Search Climate Insights Directory

ClientEarth has submitted a referral request to the FCA alleging that Just Eat Takeaway.com N.V. failed to disclose material climate-related risks and impacts in its 2020 Annual Report. The document argues that Just Eat's reporting is vague, potentially misleading, and fails to provide a fair review of its business or its long-term viability in a net-zero economy. Specifically, it highlights the absence of a Paris-aligned transition strategy and inadequate data on the environmental impact of food packaging and digital operations. ClientEarth requests that the FCA impose financial penalties, issue a public censure, and require the company to rectify its reporting deficiencies.

ClientEarth argues that the FCA's proposed disclosure requirements in CP21/17 and CP21/18 are insufficient to provide the granularity needed for informed investment decisions. The briefing recommends mandatory disclosures, the inclusion of Scope 3 emissions, and the alignment of financial accounts with the Paris Agreement and the UK's net-zero target. It specifically calls for expanding the scope of regulated firms and listed entities subject to these rules and introducing robust enforcement to prevent greenwashing.

The report examines framework climate laws in the UK, France, Mexico, Finland, Sweden, and Victoria (Australia), concluding that while such laws provide a critical political signal and a structured pathway for decarbonisation, most have struggled with implementation. Key failures include a lack of binding interim targets, overcomplexity in governance, and insufficient accountability mechanisms. The report recommends that future laws impose clear, enforceable duties on high-level government decision-makers, integrate independent scientific advisory bodies, and combine long-term goals with frequent short-term progress reporting to avoid 'paper tiger' legislation.

The CER and groundWork oppose the Gas Amendment Bill [B9-2020], asserting that it facilitates fossil fuel development contrary to South Africa's climate obligations and the 1.5°C target. They argue the Bill lacks meaningful public consultation, fails to provide adequate access to information, and irregularly grants environmental regulatory powers to the Energy Regulator, thereby encroaching on the mandate of the Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and Environment.

The report identifies a structural boom in copper prices driven by the global shift toward carbon-neutral growth, specifically the demand for electric vehicles and renewable energy. It posits that as high-grade deposits deplete, Zambia's lower-grade copper deposits will become increasingly attractive. However, the authors warn that sustained returns require investors to move beyond a 'policy taker' role to become 'development partners' who strengthen state institutions and adhere to strict ESG standards to avoid legacy issues like lead poisoning and corruption.

Reclaim Finance argues that Eurizon's March 2021 coal exclusion policy is insufficient due to vague definitions of 'clear direct involvement' in thermal coal and a lack of transparency regarding its implementation. The policy notably fails to address coal expansion plans and excludes index funds, 'LTE' funds, and certain mandates from its scope.

The document argues that while the European Central Bank's (ECB) revised monetary strategy acknowledges climate threats, its concrete actions and implementation timeline are insufficient. Reclaim Finance, Greenpeace, 350.org, and Koala Kollektiv recommend that the ECB immediately stop supporting companies incompatible with EU greenhouse gas reduction goals, specifically by excluding fossil fuel project developers from asset purchases and the collateral framework, and accelerate its implementation schedule to address climate risks.

The 47th G7 summit reaffirmed commitments to a "green revolution" and the goal of halving collective carbon emissions by 2030, while pledging to end new direct government support for international carbon-intensive fossil fuel energy. However, the document highlights a disconnect between these goals and African realities, where fossil fuels account for approximately 80% of energy supply and many states are planning coal-fired power expansions. While the G7 welcomed the commitment of up to $2 billion via Climate Investment Funds, the document notes this is insufficient compared to the $20-30 billion per year the African Development Bank estimates Africa requires for climate action until 2030. Furthermore, the $100 billion promised by developed countries since COP15 remains unrealised.

The study analyzes five development scenarios for Kenya's residential cooking sector to quantify GHG emissions, health impacts, and fuel demand. It finds that shifting from 'modern cooking' (LPG and improved biomass stoves) to 'clean cooking' (electric, biogas, and bioethanol) can significantly reduce emissions, with the most ambitious scenario achieving net-zero by mid-century. Implementation of the net-zero scenario could avoid nearly 500,000 premature deaths over 30 years. However, the transition is hindered by high upfront costs, cultural practices like fuel stacking, and the absence of a comprehensive, sector-wide strategy.

The document warns that African oil and gas producing countries risk committing public funds to stranded assets by basing investment decisions on current price trends rather than energy transition scenarios. It highlights the vulnerability of National Oil Companies (NOCs) and the potential for revenue overestimation, specifically citing risks in countries like Angola, Mozambique, and Senegal. The author advocates for the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) to mandate the disclosure of project viability data and for governments to diversify their economies.

