Search Climate Insights Directory

The report documents various environmental and social justice campaigns led by Friends of the Earth (FoE) member groups across the globe. Key achievements include the 2008 UK Climate Change Act, a ban on open-pit metal mining in Costa Rica (2010), and the cessation of commercial whaling in Spain (1985). The document also details ongoing resistance against coal-fired power plants in Germany and Scotland, gas flaring in Nigeria, and the impact of large-scale dams in Mozambique, South Korea, and the Philippines. It emphasizes a strategy of combining grassroots mobilization, legal challenges, and international solidarity to combat corporate globalization and protect indigenous and community rights.

The report analyzes the surge in foreign acquisitions and long-term leases of agricultural land and water, driven by food and energy security concerns and the 2008 food crisis. It highlights a critical lack of transparency and public contracts, which obscures the impact on local communities. The authors argue that a complex interplay between national laws, investment contracts, and International Investment Agreements (IIAs) often prioritizes foreign investor protections over the rights of local users and the regulatory autonomy of host states, potentially hindering sustainable development and public health measures.

The document analyzes four studies to determine that developing countries have pledged more absolute mitigation than developed countries, though global pledges remain insufficient to limit warming to 2°C. It argues that developed countries must increase their ambition and tighten accounting rules to reflect their greater historical responsibility and financial capacity.

The research finds that while the CDM successfully drove N2O abatement efficiencies to 98-100%, it created significant competitive advantages for registered plants. This led to carbon leakage during 2008 and 2009, where production shifted from plants in industrialized countries or those with existing abatement to CDM plants. The authors estimate that approximately 13.5 MtCO2e of issued CERs for 2008 and 2009 did not represent real emission reductions. To mitigate this, the paper recommends implementing ambitious baseline emission benchmarks in the CDM methodology.

The paper addresses the 'windfall' emissions permits (AAUs) held by countries in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) and the Former Soviet Union (FSU), which threaten the environmental integrity of the Kyoto Protocol. It analyzes the conflicting positions of Russia and the EU, noting that Russia views its surplus as a hedge against future emissions growth. To resolve this, the authors propose creating a non-tradable strategic compliance reserve for first-period surpluses and implementing 'optimized trading' for second-period over-allocations. This approach aims to maintain carbon market prices and recognize the 'early action' of transition economies while preventing the market saturation that would occur if all surpluses were traded.

The paper examines the likely balance of demand and supply for carbon units in 2020, analyzing the 'emissions anyway' projections for major developed nations against their pledges. It concludes that while a theoretical demand gap exists, actual market demand for Certified Emission Reductions (CERs) from the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) may be low due to policy preferences for sectoral crediting in the US and EU, and a likely oversupply of CERs. The author warns that this suggests a potentially low-value international carbon market, which could hinder global efforts to peak emissions by 2020.

The document examines how global warming threatens fundamental human rights—including the rights to food, water, health, and housing—and explores the legal frameworks available for redress. It reviews international environmental law, the outcomes of the 2009 Copenhagen Conference, and existing jurisprudence from human rights tribunals. The authors argue that climate-related harms are not 'new territory' for litigation but fit within established legal principles. The paper specifically evaluates the CESCR's current work and proposes eleven recommendations to better anchor climate change in the Committee's state reporting, general comments, and the use of its Optional Protocol for individual and inter-state complaints.

The report argues that while precise surgical assessment of comparability is currently impossible, a common set of core indicators is necessary to define fairness and support domestic and international negotiations. It proposes an 'apples with apples' anchoring point based on economy-wide emissions excluding LULUCF and introduces 'trajectory indicators' to align 2020 targets with 2050 goals. The analysis categorizes Annex I Parties into 'New World' economies, 'Old OECD economies', and 'Transition economies' based on emissions, population, and GDP trends. Finally, it emphasizes the need for harmonized economic modelling to provide a rational basis for cost-comparability, especially following the global financial crisis.

The document examines Canada's position as a major energy producer and the risks associated with its fragmented, province-led energy approach. It highlights the tension between Canada's traditional energy exports—particularly oil sands—and the global shift toward clean energy. The authors argue that a national strategy is essential to meet climate goals, protect trade interests (especially with the U.S.), and establish global leadership in technologies like carbon capture and storage (CCS). It also assesses the current 'patchwork' of international energy governance, including the roles of the IEA, IRENA, and trade agreements like NAFTA.

The paper examines the challenges of defining 'comparable effort' for Annex I Parties, arguing that a simple set of transparent indicators is more conducive to political agreement than complex fairness models. It analyzes proposed 2020 targets against emissions, population, and GDP data, introducing 'trajectory indicators' to assess the consistency of short-term targets with 2050 goals. The authors highlight that Annex I countries fall into three distinct economic groups—'New World' economies, 'Old OECD' economies, and 'Transition economies'—which must be recognized for any target-setting to be feasible. Finally, the document reviews cost-based indicators, concluding that current model results are too inconsistent and outdated, particularly following the global financial crisis, to provide a reliable basis for cost-comparability without further harmonization.

