Search Climate Insights Directory

CIEL President Carroll Muffett critiques Secretary Kerry's COP 21 speech, stating that the US pledge to double grant-based adaptation assistance to over $800 million by 2020 is insufficient compared to the $100 billion annual pledge by developed countries. Muffett argues that US domestic politics have hindered ambitious international climate engagement and rejects the notion that the Paris outcomes are merely a "preamble," emphasizing the urgent human rights tragedies already caused by climate change.

The document is a declaration calling for the end of fossil fuel exploration and extraction to address the climate crisis and mass extinction. It demands a just transition to a democratized, 100% renewable energy system, the removal of fossil fuel industry influence from policymaking, and the recognition of the rights of Indigenous and frontline communities.

The Center for International Environmental Law critiques the claim that the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) provides the strongest and most enforceable environmental commitments in trade history, arguing that past U.S. free trade agreements (FTAs) show a pattern of ineffective enforcement of environmental safeguards while frequently utilizing Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) to allow corporations to sue governments over environmental laws.

A coal mining concession in Kenya's Mui Basin, awarded to Chinese companies, threatens the livelihoods of approximately 100,000 people in Kitui County through large-scale evictions and environmental risks. The project disproportionately affects women, who face health risks from water pollution and limited decision-making power over land. Despite a 2015 court ruling in favor of the government, the court mandated greater community consultation and participation regarding compensation and resettlement.

The adivasi communities in Panna district, Madhya Pradesh, are experiencing systemic displacement and poverty driven by diamond and stone mining and the creation of wildlife reserves like the Panna Tiger Reserve. These activities have destroyed traditional livelihoods, leading to widespread reliance on illegal mining characterized by inhumane conditions, child labour, and occupational diseases such as silicosis. Women and children are disproportionately affected, with women earning half the wages of men and children as young as 5 or 6 working in mines. Conservation efforts have further marginalized these communities through evictions from ancestral lands, often based on false promises of relocation benefits. Civil society organizations, including Prithvi Trust, Keystone Foundation, and Dhaatri Resource Centre, are working to secure land titles under the Forest Rights Act of 2006 and seek compensation for health impacts, though systemic barriers and a 'mining mafia' hinder progress.

The Center for International Environmental Law and other organizations advocate for the AIIB to implement a transparent, independent, and accessible accountability framework. They specifically call for an Oversight Mechanism aligned with UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and caution against over-reliance on potentially weak Country and Corporate Systems for grievance redress.

The document addresses the lack of nano-specific provisions in the REACH regulation's annexes, noting that current registration dossiers often omit information on nanoforms. It specifically evaluates the European Commission's May 2014 proposal to amend these annexes to ensure nanomaterials are properly identified, characterized, and evaluated.

The chemical industry is using federal TSCA reform and the TTIP trade agreement to prevent US states from enacting chemical safety laws that exceed federal standards, potentially turning federal regulations into a ceiling rather than a floor.

The document analyzes proposed changes to the EU's REACH regulation to ensure nanoforms of substances are properly characterized and assessed. It argues for mandatory separate documentation of nanoforms, stricter requirements for physicochemical and toxicological data—especially for consumer products—and the necessity of full characterization before grouping materials for hazard assessment.

The document analyzes proposed changes to the REACH regulation's annexes to ensure nanomaterials are properly documented and assessed. It argues that nanoforms must be evaluated separately from non-nanoforms and that registration dossiers should include detailed physico-chemical and toxicological data, especially for consumer products. The author supports the inclusion of a formal definition of 'nanomaterial' in Annex VI but argues that current characterization requirements are insufficient, omitting critical data on surface chemistry and agglomeration. It further advocates for mandatory inhalation or dermal toxicity studies when more appropriate than oral tests and insists that nanomaterials must be fully characterized before being grouped for risk assessment.

The submission argues that USAID lacks clear operational procedures for human rights due diligence and access to remedy. It recommends the adoption of a comprehensive human rights-based approach to development, the implementation of social impact assessments, and the creation of independent non-judicial grievance mechanisms to address abuses caused by USAID, its partners, and its contractors.

Environmental groups argue that a proposed provision in the Customs Act (H.R. 644) would 'handcuff' U.S. negotiators by ensuring trade agreements do not require changes to U.S. laws regarding global warming, thereby undermining future climate action and international commitments.

A policy brief by the Center for International Environmental Law arguing that a specific climate provision within the Customs Bill would hinder domestic and international climate action, weaken the United States' negotiating position, and block potential trade cooperation benefits.

The document expresses disappointment over the Green Climate Fund's (GCF) accreditation of Deutsche Bank, the World Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), and the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB). The signatories argue that accrediting entities with poor human rights records and heavy investments in coal and fossil fuels contradicts the GCF's goal of supporting low-carbon, climate-resilient societies. They further criticize the accreditation process as non-transparent, alleging that the Board approved applicants in blocs, which encouraged 'political horse-trading' and ignored critical information about the track records of the institutions involved.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) warns that Section 912(b)(15) of the Customs Bill would hinder climate mitigation by preventing trade agreements from requiring changes to U.S. law regarding global warming. CIEL argues this would leave domestic policies vulnerable to trade challenges, weaken U.S. bargaining power in UNFCCC and CITES negotiations, and block the use of trade agreements to phase out fossil fuel subsidies or promote green technologies, specifically citing risks to the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and U.S.-China climate cooperation.

The report argues that credit rating agencies may be artificially inflating the value of companies contributing to global warming by failing to account for climate risks, potentially repeating the systemic underestimation of risk seen during the credit crisis.

The document examines how La Mesa, a Salvadoran coalition, used amicus curiae submissions in the Pac Rim arbitration to bring community concerns regarding metals mining and sustainable development to an international tribunal. It highlights the importance of alliance building between local groups and international legal experts to navigate technical arbitration processes and argues that such interventions provide essential public interest context that disputing parties may omit.

The report examines how the Mesa Nacional Frente a la Minería Metálica de El Salvador (MNFM), supported by CIEL and FESPAD, used amicus curiae submissions in the Pac Rim investor-state arbitration to highlight environmental and human rights concerns. It details the legal requirements for such interventions, the strategic importance of technical legal expertise combined with community grounding, and the outcomes of the jurisdictional phase of the arbitration. The document concludes with lessons for other civil society organizations on navigating the technical nature of international investment law to protect public interest and democratic decision-making.

The report examines how international law can address the systemic discrimination women face in forest tenure, which risks being exacerbated by REDD+. It provides a typology of relevant rights—including land tenure, gender-specific, procedural, FPIC, and environmental rights—and analyzes how these can be leveraged within the UNFCCC and World Bank's FCPF frameworks to ensure women are recognized as key stakeholders and rights-holders.

A coalition of civil society organizations urges the World Bank to avoid a truncated, web-based Phase 3 consultation process for its Environmental and Social Framework (ESF). The group recommends a minimum six-month timeline and a strategy combining general in-country consultations in all six Bank regions, thematic consultations on issues such as climate and human rights, and targeted web-based sessions. They call for greater transparency, including the publication of verbatim transcripts and a feedback matrix, to address failures in the first two consultation phases.