Search Climate Insights Directory

The United States is urged to lead negotiations for a comprehensive global treaty to end plastic pollution, with the Break Free From Plastic Pollution Act proposed as a model for national action plans. Following a February 2022 consensus by over 175 UN Member Nations, negotiations are scheduled to proceed through 2024, with adoption and signing expected in 2025.

The document advocates for a shift from voluntary agreements to mandatory EU regulations to tackle microplastic pollution. It emphasizes reducing virgin plastic production and implementing sector-specific bans and design requirements for pellets, textiles, tyres, and agriculture. The authors argue that addressing both macro and microplastics is essential, as the degradation of larger plastics continues to fuel microplastic pollution.

The document details the significant ESG risks of the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP), including threats to biodiversity, human rights violations, and climate incompatibility. It highlights the financial and reputational risks for Japanese banks, particularly SMBC, and compares their policies with peers like Mizuho and MUFG.

This report summary highlights the environmental and health risks of intentionally adding microplastics to synthetic fertilizers and pesticides in industrial agriculture. It asserts that this practice introduces pollutants directly into soil and food supplies, compounding the toxicity of agrochemicals, and calls for a total ban on the production and use of plastic-coated agrochemicals.

This briefing by the Center for International Environmental Law provides a roadmap and initial reflections on the May 6, 2022, final report issued by the Philippines Commission on Human Rights (CHR) following a seven-year National Inquiry on Climate Change.

The Philippines Commission on Human Rights (CHR) concluded a seven-year inquiry finding that 47 'Carbon Majors' companies contributed significantly to global emissions and engaged in 'willful obfuscation' of climate science despite knowing the risks since at least 1965. The report details severe human rights impacts in the Philippines, including threats to the rights to life, health, food security, and water, disproportionately affecting vulnerable groups such as women, children, and Indigenous Peoples. The CHR asserts that these companies, and the financial institutions that fund them, have a responsibility to respect human rights and provide remediation for climate-driven harms. It recommends that states implement punitive laws for environmental harm, put a price on pollution, and transition to renewable energy by 2030 to meet the 1.5°C limit.

The document provides a side-by-side comparison of the proposed rules of procedure for negotiating a global plastics treaty against the template provided by the Minamata Convention. It highlights key additions in the plastics draft, such as provisions for online participation and gender balance, while raising concerns regarding the classification of business entities as NGOs and the potential barriers to accreditation for certain civil society groups.

The testimony asserts that CCUS is not a viable climate solution, citing its failure to meet capture targets, high costs compared to renewables, and the risk of increasing lifecycle emissions. It highlights that most captured carbon is used for Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR), which produces more CO2 than it captures. The author warns of significant safety risks from CO2 pipelines and the environmental dangers of offshore storage in the Gulf of Mexico, where legacy oil and gas wells increase the likelihood of leaks and ocean acidification.

The analysis by CIEL and the Heinrich Boell Foundation argues that the IPCC Working Group III Summary for Policymakers obscures warnings about the dangers of 'overshoot' and reliance on speculative technologies. It asserts that a rapid, equitable fossil fuel phaseout is the only certain path to avoid irreversible harm, whereas current modeled pathways often assume continued fossil fuel use and rely on unproven carbon removal methods due to political pressure from fossil fuel-producing nations.

The briefing contends that the IPCC's mitigation pathways are skewed by economic assumptions in integrated assessment models (IAMs) and political pressures during the Summary for Policymakers (SPM) negotiation process. It argues that avoiding a 1.5°C overshoot is imperative to prevent irreversible harm and that the most feasible, cost-effective path is a rapid phaseout of fossil fuels combined with scaling renewables and reducing energy demand. The document warns that reliance on CCS, BECCS, and DACCS is a dangerous gamble, as these technologies are unproven at scale, costly, and may prolong fossil fuel use while threatening food security and biodiversity.

The International Finance Corporation's (IFC) 2020 Green Equity Approach (GEA) aims to end equity investments in financial institutions lacking a plan to phase out coal by 2030. However, the Center for International Environmental Law argues the GEA is too narrow and contains loopholes that allow continued fossil fuel expansion. The document proposes ten essentials for reform, including ending support for new oil and gas projects, scaling up sustainable renewable energy, addressing past harms from fossil fuel projects, and integrating gender equality and rights-based approaches to achieve alignment with the Paris Agreement.

