Search Climate Insights Directory

The briefing advocates for Community Forest Management (CFM) as a superior model for protecting biodiversity and mitigating climate change compared to industrial forestry and absolute protection regimes. It highlights that CFM can reduce deforestation rates and enhance carbon storage while securing the rights and livelihoods of Indigenous Peoples and local communities. The document warns against 'false solutions' like REDD+ and the 'financialization of nature,' which it claims risk land grabbing and the erosion of traditional governance. It recommends that governments recognize collective land tenure and that international frameworks, such as the Convention on Biological Diversity, prioritize CFM over traditional Protected Areas to meet conservation goals.

The document advocates for community forest management (CFM) as a superior alternative to industrial logging and strict protection regimes. It asserts that CFM effectively reduces deforestation, protects biodiversity, and supports climate mitigation and adaptation by empowering indigenous peoples and local communities. The text identifies key success factors such as land tenure security and warns against 'false solutions' like REDD+ and the financialization of nature, which it claims risk land grabbing and the erosion of community control.

The document presents community forest management (CFM) as a superior alternative to industrial logging and strict protected areas for preserving biodiversity and mitigating climate change. It highlights that CFM can be more effective at reducing deforestation, as evidenced by data from Brazil and Costa Rica, and provides critical livelihood support to approximately 1.6 billion people. The text identifies key success factors for CFM, including secure land tenure, local decision-making autonomy, and strong social capital. Conversely, it warns against 'false solutions' such as REDD+ and the financialization of nature, which it claims risk land grabbing and the erosion of traditional governance. The document concludes by recommending the prioritization of decentralized, authentic CFM and the legal protection of indigenous and local community rights to ensure ecological and social justice.

The briefing advocates for Community Forest Management (CFM) as a superior model for forest conservation and climate action compared to industrial logging and state-led protected areas. It highlights CFM's role in carbon storage and biodiversity protection, while warning against market-based mechanisms like REDD+ that may lead to land grabbing. The document recommends that governments recognize communal land tenure and prioritize CFM to meet international biodiversity targets.

The document assesses the level of federal investment in sustainable agriculture, specifically agroecology, using a five-level classification system. It finds that the vast majority of USDA funding supports incremental efficiency gains rather than transformative agroecological practices. The authors call for increased funding and a shift toward systems-based research that integrates ecological and socioeconomic sustainability.

A coalition of environmental organisations urges the European Commission to adopt 'Option 1' for the 2030 Climate and Energy Framework, which establishes a separate LULUCF pillar. They argue that including Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) in the general 'at least 40 per cent' reduction target would dilute ambition by 3-7 percentage points. The authors call for the removal of fungibility between pillars, the use of base-period accounting instead of reference levels for forest management to expose bioenergy emissions, and the maintenance of agricultural non-CO2 emissions within a strengthened Effort Sharing Decision (ESD).

Civil society organizations gathered at the World Social Forum in Tunis in March 2015 to oppose the G8's New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition in Africa. They argue the initiative promotes corporate-led agriculture, facilitates land grabbing, and undermines the rights of small-scale farmers. The statement calls for a shift toward food sovereignty, agro-ecology, and the protection of peasant seed systems, demanding that governments suspend New Alliance commitments and prioritize human rights-based agricultural systems.

A statement by social movements and civil society organizations opposing the G8 New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition in Africa, arguing that it prioritizes corporate interests over small-scale producers and undermines food sovereignty.

Friends of the Earth International celebrates the leadership of women in justice movements and emphasizes that dismantling the patriarchy is essential for a just world. The statement highlights the central role of women in agroecological production and the disproportionate violence faced by women human rights defenders, particularly those protecting land and natural resources.

The document advocates for the revitalization of publicly funded classical breeding programs in the U.S., asserting that this low-cost technology is more effective than genetic engineering for developing seeds adapted to sustainable, organic, and regional farming systems. It highlights a severe decline in public breeding resources, noting that the shift toward corporate-led seed development threatens food security by reducing genetic diversity. The author recommends that the USDA's National Institute for Food and Agriculture prioritize long-term funding for cultivars suited to agroecological systems to improve crop resilience, nutrient efficiency, and productivity.

