Search Climate Insights Directory

Friends of the Earth International argues that transnational corporations drive the climate crisis through legal loopholes and voluntary codes of conduct. The organization advocates for a UN Binding Treaty that establishes legally enforceable obligations for companies to prevent environmental harm, recognize the right to a healthy environment as a human right, and provide full reparations for ecological damage, moving beyond corporate self-regulation and 'greenwashing'.

The report analyzes climate disinformation in French and Brazilian mainstream media, finding that in France, disinformation is systemic and often linked to political and economic interests, while in Brazil, it manifests as a strategic 'invisibilization' of environmental issues driven by the agribusiness sector. It recommends strengthening media regulation, improving journalist training, and integrating disinformation detection into emergency response systems for extreme weather events.

The report analyzes climate disinformation in French and Brazilian mainstream media, finding that while France sees a high volume of structured disinformation narratives—particularly regarding energy and mobility—Brazil experiences a 'media invisibility' of environmental issues driven by agribusiness and political influence. It highlights the role of public broadcasting as a bulwark in France and warns that disinformation during extreme weather events can undermine emergency responses. The authors recommend strengthening media regulation, improving journalist training, and institutionalizing semi-automated disinformation detection systems.

Ten years after the Paris Agreement, French banks and insurers continue to heavily finance fossil fuel expansion, with some increasing their support for oil and gas extraction. The report argues that 'green finance' and ESG labels are largely greenwashing, as they fail to redirect capital away from climaticide activities. It further criticizes the French and European governments for favoring voluntary industry commitments over binding regulations and for weakening key directives like the CSRD and CSDDD under pressure from financial lobbies.

The report argues that the European Commission's 'Omnibus I' proposal, unveiled on February 26, 2025, represents a shift toward deregulation driven by disproportionate private sector influence. Analysis of meeting logs shows that Executive Vice-President Stéphane Séjourné and his office met almost exclusively with business interests, while excluding civil society, NGOs, and trade unions. This lobbying resulted in significant setbacks for the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) and the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), including the removal of obligations for financial services to undergo due diligence reviews.

The policy brief addresses the lack of a shared vision for implementing Article 2.1(c) of the Paris Agreement, which calls for making financial flows consistent with climate goals. It argues that current efforts are fragmented and risks of greenwashing are high. The authors propose a Theory of Change (ToC) to link high-level goals to specific activities across regulators, financial entities, the real economy, and civil society. The document emphasizes that while Article 9 focuses on the provision of public climate finance from developed to developing nations, Article 2.1(c) requires systemic reforms—such as climate-related financial disclosures, taxonomies, and fiscal policy changes—to redirect the broader global financial system. It concludes with recommendations for the COP30 (CMA7) to adopt a structured work program based on this ToC to avoid circular discussions and ensure a just transition.

A coalition of organizations calls on the European Commission to prevent greenwashing in the revised Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR) by requiring the exclusion of companies developing new fossil fuel projects from all sustainable finance categories.

The document introduces the Integrated Forum on Climate Change and Trade, an institutionally independent 'laboratory' designed to foster dialogue between climate and trade experts. It aims to move beyond the diagnosis of problems to the design of technical solutions in areas such as climate criteria, carbon accounting, and the acceleration of renewable energy deployment, without producing binding legal texts.

Reclaim Finance reports that asset managers are bypassing European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) guidelines on ESG fund naming to continue investing in fossil fuel developers. Analysis of 190 French-domiciled or managed funds shows nearly half changed names to avoid regulatory constraints. The document attributes these loopholes to lobbying by firms like BlackRock and Amundi and warns that similar gaps may be introduced into the revised Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR).

Reclaim Finance reports that asset managers are using regulatory loopholes in ESMA's fund-naming guidelines to avoid excluding fossil fuel investments while retaining ESG-related names. The organization highlights that major financial firms lobbied for less stringent criteria and warns that similar lobbying regarding the SFDR regulation could institutionalize greenwashing. Reclaim Finance demands a strict ban on investments in new fossil fuel projects for any fund claiming to be sustainable, ESG, or transition-focused.

The Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor reveals that major companies are increasing their use of carbon removals, often relying on low-quality, non-permanent solutions without sufficient transparency. The report highlights issues of double-counting between corporations and governments and argues that carbon removals are being used as a 'licence to pollute' rather than as a supplement to essential emissions cuts.

