Search Climate Insights Directory

The report argues that Norway's 'energy culture' is heavily skewed by the petroleum industry, creating a 'petroculture' that marginalizes climate-critical perspectives. It highlights the contrast between the Norwegian Directorate of Culture's focus on internal emission reductions and Arts Council England's systemic approach. The document details how the oil industry uses 'petroganda'—including STEM sponsorships for children and academic agreements—to maintain legitimacy and delay the energy transition. It also notes a trend of Norwegian cultural organizations taking stances against oil exploration and discusses the criminalization of climate activists in Norway.

The document is an open letter calling on governments to combat climate disinformation, which it argues undermines public understanding and delays urgent climate action. It specifically demands that governments hold media, advertising technology, and tech companies accountable by encouraging them to adopt a universal definition of climate disinformation, increase transparency, and stop the monetization of false content. The signatories advocate for the adoption of the UN's Global Principles for Information Integrity to foster a healthier online environment and support the goals of the Paris Agreement and IPCC scientific consensus.

The document argues that climate disinformation, driven by vested interests and enabled by big tech, undermines global climate negotiations and public safety. It urges governments to adopt the UN's Global Principles For Information Integrity and pressure social media, advertising, and publishing companies to recognize the threat, adopt a universal definition of climate disinformation, and implement transparent plans to stop its spread.

The document argues that green bonds are an under-utilised tool that could help Africa meet its estimated USD 2.8 trillion climate finance need by 2030. While the global green bond market reached approximately USD 2.8 trillion in 2023, Africa's share is less than 1%, representing only USD 5.1 billion. The paper highlights successful issuances in South Africa, Nigeria, and Zambia, while identifying key barriers such as low liquidity, inadequate regulation, and high transaction costs. It calls for stronger public-private collaboration and international support at COP29 to create enabling environments for green bond proliferation in Africa.

The document is an open letter from a broad coalition of individuals and organizations calling for COP30 to move beyond the mere recognition of climate disinformation and instead implement binding, verifiable measures to protect information integrity. It argues that coordinated disinformation, primarily funded by the fossil fuel industry, sabotages the energy transition, threatens public health and human rights, and undermines the goals of the Paris Agreement. The signatories call on governments to regulate tech platforms that profit from manipulative content and demand an end to greenwashing and the monetization of disinformation.

The report identifies a 'dangerously polluted' digital information landscape where Big Tech platforms allow 'super-spreaders' to propagate debunked claims against renewable energy and electric vehicles. It highlights how disinformation operations weaponise extreme weather events, such as wildfires, to decouple them from environmental drivers and fuel opposition to climate policies. Additionally, the analysis reveals that eight fossil fuel advertisers spent at least $17.6 million on Meta for over 700 million impressions to greenwash their image and lobby for US policy changes. The document warns that degrading researcher access to data is hindering the ability to track these trends and argues that systemic architectural problems and profit motives must be addressed rather than relying solely on fact-checking.

The report finds that the 20 largest European banks provided US$200.3 billion to companies expanding upstream and midstream oil and gas between 2021 and 2023, with Barclays and HSBC as the largest supporters. Despite net zero pledges, most banks lack robust policies to end corporate financing for fossil fuel expansion, and financing to diversified oil and gas companies remains overwhelmingly directed toward fossil fuel activities rather than sustainable transitions.

Nature-based solutions (NbS) are being integrated into climate strategies across Latin America and the Caribbean to address biodiversity loss and climate change. While they offer significant economic and ecological potential—such as protecting coastal resilience and sequestering carbon—they cannot replace the need for deep emissions reductions from fossil fuels. The document warns that vague definitions of NbS can lead to 'greenwashing' by polluting corporations and risk the displacement of Indigenous and local communities through land grabs and monoculture plantations. For NbS to be sustainable, the author argues they must be based on local knowledge, ensure Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC), and be supported by diverse financing mechanisms beyond voluntary safeguards.

The document highlights a contradiction between the desire of French and European citizens to support the ecological transition and the reality that their savings are invested by financial institutions into fossil fuels. It identifies a lack of transparency and poor accessibility as the primary obstacles to sustainable saving.

Reclaim Finance identifies persistent financing of coal developers and companies without science-aligned exit dates by major French banks between 2021 and 2023, arguing that policy loopholes enable practices that may constitute greenwashing.

The document highlights Indonesia's climate crisis, noting record temperatures in Larantuka and the country's position as a top ten global greenhouse gas emitter due to coal dependency. It criticizes the government's continued construction of coal-fired power plants (PLTU), the use of biomass co-firing that threatens forests and indigenous peoples, and the environmental damage caused by nickel mining for electric vehicle batteries. The guide advocates for community-based renewable energy and provides a framework for individual and collective action, including reducing transport emissions, mindful consumption, and demanding political accountability.

