Search Climate Insights Directory

The report 'Regulated Destruction' by Friends of the Earth International critiques biodiversity offsetting as a mechanism that enables corporate pollution and habitat destruction. It argues that by framing nature as 'natural capital' or 'ecosystem services', these instruments allow companies to circumvent environmental protections through promises of restoration or protection elsewhere. The document examines national implementations in India, Uganda, Canada, Colombia, Brazil, and Costa Rica, and highlights the role of the World Bank's IFC Performance Standard 6 in driving these practices. It further contends that offsetting leads to 'double land grabs' and is used by the aviation and agro-industry to maintain a social license to operate despite ongoing deforestation and emissions.

The document critiques biodiversity offsetting as a mechanism of 'regulated destruction' that allows companies to destroy nature in one location by promising to protect or restore it elsewhere. It argues that this approach redefines nature as 'natural capital' or 'ecosystem services,' reducing complex ecological systems to tradable units. The report examines national implementations in India, Uganda, Canada, Colombia, Brazil, and Costa Rica, highlighting how these schemes often lead to 'double land grabbing,' the displacement of local communities, and the failure to provide long-term protection. It specifically criticizes the World Bank's IFC Performance Standard 6 for enabling the financing of destruction in 'critical habitats.' Furthermore, it analyzes how the aviation and agribusiness sectors use carbon offsets and REDD+ to greenwash their operations while continuing destructive activities.

The report critiques biodiversity offsetting as a mechanism of 'regulated destruction' that replaces strict environmental limits with flexible, market-based compensation. It contends that these systems—including biodiversity banks and carbon credits—often lead to a net increase in environmental damage, facilitate land grabbing from indigenous and local communities, and provide a veneer of sustainability for destructive industries such as mining, agribusiness, and aviation. Through case studies in India, Uganda, Canada, Colombia, Brazil, and Costa Rica, the document demonstrates how the promise of future restoration is used to justify immediate, irreversible ecological loss.

The report critiques neoliberalism for causing environmental destruction and inequality, advocating for a transition to a sustainable economy. It proposes five key pillars: expanding public services through tax justice, scaling up cooperatives and solidarity economies, supporting local markets and fair trade, adopting wellbeing-based economic indicators instead of GDP, and establishing binding international regulations to curb the power of transnational corporations.

The document critiques neoliberalism for causing ecological destruction and deep inequalities, proposing a shift toward an economy that prioritizes people and the planet. It outlines five strategic pillars for transformation: ensuring universal public services through tax justice, expanding cooperatives and the social and solidarity economy, supporting local agroecological markets and fair trade, replacing GDP with wellbeing indicators (such as 'Buen vivir' or 'doughnut economics'), and establishing a binding UN treaty to hold multinational corporations accountable for human rights and environmental abuses.

The document outlines the 'Renewables Done Right' framework, which seeks to prevent renewable energy projects from replicating the harms of fossil fuel systems, such as land grabbing and human rights violations. It emphasizes energy sovereignty, sufficiency, and circular economies, using examples from India, Palestine, and Scotland to illustrate the need for community participation, infrastructure investment, and the avoidance of overconsumption.

The document critiques carbon markets, specifically 'cap and trade' and 'carbon offsetting', as mechanisms that allow major polluters to avoid reducing emissions at the source. It highlights the failure of the EU ETS and the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), noting that global emissions continue to rise. The briefing emphasizes the severe impacts on indigenous peoples and local communities, citing REDD as a driver of land grabbing and forced displacement. It specifically warns against the implementation of Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, which could institutionalize these markets, and calls for a transition to agroecology and a just energy transition instead.

Friends of the Earth International opposes BECCS, describing it as a 'dangerous distraction' from urgent emissions reductions. The document argues that the land requirements for BECCS at scale—up to 3,000 million hectares—would cause widespread deforestation, land-grabbing, and increased global hunger. It further contends that the technology is technically unproven, energy-inefficient, and carries significant risks of CO2 leakage, while potentially enabling corrupt carbon offsetting practices that allow polluters to avoid real emissions cuts.

The document critiques carbon emission markets, including 'cap and trade' and 'offsetting' mechanisms, as ineffective tools for climate action. It asserts that these systems allow historical polluters to avoid reducing emissions at the source while causing human rights abuses and 'climate colonialism' in the Global South. The briefing specifically warns against the adoption of Article 6 of the Paris Agreement at COP25, arguing that it would institutionalize these flawed mechanisms and prioritize corporate interests over climate justice.

