Search Climate Insights Directory

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) argues that the Zero Draft presented by the IGWG is too weak and fails to establish a robust mechanism to end the impunity of transnational corporations. The organization advocates for the primacy of human rights over trade and investment agreements, the establishment of an international tribunal for TNCs, and the inclusion of direct legal obligations for corporations rather than relying on voluntary principles or state-centric responsibilities. FoEI also criticizes the European Union for its lack of constructive participation and for favoring corporate interests over human rights.

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) argues that the 'Zero Draft' presented by Ecuador for the UN binding treaty on transnational corporations (TNCs) is too weak to end corporate impunity. FoEI advocates for the treaty to establish direct legal obligations for TNCs, prioritize human rights over trade and investment agreements, and create an international tribunal for corporate human rights violations. The document criticizes the European Union for its lack of substantive participation and warns against 'corporate capture' of the negotiation process, emphasizing the need for a gender perspective and the protection of human rights defenders.

A joint statement by civil society organizations challenging the claims of the International Hydropower Association that large dams are 'clean and green' solutions for the Paris Climate Agreement and UN SDGs. The authors demand a redirection of funding from large-scale hydro to decentralized renewables and the legal protection of free-flowing rivers.

The report examines the dilemma of the Swedish mining sector: its necessity for the low-carbon energy transition versus its negative environmental and social impacts. Through a collaborative project between Svemin and SEI, the authors developed four future scenarios for 2050 and a draft sustainability roadmap consisting of 31 robust action points. Key recommendations include improving supply chain traceability, addressing land-use conflicts with Indigenous Sami rights, and pursuing 'moonshot' projects like the 'invisible mine' to minimize surface impacts.

The statement denounces a 'systematic policy of extermination' against social actors and defenders of territories and people's rights in Latin America and the Caribbean. It attributes this violence to a neoliberal model of 'privatization and financialization' driven by imperialist forces and multinationals, which results in the spoliation of environmental heritage and the murder of activists. The authors highlight a pervasive 'architecture of impunity' where perpetrators remain free, and they call for the construction of an international front to combat this 'fascism' and protect the lives of those defending common goods and fundamental rights.

The report analyzes 38 ISDS cases brought by mining companies against Latin American states, highlighting a systemic bias that favors corporate profits over human rights and environmental laws. It documents how these suits often target government measures resulting from community resistance or environmental regulations, creating a 'chilling effect' on public policy. The document details specific cases in countries such as Colombia, El Salvador, and Venezuela, and proposes a fundamental shift toward a legal framework that prioritizes human rights and environmental protection over investor rights.

The document argues that existing human rights obligations under legally binding treaties must inform climate action to protect those most affected and ensure non-discrimination and public participation. It highlights the role of UN human rights treaty bodies (HRTBs) in elaborating these obligations and reviews their 2018 guidance on emissions reduction, adaptation, procedural rights, and international cooperation, including specific contributions from CEDAW, CESCR, and the CRC.

The document evaluates the EU's proposed Multilateral Investment Court (MIC) as a replacement for ad hoc investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanisms. ClientEarth argues that the MIC provides only cosmetic procedural improvements and fails to address systemic imbalances, such as the lack of investor obligations and the marginalization of domestic courts. The briefing provides six key recommendations for reform, including the requirement to exhaust local remedies, the inclusion of 'clean hands' and 'supremacy' clauses to protect public interest legislation, and the limitation of compensation to proven economic damages. Alternatively, the document suggests that states should withdraw consent from ISDS and terminate international investment agreements (IIAs) in favor of domestic judiciaries, political risk insurance, and state-to-state dispute settlement.

The document argues that traditional resilience concepts often ignore power dynamics and social inequalities. Based on a review of 171 articles, the authors define equitable resilience as a form of human-environmental resilience that accounts for social vulnerability and differentiated access to power, knowledge, and resources. They propose four essential elements for practice: recognizing subjectivities, ensuring inclusion and representation, working across geographical and temporal scales, and promoting systemic transformation. The brief emphasizes that resilience indicators alone are insufficient and that practitioners must engage with the politics of social change to avoid entrenching existing vulnerabilities.

The author contends that Viktor Orbán's government has systematically dismantled democratic institutions in Hungary, creating an 'authoritarian regime' that serves as a model for far-right movements in Europe. The text argues that previous EU responses were too timid, relying on 'soft law' and infringement procedures that failed to produce results. It advocates for the 'nuclear' option of Article 7—which can suspend voting rights—and specifically proposes linking EU funding in the Multiannual Financial Framework to the state of the rule of law to disrupt the financial incentives supporting the current regime.