The Changing Markets Foundation argues that the 2022 EU Strategy for Sustainable and Circular Textiles lacked sufficient ambition and calls for binding material footprint targets, a ban on the destruction of unsold goods, and mandatory disclosure of production volumes. It advocates for the decarbonisation of supply chains through financial support for Global South suppliers and the implementation of a textile-specific Unfair Trading Practices (UTP) directive to protect workers' rights and living wages. Additionally, the brief recommends strengthening the Substantiating Green Claims directive to require ex-ante verification of environmental claims and the inclusion of social impact data in Digital Product Passports.

The guidance outlines the operational requirements for Approved Verifiers to ensure the integrity of the Climate Bonds Certification mark. It details the verification processes for four certification types: Use of Proceeds (UoP), Assets, Non-Financial Entities, and Sustainability-Linked Debt (SLD). The document specifies a multi-stage methodology—comprising engagement, planning, risk assessment, testing, evidence gathering, and reporting—and mandates adherence to professional standards such as ISAE3000 or AA1000. It establishes strict independence and conflict-of-interest rules, requires professional indemnity insurance, and defines the oversight mechanisms used by the Climate Bonds Standard Secretariat to monitor verifier performance.

The document analyzes how 'plastic recycling claims'—including circular loop symbols and statements like '100% recyclable'—misrepresent the limited efficacy of plastic recycling. It highlights that 91% of global plastic waste was not recycled in 2019 and that soft plastics are particularly difficult to recycle, often ending up as fuel or incinerated. The briefing concludes that such claims deceive the 'average consumer' and undermine the waste hierarchy, urging regulators like the UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) to require evidence based on 'real world conditions' to substantiate these claims.

ClientEarth's response to CP24/12 advocates for mandatory climate disclosures aligned with TCFD and ISSB standards, specifically calling for an 'atmospheric viability test' for mineral companies to prevent stranded asset risk. The organization argues against voluntary sustainability-labelled debt disclosures, urging for contractually binding commitments to prevent greenwashing, and cautions against reducing issuer liability for forward-looking climate statements.

The report proposes a two-step assessment approach to link financial institutions' net zero strategies to real-world impacts. It emphasizes tracking investments in new assets rather than existing portfolios to avoid the 'divestment' loophole where assets are transferred without reducing emissions. The methodology uses a multi-level ownership tree (up to Level 2) to attribute finance to indirect investors based on equity and debt weightings, utilizing data from sources like Bloomberg Terminal and CPI's Global Landscape of Climate Finance.

The document critiques biodiversity offsets and credits, asserting they are based on a flawed 'mitigation hierarchy' and fail to maintain ecosystem integrity. It argues that these schemes, often modelled on dysfunctional carbon markets, lead to greenwashing, land grabbing, and human rights violations, particularly against Indigenous Peoples. The authors call for a shift away from market-based financial flows toward non-market approaches, debt and tax justice, and the protection of land tenure rights.

The document critiques biodiversity offsets and certificates, asserting they are conceptually and methodologically flawed tools that facilitate nature destruction. It argues that these mechanisms, often modeled after failed carbon markets, ignore ecosystem integrity, lead to land grabbing, and violate the human rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities. The authors call for a systemic shift away from market-based financialization toward community-led, rights-based conservation and the reduction of harmful financial flows.

Reclaim Finance identifies persistent problematic financing of the coal sector by BNP Paribas, Crédit Agricole, Société Générale, and BPCE/Natixis between 2021 and 2023. Despite overall funding decreases, the report finds that these banks supported 26 problematic groups, including coal developers and companies without climate-aligned exit dates. The analysis highlights four major policy loopholes—exclusion at the subsidiary level rather than the group level, minority ownership thresholds, the treatment of 'captive' industrial power plants, and reliance on confidential internal documents—which the report argues may constitute greenwashing and financial risk mismanagement.

Reclaim Finance analyzed transactions from 2021 to 2023 and found that four major French banks supported 26 problematic coal groups despite having policies to exit the sector. The report identifies four primary loopholes: exclusion only at the subsidiary level, lack of exclusion for minority stakes under 50%, exclusion of 'captive' coal plants at industrial sites, and reliance on confidential internal documents to justify financing companies without public exit dates. The author argues these practices are misleading to investors and regulators, urging the AMF and ACPR to sanction such 'greenwashing' and demand full transparency.