Search Climate Insights Directory

The document advocates for a rights-based approach to the implementation of the Paris Agreement, specifically through the 'Paris Rule Book'. It emphasizes that climate actions must respect existing international obligations regarding human rights, indigenous peoples' rights, gender equality, food security, just transition, and ecosystem integrity. The briefing provides specific recommendations for integrating these principles into Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), Adaptation Communications, the Transparency Framework, and the Global Stocktake to ensure policy coherence and protect vulnerable populations from potential rights abuses caused by climate mitigation and adaptation projects.

The report documents a global pattern of violence and legal harassment against land and environmental rights defenders in 2013. It argues that these individuals, often representing vulnerable indigenous or rural communities, are targeted by governments and corporations during conflicts over natural resources and large-scale development projects. The document provides specific case studies from Europe, the Americas, Africa, and Asia, detailing arrests, assassinations, and forced displacements linked to opposition to mining, hydroelectric dams, agribusiness, and oil exploration.

The document argues that the success of the global plastics treaty depends on inclusive participation, moving beyond the limitations of the existing Major Groups and Other Stakeholders (MGS) system. It analyzes previous Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) and regional instruments, such as the Aarhus Convention and Escazú Agreement, to identify best practices for accreditation, speaking rights, and funding. The brief emphasizes the need for protected participation for Indigenous Peoples, waste pickers, women, and youth, who are disproportionately affected by plastic pollution. It concludes with specific recommendations for UN Member States and international bodies to implement open accreditation, provide financial support for stakeholders, and ensure transparency through public meetings and hybrid access.

The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) issued climate-related recommendations or questions to 35 out of 43 States considered in 2023. The Committee primarily focused on the differentiated impact of climate change on women, emphasizing the need for gender-responsive strategies in adaptation and disaster risk reduction, as well as the increased vulnerability of rural, Indigenous, migrant, and refugee women. While less frequent than adaptation, the Committee also addressed mitigation policies, fossil fuel extraction—specifically criticizing Norway's expansion of oil and gas permits in the Arctic—and the necessity of women's participation in the UNFCCC loss and damage fund.

The document advocates for a land-use planning framework that separates terrestrial carbon sequestration from industrial emission reductions due to the temporary nature of the former. It emphasizes that mitigation must prioritize food sovereignty, legally enforce the land rights of indigenous peoples and local communities, and avoid using land-sector targets to offset continued fossil fuel emissions. The paper critiques current Kyoto Protocol accounting as overly complex and prone to loopholes, suggesting instead the use of direct indicators like hectares of forest maintained. Specific recommendations include addressing high meat consumption and synthetic fertilizer use in developed countries to achieve permanent emission reductions in agriculture.

The policy brief outlines key principles for land-use mitigation, warning against using carbon sequestration to offset fossil fuel emissions and emphasizing the protection of food security and indigenous rights. It critiques current Kyoto Protocol LULUCF accounting as overly complex and prone to loopholes, recommending separate targets for industrial and land-use emissions due to the temporary nature of terrestrial carbon pools. The document advocates for policy-based measures, improved forest governance, and a focus on methane and nitrous oxide in agriculture to achieve permanent emission reductions.

The document outlines a series of requirements for the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) to ensure transparency and inclusivity. Key recommendations include open accreditation, the right for stakeholders to make text proposals, and the inclusion of public representatives within the INC Bureau. It emphasizes the need for funding to support participation, particularly for developing countries and informal sector workers, and calls for the recognition of Indigenous Peoples' governance systems through free, prior, and informed consent.

The document examines the World Bank's historical reluctance to integrate non-economic factors—specifically governance, civil society, and human rights—into its development mission. It argues that the Bank's adherence to a strict interpretation of its Articles of Agreement leads to an ad hoc approach to governance and a failure to protect civil and political rights. While noting progress in 'mainstreaming' public participation and the creation of the Inspection Panel, the author contends that these efforts are often superficial or undermined by an institutional 'culture of approval' that prioritizes loan volume over project quality.

The document argues that NDCs must be guided by human rights obligations to be both legally compliant and more effective. It provides a comprehensive checklist for evaluating NDCs across nine key areas, including mitigation ambition, participatory planning, gender justice, and the rights of Indigenous Peoples. The guide emphasizes that NDCs should include an urgent phase-out of fossil fuels, avoid reliance on carbon offsets or technological 'false solutions' like CCS, and ensure a just transition that protects labor rights and prevents mining-related human rights violations.

