Search Climate Insights Directory

ClientEarth argues that the revised Notice should explicitly allow NGOs and individuals to challenge State aid measures that breach environmental law and should emphasize the need for greater transparency in aid granting to facilitate private enforcement. While maintaining that the Commission holds exclusive competence to assess the overall compatibility of aid with the internal market, the document suggests that national courts can provide critical evidence of environmental violations to assist the Commission. It further highlights systemic failures in the EU State aid Transparency Register, noting missing data for Member States such as Romania and Cyprus.

Environmental NGOs are calling for formal observer status and improved documentation to ensure equal access for all stakeholders in fisheries negotiations between the UK, EU, and Norway, arguing that current access is inconsistent and depends on the goodwill of parties.

The New Development Bank (NDB) emphasizes the use of 'country systems' for project implementation, which shifts the primary responsibility for environmental and social assessments, consultations, and grievance mechanisms to the client. However, the Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) finds that critical project documentation—including risk assessments, management plans, and Country Partnership Plans (CPP)—is not publicly available. While the NDB has its own Information Disclosure Policy (IDP), there is ambiguity regarding its susceptibility to South Africa's Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA), as the NDB's Africa Regional Center has indicated it is not subject to such legislation. The report highlights a lack of transparency in the NDB's decision-making processes and recommends that all project and policy information be made accessible via the NDB website to ensure accountability.

Commissioner Virginijus Sinkevičius acknowledges the absence of NGOs in Member States' delegations during recent consultations with Norway and the UK, stating a desire to change this for future plenary meetings. He emphasizes that the Commission has maintained continuous engagement and debriefings with NGOs to shape the Union's position. Additionally, he affirms that negotiations on sustainability and the European Green Deal will be based on scientific advice and maximum sustainable yield (MSY) objectives to avoid overfishing.

The document evaluates the EITI, a global transparency standard for extractive industries, noting its success in improving investment climates and contract disclosure while highlighting failures in preventing corruption and ensuring civil society participation.

A group of NGOs is calling for the European Parliament, the European Commission, and the Council to make the CAP trilogue process transparent by publishing meeting calendars, agendas, minutes, and '4-column' documents, arguing that the CAP's 387 billion € budget and its role in the European Green Deal make it a matter of significant public interest.

The document summarizes a ClientEarth conference session featuring experts who discussed the importance of strategic litigation, transparency, and the Aarhus Convention in achieving the green transition. Key discussions focused on the European Commission's proposal to revise the Aarhus Regulation, the limitations of the CJEU's Plauman judgment, and the tension between representative democracy and the long-term environmental goals pursued by NGOs.

The 2020 assessment of Goal 10 of the New York Declaration on Forests (NYDF) finds that global progress in forest governance remains slow, with weak legal frameworks and limited enforcement continuing to drive deforestation. While some countries have implemented positive measures—such as Indonesia's permanent Forest and Peatland Moratorium and the regional Pacto de Leticia in the Amazon—these are offset by deregulation in countries like Brazil, Bolivia, and Peru. The report highlights a critical gap in land tenure, noting that only about half of the lands customarily held by Indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLCs) are legally recognized. Furthermore, violence against environmental defenders reached a record high in 2019, with 212 killings reported globally.

The GCF Executive Director rejected recommendations from the Information Appeals Panel to disclose a detailed list of funding proposals (FPs) for Board meetings B.26 and B.27. The ED argued that the GCF is not required to create special lists upon request, that the requested information is dynamic and often already disclosed, and that certain documents are 'limited distribution' and thus non-disclosable without Board consent. Furthermore, the ED stated that disclosing draft FP information without explicit confidentiality assessments from accredited entities would pose reputational and legal risks, as no formal mechanism for marking draft FPs as confidential currently exists.

The document argues that Article 113 of the Control Regulation allows EU Member States to unconditionally veto the disclosure of fisheries data, which contradicts the Aarhus Convention, the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, and Regulation 1049/2001. It criticizes the General Court's judgment in Malta v Commission for upholding this veto power without requiring a statement of reasons. ClientEarth proposes amending Article 113 to require reasoned refusals and explicitly align the regulation with EU and international transparency frameworks.

