Search Climate Insights Directory

The statement warns that adopting GWP* would allow the livestock industry to greenwash emissions and undermine the Paris Agreement's 1.5°C target. It recommends maintaining GWP100 or GWP20 for reporting and mitigation policies.

The report concludes that breastmilk substitute (BMS) manufacturers use product differentiation and 'premium' branding to increase profits rather than to improve nutritional outcomes. Analysis of over 400 products from Nestlé, Danone, Mead Johnson Nutrition, and Abbott across 14 markets reveals that formulation variations are often based on market research and consumer willingness to pay rather than scientific rationale. This is particularly evident in high-growth Asian markets, where 'super-premium' formulas can cost a significant portion of a family's monthly salary.

The Human Rights Committee (CCPR) is increasingly linking climate change to human rights obligations under the ICCPR, particularly the right to life. In 2018, General Comment No. 36 established that climate change and environmental degradation are serious threats to the right to life, creating a due diligence obligation for States to take reasonable positive measures against foreseeable threats. In 2019, the CCPR began issuing climate-related recommendations to States, including Cabo Verde, and addressing climate issues in lists of issues for the United States and Dominica. In the case of Teitiota v New Zealand, the Committee acknowledged that climate change impacts could trigger non-refoulement obligations if they violate the right to life, though the specific petition was rejected. Additionally, a pending case involves Torres Strait Islanders against Australia, alleging that failure to mitigate emissions and adapt to climate change violates their rights to life and culture.

The Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) increasingly integrated climate change into its 2023 state reviews and released General Comment No. 26, which establishes the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment as implicit in the Convention. The CRC's work focused on state obligations for mitigation and adaptation, the regulation of private actors' contributions to environmental harm, and the protection of children's rights across various legal and procedural frameworks.

The document synthesizes the work of UN human rights treaty bodies (HRTBs) in addressing climate change, specifically focusing on Concluding Observations issued to States. It highlights that while climate change is not explicitly in key human rights treaties, HRTBs increasingly use their monitoring roles to argue that protecting human rights requires specific climate action. The report details recommendations across several themes, including the disproportionate impacts on women, children, and indigenous peoples, the need for gender-sensitive and child-sensitive climate strategies, and the obligation of some States to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and fossil fuel extraction to meet human rights standards. It provides detailed analysis of the three most active bodies: CEDAW, CESCR, and CRC.

The report outlines how the Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) interprets the 1989 CRC Convention to protect children from climate change. It highlights that while the Convention implicitly protects rights to life, health, and education, the Committee has explicitly urged States to place children's health at the center of climate strategies and to ensure children's participation in decision-making. The document analyzes 24 Concluding Observations from the past decade, noting a trend of recommendations directed toward climate-vulnerable developing countries, focusing on adaptation, disaster risk reduction, and the integration of child-sensitive strategies into national plans.

The document serves as a reference tool to track the recognition of Indigenous Peoples' rights and traditional knowledge within the UNFCCC process, highlighting over 60 decisions and the establishment of the Local Communities and Indigenous Peoples Platform.

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 report argues that while scientists identified ocean plastic pollution in the 1950s, the petrochemical and petroleum industries were aware of the issue by the 1970s. It details how industry actors participated in early workshops on marine pollutants and packaging waste, often framing the non-biodegradable nature of plastic as a benefit for landfills while privately acknowledging disposal problems. The document further asserts that the industry has historically shifted responsibility to consumers and fought regulations on single-use plastics, such as bag bans in California and Seattle, despite knowing the environmental impact of their products.

The document examines the negative impacts of ISDS on environmental and climate policy, noting that at least 175 cases are tied to environmental measures. It argues that the threat of arbitration disincentivizes states from enacting climate laws and that current treaty reforms are insufficient, suggesting that treaty termination and a shift toward domestic courts are the most effective solutions.

The report argues that the climate crisis is a human rights crisis, creating a legal obligation for States and corporations to provide effective remedy and reparations. It critiques the UNFCCC's voluntary approach to loss and damage, highlighting how it fails to uphold human rights standards and is hampered by debt injustice in the Global South. The document outlines legal pathways through international courts (ICJ, ITLOS, IACtHR) and national litigation to enforce accountability. Finally, it proposes six guiding principles for climate reparations—victim-centric, inclusive, intersectional, adequate, accountable, and trackable—drawing on lessons from other large-scale harm mechanisms.

