Search Climate Insights Directory

The report argues that 'nature-based solutions' and carbon offsetting used by corporations to achieve 'net zero' goals lead to land grabbing and the dispossession of indigenous and rural peoples. It highlights that the massive land requirements for these schemes—such as those proposed by Nestlé and Shell—threaten food sovereignty and risk co-opting agroecology, which the report presents as the only truly transformative way to produce food while cooling the planet.

The document is a 'zine' collecting conversations and educational tools from young members of Friends of the Earth in Africa and Europe. It focuses on strengthening inter-regional solidarity, addressing systemic oppressions like patriarchy and colonialism, and overcoming barriers to youth participation in environmental justice. Key components include learning tools for analyzing historical colonial relations and systemic oppression, as well as personal testimonies on the impacts of industrial pollution in South Africa and land grabbing in Liberia.

The document argues that agrofuels significantly increase food prices and volatility, contributing to global hunger and poverty. It highlights how biofuel mandates, such as the European Union's 10% renewable transport fuel target, divert land and crops from food production. The report also links large-scale agrofuel production to 'land grabbing' and human rights abuses in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, recommending the elimination of biofuel subsidies in favor of energy efficiency and food sovereignty.

The report critiques the 'No Net Loss' (NNL) concept, asserting that it functions as a financial and accounting tool that permits the destruction of biodiversity in one location provided it is protected or restored elsewhere. It argues that NNL is fundamentally flawed because biodiversity is not interchangeable and that the mechanism leads to land grabbing and the violation of indigenous rights. The document further claims that NNL 'greens' the image of a fossil-fuel-dependent development model and pushes the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) toward market-based solutions, which the authors argue should be replaced by a priority on avoiding biodiversity loss entirely.

The document is a zine detailing a cross-regional exchange between youth activists from Africa and Europe. It focuses on dismantling systemic oppressions like patriarchy and colonialism, challenging visa injustices that hinder Global South participation in climate governance, and promoting intergenerational learning within the environmental justice movement.

The document highlights the 'corporate impunity' of global companies, citing examples of environmental destruction and human rights violations in Nigeria, Colombia, and El Salvador. It argues that voluntary corporate responsibility codes are insufficient and that existing international agreements, such as investor-to-state dispute settlement (ISDS) processes, protect corporate profits over human rights. The text advocates for a binding UN treaty to close the gap in international law regarding cross-border corporate activities.

The guide critiques the agribusiness investment model, highlighting how bilateral investment treaties and mechanisms like Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) prioritize corporate profits over state sovereignty and environmental protections. It details the negative impacts of industrial agriculture, including land grabbing, biodiversity loss, and high greenhouse gas emissions. As an alternative, the document promotes agroecology led by small-scale food producers, citing evidence that such methods can increase crop yields and enhance climate resilience while supporting food sovereignty.

The report critiques the 'agribusiness investment model' promoted through bilateral investment treaties and free trade agreements, asserting that these frameworks prioritize corporate profits over human rights and environmental health. It highlights how mechanisms like Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) prevent governments from implementing public health and environmental protections. The document advocates for food sovereignty and agroecology, noting that small-scale farmers produce 70-80% of food in the developing world and that agroecological methods can significantly increase crop yields while regenerating natural resources.

The document examines the link between agrofuels and rising food prices, asserting that biofuel production diverts crops from food use and increases market volatility. It highlights the resulting impact on the world's poorest populations, including increased chronic hunger and 'land grabbing' in Africa and Asia. The briefing refutes industry claims that agrofuels are benign, noting that they compete for land and water regardless of whether the crops are edible. It concludes by recommending the scrapping of agrofuel mandates, such as the EU's 10 per cent renewable transport fuel target, and the protection of community land rights to ensure food sovereignty.

The document critiques the current global energy system as a tool of corporate and elite power that drives climate change, energy poverty, and human rights abuses. It identifies 'destructive energy sources'—including fossil fuels, nuclear power, industrial agrofuels, and mega dams—as causes of severe environmental and social harm. The author warns of a 'climate trap' where the transition to renewables could be co-opted by corporations to continue land grabbing and privatization. To counter this, the document advocates for a decentralized, democratically controlled energy system that treats energy access as a basic human right and ensures the free, prior, and informed consent of affected communities.

