Search Climate Insights Directory

The EU–China Environment Project (2018–2021) facilitated policy alignment and knowledge exchange between the EU and China across several key environmental domains. Major achievements include supporting the development of China's National Pollutant Discharge Permitting Regulation, contributing to the drafting of the Yangtze River Protection Law, and co-hosting workshops to inform the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework ahead of COP15 in Kunming. The project also provided research and workshops that influenced China's 14th Five-Year Plan and the 'Guiding Opinions on Integrating and Strengthening Efforts in Climate Action and Ecological and Environmental Protection'. Additionally, the initiative addressed plastic pollution, global deforestation in supply chains, and carbon leakage, while promoting a green economic recovery following the COVID-19 pandemic.

The guide encourages Americans to reduce their environmental footprint during outdoor dining by choosing sustainable foods and eliminating single-use plastics. It details the high water and land requirements of cotton and livestock, the vulnerability of wine production to climate change, and the low recycling rates for plastics in the US. Practical tips include planning menus to reduce waste, using reusable containers, choosing local and in-season foods, and opting for carbon-free transportation to picnic sites.

The report argues that Ecoembes and Ecovidrio, the dominant waste management systems in Spain, use their monopoly power and lobbying to prevent the adoption of a mandatory Deposit Return System (SDDR). It highlights that these organizations benefit financially from increased plastic packaging volume, creating a conflict of interest that hinders EU recycling targets. The document also criticizes major supermarkets like Mercadona for opposing the SDDR and promotes the legislative progress in the Balearic Islands as a model for the rest of the country.

The report argues that Spain's plastic waste management is dominated by monopolies like Ecoembes and Ecovidrio, whose business models profit from increased plastic packaging, leading them to lobby against effective solutions like DRS. It highlights the financial burden of litter clean-up on taxpayers, estimated at up to €744 million annually, and criticises retailers for their lack of transparency and opposition to mandatory reforms. While some regions like the Balearic Islands are implementing ambitious laws, the report warns that the Spanish government remains susceptible to industry lobbying, which threatens the country's ability to meet EU targets for separate collection and recycled content by 2030.

The document evaluates the GPA, a non-binding UNEP programme launched in 1995 to curb land-based marine pollution. While it has successfully set agendas, fostered multi-stakeholder partnerships, and helped 107 countries establish policy frameworks, it has struggled against increasing pollution levels, insufficient funding for developing nations, and a shift toward more specialized, legally binding global treaties.

The document reviews the Global Programme of Action (GPA), a non-binding framework established in 1995 to combat land-based marine pollution. It highlights the GPA's transition toward three key global partnerships focusing on wastewater, nutrient management, and marine litter. While the GPA helped establish Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 14.1 and 6.3 and supported 107 countries in creating policy frameworks, the briefing notes that marine pollution has increased, with over 500 'dead zones' identified. It concludes that the GPA's influence has waned as the international community shifts toward legally binding treaties for specific pollutants, such as plastics.

The document details the 'externalities' of fossil fuels—costs not reflected in market prices—across climate, environmental, and health dimensions. It highlights significant U.S. impacts, including $606.9 billion in extreme weather costs (2016-2020) and 350,000 premature deaths in 2018. It also emphasizes the disproportionate burden on communities of color and low-income areas, such as 'Cancer Alley' in Louisiana. Proposed policy solutions include eliminating subsidies, increasing the social cost of carbon, implementing a federal clean electricity standard, and establishing carbon pricing.

The document provides a comprehensive synthesis of the 2018 Global Sustainable Blue Economy Conference's Science and Research Symposium. It argues that a sustainable blue economy—defined as the productive and sustainable use of oceans, seas, lakes, and rivers—must be grounded in multidisciplinary science and public-private partnerships. Key focus areas include the sustainable extraction of deep-sea minerals, the mitigation of climate change through blue carbon ecosystems (mangroves, seagrasses, and seaweed), and the modernization of maritime transport through AI and robotics. The report emphasizes the need for capacity building in the Global South, particularly in Africa, and proposes the establishment of a Global Blue Economy Investment Facility to mobilize finance and technology transfer.

The document advocates for the US to lead global efforts in nature conservation and climate action. Key priorities include doubling investments in biodiversity programs, reducing US emissions by 50% by 2030, and protecting 30% of lands and waters by 2030. It also emphasizes pandemic prevention through the 'One Health' approach, combating illegal trade in wildlife and timber, and addressing plastic pollution through a binding international treaty.

