Search Climate Insights Directory

The document serves as a toolkit for local communities to resist land grabbing by governments and corporations. It explains the conflict between customary and statutory law, outlines how to utilize international human rights mechanisms—including UN Special Rapporteurs—and critiques eleven common corporate promises regarding development, jobs, and food security. It specifically highlights the vulnerabilities of women and indigenous peoples and advocates for 'Free, Prior and Informed Consent' (FPIC).

The report examines the legal landscape in Zimbabwe concerning the rights of local communities and indigenous peoples. It highlights a significant gap between progressive constitutional provisions and the actual implementation of laws, particularly in the mining and forestry sectors. While community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) programs like CAMPFIRE show some success in wildlife conservation, the report finds that local communities often face arbitrary evictions, lack of secure land tenure, and marginalization from decision-making processes in extractive industries. It recommends comprehensive legal reforms to align sectoral laws with the 2013 Constitution, establish a Land Commission, and formalize the recognition of Indigenous Community Conserved Areas (ICCAs).

The report finds that AFOLU mitigation potentials for eight major emitters—the United States, Indonesia, China, India, Brazil, the European Union, Mexico, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo—could reduce the 2020 emissions gap by approximately three-fourths and the 2030 gap by nearly half. The United States has the highest individual potential at 23 Gt CO2eq, while Indonesia, China, and India also show substantial potentials between 0.75 and 1.75 Gt. These potentials are derived from three primary activities: reducing emissions from deforestation and peatland clearing, decreasing agricultural emissions (such as methane and nitrous oxide), and increasing carbon sequestration through reforestation and ecosystem restoration.

The document opposes using carbon markets to promote climate-smart agriculture, citing the risk of impermanence in soil and forest carbon sequestration compared to permanent fossil fuel emissions. It highlights that land use accounts for 24% of global emissions and suggests that finance for these activities should be mobilized through non-market mechanisms like Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs) to avoid compromising food security and adaptation.

The We Mean Business Coalition calls on G20 leaders to move beyond rhetoric and commit to specific policy actions to stabilize greenhouse gas emissions and hold global temperatures below 2 °C. The coalition advocates for the elimination of high-carbon energy subsidies, the enactment of carbon pricing, and the scale-up of low carbon energy and public finance. It further encourages the G20 to integrate findings on climate-compatible infrastructure investment into the establishment of a global infrastructure hub, asserting that climate action is compatible with economic growth.

Amigos de la Tierra de América Latina y el Caribe (ATALC) expresses solidarity following the death of 21-year-old activist Remi Fraisse, who was killed by explosive grenades used by French gendarmerie during a peaceful protest against the Sivens dam in Gaillac. The project is criticized for causing deforestation and the flooding of a strategic wetland, reflecting a model of land and water resource grabbing by corporations with state support.

The document defines energy poverty as the lack of access to adequate, affordable, and sustainable energy services, highlighting its severe impacts on health, economic productivity, and the environment. It notes that 1.3 billion people lack electricity and 2.7 billion rely on biomass for cooking, with the highest concentrations in Sub-Saharan Africa and Asia. The author argues that while energy consumption is a necessary condition for development, universal access could be achieved by 2030 with an annual investment of 30-35 billion USD, a sum significantly lower than current global fossil fuel subsidies.

The document examines Mexico's progress in implementing REDD+ safeguards, highlighting the transition from confusing the SIS with the SNS to establishing a framework based on national law and sustainable rural development. While Mexico has strong institutional capacity and a history of community forestry, the report identifies critical gaps in the operationalization of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC), clarity on avoided emission carbon rights, and the risk of weakened World Bank safeguard policies. It argues that international guidance from the UNFCCC is necessary to standardize reporting and ensure the protection of indigenous and local community rights.

The report details WWF's efforts to transform commodity markets through the promotion of credible certification schemes, corporate engagement, and policy influence. It highlights the growth of standards like RSPO and MSC, the integration of small-scale producers into sustainable supply chains, and the increasing commitment of major retailers and financial institutions to sustainable sourcing. The document argues that while significant progress has been made in moving sustainability from a niche to a mainstream requirement, further work is needed to scale these impacts and integrate them into national policies and landscape-level management.

The document argues that LULUCF should be treated separately in the EU's 2030 climate framework to prevent its carbon sink from being used to reduce mitigation efforts in energy, industry, and transport. It emphasizes that land-use policies must prioritize biodiversity and environmental integrity over simple carbon sequestration, specifically recommending the rewetting of peatlands and the end of subsidies for unsustainable farming. Globally, it calls for the EU to address its role as a major importer of deforestation-embodied products through mandatory standards and a new EU Action Plan on deforestation.

