Search Climate Insights Directory

The document argues that the increasing use of manufactured nanomaterials (MNMs) in consumer and industrial products creates significant risks in the waste stream due to unknown toxicity and difficulties in characterization. It demands that governments and companies implement extended producer responsibility, restrict the transboundary movement of MNM waste, and establish public registries of nano-products, particularly within the European Union, to ensure safe recycling and disposal.

The document argues that manufactured nanomaterials (NM) in waste streams pose risks to health and the environment due to incomplete toxicity understanding. It demands the implementation of extended producer responsibility, restrictions on transboundary movements of NM waste, and the creation of a public registry of nano-products in the EU to ensure transparent quantification of waste flows. Additionally, it advocates for public funding of research into waste prevention and the development of safe recycling and disposal technologies that prevent cross-contamination of secondary materials.

The report details how the hazardous materials in e-waste—including lead, mercury, and cadmium—violate fundamental human rights such as the right to life, health, and food. It highlights the severe health consequences for workers and children in informal recycling sectors, particularly in China, India, Ghana, and the Philippines, where archaic recovery methods lead to systemic toxic exposure.

The report details how the lifecycle of electronic products, characterized by rapid obsolescence and the use of toxic materials, leads to severe human rights violations. It highlights the presence of hazardous substances like lead, mercury, and cadmium in e-waste and documents the resulting health crises in informal recycling hubs, particularly in China, India, Ghana, and the Philippines. The document argues that unregulated recycling practices violate the rights to life, health, adequate food, and safe working conditions, disproportionately affecting children and marginalized populations.

The document argues that the increasing use of manufactured nanomaterials (MNMs) in consumer, industrial, and medical products is leading to their proliferation in waste streams, posing risks to human health and the environment that are not yet fully understood. Signatories demand that governments and companies implement extended producer responsibility, restrict the transboundary movement of MNM waste, and establish a public registry of nano-products in Europe to ensure transparency. The statement also advocates for the development of safe recycling technologies and the integration of waste prevention into publicly funded nanotechnology research to support a safe circular economy.

The Declaration on Waste Containing Nanomaterials argues that the increasing presence of manufactured nanomaterials (MNMs) in waste streams poses risks to human health and the environment due to uncertainties regarding their toxicity. The signatories call for the implementation of full producer responsibility, the restriction of transboundary waste movements, and the creation of an EU-wide public nano-product registry to ensure transparent quantification of waste flows. They further advocate for innovation in waste prevention, the development of safe recycling and disposal technologies, and the establishment of verifiable end-of-waste criteria to support a circular economy without introducing new environmental risks.

The document catalogues alleged human rights implications across numerous international projects in sectors such as mining, energy, and forestry. It organizes these cases by the specific right implicated, including the rights to adequate food, housing, health, and life, as well as freedoms from forced labor and torture. The case studies highlight recurring issues such as forced resettlement, environmental contamination of water and land, the use of military force to suppress protests, and inadequate compensation for displaced populations.

The paper argues that natural resource subsidies—direct, indirect, and implicit—lead to overcapitalization, technological inefficiency, and overconsumption, resulting in severe environmental damage. Using forests and fisheries as case studies, it demonstrates how low rent capture and fleet modernization subsidies drive deforestation and stock depletion. The author suggests that international bodies, particularly APEC's Economic Committee, should adopt 'full-cost pricing' and the 'User-Pays Principle' to internalize environmental externalities and ensure sustainable resource management.

The document outlines the critical role of cocoa in Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire, where together they produce over 60% of the cocoa for the USD$130 billion global chocolate industry. It argues that the sector is hindered by poverty, child labor, and deforestation, and proposes a series of research papers to analyze national legal frameworks, identify governance loopholes, and assess the impact of EU and UK regulations on sustainability.

ClientEarth is an environmental charity that employs legal expertise to enforce environmental laws and shape new policies. Its five-year strategy focuses on accelerating the transition to a net zero carbon economy by pressuring governments and companies to uphold the Paris Agreement, eliminating coal power in Europe by 2030, and reducing illegal air pollution. The organization also targets the protection of oceans, forests, and wildlife, specifically focusing on sustainable fishing quotas in the EU by 2020 and securing community forest rights in Central and West Africa. Additionally, ClientEarth works to expand access to justice and modernize environmental governance in China.

The document examines five international case studies to guide Ghana in operationalizing its Environmental Protection Act, 2025. It highlights the risks of transacting carbon before establishing legal frameworks, as seen in Liberia, and the benefits of statutory community benefit-sharing floors, as implemented in Kenya. The analysis contrasts state-centered models in Zambia and Indonesia with Australia's property-law approach, where carbon rights are registrable interests in land. The briefing concludes with seven specific recommendations for Ghana, including the definition of carbon rights as transactable interests and the mandate of community development agreements to ensure free, prior and informed consent.