The paper investigates whether removing tariffs on environmental goods can significantly reduce GHG emissions. It concludes that the 'Friends of the EGS' list of 153 goods would only have a material impact through renewable energy technologies, but that tariff removal alone is insufficient to drive significant uptake without accompanying policies like feed-in tariffs. The author suggests that for trade liberalization to be effective, lists must be based on objective environmental needs rather than commercial interests and must be supported by capacity-building measures in developing countries.

The report examines how agricultural fires in the Northern Hemisphere, particularly in Russia, Kazakhstan, and China, emit black carbon (soot) that travels to the Arctic. This soot reduces the albedo of snow and ice, accelerating melting and contributing to Arctic warming. The document argues that while these fires are smaller than forest fires, their smoldering nature produces higher concentrations of black carbon. It identifies Russia as the dominant springtime emitter and suggests mitigation strategies including shifting burning seasons, implementing biochar technology, and improving international fire management coordination.

The document examines the functioning of the Kyoto Protocol's market mechanisms—the International Emissions Trading (IET), Joint Implementation (JI), and the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM)—and explores options for their expansion or replacement in a post-2012 framework. It discusses new proposals such as the Market Mechanism for Sustainable Development (MMSD), REDD, and sectoral CDM, while highlighting challenges regarding additionality, environmental integrity, and the equitable distribution of projects in developing countries.

The report projects emissions for the EU, Japan, and other Annex I countries up to 2012 and 2020. It finds that while the EU ETS is likely to have a surplus of allowances up to 2012 at a price of €20/tCO2, the EU-15 and Japan will face overall deficits relative to their Kyoto targets. Conversely, Russia, Ukraine, and new EU member states are projected to have significant emission surpluses. Looking toward 2020, the EU ETS is expected to enter a deficit unless efficiency and renewables targets are met, suggesting a rise in carbon prices post-2012.

The study finds that new ICTs, particularly internet access, are positively associated with government respect for human rights, whereas older technologies such as television and landline telephones are negatively associated with them. Using a large-N dataset, the authors argue that the internet empowers civil society and raises the costs of state repression, whereas older mass media can be more easily captured by states for control and demobilization. The results suggest that internet access can leverage the effects of autocratic regimes upward, improving human rights outcomes even in non-democratic contexts.

The report finds that Bilateral Finance Institutions (BFIs) play a major role in global climate finance, with four participating institutions (AFD, JICA, KfW, and EIB) collectively disbursing €8.09 billion in 2008. The majority of this funding (85%) is delivered as Official Development Assistance (ODA), with a heavy concentration on mitigation (72%) and the energy sector. Geographically, Asia and Oceania receive the largest share of finance. The document highlights a significant gap in adaptation funding, which is heavily concentrated in the water sector, and calls for better definitions of adaptation finance and increased coordination among BFIs to enhance effectiveness.

The report analyzes Green Investment Schemes (GIS) as a hybrid carbon finance mechanism in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) that 'greens' surplus Assigned Amount Units (AAUs) by earmarking sales revenues for domestic climate mitigation. It argues that GIS can overcome the failures of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and Joint Implementation (JI)—particularly in energy efficiency and small-scale projects—by utilizing more flexible, programmatic architectures and simplified monitoring and verification (M&V). The report identifies the thermal retrofitting of old building stock as a high-priority target area due to its long-term climate impact and significant social co-benefits. It provides specific architectural recommendations, such as the use of sectoral baselines, post-2012 crediting periods, and the dominance of 'hard greening' to ensure environmental integrity.

The report assesses Green Investment Schemes (GIS) as a carbon finance mechanism to unlock surplus Assigned Amount Units (AAUs) in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). It argues that GIS can overcome the failures of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and Joint Implementation (JI) by targeting high-priority, long-term mitigation areas such as building energy efficiency and bioenergy. The authors recommend using programmatic approaches, simplified monitoring and verification (M&V), and extending crediting periods beyond 2012 to ensure the bankability of infrastructure projects. The report estimates the potential value of transacted AAUs at approximately €9 billion and highlights the importance of additionality to maintain environmental integrity.

The report assesses Green Investment Schemes (GIS) as a hybrid carbon finance mechanism in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) that combines the sale of Assigned Amount Units (AAUs) with domestic greening activities. It argues that GIS can address mitigation priorities that other mechanisms, such as Joint Implementation (JI) and the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), have failed to deliver, particularly in building energy efficiency and small-scale bioenergy. The authors emphasize that because the window for these transactions closes in 2012, GIS should prioritize long-term, low-carbon infrastructure and high-additionality projects rather than lowest-cost measures. Key recommendations include adopting simplified monitoring and verification (M&V) processes, allowing post-2012 fund disbursement, and utilizing a programmatic approach to reduce transaction costs for small-scale investments.

The report examines the Joint Implementation (JI) mechanism of the Kyoto Protocol, detailing its two operational tracks and comparing it to the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). It highlights significant delays in implementation, particularly in Russia and Ukraine, and the restrictive impact of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) on projects in Central and Eastern Europe. The document also analyzes the role of Green Investment Schemes (GIS) as an alternative to JI and concludes that the mechanism's late start and short crediting period (ending in 2012) threaten its overall viability unless post-2012 certainty is established.