Search Climate Insights Directory

This briefing by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) and partners examines the application of the Polluter-Pays Principle (PPP) to the PFAS pollution crisis. It argues that current implementation in the EU is inconsistent and that a comprehensive strategy is needed to shift the staggering financial burden of remediation and health costs from the public to the producers and users of PFAS.

A guide published by CIEL and other organizations detailing how the International Court of Justice's July 2025 Advisory Opinion on climate change obligations can be used by negotiators at COP30 to increase climate ambition and accountability.

This issue note by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) argues that the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is paralyzed by its reliance on consensus-based decision-making. The report contends that this model allows a small minority of states to block ambitious climate action and proposes transitioning to a qualified majority voting system to accelerate progress and fulfill legal obligations to cooperate on climate change.

This report, published by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) in collaboration with the International Indigenous Peoples’ Forum on Climate Change (IIPFCC), provides a comprehensive compilation of decisions, mandates, and conclusions adopted by the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) that reference Indigenous Peoples and traditional knowledge up to 2025.

This briefing examines how the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) system hinders climate action and human rights by allowing corporations, particularly in the fossil fuel sector, to sue governments over environmental regulations. It highlights the 'regulatory chill' effect, the inadequacy of current reforms like the Energy Charter Treaty withdrawals, and the significance of 2025 advisory opinions from the ICJ and Inter-American Court of Human Rights which affirm state duties to reduce emissions regardless of prior investment licenses.

This report by the Center for International Environmental Law argues that geoengineering techniques pose severe risks to global biodiversity and human rights, potentially accelerating ecosystem collapse and species extinction. The author contends that these speculative interventions create a 'plan B' illusion that delays essential greenhouse gas emission cuts and advocates for a strict precautionary approach, including the enforcement of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity's de facto moratorium on geoengineering deployment.

This briefing, prepared for the 11th session of the open-ended intergovernmental working group (OEIGWG), advocates for the explicit inclusion of the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment (RtHE) within a proposed international legally binding instrument (LBI) to regulate transnational corporations and business enterprises.

This briefing paper argues for the adoption of a United Nations legally binding instrument (LBI) to regulate transnational corporations as a structural lever for environmental justice. It highlights the failure of voluntary frameworks to ensure corporate accountability for ecological destruction and human rights abuses, proposing that a binding treaty would operationalize the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment through mandatory due diligence, extraterritorial jurisdiction, and effective remediation.

A statement by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) arguing that the US government is dismantling critical disaster protections and weather forecasting capabilities while the petrochemical industry continues to expand in hurricane-prone regions, leaving vulnerable communities exposed to escalating climate risks and financial instability.

This briefing by the Center for International Environmental Law analyzes a July 23, 2025, advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) regarding States' obligations to address climate change. The ruling, adopted unanimously by 15 judges, establishes that States have binding obligations under international law to protect the climate system, phase out fossil fuels, and provide reparations for climate damage.

This briefing by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) outlines the critical issues and stakes surrounding the INC-5.2 negotiations for a global plastics treaty, scheduled for August 5 to 14, 2025, in Geneva, Switzerland.

This briefing note from the Center for International Environmental Law outlines the legal obligations of States to protect the ocean from climate change by halting fossil fuel expansion and phasing out their use. It highlights the significance of climate advisory opinions from the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), the International Court of Justice (ICJ), and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in establishing these duties.

This policy brief by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) argues that the plastics and petrochemical industries are attempting to weaken the Global Plastics Treaty by utilizing lobbying tactics similar to those of the fossil fuel and tobacco industries. The document calls for the integration of robust conflict of interest safeguards directly into the treaty text to prevent industry influence from undermining public health and environmental goals.

This policy brief by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) warns that the plastics and petrochemical industries are using lobbying and misinformation to weaken the Global Plastics Treaty. It highlights that industry lobbyists outnumbered many national delegations at the INC-5 session and urges the inclusion of explicit conflict-of-interest safeguards in the treaty text to protect public health and environmental goals.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) and several endorsing organizations issued a statement on April 21, 2025, regarding the approval of the Interim Remedial Action Framework (RAF) by the Boards of the International Finance Corporation (IFC) and the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA). While the statement applauds the framework as a first-of-its-kind policy for the World Bank Group to outline the delivery of remedy to harmed communities, it identifies critical gaps regarding financial commitments, legacy harms, and financial intermediaries.

A report by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) and Stand.earth Research Group (SRG) details how fracking in the Permian Basin fuels the global plastic packaging supply chain, linking major consumer brands to fossil fuel expansion.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) condemns US EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin's proposed dismantling of environmental protections, stating that such rollbacks lack due process and ignore the scientific evidence linking fossil fuels to climate change. CIEL declares its readiness to legally challenge these actions and warns companies that they will be held accountable for any increase in pollution resulting from these proposed changes.

This report by the Center for International Environmental Law argues that a restrictive international governance framework for geoengineering already exists across environmental agreements and human rights law, but is being undermined by a proliferation of outdoor experiments and commercial carbon markets.

This research paper by the Center for International Environmental Law argues that private insurance companies in California are avoiding the costs of climate-driven disasters—specifically the January 2025 Los Angeles wildfires—by shifting risk to the public and the state-supported FAIR Plan, while simultaneously profiting from investments in the fossil fuel industry.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) issued a statement on January 20, 2025, condemning the 47th President of the United States' inaugural actions. CIEL claims the administration's executive orders dismantle environmental protections and human rights safeguards, expand fossil fuel production, and target marginalized populations with hateful policies, thereby threatening global cooperation and climate safety.