Search Climate Insights Directory

The report reveals a 'corporate playbook' used by 'Big Meat and Dairy' to avoid environmental regulation through greenwashing, industry-funded science, and aggressive political lobbying. It argues that these companies use 'distract, delay and derail' tactics—similar to those used by the tobacco and fossil fuel industries—to maintain the status quo and prevent dietary shifts toward plant-based proteins. The investigation highlights how the industry promotes voluntary technological fixes over mandatory emissions cuts and leverages political influence to secure 'all-carrots-and-no-sticks' regulatory approaches.

The report exposes how 'Big Meat and Dairy' corporations employ strategies similar to those of the tobacco and fossil fuel industries to avoid environmental regulation. It identifies three primary tactics: distracting the public through greenwashing and targeting Gen Z via social media; delaying action by promoting voluntary targets and industry-funded science (such as GWP* metrics and 'regenerative agriculture'); and derailing legislation through political lobbying and 'revolving door' appointments. The analysis covers 22 major corporations across four continents, highlighting a systemic lack of scientific integrity in their climate goals and a preference for spending on advertising over low-carbon research and development. Specific case studies in the US, EU, Brazil, Australia, New Zealand, Italy, and Great Britain illustrate how these tactics have successfully weakened policies like the EU Green Deal and the Global Methane Pledge.

The report argues that credible transition plans are essential to mitigate 'greenwashing' risks and attract diverse financing for the power sector's decarbonization. It highlights the prevalence of Sustainability-Linked Bonds (SLBs) in the power industry and provides a framework for developing transition plans and selecting appropriate financial instruments.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) and Earthjustice advocate for state-mandated transparent ESG data disclosure to prevent greenwashing and human rights violations. They specifically criticize the use of carbon offsets by fossil fuel companies to justify the expansion of oil and gas production, arguing that such practices rearrange rather than reduce emissions and often violate human rights.

Reclaim Finance and a coalition of organizations call on the Autorité des Marchés Financiers (AMF) to combat systemic greenwashing in French financial products. The authors highlight that a significant portion of passive and employee savings funds claiming sustainability continue to invest in fossil fuel expansion. They demand the AMF use its existing powers to sanction misleading information and revise its doctrine on extra-financial approaches to ensure that companies developing new fossil fuel projects are excluded from sustainable funds.

The document serves as a '101' guide for journalists to report on climate change, explaining the difference between weather and climate, the primary causes of global warming, and the impacts of extreme weather. It offers specific phrasing to help reporters connect current events to climate change and distinguishes between mitigation and adaptation strategies. Additionally, it provides professional guidance on avoiding greenwashing, handling climate deniers, and centering climate justice in reporting, while emphasizing that climate coverage is based on scientific consensus rather than activism.

A coalition of over 20 experts and NGOs has sent an open letter to the Autorité des Marchés Financiers (AMF) demanding an end to greenwashing in the French financial sector. The signatories highlight that a significant portion of funds claiming sustainability continue to finance fossil fuel expansion, arguing that current AMF supervision of extra-financial information is insufficient and lacks deterrent sanctions. They call for the systematic exclusion of companies developing new fossil fuel projects from sustainable or green funds and a revision of the AMF's doctrine on funds integrating extra-financial approaches.

The document serves as an introductory resource for journalists to understand the causes and impacts of climate change and how to report on them accurately. It defines key terms, explains the role of greenhouse gases and fossil fuels, and details the effects of warming on weather patterns. The guide offers specific phrasing to help reporters connect extreme weather events to human-caused climate change and distinguishes between mitigation and adaptation strategies. It also outlines international and national policy frameworks, such as the Paris Agreement and the US Inflation Reduction Act, while advising journalists on how to avoid pitfalls like greenwashing and the platforming of climate deniers.

An analysis by Reclaim Finance and RIFT finds that most French life insurers continue to fund fossil fuel expansion through 'fonds euro' and 'unités de compte', with over 55% of 'responsible' or 'ESG' labeled funds exposed to fossil fuel developers.

The report finds a significant gap between the climate commitments of French life insurers and their actual investment practices. While most have pledged to stop funding new coal projects in their 'fonds euro', many continue to invest in oil and gas expansion. A critical 'blind spot' exists in 'unités de compte' (UC), where 63% of analyzed funds contain fossil fuel developers, including in products labeled as 'responsible' or 'ESG'. The report calls for regulators to mandate an 'eco-score' and extend ISR labeling to 'fonds euro' to protect savers from greenwashing.

The report details the systemic impacts of plastic pollution on municipal infrastructure, public health, and ecosystems, asserting that a small number of petrochemical and FMCG companies knowingly exacerbated the crisis by promoting inadequate recycling solutions. It provides a guide for government attorneys to use nuisance, products liability, and consumer protection laws to hold these polluters accountable, drawing parallels to successful litigation against the tobacco and PCB industries.

