Search Climate Insights Directory

The briefing proposes a new global Convention on Plastic Pollution to address the failure of existing fragmented governance to manage the 335 million tonnes of plastic produced annually. It outlines four pillars of action: coordination with existing treaties, pollution prevention through production caps and market restrictions, financial support for developing countries, and technical knowledge exchange. The proposed institutional architecture includes a Conference of the Parties, a secretariat hosted by UN Environment, and a Multilateral Fund modeled after the Montreal Protocol.

CIEL welcomes the IFC's official position against retaliation—including threats, intimidation, harassment, or violence—by IFC clients against those voicing opinions on projects. CIEL emphasizes the importance of integrating retaliation risks into contextual risk screening procedures to prevent harm and urges the IFC to compel its clients and co-financing partners to adopt similar zero-tolerance commitments.

The statement advocates for the UN General Assembly to recognize the right to a healthy and sustainable environment, noting that while over 100 national constitutions and various regional treaties already protect this right, the lack of global UN recognition creates a gap in the human rights protection regime. It asserts that such recognition would prioritize the prevention of environmental degradation and strengthen legal remedies against corporate and public policy failures.

CIEL supports the New York Attorney General's lawsuit against ExxonMobil, asserting that the company misled investors about the financial and regulatory risks climate change poses to its assets and operations. The statement highlights that the lawsuit, based on three years of investigation, implicates high-level executives, including former CEO Rex Tillerson, and signals an increase in climate-related litigation against fossil fuel companies.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) emphasizes that the IPCC Special Report on 1.5C confirms the necessity of limiting global warming to 1.5C to avoid irreversible impacts on ecosystems and human communities. CIEL argues that the difference between 1.5C and 2C of warming will be measured in human lives and rights, particularly for marginalized populations. To achieve the 1.5C goal, CIEL highlights the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by nearly half by 2030 and reach net zero carbon emissions by 2050 through a complete economic transformation away from fossil fuels. Furthermore, CIEL rejects 'overshoot and return' scenarios that rely on hypothetical carbon dioxide removal, labeling such strategies as dangerous and immoral.

The Escazú Agreement is a legally binding regional agreement for Latin America and the Caribbean that codifies access rights to information, participation, and justice in environmental matters. It is the first such instrument to mandate that States protect environmental and human rights defenders from retaliation. The author argues that immediate ratification is urgent due to the rising number of attacks on defenders in the region.

CIEL argues that IDB Invest's Access to Information Policy must be rooted in democratic principles and international law to protect affected communities and environmental defenders. Key recommendations include eliminating fees for information requests, extending the disclosure window for environmental and social documents to 120 days before Board approval, and ensuring the policy aligns with the Escazú Agreement. CIEL also emphasizes the need for robust protections for indigenous peoples' free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) and the safety of environmental human rights defenders in the region.

The Trump Administration's Safe Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule loosens carbon emissions standards for passenger cars and light trucks for 2021-2026 and rolls back the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) program. The author contends that these rules are detrimental to human health and the climate, and will likely fail to stop the global transition to a clean economy as international markets for combustion vehicles shrink and countries like Britain, France, Norway, India, and China move toward banning new gasoline and diesel vehicles by 2030 or 2040.

The document provides specific wording suggestions to ensure that the Paris Agreement's rights-based vision is reflected in the guidelines for Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), the Transparency Framework, the Global Stocktake, and Article 6 mechanisms. It emphasizes that these guidelines should promote the integration of human rights, gender equality, and indigenous rights without creating new obligations for Parties or new conditionalities for climate finance.

The 2018 Talanoa Dialogue, facilitated by the Fijian and Polish presidencies, aims to raise climate ambition by taking stock of progress toward the Paris Agreement and informing 2020 Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). The process uses a non-adversarial, story-based methodology to foster consensus. NHRIs and civil society are encouraged to provide actionable, positive inputs that link climate action to human rights, including gender equality, indigenous peoples' rights, and just transitions. The dialogue consists of preparatory phases (online submissions and in-session dialogues) and a final political phase at COP-24 in Katowice, Poland.

