Search Climate Insights Directory

The IRM found that the Bio-CLIMA project in Nicaragua failed to comply with GCF safeguards regarding conflict sensitivity, human rights due diligence, and informed consultation and participation (ICP). Specifically, the project did not adequately assess recurrent violent conflicts between indigenous communities and non-indigenous settlers, nor did it conduct meaningful consultations on key project components like Peaceful Co-habitation Regime Agreements (PCRAs). The IRM warns that the current design may reward illegal land occupation and exacerbate violence. It recommends conducting a macro-level conflict sensitivity analysis, a human rights due diligence report, and a framework-level ICP process before any project activities commence.

The document outlines how corruption can sabotage conservation efforts by creating opportunities for illicit private gain. It provides a framework for addressing these risks across three main intervention types: payments for ecosystem services (PES), carbon offsets, and protected areas/Other Effective area-based Conservation Measures (OECM). For each, it identifies specific corruption risks—such as elite capture, data manipulation, and the undermining of land rights—and suggests corresponding anti-corruption responses, including participatory mechanisms, transparency requirements, and independent accountability systems.

The document argues against the use of the Defense Production Act (DPA) to subsidize the mining of critical minerals, advocating instead for a circular economy based on recycling and reuse. It demands that if DPA mechanisms are used for metals such as lithium, nickel, and cobalt, the US government must mandate free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) from Indigenous communities, binding human rights due diligence, and strong anti-corruption measures. The authors emphasize the need to avoid repeating the 'generational trauma' of past government-subsidized mining and suggest the US adopt frameworks similar to the EU Battery Directive.

The document examines the role of Indigenous Peoples as stewards of 80% of the world's remaining biodiversity and their historical struggle for recognition within the United Nations and multilateral environmental agreements. It highlights the tension between Western commodified views of nature and Indigenous holistic perspectives, noting that while instruments like the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Nagoya Protocol have made strides in recognizing traditional knowledge, climate frameworks like the UNFCCC and initiatives like REDD+ continue to marginalize Indigenous voices and rights. The brief concludes that achieving global sustainability requires moving beyond tokenism to respect Indigenous self-determination and leadership.

The document argues that the 2030 global mitigation targets of the Paris Agreement cannot be met without protecting and empowering IPLCs. Analysis of Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, and Peru shows that 92% of forested IPLC lands are net carbon sinks, sequestering an average of 30 metric tons of carbon per hectare annually—more than twice the rate of non-IPLC lands. Despite this, the NDCs of these four countries largely fail to acknowledge the role of IPLC lands in meeting national targets. The paper identifies critical governance gaps, including lack of legal land recognition, limited land rights, and poor implementation of free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC). It also highlights the prevalence of illegal deforestation and violence against environmental defenders. The authors recommend that governments strengthen partnerships with IPLCs, ensure full legal land titling, and integrate specific IPLC carbon sequestration data into national inventories.

The report argues that the climate goals of Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, and Peru are heavily dependent on the carbon sequestration provided by IPLC lands, yet these lands are insufficiently recognized in national climate policies and face severe threats from illegal activities and governance gaps.

The report argues that the lands of indigenous peoples and local communities (PICLs) in Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, and Peru are critical carbon sinks that are currently undervalued in national climate commitments. Analysis shows that 92% of PICL forest lands in these countries are net carbon sinks, sequestering an average of 30 tonnes of carbon per hectare annually—more than double the rate of non-PICL lands. Despite this, the NDCs of these four countries contain limited references to PICLs and lack specific targets for protecting their lands. The report identifies significant governance gaps, including incomplete land titling, limited land rights, and the failure to implement Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC). It further highlights that these lands are under constant threat from illegal mining, logging, and agribusiness, often involving state collusion. The authors recommend that governments strengthen partnerships with PICLs, integrate their carbon sequestration data into national inventories, and ensure full legal recognition and protection of their territories to meet 2030 climate goals.

The report analyzes COP26 outcomes, noting that while some progress was made in referencing human rights within Article 6 rules and the CTCN Advisory Board, overall results were marred by exclusionary participation modalities and a failure to effectively confront the fossil fuel industry. It highlights significant gaps in loss and damage finance, the removal of human rights language from the Action for Climate Empowerment (ACE) work program, and superficial progress on gender-responsive climate action. The document concludes by outlining critical 2022 milestones, including the first Global Stocktake and the revision of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), as key opportunities to embed human rights and climate justice.

WWF International outlines a framework for high-impact nature-based solutions (NbS) for climate mitigation, emphasizing that interventions must simultaneously benefit human well-being, biodiversity, and the climate. The report argues against narrowly designing projects for carbon credits, instead advocating for landscape-scale or jurisdictional approaches that align with national strategies and the Paris Agreement. It provides a hierarchy for forest-related interventions—prioritizing REDD, then improved forest management, and finally afforestation, reforestation, and restoration—and details essential safeguards, including free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) for Indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLCs). To ensure integrity, the blueprint recommends rigorous due diligence to mitigate risks such as inflated baselines, leakage, and non-permanence.

The document advocates for the inclusion of human rights protections in the EU's upcoming legislation on forest and ecosystem-risk commodities (FERCs). It argues that deforestation is intrinsically linked to human rights abuses, particularly against Indigenous Peoples, and that protecting these rights is essential for effective forest conservation. The briefing proposes a product-based due diligence framework with a 'negligible risk' threshold, mandatory investigation of land tenure and free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC), and rights of redress before EU courts. To demonstrate feasibility, it provides case studies of Brazilian beef supply chains involving JBS and Marfrig, showing that human rights risks can be identified using publicly available digital information.

