Search Climate Insights Directory

The document explores the application of transitional justice—traditionally used to transition societies from injustice to peace—to the climate context. It identifies five key similarities between the two fields: the tension between backward- and forward-looking claims, unavoidable interdependencies, limited judicial capabilities, the management of profound loss, and inherent power imbalances. The brief concludes that ignoring historical justice claims risks the unraveling of climate agreements and suggests that a combination of mechanisms, such as truth commissions and reparations, is needed to build trust and legitimacy for future-oriented regimes.

The brief examines the application of transitional justice mechanisms to climate change, arguing that while litigation and amnesties are currently used, neither is sufficient alone. It suggests that legal pressure can force recognition of injustices, while amnesties may secure the cooperation of powerful actors, but both require integration with reparations, truth-seeking, and institutional reform to maintain long-term political legitimacy.

The brief explores how transitional justice frameworks for reparations—including restitution, rehabilitation, compensation, satisfaction, and guarantees of non-repetition—can be applied to the climate context. It emphasizes that addressing the needs of those most impacted is essential for building a legitimate global climate regime and suggests a combination of material and symbolic reparations to repair relationships and foster collective solidarity.

The policy brief explores how truth commissions, traditionally used for political reconciliation, could provide a pragmatic middle path between ignoring historical climate harms and pursuing legal liability. It evaluates three structural options: internal UNFCCC processes, external but linked mechanisms, and entirely external processes such as the International Court of Justice. The author concludes that a high-profile, neutral commission created by NGOs or a coalition of Parties is the most politically feasible approach for trust-building and documenting lived harms, though it must be accompanied by concrete action to avoid alienating supporters.

The November 2016 survey reveals that 70% of Americans believe global warming is happening, with 55% attributing it primarily to human activities. While 61% of respondents express worry and 60% believe it affects U.S. weather, the threat is largely perceived as distant, with a majority believing it will harm future generations and developing countries more than themselves. Public understanding of the scientific consensus remains low, and optimism regarding the ability of the U.S. Congress to pass ambitious legislation to reduce global warming is limited.

The document examines the impacts of 'dirty energy' (coal, oil, gas, nuclear, industrial biomass, mega-dams, and waste incineration) across Africa. It highlights how these technologies drive climate change, cause severe health and environmental damage, and often benefit elites and multinational corporations over local populations. The report provides case studies on coal in South Africa, oil in Nigeria and Uganda, mega-dams in Mozambique, and the risks of 'extreme energy' like fracking and bitumen extraction in the Maghreb and Nigeria. It concludes by calling for 'energy sovereignty' and a just transition to decentralized, renewable energy systems.

The document examines the global disparity in energy consumption, contrasting energy poverty in the Global South and parts of the North with excessive consumption in industrialized nations. It proposes 'energy sufficiency' as a paradigm shift away from orthodox economic growth and purely technocentric efficiency, which can lead to the 'Jevons paradox' (increased overall consumption). Through case studies in Gaza, Cameroon, and the Isle of Eigg, the report demonstrates how community-led, small-scale renewable energy projects can meet basic human needs and empower local populations while maintaining ecological limits.

The letter argues that the owners of the Dakota Access Pipeline are complicit in human rights abuses against Indigenous peoples in Standing Rock, North Dakota, and asserts that corporate and financial entities have an affirmative duty to prevent such impacts.

The document argues that while climate change does not cause hurricanes, it fuels stronger North Atlantic storms and increases their damage through sea level rise and heavier rainfall. It highlights specific risks to US military installations, power grids, and historic sites, while noting that low-income and minority communities face disproportionate hazards and recovery challenges.

The document analyzes how neoliberal trade and investment frameworks, characterized by 'mega-regional' agreements and bilateral investment treaties, prioritize corporate profitability over human rights and ecological sustainability. It contrasts the 'agro-industry' model—which emphasizes large-scale production of 'flexible crops' for export and financial gain—with 'agroecology,' which focuses on small-scale producers, biodiversity, and the social function of land. The report highlights the role of the European Union in driving this industrial model, particularly in Africa, and recommends a systemic shift toward policies that protect small-scale farmers, recognize land as a common good, and hold transnational corporations accountable for human rights violations.

