Search Climate Insights Directory

The guide outlines 20 essential components of a comprehensive legal framework for ESIA in the mining sector, covering the entire mine life cycle from exploration to post-closure. It emphasizes the importance of integrating social impacts alongside environmental ones, ensuring meaningful stakeholder engagement, and establishing robust financial assurances for mine closure. The document provides a phased roadmap for government action, practical tools for gap analysis and legal reform, and case studies on investor-state disputes to illustrate the risks of inadequate ESIA processes.

This guide provides a comprehensive framework for governments to implement and improve legal requirements for Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIA) in the large-scale mining sector. It details 20 key components of an integral legal framework, covering the entire mine life cycle from exploration to post-closure. The document emphasizes the importance of public participation, financial guarantees for mine closure, and the avoidance of legal stabilization clauses for environmental and social provisions to ensure sustainable development and reduce the risk of international investment disputes.

The document outlines a comprehensive approach to mining governance, emphasizing the necessity of a robust legal framework for Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIA) and Environmental and Social Management Plans (ESMP). It details the responsibilities of governments across five mining phases: prospecting, exploration, planning, construction/operation, and closure/post-mining transition. Key recommendations include ensuring legal consistency, mandating public participation and transparency, requiring financial guarantees for site restoration, and implementing strategic environmental assessments. The guide also provides practical tools for gap analysis and legal reform, while highlighting critical issues such as gender equality, indigenous rights, and the prevention of international investment disputes through clear, non-arbitrary regulatory processes.

The document establishes a framework for evaluating 'high-quality' carbon credits across six quality objectives: robust GHG impact determination, avoidance of double counting, addressing non-permanence, facilitating the transition to net zero, strong institutional arrangements, and positive environmental and social impacts. It details specific criteria for each, such as additionality, corresponding adjustments under the Paris Agreement, and the avoidance of carbon lock-in, to guide buyers in a complex market.

A group of civil society organizations and trade unions urged the International Finance Corporation (IFC) to implement binding protections for workers receiving Covid-19 response financing. The authors recommend that the IFC increase transparency by publishing a responsive financing strategy and a dedicated client website, integrate job preservation and occupational health and safety goals into loan documents, and establish an emergency grant facility for affected workers and communities. They specifically call for the prevention of discriminatory retrenchment and the provision of paid sick leave and childcare. Additionally, the document requests detailed data on the social protection policies of current IFC clients and the criteria used for distributing $8 billion in pandemic-related financing.

The report examines the global banana market, noting that while bananas are the most valuable traded fruit, the sector faces significant challenges including climate change, the Tropical Race 4 fungal disease, and poor farmer livelihoods. It highlights the growth of voluntary sustainability standards (VSSs), which accounted for 7% of production in 2016, and identifies opportunities to expand these standards in countries like India, China, and specific LHDCs such as Tanzania and Rwanda to improve environmental and social outcomes.

The toolkit outlines a strategic framework for governments to integrate the private sector into National Adaptation Plans (NAPs), emphasizing that private actors are not only sources of finance but also key implementers of adaptation options. It structures engagement across four elements: laying the groundwork, preparatory elements, implementation strategies, and reporting/monitoring. The document argues that early engagement is critical for sustainability and provides a business case for private sector participation based on risk management, new market opportunities, and regulatory compliance.

The document serves as a supplement to the UNFCCC technical guidelines, outlining how to integrate private companies and financiers into the four main elements of the NAP process. It argues that private sector involvement is critical for financing, implementation, and the overall sustainability of climate adaptation efforts. The guide details a step-by-step approach: analyzing the national context, establishing communication, creating enabling environments (addressing information, finance, and capacity gaps), and integrating private sector data into monitoring and evaluation (M&E) systems. It emphasizes the importance of including MSMEs and women-led businesses to ensure gender-responsive and inclusive adaptation outcomes.

The document serves as a supplement to the UNFCCC Technical Guidelines for the NAP process, arguing that private sector involvement is essential for funding, implementation, and the overall sustainability of climate adaptation. It outlines a four-element framework—preparatory work, preparatory phase, implementation strategies, and monitoring/review—to integrate private companies and financiers into national strategies. The toolkit emphasizes the 'business case' for adaptation, highlighting risk management and new market opportunities as primary drivers for private sector participation, while stressing the need for gender-responsive approaches to ensure inclusive resilience.

The report analyzes bioeconomy visions in Colombia based on a 2019 expert workshop, concluding that a 'bioresources' vision—balancing economic growth with environmental sustainability—currently predominates. While sectors like agriculture, biochemistry, bio-pharmaceuticals, and bioenergy show varying alignments with biotechnology or bioecology visions, common barriers include land tenure insecurity, poor rural road infrastructure, and the risk of overexploiting commercial species. The document argues that for a bioeconomy to be truly sustainable, Colombia must move beyond viewing biodiversity as a mere competitive advantage and instead integrate holistic monitoring of environmental outcomes and inclusive regional development.