The UNEP Compendium documents the intersection of human rights and environmental law through a curated selection of global and regional instruments and judicial decisions. It analyzes how substantive rights (such as the rights to life, health, and property) and procedural rights (access to information, public participation, and access to justice) are used to address environmental degradation. The document highlights the 'greening' of human rights law, where tribunals increasingly interpret existing rights to encompass environmental protections, particularly for indigenous peoples and marginalized groups. It also details state obligations regarding industrial pollution and natural resource extraction, emphasizing duties of prevention, regulation, and the requirement for free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) for indigenous communities.

DNV GL has provided limited assurance that NAB's proposed SDG Green Bond complies with the Climate Bonds Standard Version 2.1 (CBS v2.1) and relevant Sector Technical Criteria. The verification covers a portfolio of eligible assets including wind, solar, marine renewables, electrified passenger rail, and commercial buildings. DNV GL also conducted a qualitative review confirming the bond's alignment with several United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs), specifically targets related to affordable and clean energy, industry innovation and infrastructure, and sustainable cities and communities.

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.

The document examines how ISDS mechanisms are used by foreign investors to challenge environmental and climate policies, often resulting in 'regulatory chill' where states avoid enacting laws for fear of costly arbitration. It highlights the lack of transparency in these proceedings and the limited role of public participation and amicus briefs. The authors argue that investment treaties have a negligible effect on promoting foreign direct investment (FDI) but impose significant costs on human rights and the environment, particularly in the Global South. The submission recommends the termination of old-generation treaties, the carving out of climate measures from ISDS scope, and a shift toward resolving disputes in domestic courts.

The document argues that ISDS creates a 'regulatory chill' that discourages states from implementing climate policies due to the risk of expensive arbitration and compensation for 'stranded assets' in the fossil fuel sector. It suggests two main paths for reform: either terminating investment treaties and moving toward domestic courts and state-state dispute settlement, or adopting a 'legal tool-box' of procedural changes. These changes include a 'climate carve-out' to dismiss claims against good-faith climate measures, requiring the exhaustion of local remedies, allowing state counterclaims, banning third-party funding, and adjusting compensation calculations to account for public interest and climate impacts.

The document advocates for the adoption of Remote Electronic Monitoring (REM)—an integrated system of sensors and cameras—to address non-compliance with the EU Landing Obligation (LO). It highlights that traditional monitoring is insufficient and that REM provides a cost-effective way to verify catch data, improve stock assessments, and satisfy retailer demands for sustainable sourcing. While citing successful implementations in Canada, the US, Australia, and New Zealand, the text identifies privacy concerns and a lack of political will as primary barriers. It concludes by recommending that the European Commission strengthen its revised Control Regulation to mandate REM for high-risk fleet segments and remove exemptions for small catches.

The Healthy NDC Scorecard evaluates national climate commitments (NDCs) based on climate ambition, health impacts, and governance. It categorizes outcomes ranging from 'Paris Agreement compliant' and 'Science aligned' to those that are 'Catastrophic for human health', specifically tracking temperature trajectories from 1.5°C to over 4°C.

Climate Strategies argues that climate adaptation must move beyond a technical exercise to a justice-centered approach that addresses the structural drivers of vulnerability. Drawing on its South to South Just Transitions (S2S) programme, the submission highlights that adaptation actions can create winners and losers, risking the further marginalization of vulnerable populations if not managed through a Just Transition lens. The document identifies best practices in countries like South Africa, Australia, and the EU, while noting significant barriers in the Global South, such as data gaps on lived experiences and the disconnection between mitigation and adaptation policies. It calls for the JTWP to facilitate shared frameworks for operationalizing equity, tracking social outcomes, and mapping transboundary risks.

The document examines the concept of 'just resilience,' which seeks to ensure that climate adaptation does not create new winners and losers or reinforce existing marginalisation. It identifies three core dimensions of justice—distributive, procedural, and recognition—and argues that adaptation must address structural drivers of vulnerability such as wealth, gender, and ethnicity. The paper highlights maladaptation risks, where technical solutions can inadvertently increase long-term risks or displace vulnerable groups. It reviews policy examples from Australia, South Africa, the EU, and Canada, and discusses emerging trends like the rights of nature and locally led adaptation. Finally, it addresses barriers to implementation, including resource constraints and the need for equitable international climate finance mechanisms.