The document critiques the REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) mechanism, asserting that it prioritizes private finance and corporate interests over indigenous rights and genuine climate mitigation. Through case studies in Indonesia, Mozambique, and Peru, it demonstrates how REDD projects can exacerbate land conflicts, threaten food security, and fail to achieve carbon reduction goals. The report concludes that REDD is a 'false solution' that allows industrial polluters in the Global North to continue emitting via carbon offsets. It proposes an alternative based on community-led forest management, the resolution of land tenure issues, and a systemic reduction in the consumption of resources by rich countries.

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) critiques the REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) mechanism, claiming it exacerbates land tenure conflicts, threatens food security, and allows industrial polluters in the Global North to avoid domestic emission cuts. Through case studies in Indonesia, Mozambique, and Peru, the report illustrates failures in carbon accounting, financial instability, and the marginalization of Indigenous peoples. FoEI proposes an alternative model of community forest management, citing Bolivia's proposal to the UNFCCC as a viable path toward climate justice and sustainable forest preservation.

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) contends that REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation) fails to deliver permanent emissions reductions and often harms Indigenous Peoples and local communities. Through case studies in Indonesia, Mozambique, and Peru, the report illustrates how REDD+ can exacerbate land tenure conflicts, threaten food security, and facilitate continued pollution in industrialised countries via carbon offsets. FoEI proposes replacing these market-based mechanisms with community-led forest management based on traditional knowledge and a global reduction in the demand for forest-derived products.

The New York Declaration on Forests Action Agenda provides a framework for governments, companies, indigenous peoples, and multilateral institutions to combat deforestation. It highlights significant progress, such as Brazil's 71% reduction in deforestation by 2013 and the adoption of zero-deforestation policies by major palm oil traders covering 60% of global trade. The agenda details specific roles for stakeholders, including the implementation of the Warsaw Framework for REDD+ and the commitment of indigenous peoples to protect 400 million hectares of forests. It also notes financial commitments from developed nations like Germany, Norway, and the UK to provide predictable REDD+ financing.

The report highlights the vulnerability of Colombia's road infrastructure to weather-related stressors, particularly floods and landslides, which are expected to increase in intensity and frequency due to climate change. It emphasizes the high risk to the Andean Region and the need for transportation planners to integrate climate risks, land-use changes, and institutional coordination into future investments to ensure sustainable economic development.

Janet Thew, a client of Dimensional Fund Advisors (DFA), writes to CEO David Booth to announce her divestment of $100,000 and her call for the firm to stop investing in companies responsible for forest destruction. The letter highlights DFA's significant holdings in palm oil, timber, and pulp and paper producers, arguing that these investments contribute to global warming and biodiversity loss. The author urges DFA to move beyond a passive investment strategy to ensure its portfolios are deforestation-free and to use shareholder power to improve corporate human rights and environmental performance.

The document details the legal battle over the Spruce No. 1 mine, one of the largest proposed mountaintop removal sites. It highlights the EPA's historic 2011 veto of the mine based on potential harm to natural resources and overburdened low-income communities, and the subsequent court proceedings where the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit upheld the EPA's authority to veto the project in April 2013.

The document describes a social marketing 'Pride' campaign implemented by Pronatura Veracruz and Rare in the Central Coast of Veracruz, Mexico. The campaign aimed to motivate landowners to join a network of private conservation areas to protect tropical deciduous forest—critical for migratory raptors like the peregrine falcon—against threats from urban development, cattle ranching, and sugar cane production. In the Actopan municipality, where adoption of Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) had previously been slow, these methods enabled the protection of over 1,500 hectares of previously unprotected forest.

The document examines how population growth and resource-intensive meat production increase pressure on forestland, arguing that REDD+ must compete with the profitability of livestock and grain production to effectively and equitably address deforestation.

The report evaluates the 'Priority Municipalities' (MPs) policy in Brazil, which blacklisted municipalities with high deforestation rates to target law enforcement. The study finds that the policy significantly reduced deforestation in the Amazon, avoiding the clearing of 11,359 km2 of forest between 2008 and 2011. This reduction was primarily driven by increased monitoring and law enforcement, such as a 10% increase in fines, while having no negative impact on agricultural GDP, crop production, or credit concessions.