Search Climate Insights Directory

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 identifies the Technical Assistance (TA) Facility for the Global Subnational Climate Fund as a Category I-2 environmental and social safeguards project. It lists target countries across Africa, Asia-Pacific, Latin America and the Caribbean, and the Mediterranean, and confirms that an Environmental and Social Management System (ESMS) has been disclosed in multiple languages to comply with requirements.

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 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.

A solidarity statement calling for immediate government and international action to protect Amazonian indigenous peoples from COVID-19 by halting extractive industries and respecting indigenous self-governance.

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 critiques the 'corporate capture' of agroecology by three major global initiatives: the Sustainable Agriculture Initiative (SAI), the New Vision for Agriculture (NVA), and the Coalition for a New Economy of Food and Land Use (FOLU). It argues that these entities promote a restricted, 'junk' version of agroecology that focuses on productivity and technological innovation (such as precision agriculture and gene editing) rather than the social justice, redistribution of power, and food sovereignty central to genuine agroecology. The document concludes that these corporate-led models aim to 'change everything so that nothing changes,' preserving the dominance of transnational agribusiness while adopting a 'green' veneer.

The report critiques 'junk agroecology,' a corporate-led interpretation of agroecology promoted by initiatives like the Sustainable Agriculture Initiative (SAI), the New Vision for Agriculture (NVA), and the New Food and Land Use Economy Coalition (FOLU). It argues that these entities use agroecological language to mask a commitment to 'productivism' and 'sustainable agricultural intensification,' focusing on increasing yields through technology and market inclusion rather than the redistribution of power and resources. The authors contrast this with a transformative vision of agroecology that emphasizes food sovereignty, social justice, and the rights of 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 critiques the 'corporate capture' of agroecology by three major global initiatives: the Sustainable Agriculture Initiative (SAI), the New Vision for Agriculture (NVA), and the Coalition for Food, Land and Use (FOLU). It contends that these entities promote a version of 'junk agroecology' that focuses on 'sustainable intensification' and technological fixes—such as big data, blockchain, and genomic editing—rather than the holistic, social, and political transformation central to genuine agroecology. The authors argue that these initiatives aim to 'transform small farms into sustainable agro-industries' to integrate smallholders into global value chains controlled by multinationals, thereby maintaining systemic inequalities and the dominance of industrial agriculture.

The document argues that formal land titles are often used as a proxy for tenure security but frequently fail to provide women with actual control over land due to discriminatory laws, customary norms, and lack of access to resources. It highlights that individual titling can conflict with indigenous collective tenure systems and may even lead to dispossession. To achieve genuine security, the author recommends gender-equitable normative frameworks, the inclusion of women in land governance, and ancillary support such as technical training and credit access.

The report synthesizes the work of UN human rights treaty bodies (HRTBs), including the CEDAW, CESCR, and CRC, on climate change. It details how these bodies use state reporting, communications procedures, and general comments to hold States accountable for human rights violations caused by climate change and insufficient mitigation efforts. Key findings emphasize the need for highest-ambition emissions cuts, the phasing out of fossil fuels, and the protection of vulnerable groups, including women, children, and Indigenous Peoples.

The document analyzes the legal frameworks and practical trends associated with terminating bilateral investment treaties (BITs), specifically focusing on the roles of termination and survival clauses. It details three primary methods of termination—by consent with renegotiation, by consent without renegotiation, and unilateral termination—while providing strategic considerations for states to mitigate investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) risks. The guide also suggests modern drafting approaches for new BITs to avoid the pitfalls of 'tacit renewal' and long survival periods.

The document analyzes the increasing trend of states terminating old-generation bilateral investment treaties (BITs) due to perceived imbalances in the investment regime. It details the legal mechanisms for termination under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, compares 'tacit renewal' and 'fixed-term' termination clauses, and discusses the impact of 'survival clauses' (sunset clauses). The guide outlines three primary paths for termination: mutual consent (with or without renegotiation), multilateral instruments, and unilateral denunciation. It provides strategic advice on neutralizing survival clauses and recommends that states actively track key treaty dates to avoid missing narrow termination windows.

A coalition of 76 organizations urges UNESCO and the World Heritage Committee to hold state parties accountable for their contributions to climate change. The authors argue that the World Heritage Convention requires states to align their national policies, including fossil fuel exports, with the 1.5°C warming limit to protect the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of heritage sites. The statement provides examples of other UN treaty bodies making similar mitigation recommendations to countries such as Australia, Argentina, and Germany.

The global green bond and green loan market reached a record USD 257.7 billion in 2019, a 51% increase over 2018. Growth was primarily driven by Europe, which accounted for 45% of global issuance. The USA, China, and France remained the top-ranked countries, together representing 44% of the market. Energy and Buildings were the dominant sectors for use of proceeds, each holding approximately 30% market share. Certified Climate Bonds grew by 86% to reach USD 45 billion, with cumulative certified issuance surpassing the USD 100 billion milestone. The market also saw increased diversification with debut issuances from emerging markets including Kenya, Barbados, and Saudi Arabia.

The interim evaluation of the PROAmazonía project in Ecuador shows a mixed progress record as of December 2019. While the project is highly aligned with national policies and has made significant strides in land-use planning (Component 1) and REDD+ operational instruments (Component 4), it has struggled with the implementation of financial incentives and sustainable production transitions (Component 2). Budget execution stands at 31% (US$ 12,939,253 of US$ 41,172,739), hampered by high staff turnover and bureaucratic delays in ministerial approvals. Sustainability is rated as moderately likely, threatened by Ecuador's fiscal adjustment plan and political instability, though the project has successfully integrated gender strategies and established critical territorial coordination platforms.