The document establishes a two-component eligibility framework for hydropower certification: a Mitigation Component and an Adaptation & Resilience (A&R) Component. The Mitigation Component uses a 'predictive screen' based on power density to identify low-risk assets, while others must undergo a GHG assessment using the G-res tool or on-site studies to meet emissions intensity thresholds of 100g CO2e/kWh (pre-2020) or 50g CO2e/kWh (post-2020). The A&R Component requires assets to be assessed via the ESG Gap Analysis Tool, with strict limits on the number of 'significant gaps' allowed and a requirement for an Environmental and Social Action Plan (ESAP) to close those gaps within 24 months. Additionally, the criteria mandate Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) for indigenous peoples and public disclosure of compliance data.

The report outlines a framework for 'rights-based climate finance,' emphasizing that funding from developed to developing countries must be ambitious in volume, equitable in distribution, and provided as grants to avoid increasing debt. It advocates for the categorical exclusion of 'false solutions' like large-scale hydropower and geoengineering, while demanding robust social and environmental safeguards, including free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) for Indigenous Peoples and independent grievance redress mechanisms to ensure accountability.

The report argues that emissions trading mechanisms under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement risk undermining global mitigation ambition and causing human rights violations. It proposes three essential policy pillars—robust public participation, social and environmental safeguards, and independent grievance mechanisms—as prerequisites for any such framework. The document highlights failures in previous systems like the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and provides examples of 'good policies' from development finance institutions to guide the UNFCCC in creating a rights-compliant rulebook.

The letter denounces the July 18, 2020, kidnapping of four Garifuna leaders from the Triunfo de la Cruz community by armed men in police uniforms. It argues that the Garifuna people face systematic attacks from agribusinesses and land grabbers for tourism and housing developments, driven by a neoliberal model of privatization. The authors highlight the Honduran state's failure to enforce a 2015 Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACrtHR) ruling requiring the restitution of ancestral lands. The letter demands the immediate release of the kidnapped individuals, an end to violence against the Garifuna, and the demarcation of 2,840 hectares of ancestral territory, including the return of lands illegally held by the MACERICA and IDETRISA companies.

Friends of the Earth International and a global coalition of organizations have issued a formal condemnation of the Honduran government following the kidnapping of four members of the Black Fraternal Organization of Honduras (OFRANEH) from the Triunfo de la Cruz community. The document highlights a pattern of systematic aggression against the Garifuna people by banana companies, oil palm plantations, and real estate developers. It specifically calls for the immediate release of the kidnapped leaders and the execution of a 2015 Inter-American Court of Human Rights sentence requiring the state to restore 2,840 hectares of ancestral territory and specific parcels of land currently held by the Tela workers' union and companies Macerica and Idetrisa.

The document condemns the July 18, 2020, kidnapping of four members of the Afro-Indigenous Garifuna organization OFRANEH from the Triunfo de la Cruz community by armed men in police uniforms. It attributes systematic attacks on the Garifuna people to banana and oil palm companies, as well as real estate and tourism developers such as the Indura hotel, Punta Izopo National Park, Macerica, and Idetrisa. The statement highlights the Honduran government's failure to enforce a 2015 Inter-American Court of Human Rights ruling requiring the restitution of 2,840 hectares of ancestral territory and specific parcels held by the Tela Workers’ Union and private companies. It calls for the immediate return of the kidnapped individuals and an end to the criminalization of indigenous land defenders.

Friends of the Earth International expresses indignation over the July 18 kidnapping of four members of the Black Fraternal Organization of Honduras (OFRANEH) from the Triunfo de la Cruz community. The statement links these disappearances to a broader pattern of systematic aggression against the Garifuna people by banana companies, oil palm plantations, and the real estate and tourism industries. It specifically highlights land usurpation by the Indura hotel complex, Punta Izopo national park, and the companies Macerica and Idetrisa. The document emphasizes that the Honduran state has failed to execute a 2015 Inter-American Court of Human Rights sentence requiring the restitution of 2,840 hectares of ancestral territory and other specific land parcels. The organization calls for the immediate return of the kidnapped individuals and an end to the neoliberal model of land privatization.

The Southeast Alaska Indigenous Transboundary Commission (SEITC), representing fifteen tribal nations, petitions the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights for relief against Canada. The petition argues that six hard-rock mines in British Columbia—including the Red Chris, Brucejack, and KSM mines—threaten the Taku, Stikine, and Unuk river watersheds. These mines risk releasing toxic heavy metals and experiencing catastrophic tailings-dam failures, which would devastate salmon and eulachon populations essential to the Petitioners' subsistence, health, and cultural identity. The document asserts that Canada has failed its international obligations to prevent transboundary harm and has not obtained the free, prior, and informed consent of the affected Indigenous communities. It further argues that Canadian domestic legal remedies are inadequate for foreign tribes.

The report argues that community forest management (MCB) cannot fully develop without the guarantee of specific internal and external rights. It identifies threats to these rights—such as the 'financiarización de la Naturaleza' and industrial extractivism—and details a framework of essential rights, including self-determination, collective land tenure, and the right to free, prior, and informed consent (CPLIP). The document emphasizes that these rights are intrinsic to the peoples and should be protected by states as a fiduciary duty, prioritizing collective rights over individual ones to ensure the survival of cultures and the health of ecosystems.

Friends of the Earth International argues that community forest management (CFM) is only possible when the inherent rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities are guaranteed by States. The document identifies critical threats to these rights—such as the 'Financialization of Nature', industrial logging, and mining—and details the internal community conditions and external State obligations required to ensure sustainable territorial governance. It emphasizes that collective land titles, the right to self-determination, and Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) are fundamental to preserving both biological diversity and cultural identity.