Search Climate Insights Directory

The document examines the role of safeguards in REDD+ to prevent social and environmental harm and to generate 'multiple benefits' such as poverty alleviation and biodiversity conservation. It analyzes various international standards, reviews how countries integrate these into Readiness Preparation Proposals (R-PPs), and discusses the challenges of creating a cost-effective, transparent information-sharing system that respects national sovereignty while ensuring accountability.

The document analyzes the role of safeguards in REDD+ to prevent negative social and environmental impacts while maximizing 'multiple benefits' such as poverty reduction and biodiversity conservation. It evaluates various international standards (e.g., UN-REDD, World Bank SESA, FSC) and argues that no single standard covers all Cancun Agreement criteria. The paper explores the technical and financial challenges of establishing national and international information-sharing systems for safeguards, noting that costs for readiness phase monitoring vary from 35,000 USD in Costa Rica to 600,000 USD in the DRC. It concludes that effective safeguards require broad stakeholder participation, transparency, and a balance between international guidelines and national sovereignty.

The document argues that carbon markets offer indigenous communities opportunities for economic development aligned with sustainable forest management, provided that governments ensure free, prior and informed consent and protect land and carbon rights. It highlights a global lack of effort to involve indigenous peoples in carbon market policy and notes a specific information void regarding First Nations in Canada.

The Cancun LCA Outcome represents the first international climate agreement to recognize the human rights impacts of climate change, explicitly stating that Parties should "fully respect human rights in all climate change-related actions." While the document marks progress by referencing UN Human Rights Council Resolution 10/4 and establishing safeguards for REDD and the Green Climate Fund, it fails to acknowledge broader obligations to "protect, promote and fulfill" rights or explicitly guarantee procedural rights like access to information and justice. The analysis highlights that these rights-related provisions have not yet been fully operationalized within UNFCCC bodies.

A coalition of environmental and human rights organizations is challenging the registration of the Barro Blanco Hydroelectric Project (PA #3237) in Western Panama. The groups argue that the project's additionality is questionable and raise serious concerns regarding the lack of public consultation, the potential misuse of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs) for community compensation, and human rights abuses by GENISA against the Ngobe indigenous peoples.

The report documents various environmental and social justice campaigns led by Friends of the Earth (FoE) member groups across the globe. Key achievements include the 2008 UK Climate Change Act, a ban on open-pit metal mining in Costa Rica (2010), and the cessation of commercial whaling in Spain (1985). The document also details ongoing resistance against coal-fired power plants in Germany and Scotland, gas flaring in Nigeria, and the impact of large-scale dams in Mozambique, South Korea, and the Philippines. It emphasizes a strategy of combining grassroots mobilization, legal challenges, and international solidarity to combat corporate globalization and protect indigenous and community rights.

On November 12, Canada endorsed the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), having previously been one of four states to vote against its 2007 adoption. Natural Justice notes that despite this endorsement, Canada was criticized at the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (COP10) in Nagoya, Japan, for attempting to remove all references to UNDRIP from the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit Sharing negotiations, leading to Canada receiving the 'Dodo Award' for its failure to evolve.

The document critiques carbon trading as an unreliable mechanism that shifts the burden of mitigation to developing countries and benefits the Northern financial industry. It proposes a comprehensive package of alternatives: for mitigation, it suggests global feed-in tariffs for renewables, energy efficiency standards, sustainable small-scale agriculture, and the protection of Indigenous forest rights. For climate finance, it identifies a potential US$420 billion per year in new funding through a global Financial Transaction Tax, cracking down on tax evasion, redirecting fossil-fuel producer subsidies, issuing new Special Drawing Rights, and implementing carbon and energy taxes.

The document examines the 'Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation' (REDD) framework, highlighting how its implementation often prioritizes corporate profit and carbon market volatility over the rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities. Through case studies in countries like Indonesia, Mexico, and Paraguay, it illustrates risks such as 'leakage', the displacement of forest-dependent populations, and the lack of genuine free, prior, and informed consent. The report concludes that REDD should be decoupled from carbon markets and instead focus on reducing demand for agricultural commodities and timber while rewarding those who have historically conserved forests.

