Search Climate Insights Directory

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 examines the governance of multilateral development banks (MDBs), specifically the World Bank Group and regional banks, focusing on their adherence to principles of access to information, public participation, and access to justice. While noting a shift toward formal disclosure policies and the creation of accountability mechanisms like the World Bank Inspection Panel, the authors argue that these processes remain largely ad hoc, inconsistent, and subject to broad discretionary exceptions. The document concludes that current MDB governance lacks systematic standards and recommends the establishment of an International Administrative Procedures Treaty to ensure minimum citizen-based rights across all international institutions.

The document examines the interpretation of risk assessments (RA) and the precautionary principle under the WTO's SPS Agreement in the context of the EC – Biotech case. It argues that the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety could serve as a critical source of factual information and a guide for interpreting the SPS Agreement, particularly regarding the triggering conditions for provisional measures under Article 5.7.

The Global Environmental Facility (GEF) was established in 1990 as a three-year pilot program to address global warming, ozone depletion, biodiversity loss, and international water pollution. Operated by the World Bank, UNDP, and UNEP, the GEF provides grant or concessional funding for projects that offer global environmental benefits but lack economic viability without assistance. However, the facility faces significant criticism from NGOs and developing countries regarding its lack of transparency, restricted membership—due to a SDR $4 million contribution requirement—and the potential for 'greenwashing' World Bank projects. As the pilot phase ends in 1993, there are calls for restructuring to ensure universal membership and greater accountability to the climate change and biodiversity conventions.

The report details how mercury pollution impacts human health and violates international human rights. It highlights the vulnerability of fetuses and children to neurotoxins, the dangers of artisanal and small-scale gold mining (ASGM), and the systemic failure to protect workers and communities from toxic exposure. Key examples include the Minamata disaster in Japan and mercury-contaminated grain in Iraq.

The document details how mercury exposure—through industrial emissions, artisanal gold mining, and contaminated food sources—causes severe neurological and systemic health damage, particularly in fetuses and children. It links these health outcomes to violations of international human rights frameworks and provides case studies of mass poisoning in Japan, Iraq, and South Africa.

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 author analyzes the growing consensus among developing nations and some developed entities regarding the need for a 'disclosure of origin' requirement in the patent system to prevent the misappropriation of genetic resources and traditional knowledge. This effort is framed within the context of Paragraph 19 of the Doha Declaration, which tasks the TRIPS Council with examining the relationship between the TRIPS Agreement and the CBD. While countries like Brazil, India, and others advocate for mandatory disclosure and proof of prior informed consent and benefit-sharing, opposition remains from the United States and Japan, though the European Union and Switzerland have shown varying degrees of openness to such systems.

The document analyzes the 1992 Framework Convention on Climate Change, detailing the scientific consensus on global warming and the diplomatic tensions between industrialized and developing nations during its creation. It highlights the lack of binding emissions targets and the complexities of the financial mechanism and technology transfer.

The document highlights that micro- and nanoplastics are ubiquitous atmospheric pollutants that can travel thousands of kilometers, leading to significant human inhalation. It details how these particles can penetrate deep into the lungs and enter the vascular system, acting as vectors for toxic chemicals. The report links exposure to various respiratory, metabolic, and reproductive health issues and calls for a legally binding international agreement to address the full life cycle of plastics.

The report details how over 99% of plastics are derived from fossil fuels, specifically through the production of ethylene and propylene. It highlights the geographic concentration of production near fossil fuel sources, such as the US Gulf Coast, and the high degree of vertical integration between major oil and gas companies and plastics producers. The document also analyzes the shift in feedstocks, noting the US preference for natural gas liquids (NGL) and the dominance of naphtha in China, Europe, and Japan, while projecting that oil consumption by the plastics sector could reach 20% of total consumption by 2050.

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 report details the financial mechanisms supporting over 100 planned petrochemical projects in the US, primarily in the Gulf South. It finds that a small number of global banks and asset managers provide the majority of this capital, despite mounting market overcapacity, litigation risks, and environmental harms. The document calls for immediate divestment and the adoption of strict climate-aligned policies by financial institutions.

The report argues that the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) lacks substantive new environmental obligations and relies on enforcement mechanisms that have historically proven ineffective in other U.S. free trade agreements (FTAs). It highlights the absence of a reference to climate change and the elimination of independent oversight bodies, such as a Secretariat. Furthermore, the document identifies Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) as a significant threat, noting its potential to 'chill' environmental regulation and allow corporations to sue governments over public interest laws.

In 2014, the labeled green bond market grew more than threefold to reach 366 billion USD, issued by 73 entities. International financial institutions remained the leaders, accounting for 44% of the market, with the European Investment Bank (EIB) as the largest issuer at 5.6 billion USD. The market saw significant diversification through corporate issuances totaling 12 billion USD, including a 3.4 billion USD issuance by GDF Suez, and the introduction of green asset-backed securities by Toyota. Municipal bonds also contributed, with US and Canadian provinces and cities like Gothenburg and Johannesburg participating. The total market size, including unlabeled green project bonds and ABS, is estimated between 38 billion and 39 billion USD, with a projection of 100 billion USD by the end of 2015.

The green bond market experienced rapid growth between 2013 and 2016, with total emissions reaching USD 81 billion in 2016. The market is increasingly dominated by the private sector, with corporate and bank emissions rising from less than 1% in 2010 to 66% in 2016. While mitigation projects—specifically clean energy, energy efficiency, and low-carbon transport—receive approximately 75% of funds, financing for adaptation grew from less than 1% in 2011 to 5% of total emissions, driven largely by US municipalities. China emerged as a leading market, projecting to be the largest globally. To support the Paris Agreement, the Climate Bonds Initiative targets annual green bond emissions of USD 1 trillion by 2020. The document recommends that governments implement national capital mobilization plans, apply international standards like the Green Bond Principles and Climate Bonds Standard, and develop national verifier networks to reduce market friction and prevent greenwashing.

The document asserts that methane emissions from the natural gas supply chain are significantly underestimated, potentially making gas power more harmful to the climate than coal if leakage rates exceed 3%. For Japan, which imports over 90% of its gas as LNG, this creates both climate risks and energy security vulnerabilities. The briefing advocates for a transition away from gas through policies such as phasing out fossil fuel subsidies, prioritizing grid infrastructure for electrification and renewables, simplifying permitting for renewables, and implementing Carbon Contracts for Difference (CfD).

The guide outlines a framework for deploying capital to reduce methane and flaring in the oil and gas sector, with a particular focus on National Oil Companies (NOCs). It provides detailed recommendations for selecting eligible projects, quantifying emissions, and establishing credible KPIs and sustainability performance targets (SPTs) aligned with the IEA's Net Zero Scenario. The document also specifies requirements for external verification and reporting to prevent greenwashing.

The report advocates for the use of legal frameworks to bridge the gap between climate ambition and action following the COP28 Global Stocktake. It calls for the enactment of comprehensive national framework climate laws by COP30, the operationalisation of the loss and damage fund with a human rights focus, and a legally mandated phase-out of fossil fuels. ClientEarth emphasizes the role of international courts in clarifying state obligations and suggests adopting demand-reduction strategies for fossil fuels similar to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control to combat greenwashing.