The document argues that human rights-based climate action is a legal obligation under the Paris Agreement and is more effective, as confirmed by the IPCC. It provides a comprehensive checklist for NDCs, emphasizing the need for a 1.5°C warming limit, the phase-out of fossil fuels, and the exclusion of carbon offsets and 'false technological solutions' like carbon capture and storage (CCS). The checklist details requirements for inclusive public participation, gender equality, the protection of indigenous peoples' rights—specifically free, prior and informed consent—and the implementation of a just transition. It also calls for debt-free international climate finance and robust monitoring systems that use disaggregated data by gender, age, and disability.

The document explains that Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) are national plans submitted every five years under the Paris Agreement to show progress toward global climate goals. It argues that human rights-based policies are the most effective form of climate action and that all Paris Agreement parties have obligations to respect and protect human rights, gender equality, and a just transition. The guide urges civil society to act by contacting governments, participating in official drafting processes, reviewing NDCs using a provided scorecard, and holding governments accountable through advocacy or legal action.

The document argues that human rights-based climate action is more effective and a legal obligation for all Parties to the Paris Agreement. It provides a comprehensive checklist for the preparation and evaluation of NDCs, covering mitigation ambition, participatory planning, gender justice, indigenous rights, just transition, adaptation, and accountability mechanisms.

The document outlines how the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) has begun integrating climate change into its human rights oversight, specifically regarding the rights of Indigenous Peoples and people of African descent. It details specific recommendations made to El Salvador, Mexico, Guyana, and the Netherlands, while noting that climate-related outputs remain a small fraction of the Committee's total work. The report also highlights the influence of UN Special Rapporteurs, the Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent, and NGOs in pushing for a human rights-based approach to environmental racism and climate justice.

The complaint argues that the State of Chile facilitated the forced eviction of Mapuche-Pehuenche communities from their ancestral lands in the Alto Bío Bío region to allow ENDESA to build the Ralco Hydroelectric Project. The petitioners claim that the state bypassed the Indigenous Law (Ley 19.253) and environmental conditions set by CONAMA, which required voluntary land swaps (permutas) approved by CONADI. Instead, the state used the 'Electric Law' (Ley Eléctrica) to impose flood easements and monetary compensation, which the petitioners describe as a form of 'ethnocide' that destroys their cultural, spiritual, and physical existence. They further allege a denial of justice by Chilean courts, which they claim have been ineffective or biased in favor of the company.

The document serves as a practical guide for indigenous and local community leaders to navigate the human rights implications of REDD+ initiatives. It explains the mechanism's goals, the seven UNFCCC safeguards, and the specific collective rights—such as self-determination, land tenure, and Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC)—that are often at risk. The guide provides strategic advice for negotiations and lists national and international grievance mechanisms, including the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and World Bank inspection panels, to address rights violations.

The document outlines the basic concepts of REDD+, the associated safeguards agreed upon under the UNFCCC, and the specific human rights—such as self-determination, land tenure, and free, prior and informed consent (FPIC)—that may be impacted by forest governance initiatives. It provides practical advice for community leaders on negotiating REDD+ activities and lists national and international mechanisms for seeking justice and reporting rights violations.

The Sierra Club and Center for International Environmental Law argue that country ownership and international environmental and social safeguards are complementary. They propose a five-part policy framework for the Green Climate Fund including alignment with international standards, transparency, protections for vulnerable groups, clear compliance requirements, and a comprehensive environmental management system.

The document catalogues alleged human rights implications across numerous international projects in sectors such as mining, energy, and forestry. It organizes these cases by the specific right implicated, including the rights to adequate food, housing, health, and life, as well as freedoms from forced labor and torture. The case studies highlight recurring issues such as forced resettlement, environmental contamination of water and land, the use of military force to suppress protests, and inadequate compensation for displaced populations.

The report critiques the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the TRIPS Agreement, arguing that they facilitate the commercial exploitation of biological resources by developed nations and corporations while undermining the sovereign rights and traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples and developing countries.

The report examines 38 cases of international arbitration brought by mining companies against Latin American states, highlighting a pattern where corporate legal protections are used to bypass national courts and penalize governments for implementing public health, environmental, or indigenous rights policies. It identifies Canada as a primary source of mining investment and litigation in the region and argues that the current ISDS framework creates a 'chilling effect' on democratic regulation. The document details specific cases in countries such as El Salvador, Colombia, and Venezuela, and proposes a shift toward a legal framework that prioritizes human rights and environmental protection over investor profits.