Search Climate Insights Directory

The report identifies ten 'building blocks' for enabling community forestry laws, emphasizing the need for secure tenure, simple allocation processes, and inclusive governance. Through case studies of Nepal, the Philippines, and Tanzania, it argues that legal frameworks should be supportive rather than restrictive, iterative in design, and coherent across multiple sectors to ensure sustainable forest management and improved local livelihoods.

The report argues that Japan's domestic ivory market remains insufficient to prevent illegal trade and recommends a comprehensive market closure with narrow exemptions. It compares Japan's regime with those of China, Hong Kong, Thailand, the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union, highlighting gaps in Japan's traceability, registration, and stockpile management. Key recommendations include mandating the registration of privately held ivory, implementing permanent marking for tusks, and adopting stricter legal acquisition verification processes.

The analysis argues that EUSIPA perpetuates the flaws of old-generation Bilateral Investment Treaties by providing vague investor protections and a biased dispute settlement system that lacks sufficient judicial independence and fails to prioritize public interest over investment claims.

The document argues for the alignment of provincial conservation laws with national legislation, the clarification of welfare mandates between government departments, and the standardisation of permitting processes to ensure the well-being of wild animals in South Africa.

The report details a systemic failure in Peru's forestry sector where official documents, such as Forest Management Plans and Forest Transport Permits, are used to legitimize illegal logging. Analysis of 1,024 permits from 2017 shows that a significant portion of timber is high-risk, particularly from the Loreto and Ucayali regions. The document identifies specific public officials and regents who approved plans for nonexistent trees and argues that weak enforcement of administrative and criminal penalties creates an environment of impunity for organized crime networks.

The Clean Air Parents’ Network, supported by ClientEarth and the British Lung Foundation, issued this toolkit for the 2019 UK General Election. It urges voters to pressure candidates to adopt a pledge focusing on protecting children's health, implementing Clean Air Zones, and meeting World Health Organization particulate matter guidelines by 2030. The document provides factual talking points on the public health crisis caused by road transport emissions and offers practical tools for campaigning, including email templates, social media strategies, and questions for hustings.

The document provides a toolkit for using social media to engage political candidates during the 2019 UK General Election, specifically urging them to support the #cleanairforchildren campaign. It offers strategic advice for Twitter and Facebook, including the use of specific hashtags and personal storytelling, alongside template posts that call for the implementation of Clean Air Zones and the adoption of World Health Organization guideline levels for particulate matter pollution by 2030.

The document details how the Lamu Port Three Berth Project and a proposed 1050Mw coal plant in Kwasasi threaten the livelihoods of thousands of fishers in Lamu, Kenya. It highlights the environmental impacts of these projects, including water turbidity from dredging and thermal pollution from cooling systems, and describes the legal actions taken by Natural Justice, Save Lamu, and the Katiba Institute to secure compensation and challenge project approvals.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) and allied environmental groups are calling for the urgent withdrawal of an amendment to the List of Activities published on 31 October 2018. The amendment doubles the permissible sulphur dioxide (SO2) emissions for existing solid-fuel combustion installations, such as Eskom's coal-fired power stations and Sasol's coal boilers, from 500mg/Nm3 to 1000mg/Nm3. The CER argues that this change was made without public consultation, violating the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act, 2004 and the National Environmental Management Act's requirements for transparency and public participation. The group has set a deadline of 10 December 2018 for the withdrawal of the provision, threatening High Court litigation if the request is not met.

The Centre for Environmental Rights, representing the Life After Coal/Impilo Ngaphandle Kwamalahle Campaign, is urging the South African government to prioritise the promulgation of the Climate Change Bill, 2018. The authors argue that delaying climate legislation is unacceptable given South Africa's extreme vulnerability to climate change and the urgent need for 'rapid and far-reaching' transitions to limit global warming to 1.5°C. They assert that the state has a Constitutional obligation to protect the environment and prevent pollution, citing the Dutch Urgenda case as a legal precedent for the state's duty to pursue ambitious greenhouse gas emission reduction plans.