The Nyéléni Declaration defines agroecology not as a set of technologies, but as a way of life and a political tool for food sovereignty. It rejects industrial food systems and 'false solutions' like climate-smart agriculture, advocating instead for local food systems based on ecological principles, collective rights to land and seeds, and the leadership of women and youth.

The Nyéléni Declaration defines agroecology not as a set of technologies, but as a way of life and a political tool for resistance against industrial food systems. It argues that industrial agriculture drives climate and environmental crises, and warns against 'climate-smart agriculture' as a corporate attempt to co-opt agroecology. The document outlines pillars including territorial rights, collective access to commons, and the central role of women and youth, while proposing strategies for territorial policies, knowledge exchange, and local economies to achieve social and ecological transformation.

The Nyéléni Declaration defines agroecology not merely as a set of techniques, but as a political way of life and a form of resistance against an industrial food system that prioritizes profit over life. It argues that industrial agriculture drives multiple crises, including climate change, soil degradation, and public health issues. The declaration rejects 'false solutions' like 'climate-smart agriculture' or 'sustainable intensification,' which it views as attempts by corporations to co-opt agroecology to maintain existing power structures. Instead, it proposes a model based on territorial rights, collective access to commons, horizontal knowledge exchange, and the central leadership of women and youth. The document outlines a comprehensive strategy to implement this vision through territorial policies, local economy building, and the protection of biodiversity and seed sovereignty.

The document analyzes the strategic efforts of the US government (via USAID), the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and companies like Monsanto to introduce GM crops into African markets. It argues that these actors bypass national precautions by promoting 'harmonized' regional biosafety policies through bodies like COMESA and ECOWAS. The report highlights the failure of GM projects, such as the virus-resistant sweet potato in Kenya, and the socio-economic risks of the 'Green Revolution' model, citing South Africa's experience where GM adoption has allegedly increased food insecurity and wealth inequality. It advocates for the adoption of the African Union's Model Law on Biosafety and a shift toward agro-ecology to ensure food sovereignty.

The report argues that USAID and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation are aggressively promoting GM crops in Africa by influencing biosafety legislation and bypassing national regulations through Regional Economic Communities (RECs). It highlights the contrast between the 'precautionary approach' of the Cartagena Protocol and the 'promotional approach' of US-funded programs like the Agricultural Biotechnology Support Programme (ABSP) and the Programme for Biosafety Systems (PBS). The document uses case studies from South Africa, Kenya, and Malawi to illustrate how GM adoption can lead to corporate consolidation and increased food insecurity, while criticizing philanthropic projects like Water Efficient Maize for Africa (WEMA) as 'Trojan horses' for private agribusiness interests.

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 Lima Declaration, issued during the 2014 People's Summit, rejects market-based climate mechanisms and the 'green economy' as false solutions driven by capital. It demands the recognition of historical ecological debts owed by developed nations to the Global South, the protection of ancestral territories from extractive industries, and a transition to a feminist, communal, and agroecological economic model. The statement specifically calls for a global financial transaction tax and compensation for non-industrialized countries that avoid exploiting fossil fuels, while criticizing the Peruvian government's role as COP 20 president for prioritizing private investment over human and environmental rights.

The document analyzes the transition from the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), noting a shift toward a universal, integrated approach to food security. It highlights a consensus on increasing agricultural productivity and resource efficiency, with an expanded focus on nutritional value and the empowerment of smallholders. While the Open Working Group's 'Zero draft' includes a dedicated goal for hunger and sustainable agriculture, the author argues that the framework still lacks sufficient integration between goals and specific strategies for implementation, such as research and technology transfer.

The report argues that GM crops are an extension of an unsustainable industrial agricultural model that benefits a few multinational corporations while harming smallholder farmers and the environment. It highlights the failure of herbicide-tolerant and insect-resistant traits to reduce pesticide use, the emergence of resistant weeds and pests, and the socio-economic risks of seed monopolies. The document advocates for agroecology as a sustainable, farmer-led alternative to tackle hunger and malnutrition.