Search Climate Insights Directory

A statement by Friends of the Earth International arguing that biodiversity loss and human rights violations are driven by the same corporate mechanisms, specifically within extractive and agro-industrial sectors. The text calls for a legally binding international instrument to regulate transnational corporations, asserting that voluntary corporate sustainability commitments are insufficient to protect nature and its defenders.

This briefing paper argues that the proposed United Nations Legally Binding Instrument (LBI) to regulate transnational corporations is a critical structural lever for achieving environmental justice. It contends that existing voluntary frameworks are inadequate to stop corporate-driven ecological destruction and that the LBI can transform the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment (RtHE) into enforceable obligations, ensuring corporate liability and access to remedy across transnational value chains.

This briefing paper argues for the necessity of a legally binding United Nations instrument to regulate transnational corporations and other businesses as a structural lever for environmental justice. It contends that current voluntary frameworks are insufficient to ensure corporate accountability for ecological destruction and human rights violations, particularly in the Global South.

This opinion piece by Nele Marien of Friends of the Earth International critiques the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) Assessment on Businesses and Biodiversity. The author argues that the report erroneously assumes corporate ignorance is the primary barrier to biodiversity protection, whereas the actual driver is the profitability of destruction. Marien asserts that voluntary corporate actions and market-based instruments are ineffective and that only binding regulations and strict limits on corporate impacts can halt biodiversity loss.

This guide, published by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) in February 2026, provides structured 'Litigation Notes' to help lawyers integrate the findings of the International Court of Justice's (ICJ) July 23, 2025, Advisory Opinion (AO) on State obligations regarding climate change into current and future legal cases. The document breaks down the ICJ's conclusions into thematic areas, including government framework litigation, adaptation, remedies and reparations, the right to a healthy environment, corporate conduct, climate finance, speculative interventions, and regulatory backsliding. It aims to translate the ICJ's normative clarity into practical tools for promoting climate justice across national, regional, and international courts.

This briefing, produced by a coalition of climate litigation practitioners, provides structured 'Litigation Notes' to help lawyers integrate the International Court of Justice's (ICJ) July 23, 2025, advisory opinion (AO) on States' climate obligations into legal cases. This specific note focuses on corporate conduct, detailing how the ICJ AO establishes State duties to regulate private actors, particularly in the fossil fuel industry, to prevent significant environmental harm.

A case study by the International Institute for Sustainable Development and the Centre for Responsible Business examining India's 2024 Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Greenwashing and Misleading Environmental Claims and their role in promoting corporate accountability and global competitiveness.

The 2025 Forest Declaration Assessment executive summary reports that global forests remain in crisis, with deforestation and degradation continuing at high levels despite international commitments. The document highlights a systemic failure to meet 2030 goals, driven by agricultural expansion and poor governance, while noting that current funding and corporate actions are insufficient to reverse the trend.

This briefing, prepared for the 11th session of the open-ended intergovernmental working group (OEIGWG), advocates for the explicit inclusion of the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment (RtHE) within a proposed international legally binding instrument (LBI) to regulate transnational corporations and business enterprises.

This briefing paper argues for the adoption of a United Nations legally binding instrument (LBI) to regulate transnational corporations as a structural lever for environmental justice. It highlights the failure of voluntary frameworks to ensure corporate accountability for ecological destruction and human rights abuses, proposing that a binding treaty would operationalize the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment through mandatory due diligence, extraterritorial jurisdiction, and effective remediation.

An opinion piece by Pablo Fajardo of the Union of Affected People by Texaco (now Chevron) and Friends of the Earth Ecuador, arguing that climate justice is impossible without ending corporate impunity, specifically citing Chevron's environmental devastation in the Ecuadorian Amazon.

This briefing by Zero Carbon Analytics examines the link between fossil fuel production and extreme weather events in Brazil, specifically focusing on the financial responsibility of Petrobras and the tension between the government's net-zero goals and its continued expansion of oil and gas extraction.

A statement by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) regarding the Special Rapporteur's report on business, planetary boundaries, and the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment, emphasizing the need for mandatory corporate due diligence and the phase-out of fossil fuels.

An executive summary of a special edition of the Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor evaluating the renewable electricity targets of 10 major fashion and tech companies. The document highlights the inadequacy of standalone Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs), the potential of 24/7 hourly matching, and the lack of incentive from major initiatives like the GHG protocol and RE100 to adopt high-quality procurement strategies.

The NewClimate Institute proposes a conceptual framework called the 'corporate climate accountability loop' consisting of seven functions to hold companies accountable for climate action, highlighting the need for institutional independence and mandatory regulation to replace current voluntary systems.

A November 2022 report by Global Energy Monitor (GEM) based on a 50-state survey reveals that major U.S. companies in the technology, banking, and insurance sectors frequently employ state-level lobbyists who also represent the fossil fuel industry. The report highlights a contradiction between these companies' public net-zero climate goals and their reliance on 'multi-client lobbyists' who promote continued fossil fuel dependence.

This briefing by the Center for International Environmental Law provides a roadmap and initial reflections on the May 6, 2022, final report issued by the Philippines Commission on Human Rights (CHR) following a seven-year National Inquiry on Climate Change.

The World Resources Institute (WRI) issued a statement welcoming the separation of the Climate Leadership Council (CLC) from Exxon and urging companies to align their political spending and lobbying with their public climate commitments.

Friends of the Earth International argues that the Convention on Biological Diversity's (CBD) draft decision to "mainstream biodiversity" across all economic sectors is dangerous and ineffective. The organization claims the proposal prioritizes corporate profit over nature and indigenous peoples, relying on voluntary business actions and "greenwashing" mechanisms like offsetting and ecosystem accounting rather than enforceable governmental regulations to halt the drivers of biodiversity loss.

A statement by Donald Pols of Friends of the Earth regarding a landmark Dutch court ruling that held Shell responsible for oil spills in the Niger Delta, emphasizing the need for stronger European corporate due diligence legislation to prevent decade-long legal battles for victims.