Search Climate Insights Directory

ClientEarth argues that the TPT framework must mandate absolute emissions reductions aligned with a 1.5°C scenario, including Scope 3 emissions, and prohibit reliance on offsets. The organization emphasizes the need for transition plans to be integrated into financial statements and for named directors to be held accountable for delivery. It specifically calls for the prioritization of high-emitting sectors and the inclusion of 'financed emissions' for financial institutions to ensure real-world decarbonization.

Reclaim Finance calls for the strengthening of French sustainable finance labels to combat greenwashing. The organization proposes that the ISR label introduce minimum exclusions for companies developing new fossil fuel projects or those significantly involved in coal and unconventional hydrocarbons. Simultaneously, it argues that the Greenfin label must remain a strict reference for green activities by continuing to exclude fossil fuels, nuclear energy, and biomass, regardless of political shifts in the EU taxonomy.

Reclaim Finance advocates for the revision of France's ISR and Greenfin labels to include specific criteria and minimum exclusions for fossil fuel companies, aiming to protect investors from greenwashing.

The document argues that SMBC's involvement in the EACOP project contradicts its own environmental and human rights commitments, exposing the bank and its directors to litigation, reputational damage, and stranded asset risks. It details specific human rights abuses and environmental threats associated with the pipeline and demands a full withdrawal from the project.

The document argues that SMBC's role as a financial advisor and lead arranger for the EACOP project contradicts its own environmental and human rights commitments. It highlights risks including human rights abuses, biodiversity loss, and the potential for the pipeline to become a stranded asset in a net-zero transition. The authors warn that continuing this support could lead to greenwashing accusations, legal liability for directors under Japanese law, and severe reputational damage, especially as other global financial institutions withdraw their support.

The document argues that SMBC's reported role in the EACOP project exposes the group to reputational, financial, and legal liabilities, while contradicting its own environmental and human rights commitments.

The document distinguishes between climate misinformation (unintentional) and disinformation (intentional), adopting the Climate Action Against Disinformation (CAAD) definition. It identifies two primary drivers for creating this content: protecting fossil fuel profits and exploiting the 'attention economy' for revenue or influence. The guide focuses on 'Persuadables'—the approximately 69% of the UK population who are neither activists nor deniers—and categorises misinformation into four types: climate denial, climate delay, greenwashing, and conspiracy theories. Climate delay is identified as the most common and effective form in the UK, often employing 'The Cost Of Net Zero' frame or exploiting 'culture wars' through the 'eco-hypocrite' narrative. Greenwashing is highlighted as a specific form of delay driven by large marketing budgets, while climate conspiracy theories, such as 'climate lockdowns' and opposition to '15-minute cities', are noted as growing risks.

A letter from health organizations representing over 700,000 Canadian health professionals urging the federal government to ban fossil fuel advertising and regulate misleading environmental claims, citing severe public health impacts and drawing parallels to tobacco control.

Reclaim Finance analyzes the voting results of TotalEnergies' 2022 general meeting, highlighting that 89% of shareholders supported a climate plan the organization deems incompatible with climate urgency. The statement specifically condemns investors like BlackRock and Allianz Global Investors for supporting the plan despite their own public climate commitments, while noting a slight decrease in support for board directors and the emergence of a minority group of climate-engaged shareholders.

The document argues that the short-term debt market, valued at USD55tn, is an underutilised source of green capital. It recommends that short-term debt be labelled green and integrated into thematic investment strategies, provided it aligns with the Climate Bonds Standard or EU Taxonomy. The paper outlines various eligible instruments—including Commercial Paper, Revolving Credit Facilities, and Green Repos—and emphasises the need for a 'pure-play' entity definition to facilitate certification for general corporate funding.

Global Witness analysis indicates that industrial rubber plantations in West and Central Africa caused nearly 520km2 of deforestation between 2000 and 2020. The report highlights that the EU imports over 30% of rubber from six key African producers, yet rubber was excluded from proposed EU anti-deforestation laws following tyre industry lobbying. The study links this deforestation to three multinational companies—Olam, Halcyon Agri, and Socfin—which are financed by major European banks. Additionally, the report documents severe impacts on local and indigenous communities, including land loss, lack of water, and violent repression in countries like Cote d’Ivoire and Nigeria.

