Search Climate Insights Directory

A coalition of 121 civil society organisations calls for a robust Paris Treaty featuring 5-year commitment periods, a 2050 decarbonisation goal, and the exclusion of international carbon offsets. The letter advocates for a human rights-based approach, the integration of Sustainable Development Goals, and the recognition of Loss & Damage to ensure a just transition and environmental integrity.

Carbon Market Watch argues that while few countries explicitly include international trading in their Intended Nationally Determined Contributions, carbon pricing is already used by jurisdictions representing 40% of the global economy. The organization warns that a lack of clear international rules could lead to non-harmonized standards and double counting. It recommends strict principles for carbon markets, including the avoidance of 'hot air' credits, the requirement for net atmospheric benefits, and the exclusion of REDD-plus from carbon markets.

The policy brief highlights how climate mitigation actions under the UNFCCC can infringe on human rights, citing the Sasan coal power project as a case study of forced displacement and pollution. It calls for the Paris agreement to explicitly commit parties to human rights obligations and establish a robust institutional safeguard system, including grievance and monitoring mechanisms, to manage the risks associated with increasing climate finance flows from 2020 onwards.

Carbon Market Watch argues that the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) requires fundamental reform to remain viable after 2020, specifically to move beyond 'pure offsetting' and ensure human rights protections. The organization recommends establishing a formal grievance mechanism, strengthening civil society participation, and introducing stricter additionality testing to exclude high-emission technologies like coal. It also calls for the removal of conflicts of interest within the CDM Executive Board and the introduction of liability rules for Designated Operational Entities (DOEs) to prevent the issuance of non-additional credits.

The Coal Atlas 2015 examines the systemic damage caused by coal extraction and combustion, highlighting its role as a primary driver of global CO2 emissions and its associated health and human rights violations. It analyzes the economic instability of the 'carbon bubble' and the failure of technologies like carbon capture and storage, while documenting the rise of renewable energy and grassroots protests against the coal industry across various nations, including China, India, the US, Russia, and Germany.

The document criticizes the European Union for promoting a 'one-sided' legal framework that empowers corporations via Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanisms in trade deals like TTIP and CETA, while simultaneously resisting a legally binding UN treaty on business and human rights. It highlights the inadequacy of the EU's reliance on voluntary Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) guidelines and the UN Guiding Principles (UNGP), noting that such 'soft laws' fail to provide victims of corporate abuse with effective access to justice or enforceable sanctions.

The paper argues that the legal distinction between migrant smuggling (facilitating illegal movement for profit) and human trafficking (exploitation) is increasingly blurred in practice, as smugglers often transition into traffickers. It contends that restrictive border controls do not stop migration but instead make smuggling the 'new normal,' increasing migrant vulnerability and profitability for criminal networks. The authors highlight that most irregular migrants successfully reach their destinations despite high risks, and that state efforts to 'demonize' smugglers often serve as political cover for the failure of the global asylum regime.

Carbon Market Watch recommends that the Green Climate Fund (GCF) avoid the shortcomings of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) by implementing strict criteria for additionality, sustainability, and social safeguards in its funding proposals.

The Center for International Environmental Law and other organizations advocate for the AIIB to implement a transparent, independent, and accessible accountability framework. They specifically call for an Oversight Mechanism aligned with UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and caution against over-reliance on potentially weak Country and Corporate Systems for grievance redress.

UN Special Rapporteur John Knox advocates for the integration of international human rights law into the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), supporting recommendations from 98 civil society organizations to establish an independent accountability mechanism and improve stakeholder consultation to protect vulnerable populations from the adverse effects of climate mitigation measures.

A coalition of 98 global entities argues that the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) fails to comply with international human rights obligations, specifically those recognized in the 2010 Cancun Agreements. The letter calls for the establishment of an independent accountability mechanism, the adoption of international sustainable development safeguards, and the implementation of improved stakeholder consultation processes to prevent environmental and social harms.

