Search Climate Insights Directory

The document argues that 'net zero' targets are deceptive tools used by fossil fuel and agribusiness giants to avoid radical emission cuts. It specifically critiques 'nature-based solutions' (NBS) and soil carbon sequestration as mechanisms that facilitate land grabbing, marginalize small-scale farmers, and prioritize corporate profit over genuine agroecology and food sovereignty.

The document argues that 'net zero' promises act as a 'smoke screen' for multinational corporations to maintain fossil fuel and industrial agriculture growth. It specifically critiques 'nature-based solutions' and soil carbon sequestration as mechanisms that facilitate land grabbing, data extraction from small farmers, and the marginalization of agroecology. The report contends that these market-based approaches prioritize carbon metrics over food sovereignty and ecological justice, calling instead for a transition to agroecological systems and the abandonment of industrial food models.

The document argues that 'net zero' pledges act as a 'smokescreen' for corporations to continue fossil fuel extraction and industrial agriculture. It specifically critiques nature-based solutions (NbS) and soil carbon sequestration, claiming these mechanisms facilitate land grabbing, data harvesting by agribusiness and IT firms, and the co-option of agroecology. The report contends that carbon offsetting relies on a false 'equivalence' between volatile biomass carbon and long-term fossil carbon, ultimately benefiting corporate power over small-scale food producers.

The report argues that 'net zero' targets are a 'smokescreen' allowing corporations to maintain fossil-fuel-based business models through carbon offsetting and 'nature-based solutions'. It contends that these mechanisms lead to land grabbing, the dispossession of Indigenous and peasant communities, and the co-option of agroecology. The document specifically highlights the risks of soil carbon farming as a means for agribusiness and IT companies to harvest farm data and exert control over land use. It concludes that real climate justice requires a transition to food sovereignty and a rapid phase-out of fossil fuels rather than reliance on unverifiable carbon credits.

Global Energy Monitor (GEM) finds that 30 fossil fuel companies are responsible for 43% of the industry's global methane emissions. The analysis identifies the National Iranian Oil Company as the largest emitter and highlights the dominance of Chinese state-owned enterprises in coal mine methane emissions. The report emphasizes that emissions vary based on infrastructure age, operator type, and geographic location, noting that some oil and gas emissions could be reduced at no net cost.

The fact sheet compares universal and targeted basic income systems, arguing that targeting often fails due to high exclusion errors and administrative complexity. It posits that a UBIG ensures no one is left behind, reduces state administrative burdens, and provides greater poverty impact through household income pooling, particularly in South Africa.

The report examines the global cocoa market, highlighting the tension between growing demand and climate-related supply risks. It analyzes how VSSs like Fairtrade and Rainforest Alliance attempt to improve sustainability and farmer incomes, while noting that power imbalances and low farm-gate prices continue to drive poverty among the 5 to 6 million cocoa farmers worldwide.

The document examines the 'fair and equitable treatment' (FET) standard, a controversial provision found in nearly 95% of international investment agreements. It argues that the vagueness of FET leads to inconsistent interpretations by arbitral tribunals, which can result in 'regulatory chill' for states. The brief analyzes five common treaty formulations of FET and concludes that even 'new-generation' agreements often produce the same unpredictable outcomes as older ones. To mitigate these risks, the authors propose three policy options: excluding FET standards entirely, using alternative terminology like 'fair administrative treatment,' or implementing a strictly defined, closed list of breach conditions that explicitly excludes investor expectations.

The document examines the 'fair and equitable treatment' (FET) standard in international investment agreements, noting its prevalence in nearly 95% of such treaties and its role in 83% of treaty-based arbitrations. It argues that the vagueness of FET leads to inconsistent interpretations by tribunals, which can result in 'regulatory chill' for states. The brief outlines five common formulations of FET and suggests three primary policy alternatives: excluding the FET standard entirely, using alternative terminology like 'fair administrative treatment', or implementing a strictly defined, limited FET standard with a closed list of violations.

The 2022 Green Central Banking Scorecard evaluates G20 monetary and prudential authorities, finding that most remain insufficiently ambitious in mitigating climate risks. While research and advocacy have improved, the report argues that central banks prioritize analysis over action and are hindered by a commitment to 'market neutrality' and flawed taxonomies. The Banque de France is the top-ranked institution, while Saudi Arabia is the lowest. The report recommends implementing green lending schemes, increasing capital requirements for fossil fuel exposures, and adopting a 'double materiality' framework to account for the financial sector's impact on the environment.