The report examines the increasing engagement of UN human rights treaty bodies (HRTBs) with climate change, specifically analyzing their 2018 Concluding Observations (COBs), general comments, and thematic initiatives. It highlights a shift toward addressing a broader diversity of countries, including developed nations, and identifies a continuing emphasis on adaptation and procedural rights over mitigation. The document provides detailed syntheses of recommendations from the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), and the Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC), emphasizing the disproportionate impacts of climate change on women, children, and persons with disabilities.

The document outlines the progressive emergence of human rights as a crosscutting issue within UN climate governance since 2010. It details specific references in the Cancun Agreements and the Paris Agreement, the role of UNFCCC constituted bodies in applying human rights standards, and the extent to which State Parties have included human rights in their national reports and Nationally Determined Contributions.

The analysis argues that EUSIPA perpetuates the flaws of old-generation Bilateral Investment Treaties by providing vague investor protections and a biased dispute settlement system that lacks sufficient judicial independence and fails to prioritize public interest over investment claims.

The document emphasizes that adopting a human rights approach to climate action is essential for protecting those on the frontlines of climate impacts, including indigenous peoples and local communities. It traces the progressive recognition of human rights within the UNFCCC, from the 2010 Cancun Agreements to the 2015 Paris Agreement, and highlights the role of updated Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) in promoting public participation. For the SB50 negotiations, it specifically identifies the need for social and environmental safeguards in Article 6 mechanisms to avoid the rights infringements seen under the Clean Development Mechanism, and notes the importance of reviewing the Warsaw International Mechanism on Loss and Damage and the Gender Action Plan.

The report serves as a reference tool listing over 60 UNFCCC decisions and reports that acknowledge the role of Indigenous Peoples and their traditional knowledge in climate mitigation and adaptation. It highlights the establishment of the Local Communities and Indigenous Peoples Platform and recalls the minimum standards for survival and dignity set by the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

The document analyzes how the CEDAW monitors the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (ICEDAW) to address climate change. It highlights that in 2018, the Committee made climate-related recommendations to 75% of reviewed states, focusing heavily on adaptation (44%) and procedural rights (37%), while mitigation received significantly less attention (7%). The briefing details specific state obligations across four areas: mitigation, adaptation, procedural rights, and international cooperation, emphasizing the role of General Recommendation 37 (GR37) in framing disaster risk reduction with a gender perspective.

The report examines the evolving relationship between human rights and the international climate regime, specifically the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement. It identifies a trend of increasing explicit and implicit references to human rights in COP decisions, though it notes these are often disproportionately linked to adaptation rather than mitigation. The document details how procedural rights, the rights of indigenous peoples, gender equality, and the right to food are being integrated into climate policy. It also reviews national-level implementation through Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and national communications, finding that while many countries reference human rights, there is a lack of harmonized guidance. The report argues that a rights-based approach is essential to increase climate ambition and protect vulnerable populations from both climate impacts and poorly designed climate responses.

The document examines the EU's strategy of externalising border control to Libya, noting that while migrant apprehensions fell from approximately 119,000 in 2017 to around 23,000 in 2018, this success is tactical and risks long-term stability. The author contends that by providing equipment and training to hybrid forces and armed groups—such as the Coast Guard unit in Zawiya—the EU reinforces the power of unaccountable actors and criminal networks. This approach creates a 'gatekeeper' role for certain commanders and ignores the primary security concerns of Libyan citizens, such as fuel smuggling and impunity. The brief recommends that counter-migration efforts be integrated into a broader, Libyan-owned security sector reform programme that prioritises the rule of law and clear distinctions between military and civilian security roles.

The report examines the normative tensions inherent in security preparedness, identifying ten central ethical problems regarding priorities, responsibilities, and the distribution of costs and benefits. It evaluates these problems through various ethical theories—including consequentialism, contractualism, and deontology—and assesses existing guidelines like the Sendai Framework and Council of Europe principles. The document concludes by proposing a three-part framework to evaluate the ethical legitimacy of specific security policies based on human rights principles.

Carbon Market Watch calls for the inclusion of independent grievance mechanisms and rights-based safeguards in the Article 6 implementation guidelines to prevent the human rights and environmental violations seen under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM).