Search Climate Insights Directory

The author examines the intersection of communication rights, human rights, and climate justice, arguing that 'communication poverty' prevents vulnerable populations from influencing climate policy. The text details how climate change disproportionately affects the Global South and racialized communities, often exacerbating existing systemic inequalities. It explores various frameworks of climate justice—including historical, per capita, and rights-based approaches—and highlights the role of the grassroots climate justice movement in challenging elite, market-based solutions. The document emphasizes that for Indigenous and marginalized groups to achieve 'parity of participation,' they must have access to media platforms and the ability to develop their own narratives to challenge dominant stereotypes and influence global decision-making processes.

The document provides a multi-expert critique of COP26, noting that while the summit completed the Paris Agreement rule book and secured net zero commitments for 90% of the world, it failed to secure a 'grand bargain' for coal with India or a loss and damage fund. It highlights the $8.5 billion just transition deal for South Africa as a potential model but warns that developed nations have failed to meet the $100 billion annual finance goal. Experts argue that the summit ignored the critical role of oceans in carbon absorption and failed to address the resource-intensive economic systems driving global warming.

The document advocates for a 'whole-of-government' approach to climate change in Canada, defined as the use of governance structures (like cabinet committees) and processes (like mandate letters) to coordinate action across departmental silos. Through case studies of the UK, US, and British Columbia, it identifies that success depends on sustained executive leadership, adequate resources, and empowered personnel. It warns that such structures are fragile and can be easily dismantled by changes in government. For Canada, the brief recommends establishing a Prime Minister-chaired Cabinet Committee on Climate Change and Net Zero, supported by a high-level coordinating Secretariat in the Privy Council or Prime Minister's Office.

The author highlights the shared history of underestimating the effects of both climate change and nuclear weapons. The text details how nuclear detonations cause immediate blast damage and long-term atmospheric disruptions, such as 'nuclear winter', which mirror the systemic risks of the climate crisis. It warns that current geopolitical instability, exacerbated by climate-driven resource scarcity, increases the risk of nuclear conflict, particularly in South Asia. The author calls for a revival of public discourse on nuclear risks to match the current momentum for climate action.

The Climate Action Tracker identifies a 'credibility gap' where current policies lead to 2.7°C of warming, while even the fulfillment of all 2030 targets would result in 2.4°C. Despite 90% of global emissions being covered by net zero targets, only 6% are rated as 'acceptable', and no analyzed country has sufficient short-term policies to reach its net zero goal. The report highlights the continued expansion of coal and natural gas as primary drivers of this failure.

The document argues that African countries cannot rely solely on the developed world's unmet USD 100 billion annual climate finance pledge and must instead leverage collective bargaining, critical mineral resources, and regional trade agreements to secure funding. It highlights a significant finance gap and a concerning shift toward loan-based support that increases debt burdens for vulnerable nations. The author suggests that African states should link access to rare earth minerals to investments in local green industrialization and use platforms like the WTO and AU-EU negotiations to protect economic interests during the energy transition.

The briefing highlights the role of non-state actors in driving climate action despite insufficient national pledges. It identifies four mechanisms—certification schemes, demand aggregation, climate-aligned finance, and national alliances—that create 'ambition loops' to scale low-carbon solutions. Examples include India's Shoonya initiative for electric delivery, the US-based Renewable Energy Buyers Alliance, the Poseidon Principles for shipping finance, and the America Is All In coalition.

The High Level Panel for a Sustainable Ocean Economy, including leaders from 16 nations, advocates for a transition to a sustainable ocean economy to close the emissions gap. The Panel identifies six key action areas—nature-based solutions, renewable energy, industry decarbonisation, sustainable food, carbon capture and storage, and research—noting that these actions could provide up to 21% of the annual emissions cuts required to limit global warming to 1.5°C by 2050. Member nations commit to developing Sustainable Ocean Plans to manage 100% of their national waters sustainably within five years.

The report finds that new coal capacity in the IRP 2019 is unnecessary for energy security, more expensive than renewable alternatives, and incompatible with the Paris Agreement. Modelling shows that forcing 1.5 GW of new coal into the system increases total discounted power system costs by R23 billion in a reference scenario and up to R109 billion in a climate policy scenario. Furthermore, the study argues that a high-renewable pathway creates more jobs and supports higher GDP growth than a coal-dominated future.

The FAST-Infra Sustainable Infrastructure Label (SI Label) is a self-declared sustainability certification for infrastructure assets. It is based on a mapping of over 25 global standards, including the IFC Performance Standards and the EU Green Taxonomy. To achieve the label, assets must meet 14 baseline requirements across four sustainability dimensions, comply with minimum safeguards, and demonstrate a positive contribution to at least one sustainability criterion. While the label is sector-agnostic, fossil fuel projects, including unabated natural gas, are unlikely to qualify due to a carbon threshold of <100g CO2e/kWh. The framework encourages external third-party verification to enhance transparency and market trust.