The report identifies a lack of demand for post-consumer recyclate (PCR) and poor packaging design as primary barriers to a circular plastics economy in South Africa. It highlights a fragmented value chain where brand owners and retailers hold the most influence but often prioritize cost and marketing over sustainability. The study emphasizes the need for mandatory extended producer responsibility (EPR) regulations to fund infrastructure, integrate informal waste collectors, and incentivize the shift from virgin polymers to recycled content.

The report analyzes how the Covid-19 pandemic exacerbated existing fragilities in South Africa's waste sector, particularly for informal waste reclaimers and small businesses. It highlights the negative impact of low oil prices on recycled plastic demand and the failure of government relief loans to reach small enterprises. The document argues for the urgent, inclusive implementation of mandatory Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) regulations to ensure financial sustainability and the integration of informal workers into the circular economy.

The report highlights that while Africa currently produces and consumes a small fraction of global plastics, a 'business as usual' trajectory could lead to a 375% increase in consumption by 2060. It identifies systemic failures across the plastics life cycle—from production to secondary markets—and argues that existing policy frameworks are fragmented and overly focused on end-of-life waste management. The document advocates for a comprehensive, life-cycle approach, the integration of the informal waste sector, and the development of a new legally binding global treaty to combat plastic pollution.

The document examines the systemic failure of plastic recycling and the environmental and health impacts of plastic pollution. It evaluates the potential for a new global treaty versus voluntary measures and highlights the link between plastic production and fossil fuel demand.

The document describes plastic pollution as a global crisis driven by the longevity of fossil-fuel-based plastics and the failure of recycling. It reviews UN efforts, including the Basel Convention's 2019 amendments and the UNEP's expert group on marine litter, while debating the merits of a new global treaty versus voluntary measures. The author argues that the '3R' (Reduce, Reuse, Recycle) framework has unfairly shifted responsibility to consumers and that true progress requires curbing the production of virgin plastics, which the IEA predicts will drive nearly 50% of oil demand growth by 2050.

The Changing Markets Foundation warns that global plastic production is set to double by 2030 and could account for 15% of greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. The organization argues that industry lobbying is undermining the EU's Single-Use Plastic Directive through attempts to exempt bio-based plastics, viscose, and cellophane, and by jeopardizing deposit return systems. The letter calls for legislative measures to end overpackaging, prevent greenwashing, and reject 'false solutions' like chemical recycling and incineration in favor of reuse and mechanical recycling.

The Changing Markets Foundation warns that global plastic production is set to double by 2030 and could account for 15% of greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. The organization argues that industry lobbying is currently undermining the EU's Single-Use Plastic Directive through attempts to exempt bio-based plastics, viscose, and cellophane from the definition of single-use plastics. It further highlights efforts by brands and producer responsibility organisations to jeopardize deposit return systems (DRS), which the author claims are the only viable way to achieve 90%+ collection of beverage bottles. The letter calls for the EU to move beyond voluntary commitments and implement robust measures against overpackaging, greenwashing, and 'false solutions' like chemical recycling and incineration.

The Changing Markets Foundation warns that global plastic production is set to double by 2030 and could account for 15% of greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. The letter argues that industry lobbying is currently undermining the EU's Single-Use Plastic Directive by seeking exemptions for bio-based, biodegradable, viscose, and cellophane plastics, and by jeopardising the implementation of deposit return systems (DRS). The foundation calls for the EU to reject voluntary corporate commitments in favour of mandatory measures to end overpackaging, regulate green claims, and clarify that incineration and chemical recycling are not substantive contributions to a circular economy.

The Changing Markets Foundation accuses Coca-Cola of having a 'worrying track-record of broken promises' regarding plastic and of undermining deposit return legislation in Kenya, China, and Georgia (USA). The letter demands that Coca-Cola publicly support deposit return systems globally, increase transparency regarding its 2.9 million tonnes of annual plastic use, and adopt ambitious reuse targets.

The Changing Markets Foundation's investigation into the ten most plastic-polluting companies reveals a global trend of corporations undermining legislative solutions to the plastic crisis. Specifically, the foundation criticizes Colgate-Palmolive for a lack of leadership, inconsistent reporting on recycled content, and an unambitious focus on light-weighting rather than absolute virgin plastic reduction. The letter demands that the company publicly support progressive legislation, such as global deposit return systems, and provide transparent, independently verified data on its full plastic footprint.

The Changing Markets Foundation's letter to Danone highlights a global trend of corporations undermining plastic legislation and critiques Danone's lack of transparency regarding reuse systems and sustainability criteria for bio-plastics, while acknowledging its support for mandatory collection systems.