The Sustainable Energy for All (SEforALL) Anti-Corruption, Anti-Bribery and Anti-Fraud Policy mandates a zero-tolerance approach to financial misconduct for all staff, board members, and funded partners. It defines various forms of corruption—including grand and petty corruption, bribery, embezzlement, and extortion—and outlines a reporting structure led by a Compliance Officer. The policy details disciplinary actions, including dismissal and criminal prosecution, and provides protections for whistleblowers acting in good faith. To mitigate risk, SEforALL implements 'Know Your Service Provider' due diligence, background checks for new staff, and a three-year policy review cycle.

The Union of Concerned Scientists identifies systemic barriers to public participation in US federal rulemaking, noting that industry interests often have disproportionate influence and that marginalized communities are frequently excluded. The document recommends earlier community involvement, the use of plain language, increased transparency regarding funding and meetings, and improvements to digital accessibility on platforms like regulations.gov.

The document examines the African Peer Review Mechanism's (APRM) drive for universal membership, arguing that while a worthy goal, the organization must first address its backlog of 'slow states' and improve the implementation of National Programmes of Action (NPoAs). It highlights that 40 of 55 African states have joined, but many have failed to undergo first reviews or progress to second reviews. The authors warn that 'targeted reviews' may allow governments to avoid sensitive issues and suggest that the APRM adopt stricter measures, similar to the OGP or EITI, to handle inactive members.

The European Central Bank (ECB) is criticized for failing to disclose sufficient information to evaluate the climate impact of its asset purchase programs, including the Corporate Sector Purchase Program (CSPP) and the Pandemic Emergency Purchase Program (PEPP). Reclaim Finance has filed two information requests seeking the separate value of each bond held and specific data on assets linked to fossil fuels and the Global Coal Exit List, arguing that this transparency is essential for the ECB's strategic review of its monetary policy strategy.

The Clean Air Task Force (CATF) opposes a supplemental proposed rule by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that would restrict the use of scientific information not available to the public. CATF argues the rule is an 'unlawful abuse of Agency discretion' that jeopardizes the privacy of study participants and undermines the agency's mandate under statutes like the Clean Air Act. The organization specifically criticizes the expansion of the rule to cover all 'influential scientific information', asserting that environmental policy must be based on science rather than policy priorities.

The failure to establish rules for international carbon markets at COP 25 prevented the adoption of loopholes and double-counting but shifted the responsibility for environmental integrity to individual countries. This creates a risk of a 'wild west' scenario where low-ambition countries may trade 'junk credits' from the Kyoto Protocol era. While the San Jose Principles and Article 77d of the transparency framework offer some paths toward integrity and reporting, the lack of a global agreement leaves carbon markets potentially undermining overall climate action.

The document outlines a step-by-step process for accessing environmental information from EU bodies, covering the definition of environmental information, request formulation, submission methods, and the legal process for challenging refusals through confirmatory applications, the EU General Court, or the European Ombudsman.

The document examines the evolution of investment facilitation discussions at the WTO, from the early 'Singapore issues' to the current structured discussions involving 98 members. It analyzes a July 2019 working document that proposes a framework focused on transparency, administrative simplification, and international cooperation, while explicitly excluding market access, investment protection, and investor-state dispute settlement. The report also discusses the potential legal forms of such an agreement—whether as a standalone accord or a plurilateral agreement—and the broader institutional challenges facing the WTO, such as the crisis in the Appellate Body and debates over special and differential treatment.

The Union of Concerned Scientists argues that the Trump administration engaged in unprecedented attacks on science, including censorship and the sidelining of experts. The report proposes a blueprint for the next administration based on three principles: independent science, transparent decisionmaking, and scientific free speech. Key recommendations include codifying scientific integrity policies, reforming the federal advisory committee system, curbing conflicts of interest for political appointees, and expanding whistleblower protections. It also addresses broader democratic threats, such as 'dark money' in politics and voting rights restrictions, as interconnected issues affecting public health and safety.

Russia is identified as the second-largest provider of government support to fossil fuels globally, with an annual average of USD 80.9 billion between 2017 and 2019. This support is primarily driven by state-owned enterprise (SOE) investments and tax expenditures for oil and gas production. While the country has phased out some property tax exemptions for pipelines, overall tax expenditures for fossil fuels rose 79% compared to 2014–2016 averages. The report notes significant unquantified support via preferential rail tariffs for coal and regional programs for Arctic oil and gas, as well as a lack of commitment to G20 peer reviews on subsidies.