Search Climate Insights Directory

The report argues that GM crops, particularly herbicide-tolerant (HT) and Bt varieties, have failed to deliver promised benefits in yield and poverty reduction. It documents a significant increase in pesticide use and the emergence of herbicide-resistant weeds in the US, Argentina, and Brazil. The document further highlights the monopolization of the seed market by a few firms, specifically Monsanto, and the resulting economic pressure and legal harassment of farmers. Case studies in India, China, and South Africa suggest that yield increases are often due to weather or irrigation rather than GM technology, while small farmers face increased debt and vulnerability.

The briefing analyzes the EC-Biotech dispute, where a WTO panel rejected the obligation to consider the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety because they were not ratified by all WTO Members. The author argues this narrow interpretation of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties creates 'clinical isolation' for WTO law and deviates from the Appellate Body's approach in US-Shrimp, which integrated sustainable development and MEAs into its analysis. The document emphasizes that the WTO's own Committee on Trade and Environment and the Doha Mandate support 'mutual supportiveness' between trade and environmental goals.

The document discusses the EC-Biotech dispute and the European Communities' argument that WTO agreements should be interpreted in light of international law and multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs), such as the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, particularly regarding the precautionary principle and risk assessment for GMOs.

The WTO Panel found that the EC's de facto moratorium on biotech approvals and several product-specific delays violated procedural requirements of the SPS Agreement by causing "undue delay." Additionally, safeguard measures adopted by EC Member States (including France, Germany, Italy, and Greece) were found inconsistent with the SPS Agreement because they were not based on a risk assessment. However, the Panel ruled that the general moratorium itself was a procedural decision rather than a substantive SPS measure, meaning it was not subject to the science-based risk assessment requirements of Article 5.1. The Panel also rejected the EC's argument that the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety should be used to interpret WTO rules, as not all parties to the dispute were parties to those treaties.

The report asserts that ten years after the first major GM crop plantings in 1996, these technologies have not reduced hunger or poverty and have instead increased pesticide use and corporate control over seeds. It highlights the dominance of Monsanto, Syngenta, and Bayer, noting that over 95% of commercial GM plants are limited to maize, soy, and cotton. The text details failures in various regions, including poor yields of GM sweet potatoes in Kenya and farmer debt in India, while accusing Monsanto of using corruption in Indonesia and aggressive legal tactics against farmers in the US.

The report examines the link between environmental degradation and rural poverty, asserting that neoliberal policies—such as trade liberalization, privatization, and industrial agriculture—exacerbate poverty by stripping communities of their natural resources. It provides global case studies where community-led initiatives in forestry, fisheries, and renewable energy have successfully improved livelihoods. The document advocates for the unconditional cancellation of external debt, the recognition of an 'ecological debt' owed by the North to the South, and the promotion of food sovereignty and environmental justice.

The document provides a comprehensive framework for using international human rights, labor, environmental, and health laws to safeguard children's health. It details specific treaties, such as the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Stockholm Convention, and explains the roles of global institutions like the WHO and UNEP. The guide outlines six primary functions of international law: providing blueprints for action, resolving disputes, promoting compliance, providing fora for discussion, building capacity, and promoting cooperation. It also includes case studies on housing rights in the Philippines and the Yacyretá Hydroelectric Project to demonstrate practical application of these legal tools.

This report by Friends of the Earth International asserts that environmental rights—including the right to a sustainable lifestyle, a healthy environment, water access, and food security—are integral to human rights. It details specific conflicts, such as the Ava Guarani's struggle for ancestral lands in Argentina, the impact of Shell's pollution in Curaçao, and the fight against GMO contamination in Mexico. The text criticizes neoliberal economic globalization for enabling multinational corporations to operate with impunity, often displacing indigenous populations and degrading ecosystems. It calls for a new ethics of environmental justice and the implementation of legally binding international conventions to protect marginalized communities from environmental aggression.

The report by Friends of the Earth International examines the intersection of human and environmental rights, detailing case studies of corporate and state abuses. It advocates for a framework of environmental justice that includes the right to sustainable livelihoods, clean environments, water, and food security, while emphasizing the need for transparency, collective rights, and legal redress for climate refugees and ecological debt.

A coalition of environmental and agricultural NGOs requested that the WTO Panel accept an amicus curiae brief to provide technical and legal expertise on the uncertainties of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and the application of the precautionary principle under the SPS Agreement.

