million premature deaths caused by fossil fuel pollution annually between 2012 and 2018. To address these issues, the authors propose a Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty based on three pillars: a worldwide moratorium on new exploration, an equitable phase-down of existing projects, and financial and technological assistance for a just transition.

The proposed Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty is based on three pillars: an immediate end to the expansion of new fossil fuel production, a fair phase-out of existing production aligned with the 1.5 target, and a global just transition to ensure support for affected workers and communities. The initiative argues that current 'net zero' plans often fail to address fossil fuels and that a rapid global exit is possible because renewable energy resources are sufficient to meet global demand.

Global Witness critiques COP26 as a failure that lacked urgency and accountability, noting that the summit allowed fossil fuel lobbyists significant access while excluding many affected communities. The organization highlights the inadequacy of voluntary pledges on deforestation and the failure to secure comprehensive agreements on phasing out oil, gas, and fossil fuel subsidies, concluding that the commitments made are insufficient to keep global warming below 1.5 degrees.

Global Witness characterizes COP27 as a failure, primarily because world leaders did not agree to phase out fossil fuels despite the presence of 636 fossil fuel lobbyists. While the organization acknowledges the historic adoption of a loss and damage fund and the inclusion of the right to a healthy environment in the cover decision, it criticizes the lack of tangible progress on deforestation and the failure to specifically acknowledge the contributions of land and environmental defenders.

The document outlines a proposal by TotalEnergies, Shell, and PetroSA to drill up to five exploration wells in Block 5/6/7 off the coast of the Western Cape, South Africa. It argues that the project is unnecessary for energy security, contradicts South Africa's climate commitments to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, and poses significant risks to marine biodiversity and local industries like fishing and tourism. The text also highlights the poor environmental and ethical track records of TotalEnergies and Shell in other African nations.

Reclaim Finance criticizes Amundi for voting in favor of TotalEnergies' 'Say On Climate' plan despite its failure to align capital expenditures (CAPEX) with a 1.5°C trajectory. The letter highlights inconsistencies in Amundi's voting patterns across seven oil and gas majors, noting that Amundi approved plans for Repsol, TotalEnergies, and BP while rejecting those of Woodside Petroleum, Shell, and Equinor. Reclaim Finance argues that Amundi's current approach ignores the IEA Net Zero scenario, which mandates no new oil and gas fields, and calls for a systematized engagement policy that includes commitments to divest from companies continuing fossil fuel expansion.

The document critiques the ECB's climate roadmap as insufficient and proposes a comprehensive set of recommendations to align the bank's operations with the Paris Agreement. It advocates for replacing 'market neutrality' with a climate-aligned benchmark, decarbonising the collateral framework and asset purchases, and adjusting refinancing operations like TLTROs to penalise carbon-intensive lending. Additionally, it calls for the integration of climate risks into internal credit ratings and the implementation of stricter prudential capital requirements (Pillar I and II) for fossil fuel exposures to ensure financial stability and support the EU's low-carbon transition.

The report highlights a significant gap in financial sector policies where coking coal, which accounts for approximately 14% of global coal production, is often excluded from coal phase-out restrictions. Despite the steel sector contributing 7% of global greenhouse gas emissions and 11% of CO2 emissions, financial institutions continue to fund coking coal projects due to the outdated belief that no alternative technologies exist. The document notes that since 2016, banks have provided over 557 billion USD to companies involved in coking coal projects. It calls for an immediate end to financial services for new coking coal projects and the adoption of strict policies requiring companies to provide detailed closure schedules and just transition plans.