Search Climate Insights Directory

A statement from a coalition of US, EU, and international organizations expressing deep concerns regarding proposed 'regulatory cooperation' under the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). The signatories argue that these mechanisms could prioritize trade interests over public health and environmental protections, potentially creating a 'chilling effect' on the development of new laws.

Carroll Muffett of the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) argues that industry proposals for stricter data protection and confidential business information (CBI) standards within the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) negotiations would hinder public health, consumer safety, and environmental protections by limiting access to critical information.

This report provides an overview of nanomaterials, their impacts on health and the environment, the current market for nanoproducts, and regulatory initiatives for their management, with a specific focus on the Global South.

A joint statement by several European environmental and consumer organizations calling for a comprehensive revision of the EU's legal framework to address the specific risks of nanomaterials, arguing that current REACH and CLP regulations fail to account for the distinct properties of nanoforms compared to bulk substances.

This statement by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) and ClientEarth critiques a response from the American Chemistry Council (ACC) regarding industry proposals for chemicals regulation within the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership Agreement (TTIP). The authors argue that the industry's proposals seek to undermine the implementation of existing EU and US chemical laws and reflect a pattern of delaying protective regulations.

This 2014 submission from a coalition of civil society organizations provides critical feedback to the Green Climate Fund (GCF) on its proposed accreditation system, fiduciary standards, and environmental, social, and gender safeguards. The authors argue that the current framework relies too heavily on the IFC Performance Standards, which they claim do not represent international best practice, and that safeguards lack the detail and mandatory rigor applied to fiduciary standards. The submission advocates for a "do no harm" approach, the adoption of an exclusion list for high-risk activities, and a differentiated accreditation process based on the risk level of proposed projects.

A statement delivered by Dr. Marcos A. Orellana of the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) and other organizations to the United Nations Human Rights Council supporting the second report of the Independent Expert on Human Rights and the Environment, Professor John Knox.

This informational brochure examines the development of nanotechnology in the Asia-Pacific region, noting that while countries like China, Japan, and South Korea have invested heavily in the sector, there is a critical lack of funding for evaluating health and environmental risks. Consequently, nanoproducts are entering the market unregulated and unlabeled, despite the technology's promotion as a solution for regional challenges such as energy diversification and disease treatment.

A critique of the ACC-CEFIC proposal for chemical regulatory cooperation under TTIP, arguing that the industry seeks to lower safety standards, bypass democratic oversight, and delay the regulation of toxic substances by exploiting differences between EU and US laws.

This report by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) critiques a joint proposal by the American Chemistry Council (ACC) and the European Chemical Industry Council (CEFIC) regarding regulatory cooperation on chemicals within the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). CIEL argues that the industry's proposals are designed to exploit regulatory differences between the US and EU to slow the regulation of toxic chemicals, bypass democratic processes, and prioritize commercial interests over public health and environmental safety.

This report by the Center for International Environmental Law argues that trade negotiations between the European Union and the United States (TTIP or TAFTA) threaten to undermine public health protections by hindering the regulation of toxic chemicals.

This report by the Center for International Environmental Law argues that trade negotiations between the European Union and the United States (TTIP or TaFTA) threaten to undermine chemical safety regulations by weakening the EU's stronger policies and hindering improvements to the US federal system.

This urgent appeal, submitted by several NGOs to United Nations Special Rapporteurs, alleges that the Barro Blanco hydroelectric dam project in western Panama is causing imminent forced evictions of indigenous Ngöbe families. The document argues that the State of Panama, as well as financing states Germany and the Netherlands and member states of the Central American Bank for Economic Integration (CABEI), are violating international human rights law by failing to obtain free, prior, and informed consent and by threatening the Ngöbe's rights to housing, food, water, culture, and education.

This report by the Center for International Environmental Law argues that EU-US trade negotiations threaten to undermine the European Union's stronger chemical regulation policies and hinder improvements to the flawed US federal chemical management system.

A joint statement by seven civil society organisations, including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, criticising the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development's (EBRD) draft Environment and Social Policy for weakening human rights safeguards, reducing transparency, and failing to implement adequate human rights due diligence.

This briefing paper by the Center for International Environmental Law analyzes human rights issues addressed during the COP19 negotiations in Warsaw, Poland, focusing on ambition, the Clean Development Mechanism, gender, the Green Climate Fund, public participation, and REDD+.

A statement from a coalition of international organizations addressed to the United States Trade Representative and the European Commission, opposing the inclusion of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) in the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP).

The 'Human Rights for All Post-2015' joint statement, published on December 10, 2013, by the Center for International Environmental Law and supported by over 300 organizations, calls for the successor to the Millennium Development Goals to be anchored in human rights. It advocates for a shift from a 'model of charity to one of justice,' emphasizing accountability for governments, businesses, and international institutions to ensure sustainable, inclusive, and just development.

A statement by various organizations opposing the inclusion of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) in the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), citing the risk to public interest and environmental policies.

This report by the Center for International Environmental Law provides an overview of cases from 2013 involving the harassment, criminalization, and killing of land and environmental rights defenders globally. It highlights the systemic risks faced by individuals opposing extractive industries, large-scale development projects, and land grabbing, noting that these defenders are often targeted by both state forces and non-state actors, including corporations.