Search Climate Insights Directory

The report finds that low-cost, repeated behaviors like reducing food waste are significantly more common than high-cost, one-time installations like heat pumps or solar panels. While many who adopted these behaviors faced minimal difficulty, non-adopters cited lack of awareness and lack of interest for low-cost actions, and high cost and home ownership issues for high-cost technologies.

The document outlines a comprehensive framework for the gaming industry to move beyond 'net zero' toward 'drawdown.' It identifies key leverage points for software companies, including the reduction of Scope 3 emissions from players' devices, the use of the industry's massive reach to normalize climate solutions, and the decarbonization of corporate cash and investments. The guide provides specific actionable recommendations and real-world examples from companies like Xbox, Ubisoft, and Unity to demonstrate how these strategies can be implemented in practice.

The report argues that nature-based solutions (NbS) and carbon offsetting schemes often serve as a facade for corporate polluters to continue emitting while facilitating land grabbing and violating human rights. It provides numerous case studies across Africa, Asia-Pacific, Europe, and the Americas, highlighting systemic issues such as inflated carbon baselines, lack of free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC), and the failure of projects to deliver promised climate or social benefits. The document specifically critiques REDD+ projects, industrial tree plantations, and soil carbon programs for their lack of 'additionality' and their role in undermining food sovereignty and indigenous land rights.

The document argues that nature-based solutions (NBS) and carbon offsets often serve as a distraction for 'Big Polluters' to continue emitting while facilitating land grabs and violating Indigenous rights. It provides detailed evidence of inflated carbon baselines, lack of additionality, and social harms across Africa, Asia Pacific, Europe, Latin America, and North America. Key examples include REDD+ projects in Zimbabwe and Gabon that overestimated carbon savings, and soil carbon initiatives in the US and Kenya that threaten food sovereignty and traditional livelihoods. The report also critiques improved cookstove offsets for using flawed accounting to generate 'fake emission cuts'.

The document critiques soil carbon offset programs, asserting they do not reduce global emissions but instead serve as a mechanism for agribusinesses to maintain industrial models. It highlights risks such as the erosion of traditional agricultural knowledge, the promotion of patented seeds and chemicals, and the unreliability of soil carbon measurement. The text specifically identifies companies like Yara and Boomitra as drivers of these markets, expanding from industrial farms in the US, Australia, and Brazil into small-scale farming in Africa, India, and South America.

In 2022, Global Witness documented at least 177 killings of land and environmental defenders, with 88% occurring in Latin America. Colombia, Brazil, and Mexico accounted for over 70% of these deaths. The report highlights a critical situation in the Amazon, where 22% of global killings occurred, often linked to illegal mining and agroindustry. It also details the 'criminalization' of activists as a non-lethal strategy to silence dissent. The document advocates for the EU's proposed Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive to hold companies accountable for human rights and environmental abuses in their global supply chains.

The report identifies ten key components of a strong ESIA legal framework and evaluates their application in three jurisdictions. California is highlighted for its rigorous environmental review and climate change integration, Kazakhstan for its recent legislative updates aligned with EU standards, and Queensland for its comprehensive framework and use of internal audits to address rehabilitation liabilities and corruption risks.

The document analyzes the closure of the Golden Pride gold mine (1998–2013) in Tanzania, highlighting the use of Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) and progressive reclamation to transition the site into a productive post-mining landscape. Key outcomes include the transformation of the open pit into a community water reservoir and the conversion of site infrastructure into a training center for the Institute of Mineral Resources. While the reclamation of Miombo forests was successful, the document notes ongoing challenges with illegal artisanal mining and the need for adaptable land-use planning.

The IGF Mining Policy Framework Guidance 2023 outlines six pillars for sustainable mining governance. It emphasizes the creation of transparent legal frameworks, the optimization of public revenues through progressive fiscal regimes, and the promotion of local socioeconomic benefits with a strong focus on gender equality and indigenous rights. The guide details environmental standards for air, water, and biodiversity, mandates rigorous mine closure planning with financial guarantees, and provides specific strategies to formalize and support artisanal and small-scale mining (ASM) while eliminating harmful practices like child labor and mercury use.

The IGF Mining Policy Framework is a detailed guide for governments to regulate the mining sector sustainably. It is organized into six pillars: laws and institutions, financial benefits, socio-economic benefits, environmental management, mine closure transition, and artisanal and small-scale mining (ASM). The framework emphasizes transparency, gender equality, human rights, and the protection of indigenous peoples. Key recommendations include the use of integrated environmental and social impact assessments (ESIAs), the establishment of robust financial assurance for mine closures, and the formalization of the ASM sector to reduce poverty and environmental harm. It specifically advocates for the elimination of mercury in ASM and the implementation of free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) for indigenous communities.

