Search Climate Insights Directory

The Clean Air Task Force (CATF) has established a Land & Climate Program to address the complexities of land competition and its role as both a source and sink of greenhouse gas emissions. The program focuses on three pillars: Ecosystem-Based Carbon Removal, Climate-Beneficial Bioenergy, and Land-Smart Clean Energy Deployment. CATF intends to create a global hub of scholars and organizations to map land conflicts and develop solutions. While currently most active in the U.S., the program is expanding into Europe and focusing on forested areas in the Global South. To implement these strategies, CATF is seeking $2.5 million per year for the next three years.

The document advocates for the legal recognition of community-based property rights (CBPRs) in the Global South, arguing that such rights are distinct from Western individual property concepts and state-led decentralization. It posits that recognizing CBPRs—particularly for indigenous peoples—helps protect ancestral territories, prevents resource commodification, and fosters environmental justice. However, the text notes that property rights alone are insufficient for sustainable development and must be paired with technical assistance, credit programs, and strong procedural rights.

A coalition of health professionals, including the World Health Organization, advocates for a global Fossil Fuel Treaty to end the expansion of fossil fuel infrastructure and phase out existing production. The statement argues that burning fossil fuels causes millions of premature deaths via air pollution and drives a climate crisis that threatens healthcare systems, food security, and mental health. It emphasizes that these health burdens disproportionately affect the Global South, Indigenous peoples, and marginalized communities, and calls for a just transition supported by high-income countries.

A coalition of 624 global faith institutions argues that the continued expansion of fossil fuels threatens the 1.5°C goal of the Paris Agreement and disproportionately harms vulnerable populations. The signatories call for a binding global treaty to end the expansion of coal, oil, and gas production and to facilitate a global just transition to 100% renewable energy, emphasizing the moral imperative of stewardship and equity.

The document details the third pillar of the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative, focusing on a global just transition. It advocates for decentralized, people-centered renewable energy systems and the economic diversification of fossil-fuel-dependent nations. The text emphasizes that a successful transition requires wealthy nations to provide financial support and a 'fair share' of effort, while rejecting 'dangerous distractions' like carbon offsets and geoengineering. It calls for a fundamental shift from GDP-driven growth to 'well-being economies' to address the systemic root causes of the climate crisis.

The policy brief argues for a systematic intergovernmental mechanism to collect and review data on fossil fuel production to close the 'production gap'. It suggests a framework combining technical expert verification with political peer review, while allowing for differentiated reporting requirements based on a country's capacity or production share. The authors emphasize the need for capacity-building support for the Global South, formal roles for non-state actors to ensure accountability, and a staged approach to follow-up that moves from facilitative learning to goal-oriented accountability.

The statement asserts that a truly Feminist Foreign Policy (FFP) requires the phase-out of fossil fuels to dismantle exploitative power structures. It promotes the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty as a justice-centered mechanism to complement the Paris Agreement by addressing fossil fuel supply. The document links the treaty to six FFP values: intersectionality, empathetic reflexivity, meaningful leadership, accountability, active peace commitment, and decolonial justice. It recommends that nations join the treaty discussions, participate in the First International Conference for the Phase-Out of Fossil Fuels in Colombia in April 2026, and implement the July 2025 International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion on climate harm.

A technical report by a coalition of climate justice organizations arguing that "net zero" targets are used by governments and polluting corporations to mask inaction, avoid responsibility, and potentially increase fossil fuel emissions through the use of distant goals and unproven technologies.

The statement marks the tenth anniversary of the 2013 Rana Plaza collapse in Bangladesh, which killed 1,138 people, 80% of whom were women. It argues that the disaster exemplifies the harm caused by transnational fast fashion companies pursuing profit at the expense of working-class, indigenous, and peasant women in the Global South. The author calls for binding norms to force companies to respect human rights and a shift toward an economic system that prioritizes people and life over profit.

A joint technical briefing by several climate justice organisations arguing that 'net zero' targets are used by governments and corporations to disguise climate inaction, greenwash business-as-usual, and shift the burden of carbon sequestration to the global South.

