Search Climate Insights Directory

The document proposes integrating an essential use (ESU) framework into EU chemical regulations, specifically REACH and sectoral laws, to streamline the phase-out of hazardous substances. It argues that current cost-benefit analyses are too technical and favor 'business as usual'. The proposed ESU approach would evaluate chemicals across three functional levels—technical, product, and societal—to determine if a use is truly critical. It suggests that non-essential uses (e.g., luxury, cosmetics, toys) should be banned by default, while essential uses (e.g., life-saving medical devices) may receive limited, time-bound derogations. The brief emphasizes shifting the burden of proof to companies and establishing clear criteria for 'acceptable loss of performance' when substituting hazardous chemicals.

ClientEarth proposes that REACH reform should introduce a clear objective to eliminate the most harmful chemicals, specifically suggesting a 2030 target for consumer products to be free of such substances. The document argues that current REACH processes lack a guiding goal for restrictions, creating a gap in implementation and predictability for investors. It further asserts that preventing toxic exposure is a legally binding human rights obligation and calls for a new regulatory mechanism to discourage the registration of new harmful substances.

The document outlines specific demands for the 'REACH 2' reform to address systemic data gaps in the EU chemical market. It argues that the original 'no data, no market' principle failed because registration requirements were too vague and did not cover all substances, such as polymers and low-tonnage chemicals. ClientEarth proposes expanding registration obligations, introducing new reporting duties for downstream users, and increasing transparency for investors and consumers regarding substances of very high concern (SVHCs).

The policy brief proposes reforming the EU's REACH regulation to ensure that exceptions for the use of hazardous substances are rare, short-term, and limited to 'essential uses'. It identifies current failures in the burden of proof and information asymmetry between companies and authorities, suggesting a system where the onus is on companies to prove necessity. Proposed measures include a maximum 10-year limit on exceptions, growing fees to incentivise substitution, and a strict 'essential use' criterion based on the Montreal Protocol.

ClientEarth asserts that current REACH enforcement is insufficient and inconsistent across EU Member States, creating an uneven playing field and failing to protect human health and the environment. The document details high non-compliance rates across registration, supply chain, downstream user, restriction, and authorisation obligations. It proposes a comprehensive reform package including a Commission-led EU audit system, the power for ECHA to revoke registration numbers ('no data, no market'), 'name and shame' transparency measures, and turnover-based fines of at least 8% for serious breaches of authorisation and restriction decisions.

The document outlines the distinctions between 'most harmful substances', 'substances of very high concern', 'substances of concern', and 'hazardous substances' under EU regulations, while providing estimates on the scale of the global and EU chemical markets.

The document argues that EU and UK governments have failed to protect public health by not holding auto manufacturers accountable for illegal defeat devices. It proposes three main pillars of action: identifying and correcting the use of these devices through manufacturer-funded retrofits, establishing a 'Dieselgate Clean Up Fund' paid for by industry to accelerate the transition to zero-emission vehicles, and adopting more robust clean air laws and emissions standards, including an ambitious Euro 7 standard and a phase-out of new petrol and diesel vehicles by 2030 for cars and vans.

The report asserts that access to healthy and sustainable food is a fundamental human right embedded within the right to a healthy environment. It highlights that while food availability in the EU is currently stable, intensive agri-food models, biodiversity loss, and climate change threaten future food security. The authors argue that the EU has a legal responsibility to protect this right through its legislative frameworks, specifically recommending that the proposed Legislative Framework for Sustainable Food Systems (FSFS) adopt a rights-based approach, phase out harmful subsidies, and ensure public procurement of sustainable food.

The briefing reveals that small-scale coastal fishing (SSCF), despite representing 75% of the EU fleet, received only 20% of European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) spending between 2014 and 2021. It highlights a lack of transparent reporting by Member States on SSCF action plans and notes that higher public aid intensity has not sufficiently increased investments in small-scale projects. The document argues that funding disproportionately favors larger vessels, particularly in the Mediterranean, and recommends that the European Commission mandate more granular data collection and that Member States provide local administrative support to help small-scale fishers access funds.

The report argues that Canada cannot reach its 2050 net-zero goals through energy transitions alone, as material extraction and processing account for a significant portion of global emissions. It identifies key opportunities in the steel, cement, plastics, and organic waste sectors, emphasizing that reducing primary demand and extending product lifespans offer greater emission reductions than recycling alone. The document highlights the lack of comprehensive national circularity plans in Canada compared to leaders like Japan and the EU, and recommends implementing digital product passports, carbon pricing, and updated building codes to accelerate the transition.

The report analyzes the viability of first-of-a-kind clean fuel projects in Canada, finding that most are currently unprofitable without public support. It distinguishes between standard market risks, which investors can manage, and systemic failures—such as policy uncertainty, infrastructure deficits, and regulatory delays—that require government action. Through financial modeling of five project archetypes, the report highlights that only blue ammonia in Alberta shows consistent viability, while others struggle with high costs and technological immaturity. It emphasizes the need for Canada to rapidly implement a permissive policy environment to compete with the United States' Inflation Reduction Act and to foster equitable partnerships with Indigenous communities.

