Search Climate Insights Directory

The document argues that coordinated disinformation campaigns, primarily funded by the fossil fuel industry and disseminated via Big Tech and media, are delaying the energy transition and threatening public health and human rights. It calls for COP30 in Belém to move beyond the mere recognition of this issue to mandatory, verifiable actions and regulatory measures against the monetization of disinformation and greenwashing.

The Just Transition Compass was launched at a networking dinner in Belém during COP30. Developed by LACLIMA and Climate Strategies with support from GIZ and the COP30 Presidency, the Compass is an operational tool designed to help negotiators and implementers translate high-level climate ambitions into fair, inclusive transitions. It focuses on governance choices regarding participation, safeguards, and the distribution of benefits and burdens to prevent the creation of new 'sacrifice zones'. The launch followed a series of dialogues in Brasília, Panama, Bonn, and Addis Ababa, and serves as a foundation for continued collaboration on policy design and financing beyond the project's conclusion on 31 December 2025.

The authors argue that the UN climate process is outdated and allows powerful countries and polluting industries to block ambition. They propose four key reforms: implementing majority voting when consensus fails, enforcing strict conflict-of-interest rules to exclude fossil fuel lobbyists, establishing meaningful accountability and compliance mechanisms for state commitments, and guaranteeing human rights and transparency in negotiations.

A guide published by CIEL and other organizations detailing how the International Court of Justice's July 2025 Advisory Opinion on climate change obligations can be used by negotiators at COP30 to increase climate ambition and accountability.

Carbon Market Watch warns that carbon markets are being promoted as a 'cure-all' for the climate crisis, which risks camouflaging climate inaction. The organization asserts that these markets are riddled with systemic flaws, often violate human rights, and cannot replace the scale of climate finance required for developing countries. It calls for COP30 to prioritize rapid, substantial emissions cuts over the use of carbon credits for offsetting.

The report documents the increasing recognition of Indigenous Peoples and traditional knowledge within the UNFCCC process, listing specific references across various policy areas including adaptation, finance, and technology. It highlights the role of the Local Communities and Indigenous Peoples Platform (LCIPP) and emphasizes the necessity of a rights-based approach to climate action, grounded in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

The report examines the intersection of biodiversity loss and human rights violations, asserting that transnational corporations (TNCs) drive ecological destruction through industrial agriculture, extractivism, and infrastructure projects. It critiques voluntary corporate social responsibility (CSR) and due diligence frameworks as 'false solutions' that facilitate corporate impunity. The document calls for a legally binding treaty on TNCs and human rights, the operationalization of a human rights-based approach within the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), and the recognition of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities as rights-holders rather than mere stakeholders.

The document examines the link between biodiversity loss and human rights violations, asserting that transnational corporations drive ecological destruction through land grabbing and the marginalization of indigenous peoples. It criticizes voluntary corporate social responsibility (CSR) and 'due diligence' frameworks as insufficient 'false solutions' that maintain corporate impunity. The report calls for the transition from a 'stakeholder' to a 'rights-holder' approach within the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and proposes a legally binding treaty to enforce corporate accountability, mandatory free, prior and informed consent (FPIC), and the protection of environmental defenders.

The document examines the link between biodiversity loss and human rights violations, specifically focusing on the role of transnational corporations (TNCs) in driving ecological destruction and suppressing defenders. It criticizes voluntary mechanisms like Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and due diligence as 'shields' for impunity and calls for a legally binding treaty on TNCs and human rights. The report emphasizes the importance of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) and the recognition of Indigenous Peoples as rights-holders rather than mere stakeholders.

The report examines how Egypt, South Sudan, and Chad manage the influx of Sudanese refugees, highlighting a systemic gap between international legal commitments and the lived realities of displaced persons. It identifies specific failures in each country—Egypt's security-heavy approach, South Sudan's operational fragility, and Chad's institutional weakness—and recommends regional coordination through the AU and IGAD to establish a predictable protection framework.

The report examines Sudan's history of failed transitional justice efforts and proposes a multi-pillar framework—including mental health support, truth-finding, and criminal accountability—to achieve sustainable peace. It emphasizes that while a cessation of hostilities is ideal for full implementation, certain elements like psychosocial support should begin immediately. The authors advocate for a victim-centered, Sudanese-led process that integrates traditional justice mechanisms and maintains a transnational scope to address harms involving South Sudan and the diaspora.

