Search Climate Insights Directory

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) successfully divested its approximately $32 million portfolio from fossil fuel companies over an 18-month period starting in late 2013. Despite using 'sustainability funds' and low-cost index funds, UCS discovered that fossil fuel producers were still embedded in its holdings. To resolve this, the organization partnered with Blackrock for a fossil-free fund and worked with Calvert Investments to create a custom low-cost product. UCS reports that it is now almost entirely divested, with less than 2 percent exposure remaining in emerging markets, demonstrating that midsize organizations can align their financial strategies with climate goals without compromising risk or return objectives.

The report examines the systemic risk posed by credit rating agencies' failure to account for climate change in their methodologies. It argues that by assuming a 'business-as-usual' scenario of $\ge 4^{\circ}C$ warming rather than a dynamic trajectory aligned with a $2^{\circ}C$ goal, agencies are artificially inflating the credit ratings of fossil fuel projects. Using a case study of the Adani Abbot Point Terminal in Australia, the document demonstrates how generic project finance methodologies ignore risks such as stranded assets, decreased coal demand, and physical climate impacts. The report concludes that this failure not only threatens global financial stability by creating a 'carbon bubble' but also exposes rating agencies to significant legal liability under the Dodd-Frank Act and common law.

The Oregon Environmental Council (OEC) divested its $700,000 endowment fund from fossil fuels using a hybrid strategy of negative screening and shareholder activism. By partnering with Segue Point and UBS Financial Services, OEC employed 'negative screening' and a 'best-in-class' approach, utilizing ENSOGO Analytics to evaluate mutual funds. To avoid losing internal influence over polluting industries, OEC retained 20% of its endowment in a shareholder activist fund managed by Trillium Investments, which uses share ownership as leverage to influence corporate management.

The author contends that shorter UNFCCC commitment periods (five years) are superior to longer ones (ten years) because they prevent the 'locking in' of under-ambitious emissions targets. While the EU has advocated for a ten-year period to provide investment security and align with its 2030 Energy Package, the author argues this package lacks sufficient ambition and could freeze global climate aspirations. The text also notes that the US supports shorter periods due to domestic political volatility and the likelihood that a long-term legally binding agreement would be rejected by the US Congress.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) argues that the Norwegian Government Pension Fund Global (GPFG) faces significant legal, financial, and reputational risks due to its investments in fossil fuel companies. CIEL highlights that GPFG invests in 44 of the 90 'Carbon Majors' responsible for 63% of industrial greenhouse gas emissions from 1854-2010, increasing the likelihood of successful climate change litigation. The document specifically calls for immediate divestment from coal, citing the industry's financial decline, systemic demand drops in the US, and severe environmental and human rights abuses in India and China. Furthermore, CIEL asserts that continued fossil fuel investment contradicts Norway's international obligations under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and its commitment to inter-generational equity.

The event highlighted how climate change negatively impacts health through food insecurity, physical inactivity, and air pollution, while arguing that focusing on health co-benefits can overcome political inertia. Key recommendations include transitioning to sustainable diets, redesigning cities for active transportation, and divesting the healthcare sector from fossil fuels.

The document frames climate change as a mainstream public health crisis and advocates for a transition to clean energy and active transport to reduce early deaths and healthcare costs. It highlights the importance of health-aligned investment choices, citing the British Medical Association's divestment from fossil fuels and HESTA's restrictions on thermal coal. The guide also lists several high-level events in New York, including a WHO-ILO session on 'Climate, Health and Jobs' and a forum on sustainable diets.

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 argues that climate change is the greatest health threat of the 21st century and urges the health sector to adopt a 'divest-invest' framework to shift financial resources from fossil fuels to renewable energy. It calls for the declaration of climate change as a global public health emergency and urges health leaders to advocate for a fair international climate agreement in 2015.

A coalition of global social and climate justice movements, meeting at the PreCOP Social in Venezuela, condemns the 2014 Israeli military offensive and blockade in Gaza. The statement calls for an immediate end to the violence, the lifting of the blockade, and the implementation of a global campaign of boycott, divestment, and sanctions to ensure Israel respects United Nations resolutions and ends its occupation of Palestinian territories.

The research identifies key psychological and social drivers of climate activism in the U.S., finding that activists are more likely to view global warming as a serious but solvable threat and believe in the efficacy of collective action. The authors recommend that climate messaging combine threat warnings with actionable steps and support for social opinion leaders to overcome widespread public skepticism regarding the effectiveness of political activism.

The document argues that continued investment in fossil fuels contradicts the medical commitment to 'do no harm' and provides a five-step process for health organizations to transition their assets. It highlights the financial risk of 'stranded' carbon reserves and the economic opportunity of renewable energy, citing the fossil fuel sector as the worst performing in the S&P500 since 2007. The guide recommends using the Carbon Underground 200 to identify divestment targets and suggests reinvesting at least 5% of portfolios into climate solutions.

The document outlines how health professionals can act as trusted messengers to educate the public on climate-related health risks, engage peers through academic and professional channels, and influence policy-makers. It emphasizes focusing on climate policies that offer immediate health co-benefits and healthcare savings, while encouraging institutional changes such as fossil fuel divestment in universities and professional associations. The Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE) supports these efforts through regional volunteer committees in British Columbia, Alberta, Quebec, and Ontario.

The document outlines the risks of 'FrackLNG' in British Columbia, noting that 84% of public health studies find evidence of hazard or risk. It highlights potential health issues such as reproductive toxicity and asthma, as well as significant threats to water and air quality. The text argues that the Pacific Northwest LNG project alone could make it nearly impossible for BC to meet its 2050 climate targets, as the project's estimated 10 Mt CO2e/year emissions would consume most of the province's 13 Mt CO2e/yr target. Additionally, it notes social risks, including increased violence against Indigenous women and girls in Northeastern BC, and calls for a moratorium on fracking permits based on the Precautionary Principle.

The document argues that the IFC's proposed Approach to Responsible Exit fails to establish remedial responsibilities for the IFC or the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA), effectively allowing the institutions to exit projects without addressing harms caused by their investments. The authors contend that remedy should be a prerequisite for exit, as divestment removes the financial leverage necessary to drive corrective action. They propose four core principles: ensuring exits do not undermine ongoing Compliance Advisor Ombudsman (CAO) processes, conducting pre-divestment due diligence verified by communities, implementing meaningful consultation at least 12 months prior to divestment, and establishing protocols to prevent and manage reprisals against affected populations. The submission includes a table of projects in China, Egypt, Chile, Colombia, Nicaragua, and elsewhere where the IFC allegedly exited without providing remedy for documented harms such as forced labor, environmental damage, and human rights violations.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) has developed a Climate Risk Assessment Letter to help pension fund beneficiaries engage trustees on the management of climate-related financial risks. The guide argues that failing to monitor these risks—which include regulatory, technology, and litigation risks—may constitute a breach of fiduciary duty. It highlights that global financial institutions and some national funds, such as those in Norway and Ireland, are already reassessing or divesting from fossil fuel assets to protect long-term returns.

The report details the financial mechanisms supporting over 100 planned petrochemical projects in the US, primarily in the Gulf South. It finds that a small number of global banks and asset managers provide the majority of this capital, despite mounting market overcapacity, litigation risks, and environmental harms. The document calls for immediate divestment and the adoption of strict climate-aligned policies by financial institutions.

Clean Creatives warns shareholders of Interpublic Group and Omnicom that their proposed merger consolidates significant risks linked to fossil fuel clients, including legal liabilities, reputational damage, and future revenue losses as energy markets transition.

Clean Creatives calls on Netflix to implement fossil-free procurement criteria for its agencies and urges Dentsu, which recently secured a $190 million partnership with Netflix, to offramp all fossil fuel clients.

The report argues that the marketing industry must transition away from fossil fuel clients to future-proof revenue. It estimates that the top 29 oil majors spent approximately $6.97 billion on media, creative, and PR in 2024, which represents less than 1% of global marketing spend. While this spend generates an estimated $3.03 billion for major global holding companies and specific firms like Edelman, Accenture Song, and Stagwell, the report notes that for most agencies, these clients account for less than 1% of annual revenue.