Search Climate Insights Directory

The IGF Mining Policy Framework is a detailed guide for governments to regulate the mining sector sustainably. It is organized into six pillars: laws and institutions, financial benefits, socio-economic benefits, environmental management, mine closure transition, and artisanal and small-scale mining (ASM). The framework emphasizes transparency, gender equality, human rights, and the protection of indigenous peoples. Key recommendations include the use of integrated environmental and social impact assessments (ESIAs), the establishment of robust financial assurance for mine closures, and the formalization of the ASM sector to reduce poverty and environmental harm. It specifically advocates for the elimination of mercury in ASM and the implementation of free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) for indigenous communities.

The document examines the vulnerabilities of rural indigenous communities in Mexico and Colombia, exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, and proposes a resilience-based approach to public policy. It details two community projects: one in the Sierra Norte of Puebla, Mexico, focusing on productive strengthening, food security, and community savings; and another in the Guaviare department, Colombia, focusing on ancestral knowledge recovery (chagras), poultry entrepreneurship, and sustainable training. The brief argues that resilience requires delegating decision-making to communities, adopting an intersectional lens to support women and youth, and moving away from paternalistic, assistance-based government models toward long-term productive development.

The 2023 Forest Pathways Report by WWF International highlights that the world is off track to meet 2030 goals to halt deforestation, with a 21% divergence from targets in 2022. It identifies a massive funding gap, where approximately US$2.2 billion in annual public forest-positive finance is dwarfed by up to US$1 trillion in environmentally harmful subsidies. The report emphasizes the critical role of Indigenous Peoples and local communities, noting that their territories often have lower deforestation rates. It advocates for a shift from single-value carbon offsets to a 'contributions approach' and the repurposing of agricultural subsidies. Case studies from Brazil, Colombia, Gabon, and Australia illustrate specific challenges and successful interventions in forest conservation and restoration.

A coalition of civil society groups, including Oxfam Novib, Both ENDS, SOMO, and Recourse, criticizes FMO's October 2022 Position Statement on Impact and ESG for Financial Intermediaries. The groups argue that FMO's indirect investment model—which constitutes approximately 40% of its total portfolio—carries higher risks than direct lending but lacks sufficient safeguards against human rights abuses and environmental harm. Specifically, they highlight a gap in FMO's fossil fuel phase-out commitments, which apply to direct investments but not to those made via financial intermediaries, such as the Africa Finance Corporation. The statement also notes that a lack of transparency prevents impacted communities from accessing remedies for adverse project impacts.

The letter calls for the final adoption of a proposed EU law to break the link between food production and deforestation, emphasizing that forests are critical for climate change mitigation and biodiversity. It highlights that a small number of commodities—including cattle, cocoa, coffee, maize, palm oil, soy, rubber, and wood—drive the majority of forest destruction. The authors argue that mandatory rules for product origin and production checks are necessary to ensure corporate accountability and prevent human rights abuses against Indigenous Peoples.

The report documents systemic human rights violations in Paraguay's soy-growing regions, linking these abuses to major US commodity traders (ADM, Cargill, and Bunge) and European meat processors (2 Sisters and Danish Crown). It argues that voluntary sustainability certifications, specifically 'mass balance' schemes, act as accounting tricks that allow tainted soy to enter European supply chains. The document calls for mandatory due diligence legislation in the EU and UK to replace ineffective voluntary initiatives.

Friends of the Earth International calls for a Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) that prioritizes absolute biodiversity loss reversal, the rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities, and strict government regulation of corporations. The organization rejects 'false solutions' such as biodiversity offsets, nature-based solutions used for carbon capture, and corporate self-regulation, while advocating for a transition to agroecology and the provision of new, additional public financial resources for developing countries.

Global Witness reports that the expansion of soy monocultures in Paraguay is driving illegal land grabs, forced evictions of indigenous and peasant communities, and toxic pesticide poisoning. The report traces these products through global traders like ADM, Cargill, and Bunge to major European meat producers 2 Sisters and Danish Crown, and numerous high-street retailers. It argues that voluntary sustainability certifications, such as 'mass balance', act as 'accounting tricks' that mask the origin of 'tainted' soy, and calls for mandatory human rights due diligence legislation in the EU and UK.

The report details how the Kaunisvaara mine, operated by Northland Resources and later Kaunis Iron, has caused extensive land loss, disrupted reindeer migration and health, and induced psychological stress for the Muonio reindeer herding district. It highlights a significant gap between the 'moderate' impacts predicted during licensing and the actual severe consequences, noting that the district has received no financial compensation since 2012. The study also examines the systemic failure of Swedish legislation to protect Sámi rights, leaving the district marginalized in decision-making and forced into unsuccessful negotiations with mining companies.

The report details the extensive negative impacts of the Boliden mine (operated 1976–1988) and the resulting road on the Vilhelmina Södra reindeer herding district. Key findings include significant land loss, the creation of large disturbance zones that far exceed state estimates, and ongoing disruptions from tourism. The study argues that the mining industry and reindeer herding cannot coexist without significant impact and highlights the failure of the Swedish state to protect Sámi rights or provide adequate compensation.