Reclaim Finance criticizes Crédit Agricole for continuing to support oil and gas expansion despite its claim to be a "green bank" and its commitment to carbon neutrality by 2050. The organization highlights that the bank provided $33 billion to the 100 largest fossil fuel developers since the Paris Agreement and remains the primary financial supporter of TotalEnergies, including a recent $8 billion revolving loan. Reclaim Finance calls on the bank to use its general assembly and upcoming strategic plan to end support for new fossil fuel projects and to vote against incompatible climate plans of oil majors through its subsidiary Amundi.

Reclaim Finance reports a decline in shareholder support for ambitious climate resolutions and a contradictory tendency for investors to approve 'pseudo-climate plans' that are incompatible with a 1.5°C warming limit. The organization highlights specific voting trends at European oil and gas majors and calls for a shift toward voting against companies continuing fossil fuel development.

The We Mean Business Coalition calls for global consistency in corporate sustainability reporting to support the Paris Agreement and the Glasgow Climate Pact. The coalition argues that misalignments in terminology and definitions between the SEC, EFRAG, GRI, and ISSB risk undermining the impact of these standards and increasing reporting burdens for companies. Specifically, the coalition urges the CSRD to align with ISSB and GRI on impact materiality, calls on the US SEC to allow the use of ISSB standards to meet reporting obligations, and encourages the ISSB to establish itself as the global baseline for sustainability-related financial disclosures.

The report finds that European supermarkets generally exhibit low transparency and ambition regarding plastic reduction, with an overall average score of 13.1%. Most retailers rely on voluntary commitments and recyclability rather than waste prevention and reuse systems. While some UK retailers show higher performance, there is significant inconsistency in policies across international retail groups, and some companies are accused of greenwashing through ineffective recycling schemes that result in waste being exported and dumped in third countries like Turkey.

The report finds that European supermarkets generally exhibit low transparency and ambition regarding plastic reduction, often relying on voluntary commitments and recycling-focused strategies rather than systemic reuse. An analysis of 74 retailers reveals an average total score of only 13.1%, with significant disparities in performance between different countries where the same retail chains operate. The document highlights tactics used by retailers to delay legislative progress, such as lobbying against deposit return systems (DRS), and criticizes 'greenwashing' practices, including the mislabeling of single-use plastics as reusable.

The report finds that European supermarkets generally perform poorly in addressing the plastic crisis, with an average score of 13.1% across transparency, commitments, and policy support. While some UK and Irish retailers score higher, most companies lack basic data on their plastic footprints and prioritize recyclability over waste prevention. The analysis highlights a tendency toward 'greenwashing,' where retailers promote voluntary pledges or flawed collection schemes instead of systemic changes or supporting binding legislation.

The report reveals a significant gap between the public communications of European retailers and their actual performance in reducing plastic pollution, with a global average score of only 13.1% across transparency, commitments, and policy support. While some retailers like Aldi in the UK and Ireland score higher, the majority fail to provide basic data on their plastic footprints or support mandatory reuse targets. The analysis highlights a systemic preference for voluntary commitments and recyclability over waste prevention and reuse, while warning against 'greenwashing' practices such as exporting flexible plastics to third countries like Turkey where they may be illegally burned.

The report finds that European supermarkets generally perform poorly in addressing the plastic crisis, with an average score of 13.1% across transparency, commitments, and policy support. While some UK and Irish chains score higher, most companies lack basic data on their plastic footprints and fail to implement systemic changes like reusable packaging. The analysis highlights a preference for voluntary commitments over binding regulations and warns against greenwashing practices, such as exporting flexible plastics to third countries like Turkey.

The report finds that European supermarkets generally exhibit low ambition and transparency regarding plastic pollution, with a global average score of only 13.1%. Most retailers prioritize recyclability over waste prevention and reuse, often relying on voluntary commitments and 'greenwashing' tactics rather than systemic changes. While some UK and Irish retailers score higher, there is significant inconsistency within international groups, and very few support binding government targets or comprehensive deposit return systems.