Search Climate Insights Directory

CAPE argues that the City of Calgary's pesticide toxicity report fails to list specific toxic products used in its IPM program, ignores epidemiological evidence regarding adverse health outcomes for children and pregnant women, and over-relies on a flawed federal registration process administered by Health Canada's PMRA.

The report synthesizes existing data to quantify the widespread costs of pollution in Canada, which total tens of billions of dollars annually. It highlights that pollution increases expenses for medical care, food, and public services while noting that fragmented data often obscures these costs from the public and policymakers. Specific examples include $1.6 billion in costs from heat waves in 2015 and an average annual cost of $283 million for managing federal contaminated sites between 2005/06 and 2014/15.

The document synthesizes findings from systematic reviews to argue that pesticide exposure is linked to various cancers, reproductive issues, neurological disorders, and respiratory problems, particularly in vulnerable populations like children and pregnant women. It advocates for the reduction of pesticide use and the banning of cosmetic pesticides in Canada.

CIEL supports the March for Science to defend the role of empirical evidence in policy and law, specifically highlighting the need for science-based identification criteria for endocrine disruptors (EDCs) in the European Union to prevent health issues like cancers and infertility.

The report highlights a critical lack of transparency in the antibiotic supply chain for the French market, noting that while formulation often occurs in Europe, active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) are primarily sourced from India and China. It documents severe environmental pollution and the proliferation of antibiotic-resistant bacteria around production sites in these countries, linking specific manufacturers like Aurobindo and Mylan to these impacts. The document argues that current French public procurement processes fail to account for these environmental risks and calls for a global audit and stricter transparency requirements to combat antimicrobial resistance.

The report criticizes the European Commission's 2016 proposal for EDC identification criteria, arguing that limiting these criteria to pesticides and biocides violates the 7th Environmental Action Programme's mandate for harmonized, hazard-based criteria. The authors contend that this sector-specific approach creates legal uncertainty, risks inconsistent identification of chemicals across different regulatory frameworks (such as REACH and the Cosmetics Regulation), and may lower overall health and environmental protections. They recommend that the Commission adopt horizontal criteria based on the UN Globally Harmonised System (GHS) and the CLP Regulation, utilizing three hazard categories based on the strength of evidence: known, presumed, and suspected EDCs.

The document argues that Belgium and the Netherlands are in breach of international law by exporting high sulfur fuels to West African states, specifically those party to the Bamako Convention. It concludes that these fuels qualify as hazardous wastes under the Bamako Convention and, by extension, under the Basel Convention for countries with monist legal systems. The report asserts that such exports violate the Basel Convention's prohibition on exporting hazardous wastes to parties that have banned their import, breach customary international law by frustrating the treaty's purpose, and violate extraterritorial human rights obligations regarding the right to health.

The CRN3 Researchers Meeting focused on improving the translation of scientific research into actionable policy outputs. Key discussions centered on the challenges of interdisciplinary science, the establishment of an IAI open data platform supported by the Government of Uruguay, and the creation of a special peer-reviewed journal issue to compile CRN3 position papers. The meeting also explored collaborations between IAI and global bodies like the IPCC and IPBES to better align scientific projects with national environmental frameworks.

The Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE) recommends against Canada ratifying the TPP, asserting that climate change is a global health emergency requiring a low-carbon transition and the retention of 80% of fossil fuel reserves. CAPE expresses concern that TPP 'Technical Barrier to Trade' provisions and the use of investment lawyer tribunals to determine 'legitimate' public welfare objectives could prioritize trade over environmental health. Additionally, the document warns that the extension of pharmaceutical patents under the TPP would hinder generic competition and increase costs for Canadians and people worldwide.

The Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE) expresses concern that the TPP's legal frameworks, specifically Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) and Technical Barrier to Trade (TBT) provisions, may limit Canada's ability to implement essential climate mitigation and public health policies. The statement highlights risks such as corporate lawsuits over fossil fuel restrictions, increased pharmaceutical costs due to extended patents, and the potential for trade tribunals to override the precautionary principle in environmental health decision-making.

The Alberta Pesticide Survey Report details a public opinion poll conducted in August 2016. A majority of respondents expressed concern that pesticides used on lawns and gardens pose threats to children (66%), pets (68%), and the general environment (50%). Consequently, 62% of those surveyed supported a law to phase out the use and sale of all but the safest pesticides for lawns and gardens in Alberta, excluding agriculture, forestry, and mosquito control.