The Minerals and Mining Policy of Ghana outlines a strategic framework to balance mineral exploitation with sustainable economic, social, and environmental development. It details the transition from state-controlled mining (1957-1983) to a privatized sector, emphasizing the need to diversify the mineral base beyond gold, diamonds, manganese, and bauxite. The policy sets objectives to enhance local value addition, improve geo-scientific data, and support artisanal and small-scale mining, which is reserved for Ghanaian citizens. It establishes regulatory roles for agencies like the Minerals Commission and the Environmental Protection Agency, while committing to international climate goals, including the UNFCCC. Fiscal policies aim for a transparent regime that balances investor attraction with the optimization of government revenue, while social policies focus on community participation, sustainable livelihoods for displaced persons, and the prevention of child labour.

The document identifies a critical legal gap in Ghana: while the Environmental Protection Act, 2025 (Act 1124) regulates carbon market operations, it does not define who owns forest carbon. Consequently, ownership is currently inferred from a complex mix of land tenure, tree tenure, and customary law. The briefing analyzes two competing legal classifications—treating carbon as an ecosystem service versus a natural resource—and argues that the chosen model significantly impacts whether local farmers and communities receive direct benefits. It recommends a hybrid approach that maintains State regulatory oversight while statutorily guaranteeing benefit entitlements for those who steward the forests, utilizing Community Resource Management Areas (CREMAs) as a practical delivery mechanism.

The document outlines how forest carbon is monetised through compliance and voluntary markets, detailing Ghana's role as an early adopter of Article 6 of the Paris Agreement. It describes Ghana's regulatory pathway for carbon projects, highlights key transactions like the Ghana Cocoa Forest REDD+ Programme and the Ghana Shea Landscape Emission Reductions Project, and identifies risks such as double counting and bargaining power asymmetries. The briefing concludes with recommendations to codify regulations, standardise transaction documents, and target high-integrity market segments.

The Global Climate and Health Alliance and its partners call for a total phase-out of fossil fuels, health-centered adaptation planning, and strategic climate financing to prevent catastrophic impacts on global health. The statement emphasizes a 'Health in All Policies' approach, arguing that the transition to renewable energy is a public health imperative that could save 3.6 million lives annually. It further advocates for the operationalization of the Loss and Damage Fund to address health losses, the promotion of sustainable plant-rich diets to prevent 11 million premature deaths, and the exclusion of fossil fuel industry influence from UNFCCC policy-making.

Climate Strategies proposes five operational avenues for the first 2025 JTWP dialogue, including a non-prescriptive governance framework, a case study repository, a resource database, justice-focused metrics, and a global governance architecture. For the second 2025 dialogue, it recommends addressing climate resilience, restorative justice, transition minerals, and deep dives into neglected sectors like food and health systems. The submission also suggests reforming the dialogue format to combine workshops with discussions to better facilitate the sharing of real-world practitioner experiences.

The document argues that because the energy transition is already underway due to technological shifts, countries must proactively plan for a Just Transition to avoid economic dislocation. It highlights opportunities for economic diversification, such as Ghana's investment plan to generate 400,000 net jobs by 2060, and best practices like Brazil's reallocation of petroleum revenues to reforestation. However, it identifies critical barriers, including fiscal dependence on fossil fuels in countries like Azerbaijan (where oil and gas constitute 90% of exports) and a lack of granular data on workforce impacts in Indonesia. The author proposes actionable solutions including the repurposing of coal infrastructure, the expansion of local financing mechanisms, and the anchoring of transition policies in legal frameworks to ensure long-term stability.

The document examines how carbon pricing affects different household income levels across developed and developing countries. It argues that while carbon pricing can be regressive—disproportionately impacting low-income households who spend more of their income on energy—these effects can be neutralized or turned into net benefits through strategic revenue recycling, such as lump-sum rebates or targeted subsidies. The briefing highlights that in very low-income countries, carbon pricing can actually be progressive due to limited fossil fuel access among the poorest. It provides case studies from the EU ETS, the US Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), South Africa, and Iran to illustrate various implementation and mitigation strategies.

The executive summary examines domestic climate policy implementation in developing countries through six case studies in Brazil, Ghana, India, South Africa, and China. It argues that while development co-benefits drive domestic support, resource constraints and competing priorities hinder progress. The document proposes that international support—including technical assistance, technology cooperation, and financial resources for incremental costs—can overcome these barriers. It specifically advocates for the use of intermediate policy indicators for monitoring and incentive schemes, rather than relying solely on long-term emissions reductions, to provide early rewards and flexibility.

The document argues that meaningful participation from diverse, affected groups is essential for a just transition to ensure procedural justice, improve policy efficiency, and increase ownership of climate policies. It identifies barriers to engagement, such as time constraints, costs, and low trust, and suggests a people-centered design approach to overcome them. The text highlights the necessity of coordination bodies to manage state and non-state actors across different political levels. Examples include Costa Rica's Just Transition Governance Scheme and South Africa's Presidential Climate Commission, both of which serve as platforms for multi-stakeholder collaboration and policy co-creation.