The report examines how the neoliberal trade and investment regime prioritizes the economic profitability of transnational corporations (TNCs) over human rights and food security. It contrasts the 'Agribusiness Model', characterized by large-scale monocrops and investor protections, with an 'Agroecology Model' based on food sovereignty and environmental justice. The document highlights how specific legal clauses in trade agreements—such as National Treatment and Investor-State dispute settlement—create a 'regulatory chilling-effect' that prevents states from protecting small-scale producers. It specifically identifies the European Union as a driver of this system through its trade strategies and funding of agroindustrial projects in Africa. The report concludes with recommendations to reform investment regimes, prioritize small-scale producers, and establish legally binding instruments to hold TNCs accountable for human rights violations.

Friends of the Earth International (FOEI) asserts that humanity has entered 'Decade Zero,' a critical window for drastic action to prevent irreversible warming. The report advocates for a 'Fairshare' approach to the global carbon budget, where rich industrialised nations take the deepest cuts and pay their 'climate debt' to the global South. FOEI rejects 'false solutions'—including carbon markets, REDD, and 'net zero' technologies—arguing they protect corporate profits and lead to human rights violations. Instead, it proposes a transition to energy sovereignty, agroecology, and community forest management, underpinned by a shift away from neoliberalism toward an economic system accountable to people.

The document defines the 'Decade Zero' as the critical window to prevent irreversible climate warming. It critiques the current global energy system and neoliberal economic models, labeling market-based mechanisms like carbon trading and REDD as 'false solutions' that protect corporate profits while violating human rights. The report advocates for a systemic transformation centered on climate justice, where developed nations pay their 'climate debt' to the Global South and energy production is shifted to decentralized, community-owned, and sustainable models.

Friends of the Earth International asserts that humanity has entered the 'Decade Zero', the final window to prevent dangerous climate change through drastic action. The document criticizes the neoliberal economic system and the power of transnational corporations, which it claims drive the climate crisis and promote 'false solutions' like carbon markets and REDD. It proposes a transition to 'energy sovereignty', agro-ecology, and community forest management, while demanding that wealthy industrialised nations pay their 'climate debt' to support developing countries.

The document argues for a legally binding international treaty to end the impunity of transnational corporations (TNCs) regarding human rights violations. It proposes the creation of an International Tribunal on Transnational Corporations and Human Rights to counter the 'architecture of impunity' created by private arbitration systems like ICSID. The proposals emphasize the extraterritorial obligations of home states, joint and several liability across corporate value chains, and the need to reform International Financial Institutions (IFIs) like the IMF and World Bank. It further advocates for the supremacy of human rights over investment treaties and the establishment of accessible, free legal remedies for affected communities.

The document argues for a legally binding international treaty to end the impunity of transnational corporations (TNCs) and dismantle their systemic power. It proposes the creation of an international tribunal for TNCs and human rights, the establishment of joint and several liability across corporate value chains, and the reform of international financial institutions and trade regimes to prioritize human rights over investor profits. The text emphasizes the need for extraterritorial obligations for home states and the guarantee of free, collective, and swift legal recourse for affected communities.

The document argues that electrifying heavy-duty vehicles in California can significantly reduce air pollution and global warming emissions while creating job opportunities for underserved communities. It provides a life cycle emissions analysis comparing battery and fuel cell electric buses to diesel and CNG alternatives, finds that current EV technology meets many urban operational needs, and recommends targeted workforce training and financial incentives to ensure an equitable transition.

The document examines how conservation policies are used to forcibly evict indigenous peoples from ancestral lands, often masking commercial interests. It highlights the disproportionate impact on women and children and provides case studies from India's Panna Tiger Reserve and Kenya's Embobut Forest to illustrate human rights violations and the failure of top-down conservation models.

The report by Friends of the Earth International asserts that the massive amount of public revenue lost annually to tax havens—estimated at $600 billion—is sufficient to finance a global energy revolution. Specifically, it calculates that an investment of US$7,603 billion by 2030 could provide 100% renewable energy to Africa, Latin America, and 'Other Asia'. The document advocates for the elimination of tax havens and the redirection of fossil fuel subsidies to support community-controlled renewable energy systems as a means to combat climate change and global inequality.

The document examines the limited global carbon budget available to restrict warming to 1.5°C and the resulting necessity for Australia to undergo a rapid energy transformation. It argues that current national pledges under the Paris Agreement are insufficient and that relying on future 'negative emissions' technologies is risky. For Australia, a 'fair share' of the carbon budget would be exhausted in less than six years at current emission levels, necessitating a shift away from fossil fuel extraction and exports.