ClientEarth argues that current Solvency II Pillar 1 capital requirements do not adequately capture financial risks from climate change, including transition risks for fossil fuel assets and systemic disruption risks. The document highlights the UK Government's review of Solvency II, which acknowledges that the solvency capital requirement (SCR) and matching adjustment may need amendments to better reflect long-term climate risks and stranded assets. ClientEarth calls on the European Commission to implement similar enhancements to ensure the resilience of EU insurers and maintain a level playing field with the UK.

Allianz Global Investors (Allianz GI) introduced its first coal exclusion policy in July 2021, excluding companies that derive over 30% of revenues from thermal coal or produce over 30% of electricity from coal. Reclaim Finance argues this policy is outdated, mirroring a 2015 standard rather than the more stringent current Allianz Group policy. The analysis highlights that Allianz GI remains invested in 96 coal companies, including 43 coal developers, and lacks commitments to end support for coal expansion or set a full exit date for the coal sector. The document calls for the adoption of absolute exclusion thresholds and alignment with the Allianz Group's goal to exit coal by 2040.

The author asserts that the failure of developed nations to meet the 2010 commitment to mobilise $100bn per year by 2020 for climate action in developing countries erodes international trust and hinders the transition to a net-zero world. Fulfilling this commitment is presented as a catalyst to trigger large-scale private investment in low-carbon solutions and climate-resilient industries, particularly within supply chains where 65-90 per cent of company emissions originate. The text emphasizes that only 21 per cent of these funds currently support adaptation, and argues that increasing this share would protect global economic stability by building resilience in developing nations. The author calls for G20 leadership to combine this funding with mandatory climate risk disclosure and carbon pricing to support the goal of halving global emissions by 2030.

The Global Climate and Health Alliance (GCHA) developed the HealthyNDCs Scorecard to analyze and rank 40 NDCs from 66 countries, assessing how health is incorporated into climate commitments and the level of climate ambition. The document serves as a guide for a Twitter campaign to pressure governments to set ambitious emissions targets and embed health protections into their national climate plans. GCHA identifies specific countries as failing to consider health or lacking ambition, while others are praised for leadership in this area.

The NewClimate Institute developed a methodology to assess the design of NDCs based on four criteria: increased mitigation ambition, comprehensiveness, implementation plans, and transparency. Applying this to 20 diverse NDCs, the analysis found that while most countries meet requirements for comprehensiveness and transparency, less than half demonstrated higher mitigation ambition compared to their first NDC, and many lack clear implementation plans.

A letter from a Stockholm Environment Institute scientist to the Massachusetts Attorney General arguing that Harvard's fossil fuel investments are misaligned with the Paris Agreement and contribute to global health and environmental crises.

The report argues that the NGFS's second set of 1.5°C scenarios are not aligned with the Paris Agreement and are unsustainable due to an over-reliance on fossil fuels, biomass, and carbon dioxide removal (CDR). It finds that these scenarios fail to account for the need to end fossil fuel expansion and rely on unproven technologies like Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) to justify slower phase-outs of oil, gas, and coal.

The report 'Driven to Waste' estimates that 1.2 billion tonnes of food, or 15.3% of global production, is lost on farms. When combined with retail and consumer waste, total global food loss and waste is estimated at over 2.5 billion tonnes (approximately 40% of all food produced), contributing 10% of total global greenhouse gas emissions. The document highlights a geographic disparity: high- and middle-income countries in Europe, North America, and Industrialised Asia contribute 58% of global harvest loss, while low-income countries account for 54% of post-harvest farm-stage loss. It argues that farm-stage loss is driven by downstream market decisions and asymmetric power balances, and calls for national governments to include food loss and waste in Paris Agreement national carbon plans.

The NewClimate Institute proposes a rating system to categorize agribusinesses based on their consistency with Paris Agreement mitigation objectives, providing guidance for development finance on when to exclude, engage, or scale up funding. The system ranges from 'misaligned'—covering activities that drive deforestation or rely on air freight—to 'aligned,' which identifies businesses following best practices in soil carbon, manure management, and plant-based protein production.

The report finds that while the number of non-state and subnational actors setting climate targets is growing, there is limited evidence that this ambition is translating into realized impacts. Full implementation of individual targets could reduce 2030 emissions by 2.0 to 2.5 GtCO2e/year, while international cooperative initiatives' goals could lead to a reduction of 16 GtCO2e/year. However, progress is uneven, with only half of city governments and 80% of companies meeting their 2020 targets.