The report argues that transitioning from a "take, make, waste" economy to a circular one is essential for Canada to meet its climate targets, as energy transitions alone cannot address emissions from resource extraction and material use. It identifies significant emissions-reduction opportunities in the metals, construction, plastics, and food sectors, while noting that Canada is currently at a nascent stage of implementation compared to leaders like Japan and the European Union. The document emphasizes that 'upstream' measures—such as demand suppression, product life extension, and smarter design—offer greater climate benefits than downstream recycling. It highlights critical barriers in Canada, including opaque material flow data, regulatory hurdles for recycled aggregates, and a lack of comprehensive national circularity goals. The report recommends that Canada develop a formal roadmap, integrate circularity into its Nationally Determined Contributions, and utilize tools like carbon pricing and green public procurement to incentivize the shift.

The report examines the investment landscape for first-of-kind clean fuel projects in Canada, distinguishing between standard market risks and systemic market or policy failures. Through financial modelling of five project archetypes, the study finds that most are currently uneconomic and require targeted government intervention to become bankable. Key barriers include policy uncertainty, infrastructure deficits, skilled labour shortages, and the complexities of establishing equitable Indigenous partnerships.

The report details a surge in EU gas infrastructure projects, including 30 fast-tracked LNG terminals and extensive pipeline networks, driven by the 'gas panic' after Russia's invasion of Ukraine. It warns that the proposed 227.2 bcm/y of additional LNG capacity would increase the EU's maximum import capacity by 136%, potentially costing €53.5 billion and emitting up to 950 million tons of CO2 annually. The document argues that these uncoordinated efforts, led by countries like Germany, Greece, and Italy, conflict with the EU's 'Fit for 55' climate goals and the European Climate Law. Additionally, it critiques the 'European Hydrogen Backbone' initiative, stating that repurposing methane pipelines for hydrogen is technically risky and economically unjustified, further entrenching fossil fuel use.

The Institute for Economic Justice (IEJ) and Climate Finance for Equitable Transitions (CLiFT) argue that the JET-IP's strategy of 'de-risking' private finance is insufficient to mobilise the required R1.5 trillion and exposes South Africa to significant fiscal, legal, and social risks. The authors contend that the plan fails to meet National Determined Contributions (NDCs) due to an over-reliance on private renewable energy and a lack of investment in public transport and energy efficiency. They recommend shifting to a 'rights-based' governance framework and an 'allocative credit policy' that prioritises public investment, local manufacturing, and comprehensive social protections for workers and communities.

The report argues that governments have failed to fulfill commitments to shift public financial flows away from fossil fuels, with subsidies increasing since the Paris Agreement. It identifies significant data gaps regarding state-owned enterprise investments and provides a framework for fossil fuel subsidy reform based on pricing, impact management, and stakeholder support.

The brief examines the WTO JSI on e-commerce, noting a shift toward a less ambitious agreement focusing on 'lower-hanging fruit' like e-commerce facilitation. It highlights the rise of Digital Economy Agreements (DEAs) and increased national regulatory activity, while noting that the JSI's December 2022 consolidated text reflects a dilution of policy coverage and the removal of a dedicated market access section.

The report provides a comprehensive stocktake of the WTO Joint Statement Initiative (JSI) on E-commerce as of December 2022. It highlights a shift toward a less ambitious agreement for the 13th Ministerial Conference (MC13), focusing on resolved trade facilitation issues while deferring controversial market access topics. The document analyzes the impact of increasing national digital regulation, the rise of flexible Digital Economy Agreements (DEAs), and the revitalized WTO Work Programme's focus on the digital divide. It details the structural changes in the December 2022 consolidated text (INF/ECOM/62/Rev.3), including the removal of the 'Market Access' section and the creation of an 'Annex' for low-support proposals. While 10 articles have reached 'clean' or 'convergent' status, significant gaps remain regarding cross-border data flows and source code. The report concludes that 2023 will be a critical year for finalizing a simplified agreement.

The report provides a comprehensive stocktake of the WTO's Joint Statement Initiative (JSI) on e-commerce at the end of 2022. It highlights a shift toward a less ambitious 'light' agreement focusing on minor facilitation points, while more contentious issues like market access and data flows remain unresolved. The document notes the rise of flexible Digital Economy Agreements (DEAs) and an increased focus on the digital divide within the broader WTO work programme. By December 2022, 87 WTO members participated in the JSI, though participation from African countries and Least Developed Countries remains marginal. The report details the progress of various technical small groups, noting that 10 articles have reached a 'cleaned' or 'convergent' state, while others, such as source code and cryptography, face persistent divergences.

The report analyzes the global banana industry, highlighting the role of VSSs like Fairtrade and Organic in improving producer prices and resilience. It details the sector's high vulnerability to climate-driven pests and diseases, such as Tropical Race 4, and the economic pressures caused by retail price wars and market concentration. The document argues for a shared responsibility model across the value chain to ensure living wages and sustainable production.