Search Climate Insights Directory

The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) issued climate-related recommendations or questions to 35 out of 43 States considered in 2023. The Committee primarily focused on the differentiated impact of climate change on women, emphasizing the need for gender-responsive strategies in adaptation and disaster risk reduction, as well as the increased vulnerability of rural, Indigenous, migrant, and refugee women. While less frequent than adaptation, the Committee also addressed mitigation policies, fossil fuel extraction—specifically criticizing Norway's expansion of oil and gas permits in the Arctic—and the necessity of women's participation in the UNFCCC loss and damage fund.

The document examines the World Bank's historical reluctance to integrate non-economic factors—specifically governance, civil society, and human rights—into its development mission. It argues that the Bank's adherence to a strict interpretation of its Articles of Agreement leads to an ad hoc approach to governance and a failure to protect civil and political rights. While noting progress in 'mainstreaming' public participation and the creation of the Inspection Panel, the author contends that these efforts are often superficial or undermined by an institutional 'culture of approval' that prioritizes loan volume over project quality.

The report highlights a significant gap between current EU agricultural emissions trends and the 2030 and 2050 climate targets. It identifies the absence of agriculture from the EU Taxonomy as a major barrier to defining sustainable activities. The author proposes repurposing the CAP, which accounts for approximately 30% of the EU budget, to fund a transition that requires an estimated annual public investment of EUR 155bn to reduce emissions by 53% by 2050. Key recommendations include adopting science-based sectoral criteria, reforming payment structures to reward green practices, and potentially extending the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) to agrifood products to prevent carbon leakage.

The document analyzes the legal mechanisms for accessing justice in environmental matters within the European Union, structured around the three pillars of the Aarhus Convention: access to environmental information, public participation in decision-making, and access to justice for breaches of environmental law. It details the scope of review, standing requirements for individuals and NGOs, and the standards of judicial scrutiny required to ensure effective legal protection. The guide specifically highlights the disparities in implementation across Member States and the restrictive nature of judicial review for decisions made by EU institutions.

The LIFE-A2J-EARL project focused on reducing the 'implementation deficit' of EU environmental law, which is estimated to cost approximately €50 billion annually. To address this, the project provided training, legal toolkits, and a comprehensive guide on access to justice to judiciary members, public authorities, and NGOs across nine EU countries. Key outputs included the development of national toolkits for eight countries and a 'Guide on Access to Justice in European Union Law'. Despite the COVID-19 pandemic, the project exceeded its training targets, reaching 2,090 participants through workshops, training sessions, and webinars, and attracting 285 attendees to a virtual international conference. The project's digital outreach included 163 website articles and a newsletter with over 700 subscribers. Socio-economic impacts identified include increased knowledge of the Aarhus Convention, enhanced cooperation between stakeholders, and the empowerment of NGOs to challenge decisions breaching environmental legislation.

A coalition of European civil society organisations (CSOs) is protesting a campaign of disinformation led by some Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) from the European People’s Party (EPP) and far-right groups. The attack specifically targets the legitimacy of public funding for environmental NGOs under the LIFE programme. The statement argues that independent CSOs are essential for a functioning democracy and a fully informed decision-making process, contrasting the modest public grants received by NGOs with the high spending of corporate lobbyists in Brussels.

The document critiques the European Commission's proposal to update the Aarhus Regulation, asserting it fails to meet international law standards set by the Aarhus Convention. It highlights gaps regarding 'national implementing measures', 'external effects' of acts, and the exclusion of state aid decisions. The authors propose specific legislative amendments to broaden the scope of internal review, remove cost barriers for NGOs, and explicitly link the Regulation to the Aarhus Convention to ensure effective judicial review of EU environmental decisions.

The document argues that the European Commission's proposal to amend the Aarhus Regulation contains loopholes that would leave the EU in breach of the Aarhus Convention. It specifically criticizes the exclusion of acts requiring national implementing measures and state aid decisions from internal review. The paper proposes amendments to broaden the scope of reviewable acts, ensure that costs of litigation are not prohibitive for NGOs, and explicitly link the Regulation to the EU's international obligations under the Aarhus Convention.

A collective statement from individuals across various faith traditions calling on the U.S. Congress to reject a proposed 'fossil fuel immunity bill'. The authors argue that such legislation would shield corporations from legal accountability for climate damages, violating the moral principle that those who cause harm must be held responsible. They contend that the bill would block 'polluter pays' laws and shift the financial burden of climate disasters from the responsible corporations to taxpayers and affected families.

The document is a collection of essays and interviews exploring the concept of borders in Europe. It argues that while the Schengen Agreement created a symbolic and practical 'common home' for Europeans, the refugee crisis has triggered a return to national borders and 'cognitive barriers.' Contributors discuss the failure of the Dublin Regulation, the need for a common European asylum system, and the potential for 'borderless solidarity.' The volume also extends the analysis of borders to the maritime domain, arguing for the ocean to be treated as a 'global nation' or common good to prevent resource exploitation and conflict.

The report identifies a complex threat landscape for the 2025 Czech elections, where foreign actors—primarily Russia and China—exploit domestic polarization and economic grievances. Key risks include the use of AI-generated deepfakes, the proliferation of pro-Kremlin Telegram networks, and narratives targeting the legitimacy of the new postal voting system. While Czechia's decentralized electoral infrastructure is considered resilient, the report highlights critical gaps in regulatory strength, specifically the delayed implementation of the EU Digital Services Act (DSA) and inadequate oversight of third-party campaign financing.

The Strategies of Resistance Data Project (SRDP) provides a global dataset of 1,124 organizations involved in self-determination disputes between 1960 and 2005. Unlike previous datasets that focus on mass campaigns or violent actors, SRDP uses the organization as the unit of analysis to track tactical shifts. Findings indicate that nonviolent tactics are more common than violence in these movements, and organizations are more likely to switch from violence to nonviolence than vice versa.

The author examines the post-communist trajectories of Central and Southeastern Europe, arguing that the collapse of communism was foreseeable and constituted a comprehensive revolution. The text analyzes debates over whether the process was a 'transition' or 'transformation' and identifies key determinants of democratic consolidation, such as the absence of war, the role of the European Union, and educational attainment. It specifically refutes the 'ancient hatreds' myth regarding the Yugoslav meltdown, attributing the conflict instead to system illegitimacy, economic decay, and the agency of leaders like Slobodan Milošević.