Search Climate Insights Directory

The report examines how a 21.8% rate hike for State Farm homeowners insurance in California, approved in March 2025 following devastating wildfires in Los Angeles, disproportionately affects policyholders in high-risk areas. It projects that the average State Farm policyholder in California will pay $841 more in 2025 than in 2023, with some communities seeing premiums more than double. The analysis highlights that 280,000 policyholders across 122 communities will face annual premium increases of $1,000 or more. The document argues that these escalating costs are a direct result of climate change and suggests that the financial burden should shift from policyholders to the oil and gas companies responsible for fossil fuel pollution.

The Union of Concerned Scientists finds that the 122 largest fossil fuel and cement producers, termed 'Carbon Majors', are responsible for nearly half of present-day surface temperature increases and nearly one-third of observed global mean sea level rise. The research indicates that past emissions from these entities have already guaranteed an additional 10 to 22 inches of sea level rise by 2300. The document argues that these corporations knowingly misled the public and obstructed climate policy, and it advocates for using legal pathways and multilateral negotiations to hold them financially and legally responsible for climate damages, particularly for vulnerable island nations.

The Superior Court of Justice in Ontario denied a motion to dismiss a case brought by seven youth who argued that Ontario's 2030 greenhouse gas reduction target of 30% below 2005 levels is insufficiently ambitious and violates constitutional rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom. The court ruled that the application is prima facie justiciable, the targets are reviewable, and the applicants have standing for themselves and future generations.

Six youth activists sued the Brazilian government, claiming the 2020 NDC update used an 'accounting trick' to increase allowable emissions while maintaining the same reduction percentages as the 2015 NDC. The plaintiffs argued this violated the principle of non-regression and the Paris Agreement. A federal judge denied the request for urgent injunctive relief, ruling that the updated NDC's goal of climate neutrality by 2060 and the nature of the calculation changes did not prove a lack of ambition or a violation of the principle of progression. The case is currently awaiting final judgement.

ClientEarth argues that the 'recklessness standard' in English law already protects companies from liability for honest but incorrect forward-looking statements in transition plans. It contends that detailed transition planning reduces risks related to greenwashing, breach of duty, and human rights harms, and opposes the introduction of 'safe-harbours' which would undermine market integrity.

The report identifies a crisis of information integrity about climate science, characterized by a shift from outright denial to more nuanced skepticism and 'response skepticism' regarding climate solutions. It documents how powerful economic interests, particularly the fossil fuel industry, and political actors use strategies like greenwashing, delay, and obstruction to undermine scientific consensus. The review highlights the role of social media algorithms, bots, and 'source media' (such as corporate reports) in amplifying misleading narratives. It concludes that while individual-level interventions like inoculation and education are valuable, systemic governance through public regulation, standardized corporate reporting, and litigation is essential to restore information integrity.

The report identifies a shift from outright climate denial to 'strategic doubt,' where powerful economic and political actors—including fossil fuel companies and right-wing populist movements—deliberately spread misleading narratives to obstruct climate action. It highlights that policymakers are primary targets of this misinformation, which is disseminated through social media, traditional media, and corporate sustainability reports. This environment erodes public trust and creates a feedback loop of scientific denial and political inaction. The document recommends four key policy interventions: legislation for standardized carbon reporting and content labeling, litigation against greenwashing, the formation of counter-alliances by civil society, and the promotion of scientific and media literacy.

The report analyzes greenhushing in Colombia's financial sector, identifying key barriers to transparency such as fear of scrutiny over imperfect data, the desire to protect competitive 'know-how', and high market expectations for quantitative metrics. While Colombia's progressive regulation (Circular 031 of 2021) and lack of climate litigation have mitigated some pressures, the document argues that a shift toward flexible, standardized reporting and collaborative regulation is necessary to transform climate transparency into a strategic asset.

The document details the legal actions taken by a coalition of civil society organizations, including Trend Asia, WALHI, and Greenpeace Indonesia, against the Indonesian government's National Electricity General Plan (RUKN) and the Electricity Supply Business Plan (RUPTL). It argues that these plans ignore the escalating climate crisis—exemplified by Cyclone Senyar—and instead lock the country into fossil fuel dependency through the extension of coal-fired power plants (PLTU) and the use of biomass co-firing, which the authors claim drives deforestation. The coalition alleges that these policies violate multiple national laws and international commitments, such as the Paris Agreement, by failing to provide a clear coal phase-out roadmap and ignoring cheaper renewable energy alternatives.

Earthjustice reports a series of legal victories in 2024, including a landmark settlement to decarbonize Hawaii's transportation system by 2045, the cessation of coal leasing in the Powder River Basin, and a historic Inter-American Court of Human Rights ruling requiring Peru to remediate lead pollution in La Oroya. The organization also secured wins against cryptomining operations in New York, fossil fuel infrastructure expansion in New Jersey, and the loss of wetlands protections following the U.S. Supreme Court's Sackett v. EPA decision, notably helping Colorado pass legislation to reinstate wetland protections in May 2024. Additionally, the report highlights efforts to regulate PFAS in plastic containers, limit lead wheel weights, and protect endangered species such as the Cook Inlet beluga whale and Pacific sardine.