The document critiques the concept of 'no net loss' (NPN/NNL) and biodiversity offsetting, asserting that these mechanisms provide a 'green' image for a development model dependent on fossil fuels and nature destruction. It explains that NNL does not prevent loss but rather allows destruction in one area to be balanced by protection or restoration elsewhere through financial tools like biodiversity credits. The author warns that this approach leads to land grabbing, threatens the rights of Indigenous peoples and local communities, and risks the economic valuation of nature. The briefing calls for a transformational system change and the exclusion of NNL from the new Global Biodiversity Framework, advocating for the avoidance of biodiversity loss rather than its compensation.

The report critiques the impact of bilateral investment treaties and free trade agreements on national sovereignty, specifically highlighting how mechanisms like Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) prevent states from implementing environmental and social protections. It argues that the agro-industrial model leads to land grabbing, biodiversity loss, and increased hunger, while proposing that investing in small-scale agroecology can double food production in critical regions and improve climate resilience.

The document critiques the 'green economy' as a mechanism for financial institutions and multinationals to commodify nature. It argues that market-based solutions, such as carbon markets and biodiversity offsets, lead to 'green grabbing,' the marginalization of indigenous communities, and the evasion of corporate environmental responsibility. The report advocates for the recognition of ecological debt, the protection of common goods through community management, and a radical shift toward sustainable societies based on social and ecological justice rather than market logic.

The report critiques the extension of market economies to ecosystems, specifically targeting carbon markets, biodiversity offsets, and water trading. It argues that these mechanisms allow corporations to avoid genuine emission reductions and environmental protection by paying for compensation certificates. The text highlights the role of financial institutions like the World Bank and Caisse des dépôts et consignations in structuring these markets, and warns that such financialization leads to land grabbing, the marginalization of indigenous populations, and the deregulation of environmental laws.

The document critiques the 'no net loss' (NNL) approach to biodiversity, asserting that it functions as an accounting tool that permits the destruction of biodiversity in one location provided it is compensated elsewhere. It argues that NNL and biodiversity offset mechanisms—including biodiversity banks and credits—facilitate a predatory economic model and can lead to land grabbing and the infringement of Indigenous Peoples' and local communities' rights. The author contends that NNL is an unreliable substitute for the 'mitigation hierarchy' and calls for a transformational system change rather than technical offsets.

The statement by Friends of the Earth International and partner organizations denounces the RAI framework as a tool to legitimize land grabbing. It argues that large-scale land acquisitions are driven by financial speculation and result in human rights violations, environmental degradation, and threats to food security. The authors demand the cancellation of existing land grab agreements and the adoption of food sovereignty and agroecological models based on small-scale farming.

The report advocates for climate justice, asserting that wealthy nations bear a historical responsibility for emissions and must provide financial and technological support to developing regions. It critiques market-based mechanisms like carbon credits and biofuels, labeling them as 'false solutions' that protect corporate profits while harming local communities and ecosystems. The text provides specific examples of climate impacts in Nigeria, Kiribati, and the Himalayas, and proposes a transition for Europe toward a low-carbon society based on drastic emission reductions and lifestyle changes.

The document outlines the dangers of BECCS, highlighting its potential to cause massive deforestation, land grabbing, and food insecurity. It argues that the technology is inefficient, carries risks of CO2 leakage, and serves as a justification for continued fossil fuel use through carbon offsetting. The authors advocate for a systemic shift toward agroecology, community-managed ecosystems, and a just energy transition based on renewable sources like wind and solar.

The report argues that excessive financial speculation in agricultural commodity derivatives and the financing of land grabs by European banks, pension funds, and insurance companies contribute to food price volatility and human rights abuses. It identifies key institutions such as Deutsche Bank, Barclays, and BNP Paribas as significant actors in these markets and recommends strict EU regulations, including position limits and bans on index funds for agricultural commodities, to protect the right to food.

The document critiques the 'new' Green Revolution in Africa, which it describes as a corporate takeover driven by multinational agribusinesses and philanthropic foundations. It highlights the risks of genetically modified (GM) crops and synthetic fertilisers, contrasting these with the benefits of agroecology. The report argues that small-scale farmers, who produce 80% of the food consumed in Africa, are the key to food security and should be supported through policy reforms that prioritise public goods and ecological sustainability over private corporate profit.