Search Climate Insights Directory

The South African Water Caucus (SAWC) has formally requested that the Department of Human Settlements, Water and Sanitation and the National Disaster Water Command Centre urgently provide water tanks, tankers, and sanitation packs to numerous communities across South Africa. The request emphasizes that lack of clean water and soap increases the risk of contracting COVID-19, violating constitutional rights to an environment not harmful to health. The SAWC identifies specific failures in several provinces, including unreliable water trucking, unaffordable private water costs, and police harassment of women collecting water. The document calls for weekly public updates on the National Disaster Water Command Centre's activities and a dedicated contact person for updating the list of affected communities.

The statement asserts that COVID-19 has exposed the fragility of a global food system where 820 million people were chronically hungry prior to the pandemic. It calls on G20 ministers to protect the rights of peasant farmers and migrant workers, curb financial speculation in agricultural futures to prevent price crises, and transition toward a sustainable food system based on food sovereignty and local production rather than long supply chains and external inputs.

The document argues that the COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the fragility of a global food system where 820 million people suffered chronic hunger before the crisis. It calls on G20 governments to protect the rights and health of food producers and migrant workers, restrict financial speculation in agricultural futures to prevent price crises, and rebuild the food system to stop environmental degradation and climate crisis drivers. The authors advocate for a global political response coordinated by the UN Committee on World Food Security, grounded in international human rights instruments and the principle of food sovereignty.

The statement urges G20 ministers to address the vulnerability of food producers and migrant workers during the COVID-19 crisis. It calls for measures to prevent financial speculation on food, the protection of fundamental rights for agricultural workers, and a systemic shift away from industrial food chains toward sustainable, local food sovereignty to mitigate future pandemics and climate crises.

A solidarity statement calling for immediate government and international action to protect Amazonian indigenous peoples from COVID-19 by halting extractive industries and respecting indigenous self-governance.

CIEL announced the temporary closure of its Washington, DC, and Geneva offices and the suspension of in-person meetings and travel due to COVID-19. Despite these operational changes, the organization committed to holding corporations and governments accountable for environmental destruction, protecting human rights in pandemic responses, ensuring future solutions avoid past problems, and maintaining the inclusion of marginalized communities in virtual spaces.

The document expresses solidarity with the Naso Bröran people following the murder of leader Jehry Rivera Rivera on February 24, 2020. It highlights a pattern of violence and state inaction in Costa Rica, noting that early warnings about armed non-indigenous intruders in the Térraba region were ignored by authorities. The statement links these killings to the struggle for indigenous autonomy and opposition to extractive projects, specifically citing the Diquís Hydroelectric Project, and demands the implementation of Inter-American Commission on Human Rights precautionary measures.

The report synthesizes the work of UN human rights treaty bodies (HRTBs), including the CEDAW, CESCR, and CRC, on climate change. It details how these bodies use state reporting, communications procedures, and general comments to hold States accountable for human rights violations caused by climate change and insufficient mitigation efforts. Key findings emphasize the need for highest-ambition emissions cuts, the phasing out of fossil fuels, and the protection of vulnerable groups, including women, children, and Indigenous Peoples.

The document identifies three typologies of rights-based claims in the extractive sector of South and Southeast Asia: environmental justice, Indigenous rights and land claims, and the right to conduct artisanal and small-scale mining. It highlights that while international law provides a framework for these rights, local actors face significant institutional, financial, and informational barriers. The brief recommends strengthening the rule of law, formalizing artisanal mining, and incorporating free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) into domestic legal frameworks.

The paper identifies three main categories of rights-based claims: environmental justice, Indigenous rights and land claims, and artisanal and small-scale mining (ASM) rights. It finds that claimants often use multi-scalar strategies, combining domestic litigation with mass protests and international advocacy. While some claims lead to the suspension of extractive activities or improved corporate engagement, others are met with state oppression or violence. The study highlights the critical role of civil society organizations (CSOs) as enablers and the importance of framing strategies to maximize available resources.

The evaluation concludes that the GCF's interim ESS standards, based on IFC Performance Standards, are not fit-for-purpose as they focus on risk mitigation ('do no harm') rather than generating positive environmental and social outcomes ('do good'). Key gaps were identified in human rights, gender equity, and the monitoring of co-benefits. The report finds that the accreditation process is largely a desk review that fails to verify institutional capacity, and the Project Preparation Facility (PPF) suffers from excessive processing times. Monitoring is heavily reliant on AE self-reporting via Annual Performance Reports (APRs) due to the non-operationalization of the Monitoring and Accountability Framework (MAF). Additionally, the REDD+ pilot programme was found to be inconsistent with the Warsaw Framework for REDD+ (WFR) by imposing additional safeguard requirements and a binary pass/fail assessment.