The 2024 Scorecard by Insure Our Future argues that the global insurance industry is in a 'vicious cycle,' where it continues to underwrite fossil fuel expansion while simultaneously withdrawing coverage from communities facing the resulting climate risks. Using climate attribution science, the report estimates that over one-third of weather-related insured losses between 2002 and 2022—approximately $600 billion—are attributable to human-caused climate change. The analysis reveals a stark mismatch in underwriting, with renewable energy premiums representing less than 30% of the size of the fossil fuel insurance market in 2023. For 15 of the 28 major property and casualty insurers analyzed, estimated climate-attributable losses exceeded the premiums they collected from fossil fuel clients. While Generali is noted as the first insurer to restrict oil and gas expansion across the entire value chain, the report concludes that voluntary corporate leadership has stalled, necessitating urgent regulatory intervention to mandate 1.5°C-aligned transition plans and higher capital requirements for fossil fuel exposure.

The document argues that the climate crisis is a human rights crisis, creating a legal obligation for States and corporations to provide remedy and full reparation for loss and damage. It asserts that the right to remedy is already established under international law and does not require new norms, but rather the application of existing frameworks and the 'polluter pays principle' to hold fossil fuel industries accountable. The text criticizes the UNFCCC for failing to uphold the right to remedy through its reliance on voluntary approaches and calls for the restructuring of loss and damage mechanisms to align with human rights standards. Finally, it emphasizes that while the UNFCCC is insufficient, complementary legal strategies—including litigation in international, regional, and national courts—are essential for delivering climate justice.

The briefing links the increased frequency and intensity of US extreme weather events, such as the July 2023 heatwave and August 2024 California wildfires, to climate change driven by fossil fuels. It highlights that US oil and gas production emissions rose roughly 42% between 2011 and 2022 and notes that 88 large fossil fuel and cement companies are responsible for 48% of the rise in fire-danger conditions in the region. The document argues for corporate accountability, citing a Climate Analytics estimate that the 12 most polluting companies are responsible for USD 15 trillion in economic damages from 1985 to 2018. While the US has seen significant growth in solar and wind capacity and electric vehicle sales, primary energy consumption remains dominated by petroleum (38%), natural gas (36%), and coal (9%) as of 2023.

The document identifies a rapid increase in climate lawsuits against major fossil fuel producers, noting that annual filings nearly tripled since 2015. It categorizes these cases into primary types—most notably compensation for climate damages, misleading advertising, and emissions reductions—and highlights emerging trends such as criminal liability claims and challenges to project permitting. The analysis emphasizes the role of attribution science in quantifying corporate liability and the potential for landmark rulings, such as the one against Shell in the Netherlands, to set global precedents.

The Union of Concerned Scientists interviewed 19 legal experts to identify critical research gaps in climate litigation. The report categorizes these into three priority areas—attribution science, human health, and economic modeling—and five strategic areas, including greenwashing and emissions accounting. A central cross-cutting theme is the need for research on losses and damages. The authors emphasize that while IPCC reports provide a foundation, litigation requires more granular, geographically specific data and better communication between scientists and legal teams to overcome barriers such as differing timelines and data gaps in the Global South.

The document supports the SEC's climate-related disclosure rule, specifically the requirements for companies to report the use of carbon offsets when they are a material part of achieving climate goals. It argues that because the voluntary carbon market lacks standardization and is often flooded with low-quality credits, investors need project-level transparency to assess a company's actual risk exposure. The brief highlights that reliance on flawed offsets can lead to 'greenwashing' litigation and financial instability as demand shifts toward more expensive, high-integrity credits.

The report examines the increasing integration of climate change into the monitoring work of UN Human Rights Treaty Bodies, highlighting a rise in climate-related recommendations to States in 2023. It specifically analyzes the role of these bodies in addressing fossil fuel phase-outs, the right to a healthy environment, loss and damage, and the rights of future generations, while identifying gaps in the scrutiny of carbon markets and international climate finance.

The briefing establishes that fossil fuels are responsible for approximately 70% of carbon dioxide emissions since the industrial revolution, with a small number of companies contributing a disproportionate share. It highlights the role of attribution science in linking specific extreme weather events to climate change and details the growing trend of using the 'polluter pays' principle in litigation and legislation to hold these companies financially accountable. The document further argues that to meet the 1.5C target, global fossil fuel production must decrease significantly by 2030, supported by a transition to renewable energy and electric vehicles.

The report details the systemic impacts of plastic pollution on municipal infrastructure, public health, and ecosystems, asserting that a small number of petrochemical and FMCG companies knowingly exacerbated the crisis by promoting inadequate recycling solutions. It provides a guide for government attorneys to use nuisance, products liability, and consumer protection laws to hold these polluters accountable, drawing parallels to successful litigation against the tobacco and PCB industries.

The document asserts that nature loss is a "macro-critical" threat to financial stability, with potential global economic costs of $5 trillion over five years. It details how policy, legal, reputational, and physical risks are already impacting corporate balance sheets, citing examples such as Tesla's Gigafactory delays and significant financial losses from mishandled nature interactions. The briefing identifies five priority themes for investors through 2025: framework alignment (e.g., TNFD), leveraging AI for deforestation data, managing ocean-related impacts in the blue economy, pursuing 'nature alpha' for financial returns, and active policy engagement to reverse biodiversity loss.