The fact sheet advocates for a binding UN Human Rights Treaty to close the gap in international law where corporations escape accountability for cross-border activities. It contrasts the strong legal protections afforded to corporate rights via free trade agreements and investor-to-state dispute settlement (ISDS) with the lack of legal recourse for victims of corporate abuse. The document provides examples of corporate misconduct in El Salvador, Nigeria, Colombia, and Indonesia, highlighting issues such as water pollution, gas flaring, land-grabbing, and deforestation, while arguing that voluntary corporate responsibility codes are insufficient.

The document calls for the European Commission to move beyond voluntary guidelines and implement robust, enforceable legislation to hold companies and financiers accountable for environmental destruction and human rights abuses, particularly in the context of large-scale projects causing deforestation and land grabbing.

The document highlights how EU-based financial institutions, including banks and pension funds, invest in projects that cause land grabs and environmental damage, often in violation of their own policies. It argues that voluntary measures are insufficient and that the EU is falling behind countries like Brazil and China in implementing social and environmental risk management. The text asserts that a lack of robust regulation increases financial risks for investors, noting that community opposition can increase operating costs by 29 times. It calls for mandatory due diligence, a broader sustainability taxonomy beyond climate risks, and harmonised public reporting requirements.

The author describes the rapid deforestation of Cambodia, driven by a corrupt government and politically connected timber barons, which led to the displacement and abuse of hundreds of thousands of people. Despite a 2016 ICC policy stating that the court would prioritise crimes resulting in the destruction of the environment or illegal dispossession of land, a 2014 complaint regarding Cambodia remains inactive. The document calls on the ICC to open an investigation to signal that environmental destruction and land grabbing can be prosecuted as crimes against humanity.

The report exposes the failure of voluntary zero-deforestation policies among Brazil's largest beef producers—JBS, Marfrig, and Minerva—and the inadequacy of audits by DNV-GL and Grant Thornton. It highlights that these companies continue to source cattle from illegally deforested lands and farms linked to land grabbing and human rights abuses, while receiving continued funding from global banks such as HSBC, Barclays, and Santander.

Global Witness reports that JBS, the world's largest beef company, continues to source cattle from ranches involved in illegal Amazon deforestation, land-grabbing, and slave labour, despite legal agreements and voluntary pledges. The investigation highlights a 'chain of deforestation complicity' involving Italian leather manufacturer Gruppo Mastrotto, UK supermarkets, and major global banks and credit rating agencies that provide the financial fuel for these operations. The report argues that voluntary due diligence has failed and calls for mandatory legislation in the UK, EU, and US to regulate both commodity imports and the financial sector.

Global Witness reports that between 2018 and 2025, banks provided $31 billion in sustainability-linked loans to palm oil companies facing deforestation allegations. The report highlights a systemic failure in the SLL model, where companies like Wilmar, Musim Mas, and Olam Group access 'green' funding while allegedly continuing deforestation through direct concessions or third-party 'shadow networks.' It criticizes the reliance on voluntary standards and the lack of public disclosure regarding Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), arguing that these loans often serve as greenwashing tools rather than drivers of environmental improvement.

The Cerrejón coal mine in Colombia, owned by BHP, Anglo-American, and Glencore, is accused of severe human rights and environmental violations, including forced evictions, water contamination, and health crises. Global Witness argues that the mine's owners and their European links demonstrate a systemic lack of corporate accountability, advocating for new EU legislation to make companies liable for harms caused in their global supply chains.

The report reveals that the Philippines' push to become a leading exporter of transition minerals, such as nickel and copper, is causing significant land loss for Indigenous Peoples and the destruction of critical biodiversity hotspots. It highlights a pattern of state-driven violence, where the military is identified as the primary perpetrator of killings and detentions of land defenders. The document argues that the global shift to renewable energy is fueling a 'green mineral rush' that relies on 'red-tagging' activists and militarising infrastructure, particularly in Mindanao, to facilitate extractive projects.

Global Witness estimates that financial institutions in the EU, UK, US, and China generated $1.74 billion in weighted revenues from $157 billion in deals with 20 major agro-industrial companies linked to deforestation between 2016 and 2020. The report highlights a systemic failure of voluntary commitments, noting that major banks like JPMorgan, HSBC, and BNP Paribas continue to fund companies involved in illegal land conversion and human rights abuses in the Amazon, Southeast Asia, and Africa. It argues that these profits should be viewed as a 'forest debt' owed to affected communities and calls for mandatory government regulation to replace ineffective voluntary policies.

The report examines Angola's transition from a war-torn state to a market economy, focusing on the critical role of land tenure. It traces the evolution of land laws from the Portuguese colonial era through the socialist post-independence period to the 2004 Land Act. The author highlights a systemic pattern of 'land grabbing' by political and military elites, the marginalisation of rural peasants and women, and the precarious legal status of peri-urban dwellers. It argues that without transparent, inclusive land administration and the recognition of customary rights, the current legislative trajectory risks exacerbating inequality and triggering new conflicts.