Search Climate Insights Directory

A statement by several NGOs, including the Center for International Environmental Law, criticizing the European Commission's working conclusions on transparency measures for nanomaterials. The authors argue that the Commission has ignored public consultation results and scientific concerns in favor of industry interests, and they strongly advocate for the creation of an EU-wide nanoregister to ensure public health, environmental safety, and consumer transparency.

This position paper, authored by civil society organisations, criticises the European Commission's governance of nanomaterials, describing it as a "laissez-faire approach" that prioritises industry interests over human health and environmental safety. The signatories demand a comprehensive framework regulation to harmonise the regulation of nanomaterials across the EU, incorporating a lifecycle approach and the "no data, no market" principle.

This legal opinion by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) analyzes the obligations of OECD members regarding the trade of plastic wastes following the OECD's failure to reach a consensus on incorporating the Basel Plastic Amendments into the OECD Wastes Trade Decision. The analysis concludes that plastic wastes designated as "other wastes" under the Basel Convention have fallen outside the scope of the OECD Decision, requiring OECD members who are Basel parties to apply Basel's control and ban mechanisms. CIEL further argues that recent arrangements between the US and Canada, and within the European Union, fail to meet the requirements of Article 11 of the Basel Convention and are therefore invalid as alternatives to Basel controls.

This research paper examines the push by developing countries to incorporate a mandatory disclosure of origin for biological resources and traditional knowledge into the TRIPS Agreement. This effort aims to prevent the misappropriation of genetic resources and ensure compatibility with the Convention on Biological Diversity (CDB). While there is growing consensus among many developing nations and some support from the European Union and Switzerland, opposition remains from the United States and Japan.

This briefing by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) and the Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA) provides a critical analysis of the UNEP 'Options for Elements' Paper prepared for the second session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-2). The document evaluates the proposed core obligations and control measures for a new legally binding instrument on plastic pollution, highlighting gaps where the Options Paper fails to reflect the ambition of Member State submissions, particularly regarding upstream production limits, chemical safety, and the protection of human health.

This report by the Center for International Environmental Law analyzes the conflict between international trade policy and environmental protection, arguing that the World Trade Organization (WTO) typically prioritizes trade over the environment. The authors critique the U.S. government for abdicating its leadership in this area and propose a new foreign policy agenda that integrates environmental protection and worker rights into trade agreements, specifically regarding NAFTA and the proposed Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA).

This report by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) analyzes the current state of transparency and public participation within the World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement system. It examines existing practices, the ongoing negotiations to review the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU), and provides recommendations to increase both direct and indirect participation for non-state actors and WTO Members.

This fact sheet by the Center for International Environmental Law argues that the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) negotiations between the European Union and the United States threaten to undermine public health and environmental protections regarding chemical substances. The document contends that TTIP's focus on regulatory alignment could lead to a 'downward harmonization' of standards, favoring the weaker US federal system over the stricter EU policies.

This fact sheet by the Center for International Environmental Law argues that the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is primarily a regulatory agreement that threatens to undermine public health and environmental protections regarding chemical regulation in the European Union and globally.

This fact sheet by the Center for International Environmental Law argues that the Transatlantic Investment and Partnership Agreement (TTIP), also referred to as TAFTA, threatens to weaken European chemical regulations and public health protections in favor of less stringent US standards and corporate interests.

This fact sheet by the Center for International Environmental Law argues that the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), also known as TAFTA, threatens to undermine public health and environmental protections regarding toxic chemicals by harmonizing regulations between the European Union and the United States.

This fact sheet by the Center for International Environmental Law argues that the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) negotiations between the US and EU threaten to undermine public health and environmental protections by harmonizing chemical regulations downward and restricting the regulatory authority of US states and the EU.

This briefing by the Center for International Environmental Law outlines several reform options for Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) to be considered by UNCITRAL Working Group III. The document argues that current ISDS mechanisms are asymmetrical, often ignoring state obligations and public interest, and proposes alternatives such as multilateral treaty termination, the allowance of state counterclaims, public interest carve-outs, 'clean hands' clauses for investors, the requirement to exhaust local remedies, and expanded third-party access to proceedings.

This statement from the Center for International Environmental Law argues that the World Health Organization (WHO) must actively analyze and intervene in the intellectual property (IP) provisions of bilateral and regional free trade agreements (FTAs). The document asserts that these agreements often impose standards that exceed the TRIPS Agreement, potentially undermining the Doha Declaration on TRIPS and Public Health and restricting access to affordable medicines in developing countries.

This technical guidance note by the Climate Bonds Initiative (CBI) compares the Climate Bonds Buildings Standard with the EU Taxonomy's criteria for climate mitigation and 'Do No Significant Harm' (DNSH) across the acquisition, construction, and renovation of residential and commercial buildings.

This report by the Climate Bonds Initiative examines the role of European Development Finance Institutions (DFIs) in mobilising private capital to address the global climate investment gap, which is estimated between USD 2.5 trillion and USD 4 trillion annually.

This executive summary from the Climate Bonds Initiative argues that fossil gas can no longer be considered a transition fuel due to methane leakage and the urgent need to halve global carbon emissions by 2030 to limit warming to 1.5°C. It advocates for a rapid leap to renewable energy and low-carbon hydrogen, while warning against incremental strategies like gas blending and the construction of new fossil gas infrastructure.

This document is an annex containing comparative tables that analyze the alignment and ambition levels between the Colombian Green Taxonomy and the EU Taxonomy across various economic activities in the energy, construction, waste, transport, ICT, manufacturing, and forestry sectors.

This report by the Climate Bonds Initiative analyzes how sustainable finance taxonomies integrate mechanisms to support the transition of high-emission sectors toward net-zero emissions by 2050. It identifies six specific 'Taxonomy Transition Mechanisms' used to define and evaluate the credibility of transition activities, providing a framework for taxonomy designers, investors, and market professionals to ensure robust and science-based decarbonization pathways.

This report by the Climate Bonds Initiative analyzes how financial taxonomies can facilitate the transition to net-zero emissions by 2050, particularly for hard-to-abate sectors. It introduces six 'transition mechanisms'—including forward-looking criteria, expiry dates, and transition plan requirements—to help developers create credible benchmarks. Through case studies of the EU, China, and Australia, the report illustrates different taxonomy archetypes (binary, traffic-light, and mixed) and emphasizes the need to integrate these technical tools with broader national climate policies and science-based pathways.