The document traces the path from the 1972 Stockholm Conference to the 2017 entry into force of the Minamata Convention on Mercury. It highlights the role of activism and scientific evidence in driving global action and details the treaty's mechanisms for phasing out mercury-added products and regulating artisanal and small-scale gold mining (ASGM). The brief also explains that the discrete nature of mercury's industrial sources and a stronger scientific consensus on its global threat allowed it to move toward a binding treaty, whereas lead and cadmium remain managed through voluntary partnerships and regional agreements.

The document critiques the current global energy system as a product of patriarchal extractivism and capitalism that disproportionately harms women, particularly in the Global South. It warns against 'greenwashing' (maquillaje verde) and 'purplewashing' (maquillaje violeta), where corporations use environmental and gender-equality narratives to mask continued exploitation. The authors advocate for a 'just and feminist energy transition' centered on the sustainability of life, public ownership, and the recognition of care work, rather than market-driven technological fixes.

The document argues that standard tax treaty models (OECD and UN) may lead to significant revenue losses for resource-rich developing countries if not adapted for the mining sector. It identifies three primary risks: the inability to tax offshore indirect transfers of mining assets, subcontractors avoiding a taxable presence (permanent establishment), and the loss of withholding tax on technical and management services. To mitigate these, the guide recommends adopting comprehensive domestic definitions of immovable property, implementing 'Extractives PE' or standalone extractive industry articles in treaties, and utilizing standalone 'fees for technical services' articles. It also warns against the 'locking in' of unsustainable tax benefits through fiscal stabilization clauses in Mining Concession Agreements (MCAs).

The TCFD Good Practice Handbook identifies effective disclosure examples across the four TCFD core elements—Governance, Strategy, Risk Management, and Metrics and Targets—while offering practical advice and case studies to help organisations overcome implementation barriers.

The Life After Coal campaign calls for South Africa to adhere to the lower bound of its updated NDC (350 to 420 Mt CO2eq) to align with the 1.5°C pathway. This requires cancelling all new coal and gas projects, accelerating the retirement of the coal fleet to reach zero fossil fuels in electricity by 2040, and building at least 4 GW of renewable capacity annually. The campaign also advocates for a just transition that prioritizes workers and communities and urges South Africa to lead at COP26 in demanding increased finance for adaptation and loss and damage from wealthy nations.

The document is an amicus curiae application and submission in the case of Odyssey Marine Exploration, Inc. v. United Mexican States. The applicants argue that the Don Diego Project, which involves dredging 91 thousand hectares of the Gulf of Ulloa seabed to extract phosphate rock, would cause irreversible ecological damage and violate human rights. They contend that the Mexican State's decision to deny the environmental permit is supported by the precautionary principle and obligations under UNCLOS, the Rio Declaration, and various human rights treaties, including the ICESCR and the American Convention on Human Rights.

The amicus curiae brief argues that the Mexican state was obligated to deny the environmental permit for the Don Diego project due to severe risks to the marine ecosystem of the Golfo de Ulloa and the human rights of local fishing communities. The authors contend that the project, which involves dredging 91,000 hectares of the seabed to extract 7 million tons of phosphate rock annually, would cause irreversible biodiversity loss and contaminate the area with radioactive elements like uranium and thorium. They assert that the precautionary principle and international treaties—including the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and the American Convention on Human Rights—mandate the protection of the environment and the right to work and health for the 128 families of the Puerto Chale Cooperative and other regional residents.

The authors contend that Russia's current climate pledges are insufficient and that the government must acknowledge the global shift away from coal to protect its coal-producing regions, particularly Kuzbass, from economic disruption. While Russia is a top global coal exporter, the authors warn that the collapse of the global coal development pipeline and policies like the EU's carbon border adjustment mechanism threaten the sector's viability. They advocate for proactive economic diversification and a managed phase-out to support workers and the global 1.5°C target.

Carbon Market Watch analyzed 18 "carbon neutral" fossil fuel claims, primarily involving liquefied natural gas (LNG), and found that every claim failed to meet basic criteria for environmental integrity and transparency. The report argues that fossil fuels cannot be carbon neutral because the firms involved are not aligned with 1.5°C pathways and rely on flawed "tonne-for-tonne" offsetting. Key failures include the omission of Scope 3 emissions in one-third of claims, a total lack of transparency regarding the price paid for carbon credits, and the use of impermanent nature-based sinks to offset long-term fossil carbon emissions. The report recommends that fossil fuel firms cease these claims, stop new exploration, and shift toward a "contribution" model for climate finance.

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) rejects Nature-based Solutions (NbS), characterizing the term as a 'wolf in sheep's clothing.' The organization contends that NbS is too vague, allowing harmful practices like industrial monoculture plantations to be labeled as 'natural.' FoEI argues that NbS serves as a greenwashing tool for fossil fuel and agro-industrial companies to justify 'net zero' claims through carbon offsetting rather than actual emission reductions. The document warns that the scale of land required for these projects leads to land grabbing and violates the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities, particularly in the Global South. Instead of NbS, FoEI advocates for systemic change through agroecology, community forest management, and a coordinated phase-out of fossil fuels.