The policy brief argues that any use of carbon markets post-2020 must be governed by strict environmental integrity standards to avoid 'hot air' and double counting. It recommends that the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) undergo fundamental reform, including the adoption of social and human rights safeguards, to remain viable. The brief also calls for the exclusion of early action credits from post-2020 targets and urges the UNFCCC to demand greater emission reductions and adaptation levies from the international aviation (ICAO) and maritime (IMO) sectors. Finally, it advocates for the inclusion of human rights and gender equality protections in the core text of the Paris Agreement.

Carbon Market Watch recommends that the ICAO GMBM exclude high-risk offset projects, including fossil fuel power plants, nuclear facilities, large-scale hydropower, and certain industrial gas destruction projects. The brief highlights that these project types often lack additionality, cause severe social and environmental harm, or suffer from non-permanence. It cites existing exclusions in the EU ETS and other jurisdictions as precedents for maintaining high quality standards in aviation's climate response.

The document examines the fragmentation of social and environmental standards across UNFCCC instruments, including the CDM, REDD+, NAMAs, GCF, and AF. It finds that while some funds like the GCF and AF have robust safeguard policies, others like the CDM and NAMAs lack mandatory monitoring, universal guidelines for stakeholder consultation, or formal redress mechanisms. The author recommends that the Paris climate treaty explicitly mandate the protection of human rights and establish a centralized UNFCCC accountability mechanism and safeguards system to ensure climate actions do not cause adverse social or environmental impacts.

Civil society organizations are urging the CDM Executive Board to act against the Barro Blanco Hydroelectric Project in Panama. They cite the Panamanian government's temporary suspension of the project due to failures in reaching agreements with indigenous Ngöbe-Buglé communities and breaches of environmental impact assessments. The authors argue that the project's 2011 CDM registration ignored evidence that stakeholder consultation rules were not met and call for the Board to coordinate with financing banks and national authorities to ensure compliance with human rights and CDM standards.

The document expresses disappointment over the Green Climate Fund's (GCF) accreditation of Deutsche Bank, the World Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), and the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB). The signatories argue that accrediting entities with poor human rights records and heavy investments in coal and fossil fuels contradicts the GCF's goal of supporting low-carbon, climate-resilient societies. They further criticize the accreditation process as non-transparent, alleging that the Board approved applicants in blocs, which encouraged 'political horse-trading' and ignored critical information about the track records of the institutions involved.

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) advocates for a legally binding international treaty to replace voluntary corporate social responsibility approaches, arguing that TNCs currently operate under a 'shield of special rights and privileges'. The proposal emphasizes the need for mandatory rules that prioritize human rights over trade and investment agreements, the establishment of a World Court on TNCs and Human Rights to end corporate impunity, and the legal recognition of 'Ecocide' and the rights of 'Affected Peoples'. FoEI specifically calls for the criminal and civil liability of TNC executives and the protection of environmental defenders.

The document evaluates the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM), noting that while it has successfully provided a platform for citizen engagement and reviewed 17 countries, it is currently 'under stress'. The authors identify critical failures in leadership, funding, and political will, specifically noting that no Country Review Reports have been produced since early 2013. To remain relevant to Agenda 2063, the APRM must reform its administrative structure, establish a 'knowledge hub', and implement a more sustainable funding model based on GDP to ensure its autonomy and effectiveness.

The document examines how La Mesa, a Salvadoran coalition, used amicus curiae submissions in the Pac Rim arbitration to bring community concerns regarding metals mining and sustainable development to an international tribunal. It highlights the importance of alliance building between local groups and international legal experts to navigate technical arbitration processes and argues that such interventions provide essential public interest context that disputing parties may omit.

The report examines how the Mesa Nacional Frente a la Minería Metálica de El Salvador (MNFM), supported by CIEL and FESPAD, used amicus curiae submissions in the Pac Rim investor-state arbitration to highlight environmental and human rights concerns. It details the legal requirements for such interventions, the strategic importance of technical legal expertise combined with community grounding, and the outcomes of the jurisdictional phase of the arbitration. The document concludes with lessons for other civil society organizations on navigating the technical nature of international investment law to protect public interest and democratic decision-making.