The report critiques the REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) framework, highlighting how its implementation often leads to the marginalization of indigenous communities and the privatization of forest resources. Through case studies in countries like Indonesia, Mexico, and Paraguay, it argues that REDD is being used by transnational energy companies to 'greenwash' their images while continuing fossil fuel extraction. The document warns that linking REDD to unstable carbon markets and allowing monoculture plantations may undermine actual emission reductions and exacerbate land conflicts.

The report critiques 'Reducing Emissions from Deforestation in Developing Countries' (REDD), claiming it risks exacerbating inequality and privatizing forest resources. It highlights how energy companies use REDD for greenwashing while continuing fossil fuel extraction. Through case studies in Indonesia, Mexico, Paraguay, and others, the document illustrates failures in community consultation, the risk of 'leakage' where deforestation simply shifts location, and the danger of including monoculture plantations in carbon accounting. It concludes that REDD should be decoupled from volatile carbon markets and instead based on public funding and the recognition of Indigenous land rights.

The report critiques the 'Reducing Emissions from Deforestation in Developing Countries' (REDD) mechanism, highlighting how it can exacerbate inequality and privatize forest resources. Through case studies in countries like Indonesia, Mexico, and Paraguay, it demonstrates that REDD projects often exclude indigenous communities from decision-making and serve as a 'greenwash' for fossil fuel and logging companies. The document warns that without reducing demand for agricultural commodities and timber, REDD may lead to 'leakage,' where deforestation simply shifts to other areas, rendering the mechanism ineffective for global climate mitigation.

A civil society statement warns that the CBD COP is heading for failure, comparing it to the Copenhagen climate summit, due to Northern governments' refusal to accept legally binding commitments on Access and Benefit-Sharing (ABS) and financial obligations. The statement calls for an ABS Protocol with strong enforcement to stop biopiracy and protect the rights of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities.

The report documents a regional trend of violence against environmental defenders in Mexico and Central America linked to industrial mining. It argues that this violence stems from state failure to manage environmental impacts and a lack of protection for defenders, often exacerbated by the influence of foreign mining companies from Canada and the United States. Through case studies in Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, and Panama, the document details threats, kidnappings, and assassinations, while recommending stronger institutional protections, the implementation of free, prior, and informed consent, and greater accountability for home states of foreign corporations.

The report documents a regional trend of violence against environmental defenders in Mexico and Central America, linking these abuses to the social and environmental impacts of industrial mining and the failure of states to protect human rights. It provides case studies from five countries and recommends strengthening institutional protection, environmental regulations, and the right to free, prior, and informed consent.

The document argues that the IFC's shift toward an "outcomes-based" approach has reduced its accountability and oversight, leading to inadequate risk identification and poor development outcomes. It calls for a return to more stringent, verifiable requirements, particularly regarding the rights of indigenous peoples, climate change mitigation, and transparency in financial intermediary lending.

The Salmon Aquaculture Dialogue (SAD) has released a working draft of standards for salmon grow-out and smolt production. These standards cover seven key principles: legal compliance, biodiversity conservation, protection of wild populations, resource efficiency, disease management, social responsibility, and community engagement. The document specifies measurable indicators and performance levels, such as limits on sea lice, forage fish dependency ratios, and labor rights. Once finalized, these standards will be managed by the Aquaculture Stewardship Council (ASC) for third-party certification.

The document examines how global warming threatens fundamental human rights—including the rights to food, water, health, and housing—and explores the legal frameworks available for redress. It reviews international environmental law, the outcomes of the 2009 Copenhagen Conference, and existing jurisprudence from human rights tribunals. The authors argue that climate-related harms are not 'new territory' for litigation but fit within established legal principles. The paper specifically evaluates the CESCR's current work and proposes eleven recommendations to better anchor climate change in the Committee's state reporting, general comments, and the use of its Optional Protocol for individual and inter-state complaints.

The document outlines systemic failures in the IFC's environmental and social due diligence, highlighting an overreliance on unverified client data and inadequate project categorization. It calls for the explicit integration of international human rights standards, including the right to free, prior and informed consent for indigenous peoples, and a strategic shift away from fossil fuel investments toward renewable energy. The authors also criticize the 'loophole' created by financial intermediaries and demand greater transparency in extractive industry contracts.

Civil society organizations are calling for the International Finance Corporation (IFC) to update its Social and Environmental Sustainability Policy and Performance Standards. They argue that the current framework fails to account for the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the urgent need to address climate change, and the lessons of the financial crisis regarding the risks of shifting monitoring responsibilities to private sector clients.