The research finds that while polycentricity in Pakistan allows non-state actors to voice diverse climate justice framings—including human rights and vulnerability—these perspectives are largely blocked from policy change by state power and a national strategy that prioritizes international justice over domestic inequalities.

The case of Urgenda Foundation v The State of the Netherlands resulted in a Supreme Court ruling on 20 December 2019, upholding a lower court's order for the Dutch government to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 25% relative to 1990 levels by the end of 2020. The courts determined that the State has a positive obligation under Articles 2 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights to take concrete actions against climate change to prevent risks to the right to life and family life. The ruling established that such mandates do not violate the separation of powers, as the government retains discretion over the methods used to achieve the target. This judgment has since influenced climate litigation in other jurisdictions, including Ireland and Australia.

The failure to establish rules for international carbon markets at COP 25 prevented the adoption of loopholes and double-counting but shifted the responsibility for environmental integrity to individual countries. This creates a risk of a 'wild west' scenario where low-ambition countries may trade 'junk credits' from the Kyoto Protocol era. While the San Jose Principles and Article 77d of the transparency framework offer some paths toward integrity and reporting, the lack of a global agreement leaves carbon markets potentially undermining overall climate action.

Mighty Earth advocates for a sustainable natural rubber industry, highlighting the role of the Global Platform for Sustainable Natural Rubber (GPSNR) in addressing deforestation and human rights abuses. While acknowledging progress in stakeholder cooperation, the author identifies critical gaps in the GPSNR, including the lack of internal company policies, the absence of a grievance mechanism, and the non-participation of Chinese companies. The document calls for increased supply chain transparency, the inclusion of smallholder farmers, and a shift toward binding regulation to ensure a level playing field.

The briefing examines the lack of legal recognition for 'climate refugees' in international law and the EU's asylum system, highlighting how current frameworks often classify such individuals as voluntary or economic migrants. It advocates for a holistic, human-rights-based approach that integrates climate, development, and migration policies, suggesting the use of humanitarian visas and flexible legal labor channels as potential solutions. The author emphasizes the role of the UN Global Compacts and the potential for the Greens in the European Parliament to push for these reforms despite political divisions and a Commission focus on border security.

The document outlines the mechanisms of the UN Human Rights Treaty Bodies (HRTBs) and provides a strategic guide for climate advocates to engage in the State reporting process. It highlights the benefits of securing non-binding but authoritative 'Concluding Observations' to pressure states, provides examples of successful interventions in countries like Argentina and Norway, and details the five-step reporting cycle from initial submission to national follow-up.

The report evaluates COP25 as a failure in meeting the global call for increased climate ambition, noting a disconnect between mass mobilizations and the lack of urgency among negotiating Parties. While it highlights progress in gender-related frameworks and the establishment of the Santiago network for loss and damage, it emphasizes significant failures in integrating human rights and indigenous protections into Article 6 carbon market rules and the Warsaw International Mechanism. The document concludes by identifying 2020 advocacy opportunities to ensure human rights safeguards are embedded in NDCs and carbon trading modalities.

The document outlines a structured approach for organizations to submit shadow reports to UN Human Rights Treaty Bodies, focusing on how climate change and inadequate state responses violate human rights. It suggests a concise format (6-8 pages) divided into sections covering relevant human rights obligations, adverse climate effects on specific populations, deficiencies in national policies (such as NDCs under the Paris Agreement), and specific legal obligations under treaties. The guide includes a table of submission deadlines and contact emails for various committees, including the CCPR, CEDAW, CERD, CESCR, CRC, and CRPD.

The document outlines the mechanisms of UN human rights treaty bodies (HRTBs) and provides a strategic framework for climate activists to influence state climate policies. It details the reporting cycle, the role of 'shadow reports' submitted by civil society, and the subsequent 'Concluding Observations' (COBs) issued by committees. While COBs are not legally binding, the guide argues they serve as authoritative guidance that can be leveraged in national advocacy, media campaigns, and litigation. It provides specific examples of recommendations made to countries like Argentina, Norway, and Spain regarding fossil fuels and air pollution.