Search Climate Insights Directory

The IPIE argues that AI audits are the primary mechanism to operationalize governance, moving beyond simple transparency to ensure human rights compliance and the fair distribution of AI benefits. It proposes a global audit framework based on universal parameters—including fairness, transparency, and technical robustness—and offers the IPIE's scientific expertise to help the UN develop these international standards and research functions.

The International Panel on the Information Environment (IPIE) proposes a comprehensive global AI auditing framework to address the lack of common standards in AI inspection. The framework emphasizes the need for auditor independence, stakeholder engagement, and the inclusion of environmental and labor impacts. It provides a seven-step approach covering audit scope, auditor roles, context identification, criteria development, evidence collection, methodology, and post-audit transparency to protect human rights and collective wellbeing, particularly for marginalized communities in the majority world.

The International Panel on the Information Environment (IPIE) proposes a global framework for AI auditing to address the lack of consistent standards and the risk of AI perpetuating biases and environmental harm. The framework outlines seven key characteristics for effective audits: scope, auditor role, stakeholder engagement, context-adapted criteria, evidence requirements, methodology, and post-audit activities. It emphasizes the need for auditor independence, transparency of results, and the inclusion of marginalized communities, particularly those in the 'majority world', to mitigate systemic harms and protect human rights.

The International Panel on the Information Environment (IPIE) outlines a global AI auditing framework designed to address the lack of common standards and the tendency of current audits to overlook global disparities. The framework is built on seven core characteristics: audit scope, auditor role, stakeholder engagement, context-adapted criteria, evidence requirements, auditing methodologies, and post-audit activities. It emphasizes the need for independent auditors with access to comprehensive evidence and the inclusion of marginalized communities to prevent human rights violations and environmental degradation.

The International Panel on the Information Environment (IPIE) recommends a comprehensive global AI auditing system to address the risks of bias, inequality, and environmental harm. The proposed framework emphasizes the need for independent auditors, transparent results, and a context-sensitive approach that includes diverse stakeholders and considers global impacts, particularly on marginalized communities.

The International Panel on the Information Environment (IPIE) presents a global framework for AI auditing designed to mitigate systemic harms, including bias, inequality, and environmental damage. The framework outlines seven key features: audit scope, the auditor's role, stakeholder engagement, context-specific criteria, evidence requirements, auditing methodologies, and post-audit activities. It emphasizes the need for auditor independence, public transparency of results, and the inclusion of marginalized communities, particularly in the Global South, to address disproportionate impacts of AI technologies.

The International Panel on the Information Environment (IPIE) presents a global AI auditing framework designed to address the lack of uniform standards and the failure of current audits to account for global inequalities. The framework consists of seven key characteristics: audit scope, auditor role, stakeholder engagement, context-dependent criteria, evidence requirements, methodology, and post-audit measures. It emphasizes the need for auditor independence, transparent results, and the inclusion of marginalized communities to prevent AI from perpetuating biases, labor exploitation, and environmental degradation.

The International Panel on the Information Environment (IPIE) presents a global AI auditing framework designed to address the lack of common standards and the failure of current audits to account for global, disparate impacts. The framework outlines seven key features: audit scope, auditor roles, stakeholder engagement, context-specific criteria, evidence requirements, auditing methodologies, and post-audit activities. It emphasizes the need for auditor independence, transparent results, and the inclusion of environmental and labor impact assessments to protect marginalized communities and the collective well-being.

The International Panel on the Information Environment (IPIE) presents a policy brief outlining a Global AI Auditing Framework (SR2024.3). The framework addresses the inadequacy of current AI auditing practices, which often lack independent auditors and fail to account for global impacts. It proposes a seven-component system covering audit scope, auditor roles, stakeholder engagement, criteria, evidence requirements, methodology, and post-audit activities. The goal is to create a standardized approach to identify AI-driven biases, labor exploitation, and environmental harms, particularly those affecting marginalized communities globally.

The document outlines a global framework for AI auditing developed by the International Panel on the Information Environment (IPIE). It argues that current auditing practices lack independence and fail to account for global inequalities, particularly regarding human rights and environmental degradation. The proposed framework consists of seven key characteristics: audit scope, auditor roles, stakeholder engagement, context-adapted standards, evidence requirements, auditing methods, and post-audit activities. It emphasizes the need for transparent, multi-stakeholder driven audits that can identify systemic harms such as bias and labor exploitation.