This report argues that European transnational corporations frequently commit human rights and environmental violations globally while avoiding accountability, a process facilitated by EU trade, investment, and carbon permit policies that outsource negative impacts to the Global South.

This technical briefing, produced by a coalition of climate justice organizations including Friends of the Earth International and Action Aid, argues that 'net zero' targets are used by governments and polluting companies to mask political inaction and justify continued fossil fuel extraction.

The report criticizes COVAX as a commercial-style mechanism that prioritizes corporate interests and market stability over human rights and equitable vaccine distribution. It contends that the multi-stakeholder governance model used by COVAX obscures accountability, sidelines governments and the WHO, and risks allowing corporate interests to dictate global health decisions for the Global South.

The report criticizes COVAX as a multistakeholder initiative that functions more like a merchant bank than a humanitarian effort, arguing that it marginalizes the World Health Organization (WHO) and lacks public accountability. It contends that the mechanism is designed to protect the global pharmaceutical market and business interests rather than ensuring equitable, low-cost vaccine access for developing countries.

The fact sheet contrasts agroecology with 'nature based solutions' (NBS), asserting that NBS serves as a tool for agribusinesses and the finance sector to commodify nature and carbon. It claims that NBS focuses on narrow carbon sequestration metrics and specific practices like no-till farming to preserve corporate control, whereas agroecology seeks systemic change, food sovereignty, and land redistribution. The document warns that NBS integrates nature into corporate profit chains and provides carbon credits that allow fossil fuel corporations to pursue 'net zero' instead of real zero emissions.

The fact sheet critiques the trend of presenting agroecology as a subset of 'nature-based solutions' (NbS), asserting that this framing serves the interests of fossil fuel companies, agribusiness, and the financial sector. It argues that while agroecology seeks systemic change and social justice, NbS focuses narrowly on carbon capture to create new financial assets and 'green' credentials for industrial actors. The document highlights the incompatibility between the emancipatory goals of agroecology and the market-driven approach of NbS, which it claims facilitates land displacement and the continuation of destructive business models.

Friends of the Earth International argues that the proposed EU corporate sustainability due diligence legislation must move beyond procedural requirements to establish substantive obligations and strict liability for companies. The document asserts that EU law should complement a legally binding UN instrument to end corporate impunity, ensuring that parent companies are held administratively, civilly, and criminally liable for damages caused by their subsidiaries and value chains globally. Key demands include the inversion of the burden of proof, the recognition of the right to free, prior and informed consent for affected communities, and the provision of effective legal remedies in EU courts for victims, including those in the Global South.

The document argues that the 'COVID crisis' consists of three layers: a viral reality, a systemic crisis rooted in existing inequalities, and a 'power crisis' driven by the strategic responses of powerful actors. It contends that multistakeholderism (MSism)—exemplified by ACT-A and COVAX—serves as a tool for the Global North to maintain corporate profits and the rules of globalisation while bypassing the accountability of the UN system. The author identifies four responses by the powerful: expanding markets, protecting globalisation, a passive 'stand-back' approach that allows mass death in the Global South, and limited mitigation. The report concludes with recommendations to treat health as a global public good and return governance to multilateral frameworks.

The Global Resilience Partnership (GRP) aims to support 15 million people and leverage $100 million for resilience initiatives by 2030. Its strategy focuses on transforming food and financial systems, scaling collaborations between formal and informal stakeholders, and embedding resilience within the private sector. Short-term targets for 2024-2027 include leveraging US$25 million, supporting five million people, and establishing 100 urban labs in informal settlements led by women's collectives.

The Global Resilience Partnership conducted a survey of 88 stakeholders to identify barriers to virtual engagement for grassroots and community-based organisations (CBOs). The findings highlight four primary challenges: lack of access to stable internet and hardware, platform unfamiliarity, language and time zone barriers, and inequitable power dynamics in agenda-setting. To address these, the report recommends financing data and equipment, using consistent platforms like Zoom, offering staggered meeting times, and co-creating agendas with local partners. It also identifies key best practices for successful engagement, including timely preparatory materials, inclusive agendas, and interactive formats.