The report documents the extensive and lasting impacts of the Boliden mine (operated 1976–1988) and the resulting road infrastructure on the Voernese sameby. Key findings highlight significant pasture loss, increased costs and workload for herders due to tourism and traffic, and the marginalization of Sámi knowledge in decision-making processes. The study argues that the state's failure to protect Sámi rights allows colonial exploitation of resources to persist, as evidenced by inadequate compensation and the ongoing pressure from new mining proposals by Vilhelmina Mineral.

The report examines how 'maldevelopment'—development that prioritizes economic growth over social equity—increases the vulnerability of marginalized groups, particularly women and Indigenous peoples, to disasters in Nepal and the Philippines. It details how inadequate planning and failed free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) processes lead to land grabs and forced displacements, which are experienced as disasters. The study highlights the role of WEHRDs in resisting these processes through grassroots mobilization, legal advocacy, and capacity building, while also documenting the severe hostility, violence, and systemic fragmentation they face.

The report analyzes the 'Nature Positive' concept, which aims to stop and reverse biodiversity loss. It argues that the term is vaguely defined and relies on 'net gain' accounting, which allows for the continued destruction of ecosystems if compensated elsewhere. The authors contend that such offsetting is often technically impossible, particularly in forest and marine ecosystems, and frequently leads to human rights violations against Indigenous Peoples and local communities. The document further asserts that the concept is pushed by the private sector to avoid strong regulations and to create new business opportunities, while failing to integrate the rights and knowledge of those who protect 80% of existing biodiversity.

The toolkit argues that rights-based approaches lead to more effective and legitimate climate outcomes. It outlines a three-step process for integrating rights into NDCs: inclusive planning, transparent communication of how rights informed that planning, and reflecting human rights obligations in implementation and monitoring. The document provides specific recommendations across seven thematic areas: ambition, participatory planning, general human rights integration, gender mainstreaming, Indigenous Peoples' rights, land tenure, and just transition. It emphasizes that states must align their climate ambition with the 1.5°C target to fulfill human rights obligations and should account for all emissions under their jurisdiction, including extraterritorial ones. The toolkit includes guiding questions and illustrative examples from the NDCs of Canada, Mexico, Vanuatu, Nepal, Costa Rica, Bolivia, and Chile to demonstrate best practices in human rights-based climate action.

The document argues that climate action must be aligned with human rights to be effective and legitimate. It provides a framework for integrating these rights into NDCs, focusing on scientific ambition, inclusive public participation, gender equality, the rights of Indigenous Peoples, land tenure, and a just transition for workers.

The document argues that climate action is most effective and legitimate when based on a human rights approach. It outlines a framework for integrating these rights into NDCs, focusing on scientific ambition, inclusive public participation, gender equality, the rights of indigenous peoples, land tenure, and a just transition for workers.

The document critiques the 'net zero' narrative, asserting that it relies on unproven carbon removals and offsets that allow polluters to continue emissions. It specifically highlights the risks of 'Nature Based Solutions' (NBS) leading to land grabbing in the Global South and the dangers of techno-fixes like BECCS and DACCS. The briefing details how the Article 6 'Rulebook' agreed at COP26 facilitates global carbon markets and warns that COP27 may further entrench these mechanisms. It concludes by advocating for 'real solutions' centered on a coordinated fossil fuel phase-out, food sovereignty, and Indigenous rights.

The report establishes a monitoring tool for forest legality and governance in the Congo Basin, based on Chatham House methodology. It defines 50 indicators categorized into forest goals, sustainable production and development, forest financing, and forest governance. Additionally, it provides a comparative matrix of the legal frameworks, dedicated agencies, and development policies of Cameroon, Gabon, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and the Republic of the Congo, specifically addressing drivers of deforestation such as commercial agriculture, extractive industries, and small-scale farming.

The Forest Declaration Assessment provides a structured monitoring tool for the Congo Basin, utilizing 50 indicators across four themes: forest goals, sustainable production and development, forest finance, and forest governance. The framework evaluates the quality and implementation of policies adopted by public and private stakeholders. Additionally, the document provides a detailed comparative annex of the existing forest laws, coordinating entities, and strategic policies in Cameroon, Gabon, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and the Republic of the Congo.

The Congo Basin, the world's second-largest tropical forest and a critical carbon sink, experienced an increase in deforestation in 2021, reaching 636,000 hectares. While historically low, current trends show that only Gabon and the Republic of the Congo are aligned with the 2030 goal of zero deforestation. Primary drivers include small-scale subsistence agriculture combined with road construction, though industrial mining and logging pose severe risks to intact forest landscapes. Despite the existence of legal frameworks and international funding commitments—such as $1.5 billion from COP26 donors—implementation is hindered by poor governance, land tenure insecurity for indigenous peoples, and a lack of intersectoral policy alignment. The report emphasizes the need for stronger community land rights and more transparent, quantifiable financial mechanisms to protect this vital ecological region.