A coalition of environmental and health organizations expresses grave concern over the reported plan to eliminate the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario (ECO) via Bill 57, arguing that the office's independent, evidence-based analysis is essential for environmental accountability and public health.

This document contains the heads of argument submitted by ACWA Power to the Appeal Authority of the Nkangala District Municipality. ACWA argues that an appeal brought by the non-profit organization GroundWork against the transfer of a Provisional Atmospheric Emission Licence (PAEL) should be dismissed because GroundWork, as a third party, lacks the legal standing to appeal under section 62 of the Local Government Municipal Systems Act 32 of 2000.

The Pretoria High Court set aside a decision by the Minister of Environmental Affairs and the Minister of Mineral Resources to allow Atha-Africa Ventures 16 (Pty) Ltd to mine in the Mabola Protected Environment, citing procedural unfairness, lack of transparency, and failure to apply environmental management principles.

ClientEarth argues that the European Commission's Proposal for a Collective Redress Directive is too narrow because it focuses primarily on consumer rights. The organization contends that the directive should be expanded to include 'horizontal collective redress,' allowing citizens harmed by industrial pollution, toxic chemicals, and breaches of labour or anti-discrimination laws to seek compensation. ClientEarth rejects concerns over 'abusive litigation,' noting that no such instances have occurred in EU jurisdictions, and calls for NGOs representing environmental and worker interests to be recognized as qualified entities for bringing representative actions.

The Centre for Environmental Rights, on behalf of the Life After Coal/Impilo Ngaphandle Kwamalahle Campaign, supports the elimination of 'rolling postponements' for emission standards but argues that the draft legislation lacks sufficient safeguards. The submission recommends that postponement applications be contingent on ambient air quality compliance, require full public disclosure of decommissioning schedules, and mandate stricter emission standards for facilities seeking once-off suspensions, particularly in air quality priority areas.

The report evaluates the South African legal framework for wild animal welfare, highlighting a critical divide between biodiversity conservation (managed by the Department of Environmental Affairs) and animal welfare (managed by the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries). It finds that the primary welfare statute, the Animals Protection Act of 1962, is outdated and contains loopholes—specifically the use of the term "unnecessary"—that dilute protection. The report identifies significant failures in the permitting system, noting that provincial authorities often ignore national TOPS regulations and omit welfare conditions from permits. It concludes with recommendations for a standardized national electronic permit database, increased enforcement capacity, and the integration of welfare mandates across environmental and agricultural departments.

ClientEarth asserts that the EU is in violation of international law following a 2017 finding by the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee (ACCC) that the EU fails to provide the public with adequate access to EU courts. The document argues that the current Aarhus Regulation is unduly restrictive, noting that only 7 out of 35 internal review requests were declared admissible. ClientEarth contends that amending the Aarhus Regulation is the only viable legal mechanism to remedy these shortcomings and bring the EU into compliance with the Aarhus Convention and the Vienna Convention of the Law of Treaties.

Earthjustice argues that the U.S. House Farm Bill (H.R. 2) contained 'poison pill' provisions that threatened water quality, old-growth forests, endangered species, and climate adaptation efforts, while restricting public access to justice.

The report proposes a UK-wide Nature and Environment Commission to replace the oversight and enforcement functions previously provided by EU institutions. It argues that environmental law is often ineffective due to poor compliance by public authorities and a lack of a dedicated enforcer. The proposed Commission would combine technical expertise with strong legal powers, including the ability to conduct thematic inquiries, issue binding notices, and seek specific mandatory injunctions from courts. To ensure independence, the report recommends that the Commission be funded by and accountable to parliaments rather than governments, and be composed of an interdisciplinary team of experts. It also emphasizes the need for the Commission to act as a voice for nature and local communities through a transparent complaints process and public advocacy.

The paper argues that while South Africa possesses the necessary legal tools—primarily through the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA) and the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA)—to achieve the targets of SDG 12, practical implementation is hindered by systemic failures. These include a lack of political will, administrative inefficiency within the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR), and poor inter-departmental coordination. The authors highlight a specific governance risk where the DMR acts as both the awarding authority for environmental authorisations and the body responsible for their implementation, which weakens oversight.