Search Climate Insights Directory

The report assesses how the ASEAN-China Free Trade Agreement (ACFTA) has influenced trade flows and environmental quality in the Greater Mekong Sub-region (GMS). Using a trade-environment matrix, the authors find that while two-thirds of trade is in low-pollution sectors, a third is in highly polluting sectors, with China as the primary producer of these goods. In Cambodia, the agreement has increased imports of polluting goods from China, which the authors describe as an environmental 'gain' for Cambodia at the expense of China's environment. However, the report highlights severe risks of natural resource depletion in Cambodia, specifically deforestation driven by wood and rubber exports, and overfishing. The authors conclude that the ACFTA lacks environmental provisions, which is a significant shortcoming in regional economic policy.

The report finds that Malaysia's ambitions to become a global biodiesel producer have been undermined by volatile feedstock prices and the high cost of production relative to petroleum diesel. While the government provided limited support through soft loans and tax incentives, a proposed B5 blending mandate would likely increase the national subsidy burden. The industry's profitability is precarious, relying heavily on exports to the EU and US, where it may benefit from subsidy loopholes. Environmentally, the report argues that the presumed carbon benefits of biodiesel are offset by greenhouse gas emissions from deforestation and peatland conversion, while socially, global biofuel demand has contributed to rising food prices.

The briefing contends that forests should not be treated primarily as carbon sinks and warns that market-based REDD mechanisms risk creating climate loopholes and displacing local communities. It advocates for funding forest conservation through national programs and carbon taxes in industrialized nations rather than carbon markets, emphasizing the need to address the underlying drivers of deforestation such as agrofuels and industrial logging.

This briefing by Friends of the Earth International contends that forests provide value beyond carbon sequestration and warns that integrating REDD into carbon markets threatens indigenous land rights and climate goals. It advocates for direct funding of community-led conservation, the recognition of territorial rights for over one billion forest-dependent people, and a shift in responsibility toward industrialized nations to reduce emissions and address the root causes of deforestation, such as biofuels and industrial extraction.

The fact sheet contends that treating forests primarily as carbon sinks undermines biodiversity and the rights of indigenous peoples. It argues against the use of carbon markets and REDD, suggesting instead that industrialized nations provide direct financial support and address the root causes of deforestation, such as industrial logging and unsustainable consumption of meat and paper.

The report criticizes the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) for promoting a 'flawed model' of large-scale, export-oriented agrofuels in Latin America and the Caribbean. It argues that these projects, driven by demand from the US and Europe, lead to deforestation, biodiversity loss, and human rights abuses, such as violent land grabs in Colombia. The document asserts that agrofuels are not a viable climate solution due to land-use emissions and calls for the IDB to shift funding toward small-scale, local energy projects and truly clean renewables like wind and solar.

The briefing identifies three primary financing categories for REDD: direct carbon markets, market-linked approaches, and voluntary sources. Direct carbon markets offer the highest funding potential (tens of billions of dollars annually) but risk a zero-sum effect on global emissions if offsets are not real and verifiable. Market-linked approaches, such as using auction revenues or dual markets, provide additional reductions and can fund capacity building and stabilization. Voluntary sources, including official development assistance, provide the fastest way to build initial capacity but offer the least reliable and smallest funding scale (hundreds of millions of dollars annually). The author proposes a phased timing strategy: utilizing voluntary funding in the short term, increasing market-linked funding toward 2020, and transitioning to direct carbon markets as the primary source in the 2020s once capacity and verification systems are established.

The document argues that REDD is a cost-effective method for reducing heat-trapping emissions, noting that $5 billion annually could protect nearly 20% of tropical forests at risk, while $20 billion could protect about half. It identifies opportunity costs as the largest expense and highlights that global models provide more conservative, comprehensive cost estimates than regional studies. Total implementation, administrative, and transaction costs are estimated at nearly $1 per ton of reductions, with separate stabilization costs estimated at $630 million per year for the ten most critical countries to prevent international leakage.

The document critiques the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) for promoting large-scale biofuel monocultures as a 'clean energy' solution. It argues that these projects, particularly in Brazil and Colombia, lead to deforestation, biodiversity loss, and rural displacement while failing to provide significant greenhouse gas reductions. The report calls for a shift toward small-scale, decentralized energy systems that support local food security and rural development.

The report analyzes the global commodity chain of forest products where China acts as the central processing hub, importing raw materials from developing nations and exporting finished goods to Western markets. It highlights a systemic failure in governance and sustainability, particularly in Mozambique and Russia, where weak tenure rights and corruption lead to illegal logging and forest degradation. Conversely, it notes that trade with New Zealand demonstrates a positive model where strong governance ensures sustainable plantation management. The document argues that China's own self-interest—specifically the need for secure, long-term fibre supply—should drive it to lead international efforts in sustainable forest management, improve its procurement policies, and support capacity-building in supplier countries.