WWF International provides a framework for corporate forest and climate goal-setting, advocating for a mitigation hierarchy that prioritizes avoiding and reducing footprints before pursuing compensation. The guide argues that protecting existing forests is significantly more effective for climate mitigation than tree planting, noting that preventing the loss of one hectare of mature forest avoids approximately 100 tons of carbon, whereas tropical reforestation sequesters only about 3 tons per hectare annually. It further recommends that companies align carbon credit purchases with specific quality criteria and national commitments (NDCs) and pursue transformational change through improved land tenure and multi-stakeholder initiatives.

The IAI and CLARA have entered into a non-binding agreement to promote regional scientific capacities through the use of advanced networks, focusing on data management, open publications, and technological infrastructure for global change research in Latin America.

The statement argues that the COVID-19 pandemic has created an urgent need for governments to focus all resources on public health, specifically the procurement of medical supplies, vaccines, and medicines. It calls for the immediate suspension of trade and investment negotiations at the WTO, bilateral, and regional levels, asserting that such activities divert critical resources and personnel. The authors highlight that intellectual property rules under the WTO's TRIPS agreement and free trade agreements may obstruct the affordability and accessibility of life-saving supplies. The document demands the removal of all trade barriers and unilateral sanctions that hinder medical procurement and urges a fundamental rethink of trade rules that encourage monopolies and limit healthcare access.

Friends of the Earth International and a broad coalition of global endorsers call for an immediate cessation of trade and investment treaty negotiations. They argue that governments, particularly in developing and least developed countries, lack the resources to engage in these negotiations while managing the COVID-19 health crisis. The statement demands that trade negotiators focus exclusively on removing obstacles, such as intellectual property rules and unilateral sanctions, that hinder access to affordable vaccines, medicines, and diagnostics.

WRI supported the procurement of electric bus fleets in Santiago, Bogotá, and Medellín to reduce emissions and operating costs. By developing scalable contractual and procurement mechanisms with partners like C40 and the Inter-American Development Bank, WRI helped these cities overcome the high upfront costs of e-buses. Santiago and Bogotá are procuring the two largest e-bus fleets globally outside of China, with Medellín adding 64 vehicles.

The European Union is urged to move beyond a "measure first, act later" approach to methane emissions, instead implementing mandatory Leak Detection and Repair (LDAR) and equipment upgrades domestically while using its purchasing power to pressure gas suppliers like Russia and Norway to reduce emissions.

The report argues that the 'Sustainable Agriculture Initiative' (SAI), 'New Vision for Agriculture' (NVA), and 'Food and Land Use Coalition' (FOLU) promote a version of 'junk agroecology' (agroecología chatarra). This approach selectively adopts agroecological techniques to mitigate environmental damage while preserving the industrial, profit-driven corporate model. The authors contrast this with a transformative agroecology rooted in food sovereignty and social justice, which requires shifting power from corporations to small-scale producers.

The report argues that big agrifood capital is developing 'junk agroecology'—a selective appropriation of agroecological techniques integrated into a productivist, market-driven framework. Through an analysis of three major initiatives—the Sustainable Agriculture Initiative (SAI), the New Vision for Agriculture (NVA), and the Food and Land Use Economy Coalition (FOLU)—the authors demonstrate how corporations use 'sustainable intensification' to greenwash the industrial food system. These initiatives prioritize technological determinism (such as gene editing and big data), the integration of smallholders into global value chains, and multi-stakeholder governance models that shift power from public institutions to private entities. The report concludes that a true agroecological transition requires participatory public policies rooted in food sovereignty and social justice, rather than corporate-led reforms.

The report argues that multinational corporations are promoting a 'fake agroecology' (agroécologie bidon) through initiatives like the Sustainable Agriculture Initiative (SAI), the New Vision for Agriculture (NVA), and the Food and Land Use Coalition (FOLU). These initiatives are characterized as 'sustainable intensification' rather than true agroecology, as they prioritize technological productivism, market-driven value chains, and public-private governance over social justice and structural transformation. The authors contend that this approach allows industrial giants to 'greenwash' their image while maintaining the existing power structures of the global food system.

The briefing warns that emergency government responses to the COVID-19 pandemic—such as lockdowns, medical supply requisitions, and export bans—create an unprecedented risk of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) claims under over 3,000 investment treaties. It highlights the unpredictability of arbitration tribunals and the high cost of defense, citing historical examples from Argentina and Egypt where states faced multi-billion dollar awards. The authors call for a coordinated global response, potentially through the UN or WTO, to suspend ISDS for pandemic measures or issue joint interpretations of the 'state of necessity' defense. As an interim measure, it suggests states may withdraw their consent to arbitration.