The document provides technical and legal arguments to support the position that 'insufficient scientific evidence' under the SPS Agreement should be interpreted to include cases of high scientific uncertainty. It details the unpredictable nature of rDNA techniques, the lack of independent peer-reviewed data, and the potential for unintended toxic or environmental effects, asserting that these factors prevent adequate risk assessments and justify precautionary regulatory measures.

The report claims that the first ten years of GM crop commercialization were a 'resounding failure', noting that promises of cheaper, higher-quality food and the solution to global hunger have not materialized. It highlights the dominance of Monsanto, the failure of the first GM tomato, and the rise of global opposition due to concerns over genetic contamination, biodiversity loss, and corporate control of seeds.

The document examines the role of agricultural biotechnology in meeting future food demands in developing countries, contrasting the market-driven approach of transnational corporations (TNCs) with the needs of small-scale farmers. It argues that while GM technology can improve yields and nutritional content, its success depends on an 'enabling environment' consisting of R&D capacity, functional biosafety regulatory regimes, and clear biotechnology policies. The authors highlight significant obstacles, including the high cost of biosafety compliance, intellectual property rights (IPR) restrictions, and trade conflicts between the EU and USA. It recommends that donor agencies like Sida focus on institutional capacity building, particularly for 'GM-local crops' developed by public sector institutions to benefit the poor.

The Cartagena Declaration, issued in September 2003, argues that a 'predatory economic model' and the 'greed' of the Global North drive systemic environmental and human rights violations. It highlights specific injustices, such as the fumigation of the Amazon and the desecration of sacred sites by the oil industry, while criticizing the role of transnational corporations and multilateral development banks. The declaration calls for a shift toward 'ecological security, food security and energy security' and an end to the criminalization of environmental defenders.

The document argues that the WTO's 'free trade' framework is systematically biased toward transnational corporations, which use privileged access to governments in the US, EU, and Japan to shape global rules. Through case studies, it illustrates how this influence leads to the forced adoption of GMOs, restricted access to essential medicines, the privatization of water and energy, and the undermining of international environmental agreements like the Kyoto Protocol and the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. The authors call for a halt to current negotiations and an independent assessment of the social and environmental impacts of trade liberalization.

The report examines the impact of transgenic maize, specifically the Bt 176 variety, in Spain. It argues that the Spanish government has failed to implement adequate monitoring and prevention plans, leading to genetic contamination of organic crops and the development of pest resistance. The document claims that transgenic maize does not provide the promised yield increases and poses risks to non-target species and human health through antibiotic resistance markers. It concludes that Spain is uniquely permissive within the EU and calls for a halt to transgenic cultivation until a comprehensive legal and safety framework is established.

The report examines the deployment of Bt 176 GM corn in Spain, highlighting a lack of independent monitoring and the failure of the Spanish government to enforce mandatory 'Prevention Plans'. It documents cases of genetic contamination in organic crops in Navarra and presents evidence from the ITG-A suggesting that corn borers are developing resistance to the Bt toxin. The document further argues that GM corn does not provide superior yields compared to conventional varieties and poses risks to non-target species and human health via antibiotic-resistance genes.

The report argues that the WTO system is biased toward transnational corporations, which use their access to governments and the WTO Secretariat to promote rules that undermine national environmental and health standards. Through case studies, it details how this influence manifests in the push for GMO acceptance, the restriction of essential medicines via the TRIPS agreement, the promotion of water and energy privatization through GATS, and the use of investment treaties to challenge public interest regulations. The authors call for a moratorium on further trade negotiations and an independent assessment of the social and environmental impacts of 'free trade'.

The report examines the global landscape of GMO import regulations, noting a concentration of commercial acreage in the US, Argentina, Canada, and China, while many developing nations face regulatory blockages. It details the stringent regimes in the EU and Australia/New Zealand, the more flexible approach in the US, and varying levels of adoption and restriction in Asia, Latin America, and Africa. The document further analyzes potential conflicts between these national regulations—specifically regarding traceability, labelling, and the precautionary principle—and WTO agreements such as the SPS, TBT, and GATT, as well as the influence of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety.

The report examines GMO import regulations in the EU, USA, Australia, New Zealand, Asia, Latin America, and Africa, comparing them against WTO agreements. It highlights the tension between the EU's stringent traceability and labelling requirements and the more permissive approach of the US, while analyzing how the 'precautionary principle' and 'substantial equivalence' impact trade disputes.