The document advocates for development finance institutions (DFIs) to establish robust frameworks for providing remedy to harmed persons and communities by drawing on international human rights law. It emphasizes the distinction between procedural and substantive remedy, providing a typology of remedies used by international bodies to guide DFIs in addressing harms occurring within their financed projects.

The statement highlights the intensifying toxification of Earth and the creation of 'sacrifice zones' that disproportionately impact children and future generations. It references three United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA) resolutions: the establishment of an Intergovernmental Panel on Chemicals, waste and pollution prevention; the sound management of chemicals and waste (including updating science on endocrine disrupting chemicals); and the mandate for a legally binding instrument on the full life cycle of plastics. The authors call for the phase-out of toxic additives, specifically endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs), and the active participation of youth in treaty negotiations.

The submission contends that ISDS mechanisms allow fossil fuel companies to shift the financial risk of stranded assets onto taxpayers and create a 'regulatory chill' that discourages governments from implementing emissions-reduction policies. It highlights that the fossil fuel industry is the most litigious sector in ISDS, accounting for nearly 20% of cases. The authors argue that the perceived benefits of investment agreements in attracting renewable energy are unproven, while the costs—including massive compensation awards—are high. To align investment law with the Paris Agreement, the document recommends the OECD explore multilateral termination of treaties, the removal of protections for carbon-intensive investments, and the creation of 'climate carve-outs' to exempt climate-related measures from arbitration.

The Center for International Environmental Law and Pesticide Action Network calls for the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) to end its strategic partnership with CropLife International, arguing that the alliance creates conflicts of interest and allows agrochemical companies to influence international policymaking. The statement highlights that 44% of the global farm workforce is poisoned by pesticides and that industrial agriculture undermines human rights and biodiversity. It supports the Special Rapporteur's recommendation to rescind the agreement and advocates for a transition toward people-led agroecology.

The document examines the IPCC Working Group II report, emphasizing that temperature overshoot beyond 1.5°C leads to permanent ecological and human loss. It critiques the reliance on carbon dioxide removal (CDR) and solar radiation modification (SRM) as ineffective and hazardous alternatives to immediate emissions reductions. Finally, it asserts that climate adaptation and mitigation must be grounded in social justice, equity, and Indigenous knowledge to be effective.

CIEL condemns Russia's military action in Ukraine as a violation of international law and human rights, while highlighting how oil and natural gas fuel the crisis and are used as economic weapons.

The document is an open letter from a coalition of civil society organisations to the European Commission criticizing the revision process of the "nanomaterial" definition. The authors argue that the 2021 online consultation was rushed and lacked clarity, potentially leading to a definition that excludes substances covered by the 2011 recommendation. They highlight risks such as the under-registration of nanomaterials in REACH and the presence of unauthorised nanomaterials in consumer products. The signatories demand that the Commission justify modifications with real-world examples, conduct transparent public Q&A sessions, and align the definition with the latest scientific evidence, citing EFSA guidance on particle size thresholds.

The report analyzes COP26 outcomes, noting that while some progress was made in referencing human rights within Article 6 rules and the CTCN Advisory Board, overall results were marred by exclusionary participation modalities and a failure to effectively confront the fossil fuel industry. It highlights significant gaps in loss and damage finance, the removal of human rights language from the Action for Climate Empowerment (ACE) work program, and superficial progress on gender-responsive climate action. The document concludes by outlining critical 2022 milestones, including the first Global Stocktake and the revision of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), as key opportunities to embed human rights and climate justice.

The document explains the Global Stocktake (GST) as the Paris Agreement's "ratchet mechanism" to assess collective progress on mitigation, adaptation, and finance. It argues that for climate action to be effective, it must be guided by human rights, including the rights of Indigenous Peoples, gender equality, and intergenerational equity. The briefing details the GST's three-phase structure—information collection, technical assessment, and consideration of outputs—concluding at COP28 in November 2023. It provides a framework for stakeholders to align their submissions with the GST's guiding questions to address critical gaps such as fossil fuel phase-out, land tenure rights, and loss and damage.