The report argues that labelled transition finance is currently stalled by 'transition-washing'—where finance is provided to entities without a credible plan to reach net zero. It identifies root causes such as a lack of scientifically robust, geography-specific emissions pathways and the prevalence of non-binding voluntary standards. Using sustainability-linked bonds (SLBs) and Japanese transition-labelled bonds as case studies, the author highlights issues like unambitious targets, immaterial penalties, and reliance on non-credible technologies like ammonia co-firing. To address this, the report recommends six guardrails: preparing national Paris-aligned pathways, establishing robust classification standards, building external verification capacity, implementing mandatory regulatory thresholds for protected labels, empowering regulators to penalise transition-washing, and enacting systemic reforms such as mandating transition plans for large firms.

Reclaim Finance highlights the contradiction between the values promoted by French banks through sports sponsorships and their continued financial support for fossil fuel expansion. The report details the funding provided by BNP Paribas, Crédit Agricole, Société Générale, and BPCE to oil and gas companies and liquefied natural gas (LNG) projects between 2021 and 2024, asserting that such investments are incompatible with the Paris Agreement and IPCC guidelines.

The report identifies a systemic network of financial support for Indonesia's coal industry, noting that between 2020 and 2023, at least IDR 163 trillion was disbursed to coal-related activities. It highlights the role of state-owned banks, particularly Bank Mandiri and Bank Rakyat Indonesia, as primary funders. The document argues that this financial support, combined with 'regulatory capture' and the influence of a wealthy elite (the 1%), creates a state of 'climate delay.' It specifically criticizes the OJK's updated green taxonomy for labeling certain coal-fired power plants as 'Green' or 'Transition,' which the authors characterize as greenwashing. The report also maps the ownership and political affiliations of seven major coal companies, linking them to politically exposed persons and individuals listed in Offshore Leaks.

The report identifies a systemic link between Indonesia's coal industry, political elites, and national banks, which continues to fund fossil fuel expansion despite global climate commitments.

Reclaim Finance claims that ArcelorMittal uses the low-carbon recycled steel of the Paris 2024 Olympic flame to mask a global strategy that continues to build coal-fired blast furnaces. The organization highlights that four major French banks—BNP Paribas, Crédit Agricole, Société Générale, and BPCE—provided nearly 13 billion US$ to the company between 2016 and June 2023, urging them to adopt stricter sectoral policies to end financing for new coal-based steel projects and the companies that develop them.

Reclaim Finance criticizes ArcelorMittal for using the Paris 2024 Olympic flame, made from recycled steel, to mask a broader business strategy that relies on coal for 71% of its production and the use of carbon capture technologies. The report highlights that between 2016 and June 2023, four French banks—Crédit Agricole, BNP Paribas, Société Générale, and BPCE—provided nearly $12 billion in financing to the steelmaker. The author calls for these banks to adopt robust sectoral policies to restrict financing for new blast furnaces and companies developing metallurgical coal projects.

The document outlines a framework for the Brazilian Sustainable Taxonomy, specifically focusing on land use activities such as crop production, cattle, and forestry. It argues for the need for harmonized, technical, and verifiable criteria to direct financial flows toward sustainable production and prevent greenwashing. The report proposes a phased implementation approach, suggests a three-tier verification system (automatic, remote, and on-site), and highlights the importance of interoperability with international standards. It also identifies critical challenges, such as defining the scope of the 'do no significant harm' (DNSH) principle and determining the appropriate level of granularity for classification (economic activity versus rural property).

The report analyzes national and international sustainability taxonomies to propose criteria for the Brazilian Sustainable Taxonomy's land-use sector. It highlights the high sensitivity of sustainable finance measurements to the chosen classification, demonstrating through a rural credit case study that alignment varies from 1% to 44% depending on the reference used. The authors recommend a technical, science-based approach with granular application levels and a gradual implementation roadmap to prevent greenwashing and attract international investment.

The report finds a substantial gap between the world's largest public and private companies regarding net zero commitments. While 70% of the largest public companies have set net zero targets, only 40% of the largest private companies have done so. Furthermore, private companies show a critical lack of integrity in their pledges; only 20% of those with net zero targets have published plans to achieve them, compared to 80% of public companies. The analysis highlights that high-emitting private sectors, particularly fossil fuels, are largely avoiding targets. The report argues that emerging regulations, such as the EU's CSRD and CSDDD, as well as California's SB 253 and SB 261, are essential to compel private companies to disclose emissions and adopt mandatory transition plans to mitigate transition risks.