The document outlines a methodology for applying the Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method to bauxite transactions, focusing on the impact of mineral quality and market indexes on pricing. It identifies available alumina and reactive silica as the primary drivers of economic value and provides a detailed process for adjusting benchmark index prices to reflect specific ore characteristics and transportation costs. The guide also lists reputable price-reporting agencies and provides a worked example of calculating a Free on Board (FOB) price for Guinean bauxite exported to China.

This guide establishes a methodology for valuing bauxite in transactions between related parties, focusing on the 'arm's length principle'. It identifies key economic drivers of bauxite pricing—such as available alumina content and reactive silica impurities—and explains how to use market price indices from agencies like CBIX, Fastmarkets, and CRU to establish fair market values. The document also details necessary comparability adjustments for product quality, transport costs (Incoterms), and economic circumstances to prevent tax revenue loss in developing nations.

The document applies the Comparable Uncontrolled Price (CUP) method to bauxite, detailing how physical characteristics, economic circumstances, and contractual terms influence pricing. It identifies key price drivers—specifically available alumina and reactive silica—and provides a methodology for using market indices from agencies like CBIX, Fastmarkets, and CRU to establish arm's length prices, including a practical calculation example for exports from Guinea to China.

The report examines the information asymmetry between social media platforms and public interest researchers, identifying technological, legal, and ethical barriers to data access. It evaluates existing mechanisms such as transparency reporting, API access, and crowdsourced data donations, while analyzing the impact of the EU's Digital Services Act (DSA) and GDPR. The authors recommend the creation of an independent intermediary body to vet researchers and the alignment of international standards to ensure a safe, transparent, and evidence-based approach to studying the societal impacts of digital platforms.

The document examines how emerging technologies—decentralised platforms, generative AI, and immersive environments—are exploited by malign actors to spread hate and disinformation. It argues that these technologies converge to amplify existing harms and calls for updated regulatory frameworks, international coordination, and 'Safety by Design' principles to mitigate these risks.

The report analyzes the link between misogyny and violent extremist ideologies, arguing that OGBV serves as an ideological gateway to radicalization. It evaluates the failures of current platform community guidelines and algorithmic systems in addressing gendered violence and proposes a 'Safety and Privacy by Design' approach, improved API access for researchers, and standardized transparency reporting to combat these systemic risks.

The report examines online gender-based violence (OGBV) as part of a continuum of violence that links misogyny to various extremist ideologies, including far-right and Islamist extremism. It argues that platforms often exacerbate these risks through engagement-based algorithmic ranking and inadequate content moderation. To counter this, the author recommends that platforms provide vetted researchers with API access, implement gender-disaggregated transparency reporting, adopt victim-survivor-centred 'Safety by Design' principles, and enhance cross-platform cooperation to track perpetrators and coordinated harassment campaigns.

The report examines how 'decentralized', 'generative', and 'immersive' technologies are being exploited by malicious actors to spread hate and disinformation. It highlights the role of the Fediverse and Web3 platforms like Odysee in creating extremist echo chambers, the capacity of Large Language Models (LLMs) to generate persuasive misinformation and toxic content, and the potential for Extended Reality (XR) to enable severe emotional manipulation and virtual crimes. The authors argue for updated regulatory frameworks, including the EU AI Act and Digital Services Act, and emphasize the need for international coordination, safety-by-design, and new taxonomies for virtual harms.

The document identifies technological, ethical, legal, and fragmentation barriers that inhibit public interest research on smaller and medium-sized platforms. It argues that current regulatory frameworks, such as the EU's Digital Services Act, primarily target very large platforms, leaving a gap in oversight for smaller platforms that may still pose significant risks. The author provides recommendations for platforms to standardize data access, for policy-makers to introduce legal 'safe harbours' for researchers, and for the research community to collaborate on tools and ethical frameworks.

The report identifies a global convergence of far-right groups, conspiracy theorists, and 'parents' rights' movements targeting drag events to denigrate the LGBTQ+ community. While the US is the primary driver of narratives and the only country in the set to pass anti-drag legislation, similar tactics like doxxing and harassment are appearing globally. The report highlights the use of 'save the children' and 'groomer' narratives to justify extremism and warns that these fringe tropes are becoming mainstreamed in political discourse.