The brief supports petitioners in Jam v. International Finance Corporation, contending that applying a restrictive theory of immunity under the IOIA would enhance the accountability of international organizations and complement existing non-judicial accountability mechanisms without causing a flood of litigation.

CIEL welcomes the release of three UNEP reports detailing worldwide initiatives to identify endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs), scientific knowledge of their effects, and existing regulatory frameworks. The statement notes that EDCs are found in a wide range of daily products and that there is a significant lack of explicit regulatory frameworks to address them, particularly in developing countries.

CIEL asserts that the US withdrawal from the UN Human Rights Council signals a retreat from the international community and an attempt to avoid scrutiny for its own human rights failures. The organization suggests that the Council should use this departure to advance issues previously obstructed by the US, specifically transnational corporate accountability and the human rights impacts of climate change.

The document is a formal condemnation of the May 2, 2018, killing of Hugo Albeiro George Pérez and Domar Egidio Zapata George in Puerto Valdivia, Antioquia. The victims were associated with Movimiento Ríos Vivos and the Asociación de Víctimas y Afectados por Megaproyectos (ASVAM) El Aro, opposing the Hidroituango dam on the Cauca River. The signatories call for an expedited investigation by the Office of the Attorney General of Colombia and urge the government to protect environmental defenders and investigate the social and environmental impacts of the dam project, which is financed by IDB Invest.

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court rejected ExxonMobil's attempt to block Attorney General Maura Healey from obtaining records to investigate if the company concealed knowledge about fossil fuels and climate change. The court ruled that Exxon's franchise agreements do not shield it from such investigations and affirmed the Attorney General's authority to use consumer protection statutes to investigate climate denial, potentially setting a precedent for similar litigation in other states with comparable laws.

The document argues that public participation and access to information are essential for the effective implementation of the Paris Agreement, contributing to higher ambition and resilience. It outlines specific entry points for enhancing these procedural rights across several UNFCCC agenda items, including Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), Adaptation Communications, the Transparency Framework, the Global Stocktake, and Article 6 mechanisms. It also highlights the importance of regional frameworks like the Aarhus and Escazú Conventions and calls for improved engagement of observer organizations and the operationalization of the Local Communities and Indigenous Peoples Platform.

The report 'A Crack in the Shell' by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) uses internal documents to demonstrate that Royal Dutch Shell had early and urgent notice of climate risks associated with fossil fuels. It highlights a dichotomy between Shell's internal scientific understanding—which acknowledged the link between CO2 and global warming as early as the 1950s and 60s—and its public efforts to sow doubt through industry groups like the Global Climate Coalition and the American Petroleum Institute. The document further argues that Shell continues this pattern by promoting the 'Sky Scenario' to appear aligned with the Paris Agreement while continuing to invest in fossil fuel expansion, including in the Arctic.

The Achmea ruling establishes that ISDS provisions are incompatible with EU law when they sideline domestic courts and undermine the EU's judicial system. While the ruling explicitly applies to bilateral investment treaties (BITs) between EU Member States, the briefing argues that the same reasoning likely renders agreements with third countries impermissible if the tribunals are not part of the EU judiciary, may interpret EU law, and lack full judicial review by Member State courts. This creates significant legal uncertainty, potentially making awards unenforceable and hindering the negotiation of new treaties containing investment arbitration.

This document is a cover letter accompanying a Joint Summary of Amicus Curiae Briefs submitted to the Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines. The submission supports petitioners Greenpeace Southeast Asia et al. in a national inquiry into the impact of climate change on the human rights of the Filipino people, specifically focusing on the responsibility of 'Carbon Majors' companies for human rights violations.

The document argues that the Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines has the jurisdiction to investigate 'Carbon Majors'—major fossil fuel and cement producers—for their role in climate change. It asserts that these companies contributed significantly to global warming despite knowing the risks, thereby violating fundamental human rights including the rights to life, health, food, and water. The amici argue that under the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the 'Polluter Pays' principle, these corporations are accountable for the resulting damages. The text also outlines state obligations under international law and the Public Trust Doctrine to protect citizens from environmental harm and to seek natural resource damages for atmospheric recovery.