The author contends that sub-Saharan Africa's underdevelopment stems from the mismanagement of economic surpluses by political elites who exploited their power to maintain high living standards and fund failing industrial projects. Comparing the divergent paths of Ghana and South Korea since 1965, the text argues that current frameworks like Nepad fail to address the power imbalance between elites and producers. To achieve development, the author proposes introducing freehold land ownership for peasants, granting producers direct access to world markets for cash crops, and establishing independent financial and technical institutions supported by foreign donors.

Friends of the Earth International rejects the Roundtable on Responsible Soy (RTRS), claiming it provides a "façade of sustainability" for agribusinesses and energy companies while failing to address the systemic impacts of industrial soy. The document highlights how soy expansion leads to deforestation, biodiversity loss, human rights violations, and increased food insecurity. It specifically criticizes the promotion of genetically modified (GM) soy, noting substantial increases in herbicide use in Brazil and the United States. The statement argues that the RTRS ignores indirect regional and global impacts, such as the displacement of agriculture into primary forests and the pollution caused by intensive livestock production in Europe. To address these issues, the organization calls for structural land reforms, reduced global demand for meat and dairy, and an end to large-scale agrofuel production.

The document analyzes China's strategy of accessing previously untapped natural resources in Africa, often in ecologically fragile areas with weak governance. It highlights the central role of the China Exim Bank in financing large-scale infrastructure and extractive projects, noting a historical lack of adherence to international environmental standards. Using the Merowe Dam in Sudan as a primary case study, the author illustrates significant social and environmental failures. While the Chinese government has begun introducing social and environmental guidelines and 'green credit' policies, the report warns that stricter domestic regulations may inadvertently encourage the relocation of polluting industries to Africa.

The document identifies that 76% of the sub-Saharan African population relies on traditional biomass for cooking, leading to deforestation, indoor air pollution, and gender inequality. It argues that while clean fuels like LPG, ethanol, and biogas offer significant health and environmental benefits, their adoption is stifled by high costs, lack of infrastructure, and socio-cultural preferences. The authors recommend national government intervention through targeted subsidies, the creation of clean cooking fuel bureaus, and the development of local sustainable energy resources for rural areas.

This fact sheet by Friends of the Earth International contends that GM crops, primarily soya, maize, and cotton, fail to increase yields or reduce poverty in developing regions. It asserts that the GM model benefits large-scale industrial farmers through 'convenience' while harming small-scale farmers via high seed costs, land displacement, and increased pesticide use. The document specifically highlights negative outcomes in South America, Africa, India, and China, and disputes claims that GM technology makes food cheaper or is necessary for the livestock industry.

The report 'Losing Ground' documents the systemic human rights violations associated with the expansion of oil palm plantations in Indonesia. It details how the conversion of customary lands into industrial monocultures leads to land dispossession, violent conflict, and the erosion of indigenous cultures. The authors highlight the economic failure of many smallholder schemes, which often result in debt bondage rather than prosperity, and describe severe environmental degradation, including water pollution and the loss of biodiversity. The document calls for the adoption of the principle of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) and urges European governments to abandon biofuel targets that drive this unsustainable expansion.

The document assesses the bio-diesel sector in Lao PDR as a means to reduce oil import dependency and create economic opportunities. While the government views biofuels as a tool for climate change mitigation and energy security, the report warns of significant environmental risks, including deforestation, biodiversity loss, and water pollution. It notes the absence of a cohesive national biofuel policy and recommends integrating strategic environmental assessments into policy development and private sector operations.

The document identifies the organic agriculture sector in Lao PDR as inherently environmentally friendly but underdeveloped due to non-tariff barriers like certification. While it offers benefits such as enhanced soil fertility, significant growth could lead to negative impacts including deforestation and increased carbon emissions from transport. The author recommends that the government implement formal certification processes and draft regulations for food safety and land-use management to support the sector's expansion into international markets.

The testimony argues that broad biofuel mandates, such as those implemented by the European Union, can inadvertently accelerate global warming by driving deforestation and land-use changes to meet feedstock demand. The author warns that using farmland for energy crops displaces food production, leading to the conversion of carbon sinks like forests and wetlands. To avoid these outcomes, the Clean Air Task Force recommends that Massachusetts slow the rush toward broad mandates, develop comprehensive life-cycle analysis tools that account for indirect land-use effects, and prioritize 'niche' feedstocks that do not require substantial farmland, specifically algae, biomass waste, and other waste products.

The Union of Concerned Scientists reports that the Office of Surface Mining (OSM) attempted to replace the 1983 stream buffer zone (SBZ) rule, which protects Appalachian streams from mountaintop removal mining, with weaker regulations. The report alleges that OSM's 2004 and 2007 environmental impact statements (EIS) were compromised by political interference and the systematic misrepresentation of scientific data regarding biodiversity, water toxins, and flood risks. Specifically, it claims OSM ignored findings on the ecological importance of temporary streams, the reduction of fish genetic diversity in West Virginia and Kentucky, and the presence of human toxins like manganese and selenium in mining-affected waters. The document concludes that the OSM prioritized the interests of the coal industry over scientific integrity and environmental protection.