The document outlines the regulatory landscape of cosmetic pesticides in Canada, comparing 'white list' and 'black list' approaches and evaluating the effectiveness of mandatory bans over voluntary programs. It identifies key gaps in current legislation, such as exceptions for golf courses and lack of retail enforcement, while providing evidence of reduced pesticide concentrations in Ontario water bodies and decreased resident use in Toronto following the implementation of bans.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) criticizes the European Commission's June 2016 draft legal acts for Plant Protection Products and Biocidal Products Regulations. CIEL argues the proposed criteria for identifying endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) are too restrictive because they only include substances 'known to' cause adverse effects, excluding 'presumed' and 'suspected' EDCs. The document claims this high burden of proof, potentially influenced by industry lobbying and US trade concerns, fails the precautionary principle and could exclude hundreds of harmful chemicals. CIEL specifically opposes the 'negligible risk' allowance in the Plant Protection Products Regulation, advocating instead for a hazard-based approach similar to that used for carcinogenic, mutagenic, or toxic to reproduction (CMR) substances.

The paper evaluates sanitation policies in Rwanda, Uganda, and Tanzania against seven criteria, finding that while frameworks are ambitious and reforms toward decentralization and Sector Wide Approaches (SWAps) are positive, significant gaps remain in funding, technical capacity at the district level, and the translation of policy into functional facilities.

The Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE), along with Pesticide Free Alberta and Prevent Cancer Now, is requesting that the Federal Minister of Health intervene to stop the use of chlorpyrifos (specifically the products Pyrate and Dursban) for mosquito control in Edmonton. The organizations argue that the chemical is a "powerful developmental neurotoxicant" and that its federal re-evaluation has been "unacceptably prolonged". They suggest Vectobac as a safer bacteria-based alternative already used in cities like Grand Prairie.

The report finds that residents in underserved Maryland neighborhoods perceive climate change risks similarly to the general state population but experience significantly higher rates of environmental harms, such as flooding and sewage overflows. While these communities support government action on climate and the creation of local resilience hubs, they report lower levels of social capital and resource accessibility. The study highlights a strong demand for energy bill assistance and community centers, suggesting that climate preparedness efforts should be integrated with broader community development and social resilience goals.

The Centre for Environmental Rights, representing various community and environmental organisations, argues that the 2013 National Dust Control Regulations are ineffective due to their reliance on a 30-day monitoring average and the 'crude' ASTM D1739 test method. The letter highlights that PM10 fugitive emissions from mine haul roads account for 49% of total annual PM10 emissions in the Highveld Priority Area. It recommends adopting a pro-active 'best practices' approach and opacity standards similar to those used in Michigan and Utah (USA), and calls for mandatory geochemical and radionuclide analysis of dust from tailings storage facilities to address toxicity and radiation risks.

The document analyzes proposed changes to the REACH regulation's annexes to ensure nanomaterials are properly documented and assessed. It argues that nanoforms must be evaluated separately from non-nanoforms and that registration dossiers should include detailed physico-chemical and toxicological data, especially for consumer products. The author supports the inclusion of a formal definition of 'nanomaterial' in Annex VI but argues that current characterization requirements are insufficient, omitting critical data on surface chemistry and agglomeration. It further advocates for mandatory inhalation or dermal toxicity studies when more appropriate than oral tests and insists that nanomaterials must be fully characterized before being grouped for risk assessment.

The report argues that while open records laws are essential for government transparency, they are increasingly weaponized to target scientists and academics whose work threatens vested interests. By requesting vast amounts of private correspondence, draft papers, and raw data, harassers aim to chill speech, distract researchers from their work, and undermine scientific integrity. The document provides numerous case studies across fields such as climate science, tobacco research, and environmental health, noting that public universities are often unprepared to handle these intrusive requests. It calls for clearer legal exemptions to protect the scientific deliberative process and the development of institutional guidelines to safeguard researchers while maintaining public accountability.

A coalition including Earthjustice and the Center for Food Safety is defending a Maui County initiative that bans genetically engineered (GE) crops until their safety is proven. This follows similar efforts in Kauaʻi and Hawaiʻi counties. The initiative was challenged in court by Monsanto and Dow-owned Agrigenetics shortly after its passage in November 2014. The document highlights the high volume of GE field test sites in Hawaiʻi compared to California and the associated risks of pesticide spraying near communities.