The report exposes a tightly coordinated network of scientists, doctors, and journalists who used hashtags like #Yes2Meat and #ClimateFoodFacts to discredit the EAT-Lancet report. It details the role of the PR agency Red Flag and industry-funded entities like the UC Davis CLEAR Center in orchestrating these campaigns. The document also analyzes subsequent industry gatherings, such as the Dublin Declaration and the Denver Summit, as efforts to maintain the meat industry's 'social license to operate' through biased scientific narratives and identity-driven influencer campaigns ahead of the EAT-Lancet 2.0 update.

ClientEarth advocates for the UK government to mandate the development, disclosure, and implementation of transition plans aligned with the Paris Agreement. The organization argues that a 'comply or explain' framework is insufficient and that mandatory requirements are necessary to prevent 'greenwashing' and 'say-do gaps'. It specifically highlights the need for pension schemes to manage systemic climate risk through Paris-aligned anchors and robust stewardship. ClientEarth further asserts that legal risks for directors are often overstated due to the 'dishonesty standard' in English law, and that alignment with the 1.5°C goal is essential for the UK to fulfill its international obligations following the 2025 ICJ Advisory Opinion.

A coalition of environmental organizations argues that Arendalsuka, a major Norwegian democratic festival, should drop Equinor as a sponsor. The authors claim Equinor is one of 36 'fossil giants' responsible for over half of global CO2 emissions and accuse the company of using 'petroganda' to manipulate public perception. They highlight that in 2023, only 0.15% of Equinor's total production was renewable energy, contrasting this with the company's image as a pioneer in low-carbon solutions. The statement further notes that Equinor spent 833 million NOK on sponsorships over the last five years to preserve its image.

Erlend Eggen, head of Klimakultur, criticizes the Arctic Race of Norway for its reliance on fossil fuel sponsorship, specifically Equinor, and the participation of the Israel Premier Tech team. He argues that the event's sustainability claims, such as using an electric car fleet, are undermined by the fact that Equinor's energy production remains over 99.6% fossil-based. The text highlights the role of cycling as a venue for corporate greenwashing and calls for the event to sign 'The Fossil Free Declaration' to phase out high-carbon partnerships.

The report outlines a framework for an energy transition that prioritizes gender justice, human rights, and systemic transformation over corporate profit. It argues that the current fossil-fuel-based system is rooted in patriarchal and colonial oppression, which disproportionately affects women, LGBTQIA+ individuals, and Indigenous peoples. The proposed transition is based on ten principles: feminist popular power, a life-centered feminist economy, decent work, energy sovereignty, colonial reparations, the right to free, prior and informed consent (FPIC), demilitarization, fair public finance, the rejection of 'false solutions' like carbon markets, and the decolonization of knowledge and technology. The document emphasizes that renewable energy deployment must not replicate existing inequalities or lead to new forms of extractivism, particularly in the Global South.

The document is an open letter addressed to the Prime Minister of Denmark, calling for the resumption of negotiations on the EU Green Claims Directive to combat greenwashing and provide legal certainty for businesses. The signatories argue that existing enforcement under the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive is insufficient, citing EU Commission data that 53% of green claims are vague, misleading, or unfounded, and 40% lack supporting evidence. They contend that the Directive would establish minimum standards for substantiating and verifying environmental claims, thereby protecting consumers and ensuring fair competition without creating an undue administrative burden.

Carbon Market Watch (CMW) opposes the UK government's proposed reliance on market-based mechanisms and the VCMI Scope 3 Action Code of Practice, arguing that allowing carbon credits to 'close scope 3 emissions gaps' effectively legitimises offsetting and risks rewarding 'climate laggards'. CMW advocates for a 'contribution' or 'beyond value chain mitigation' (BVCM) model over offsetting and insetting, and suggests that the UK's Environmental Reporting Guidelines (ERG) should mandate, rather than encourage, the disclosure of carbon credit information. The document also recommends 'temperature-alignment claims' (specifically referencing 1.5°C) as a more precise alternative to 'Paris alignment' claims.

The document identifies a pattern of right-wing and fossil fuel-linked disinformation during Canadian wildfire seasons that downplays climate change and obstructs policy action. It urges Canadian policymakers to implement laws against greenwashing, define climate disinformation scientifically, and regulate the monetization and amplification of such content by tech platforms.

The Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor 2025 calls for an end to 'creative accounting' and the reliance on voluntary frameworks in corporate climate action. It emphasizes that government regulation must become the 'backbone of climate action' to ensure that big tech, fast fashion, automotive, and agrifood companies implement substantiated emission reductions rather than relying on misleading carbon neutrality claims based on carbon credits.