The Amazon biome is facing a critical situation due to deforestation, degradation, and climate change, which threaten its role in global climate regulation and its immense biodiversity. Key drivers include cattle ranching, mechanized agriculture, illegal logging, and unsustainable infrastructure projects like dams. The report emphasizes the vital role of indigenous territories and protected areas in maintaining resilience and proposes an integrated landscape management approach, the protection of free-flowing rivers, and the transition to a sustainable bioeconomy to avoid an ecological tipping point.

The statement by Friends of the Earth International calls for a shift from non-binding guidelines to legally binding regulations for multinational corporations. It highlights the failure of the UN Guiding Principles and advocates for an international treaty currently under negotiation at the UN, supported by national legislation. The text cites the French 'duty of vigilance' law and a proposed corporate and human rights framework in Brazil as key examples of progress toward corporate accountability.

This research paper by the Stockholm Environment Institute examines transboundary climate risks to Sweden's international trade, arguing that traditional analysis overlooks hidden vulnerabilities in deeper supply chain tiers, specifically regarding inputs from Asia, Africa, and soy production in Brazil.

The report outlines the Green Guarantee Company's (GGC) framework for integrating gender equality and women's empowerment into its credit guarantee operations for green bonds and loans. It assesses gender vulnerabilities in five key sectors—energy, transport, buildings/cities, health/food/water security, and infrastructure—and provides high-level profiles for eight target countries. The document details a seven-step Transaction Selection Process (TSP) designed to ensure that guaranteed projects are gender-responsive, including rigorous due diligence, remediation strategies, and the use of a multidisciplinary 'line of defence' consisting of internal and external gender specialists.

The report assesses gender dynamics and barriers for climate entrepreneurs and support organizations in Latin America and West Africa, specifically focusing on Mexico, Côte d'Ivoire, and Senegal. It identifies systemic gaps in education, agriculture, and energy, and provides recommendations for the project's Executing Entities to increase women's participation in climate innovation.

The complaint argues that TIAA/Nuveen engages in systematic greenwashing by marketing sustainable ESG products while maintaining substantial holdings in coal, oil, and gas, and acquiring land in Brazil linked to deforestation and human rights abuses. It requests that the PRI Board investigate these practices and require corrective actions, including full divestment from fossil fuels by 2025.

The Green Guarantee Company (GGC), managed by the Development Guarantee Group (DGG) and accredited by MUFG Bank, Ltd., seeks USD 82.5 million in equity from the Green Climate Fund (GCF) to create a guarantee vehicle. GGC aims to leverage its capital 10x to provide up to USD 4 billion in guarantees for green bonds and loans in developing countries, specifically targeting those with sub-investment grade ratings to attract global institutional investors. The programme focuses on five GCF result areas: energy generation and access, low-emission transport, buildings/cities/industries/appliances, health/food/water security, and infrastructure/built environment. It targets a mitigation impact of 74.6 million tCO2e and reaches approximately 36.9 million beneficiaries over a 20-year lifespan. The proposal includes a detailed Transaction Selection Process (TSP) to ensure climate impact and a comprehensive Gender Action Plan to promote equality and women's empowerment in the supported projects.

The author contends that reducing food loss and waste is a non-contentious solution to climate change and biodiversity loss, yet it remains under-adopted by governments. While some countries have set targets aligned with SDG 12.3, only 38 nations have included food loss and waste in their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC). The text highlights that agriculture drives 70% of terrestrial biodiversity loss and 30% of greenhouse gas emissions, with rotting food in landfills serving as the third largest cause of methane emissions.

This briefing outlines the progress of the Regional Assessment conducted by the Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research (IAI). The assessment aims to identify knowledge gaps and uncertainties in decisions impacted by global environmental change (GEC) to better target science and capacity-building efforts for Member Countries.

The IAI is conducting a Regional Assessment to better understand how global environmental change (GEC) affects the decisions of its member Parties. Through surveys and subregional listening sessions held in 2022, the IAI identified 'climate action' as the most important current national priority for 14 Parties. Key barriers to using scientific information include a lack of intersectoral collaboration and a lack of science available for non-technical audiences. The assessment has grouped member countries by shared priorities and identified specific regional focuses, such as water security in the Southern Cone and biodiversity in the Andean subregion. Next steps include a deep analysis of collected data and a review of national policy documents, with results to be communicated at CoP-31.