A coalition of NGOs denounces TotalEnergies' plan to restart the $20 billion Mozambique LNG project, citing a 'deep contempt' for local communities and the environment. The organizations highlight that the project's resumption is contingent on the Mozambican government approving a revised budget that includes $4.5 billion in additional costs incurred during the force majeure period. The statement further alleges severe human rights abuses, including the 'container massacre' and torture of civilians, and calls on financial institutions—including Crédit Agricole, Société Générale, and various export credit agencies—to withdraw their support.

A coalition of civil society organisations condemns TotalEnergies' plan to restart the USD 20 billion Mozambique LNG project. The organisations highlight that the restart is conditional on the Mozambican government approving a revised budget that includes USD 4.5 billion in incremental costs incurred during the force majeure period. The statement warns that the project's 'fortress' security model increases the vulnerability of local populations to an ongoing regional insurgency and recalls allegations of serious human rights abuses, including the 'container massacre' and torture of civilians on the gas site. The coalition calls on financial institutions, including export credit agencies and banks, to withdraw their support for the project due to these environmental, social, and financial risks.

The document is an open letter to President Emmanuel Macron from a coalition of climate and human rights organizations. The authors warn that the 'Omnibus I' proposal in the European Parliament is undermining the European due diligence directive. They highlight a conflicting letter sent to the President by 46 companies, including TotalEnergies and Siemens AG, which called for the 'abrogation' of the CSDDD. The signatories argue that France, as a pioneer of corporate duty of vigilance and a signatory of the Paris Agreement, must ensure multinationals are required to identify, prevent, and remedy social, environmental, and climate impacts. They further claim that deregulation efforts are influenced by US interests, specifically ExxonMobil and President Trump, and align with the agenda of the French far-right.

The report details a seminar in Brasília where social movements and civil society organizations critiqued the current energy transition as an expansion of an extractivist system. Participants argued that a truly just transition must be grounded in climate justice, human rights, and territorial sovereignty, emphasizing the need for meaningful participation and the protection of Indigenous and traditional lands to avoid creating new 'sacrifice zones'.

The document is a formal letter to President Cyril Ramaphosa calling for systemic changes to global debt restructuring and sustainability. The authors argue that current G20 mechanisms, such as the Common Framework, are inadequate and that African nations face an 'African premium' in borrowing costs. They propose several specific interventions, including a UN Framework Convention on sovereign debt, the creation of an African Credit Rating Agency, and the sale of IMF gold reserves to fund debt relief.

A coalition of NGOs, including Reclaim Finance and Friends of the Earth France, is urging banks to withdraw support for gas projects in Mozambique, specifically citing the 'fortress strategy' of TotalEnergies and the ongoing instability in Cabo Delgado.

A coalition of civil society organisations, including Reclaim Finance and Justiça Ambiental!, condemns the push by companies like TotalEnergies, ENI, and ExxonMobil to advance gas projects in Mozambique. They argue that restarting these projects, specifically the Mozambique LNG project, ignores unresolved community grievances and escalates security risks in Cabo Delgado. The organisations call on over 30 financial institutions, including Crédit Agricole and Standard Chartered, to withdraw support to avoid complicity in human rights abuses and environmental destruction.

The document examines how the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) system enables foreign investors, particularly from the fossil fuel industry, to claim compensation from states for climate policies. It highlights the 'regulatory chill' effect, where the threat of costly awards—which have increased from an average of $25 million (1994-2003) to over $250 million (2014-2023)—deters governments from phasing out fossil fuels. The briefing references July 2025 advisory opinions from the International Court of Justice and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights to affirm state duties to regulate polluting conduct. It concludes that current reform efforts, including the EU and UK withdrawals from the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT), are insufficient due to sunset clauses and inadequate carve-outs, and recommends coordinated UN-level action to eliminate ISDS threats to climate and human rights obligations.

The briefing argues that proposed 'Omnibus I' amendments to weaken or delete Article 22 of the CS3D—which requires companies to adopt and implement 1.5°C-compatible climate transition plans (CTPs)—would contradict the International Court of Justice's (ICJ) July 2025 Advisory Opinion. The ICJ confirmed that States have a binding legal duty to regulate private sector emissions using 'stringent' due diligence. The authors warn that diluting these requirements would increase the liability risks for EU Member States, heighten the legal exposure of companies to climate litigation, and leave the final Omnibus I Directive vulnerable to legal challenges for failing to meet international and EU climate obligations.