The document assesses the contemporary UK landscape of hate and extremism, highlighting a shift toward 'hybridised' threats where ideological boundaries blur and online ecosystems drive real-world violence. It identifies the extreme right as the most dynamic threat, particularly among youth, while noting that Islamist extremism remains the dominant terrorism threat. The report also details the rise of anti-LGBTQ+, anti-migrant, and antisemitic hate, often amplified by international conflicts and hostile state actors from Russia, Iran, and China. To counter these, the authors propose a unified policy framework that integrates social cohesion, a rights-based definition of extremism, and a public health model of violence prevention, moving away from siloed counter-terrorism approaches.

The document presents a series of demands from African environmental defenders, calling for the recognition of their human rights, the creation of a legally binding regional treaty for their protection, and an end to 'false solutions' in climate change. It advocates for a transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy, the cessation of militarized conservation in favor of community-led models, and the implementation of redress mechanisms to hold governments and businesses accountable for human rights violations. The text emphasizes the need for the meaningful inclusion of women, youth, and indigenous peoples in the management of natural resources and climate mitigation efforts.

The report argues for a participatory, inclusive, and direct-access approach to the Loss and Damage Fund to ensure it reaches the most vulnerable communities. It recommends creating direct access windows for local actors to bypass slow national processes, adopting 'learning by doing' through small pilot projects to build institutional capacity, and expanding the scope of funding to include non-economic losses and human rights-based reparations.

The document argues that Latin America and the Caribbean are among the most climate-vulnerable regions globally, facing severe economic losses and ecosystem degradation. It highlights the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) as a strategic opportunity for the region to secure quantitative financing and integrate nature-based solutions. The brief recommends aligning national adaptation plans with human rights, indigenous knowledge, and regional cooperation to ensure a just and measurable transition.

WACC partners argue that the Global Digital Compact (GDC) lacks a focus on communication rights and fails to adequately address the environmental impacts of technology, gender intersectionality, and the specific vulnerabilities of migrants. They recommend transitioning from a market-oriented digital model to one based on public interest, where digital resources are treated as public utilities and governance prioritizes human rights over private profit.

The STAND Initiative addresses the security risks faced by grassroots environmental defenders (GEDs), such as criminalization and physical attacks, which are often driven by poor enforcement of human rights and environmental laws. The initiative provides capacity building, a small grant fund, and collaborative partnerships to enhance advocacy skills and protection measures in Brazil, Guatemala, Mexico, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Kenya, and Liberia.

The document highlights the disparity between the high profits of global chocolate companies and the poverty of cocoa farmers, particularly in Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire. It argues that farmer poverty is a primary driver of environmental and social issues, including deforestation and child labor, and calls for companies to implement living income reference prices, fair contracts, and transparent reporting.

The document contends that the Loss and Damage Fund (LDF) adopted at COP28 is insufficient because it treats climate reparations as voluntary donations rather than legal obligations. It argues that the fund's governance excludes frontline communities and indigenous peoples, lacks a human rights framework, and ignores the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities. The authors request that the Inter-American Court of Human Rights clarify that UNFCCC decisions do not limit state obligations to provide full reparation to climate victims.

The Global Climate and Health Alliance (GCHA) provides legal and scientific commentary to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, detailing how climate change exacerbates health crises in Latin America and the Caribbean. The document highlights the disproportionate impact of heat, wildfires, air pollution, and vector-borne diseases on vulnerable populations, including indigenous peoples and children. It argues that states have a legal duty under the American Convention on Human Rights and the Paris Agreement to prevent climate-related health harms. The brief recommends a transition away from fossil fuels, the elimination of 'sacrifice zones', and the adoption of sustainable land management to achieve health co-benefits and uphold human rights.

The Global Climate & Health Alliance (GCHA) argues that climate change is a critical threat to public health in Latin America and the Caribbean, exacerbating inequalities and violating human rights. The document details specific health impacts—including heat-related deaths, respiratory issues from wildfires and air pollution, and the spread of vector-borne diseases like dengue—while highlighting the vulnerability of indigenous peoples, children, and the elderly. It asserts that states have legal obligations under the American Convention on Human Rights and the Paris Agreement to prevent climate-related health harms. The GCHA recommends a transition away from fossil fuels, the elimination of 'sacrifice zones,' and the implementation of sustainable land management and urban design to achieve health and climate co-benefits.