Search Climate Insights Directory

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) advocates against the Keystone XL pipeline, citing the high greenhouse gas emissions of Alberta's tar sands and concerns over political influence in the State Department's permitting process. The statement also details CIEL's efforts to eliminate coal funding in international finance institutions, specifically criticizing World Bank loans for coal projects in South Africa and Kosovo, while referencing IPCC findings that renewables could meet nearly 80 percent of global energy supply by mid-century.

CIEL opposes the validation of the Coastal Gujarat Power Ltd. project, citing a failure to properly record local stakeholder concerns in the Project Design Document (PDD) and alleging that the project's use of a once-through sea water cooling system violates Indian environmental law and harms marine ecology.

The analysis concludes that the Safe Chemicals Act of 2011 (S. 847) provides the legal authority required for the U.S. to ratify the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), the LRTAP POPs Protocol, and the Rotterdam Convention. Key mechanisms include closing the TSCA export loophole and granting the EPA authority to prohibit the manufacture, use, and distribution of chemicals inconsistent with treaty obligations. The report also highlights the bill's ability to allow the U.S. to regulate persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic (PBT) chemicals independently of international consensus, potentially restoring U.S. global leadership on chemical safety.

The brief, submitted by member organizations of La Mesa Nacional Frente a la Minería Metálica de El Salvador, contends that Pac Rim's claims do not constitute a 'legal dispute' or a 'measure' under the ICSID Convention and CAFTA. It argues that the conflict is a political disagreement over metals mining policy driven by organic community opposition, rather than a legal dispute with the state. The brief further alleges that Pac Rim abused the legal process by strategically reincorporating in the United States to gain CAFTA benefits and seeks to use international arbitration to bypass domestic democratic processes and community resistance.

The document identifies four primary areas of focus for the COP5 meeting in Geneva: the potential banning of the pesticide endosulfan, the elimination of newly listed persistent organic pollutants (POPs) and the review of DDT and lindane exemptions, the improvement of the Convention's effectiveness regarding compliance and voting, and the closing of the funding gap for developing countries. It also notes the United States' status as an observer and the legislative hurdles preventing its ratification of the treaty.

The report concludes that the Hong Kong Convention does not provide an equivalent level of control to the Basel Convention and therefore fails to ensure the environmentally sound management of shipbreaking. It argues that the Hong Kong Convention undermines key Basel protections through narrower scope, a weaker notification system that allows tacit consent, a lack of criminalization for illegal traffic, and the absence of a duty to re-import waste. Furthermore, the analysis finds that the Hong Kong Convention fails to sufficiently consider the interests of developing countries, where most shipbreaking occurs, by lacking funding mechanisms and mandatory minimum standards to phase out dangerous 'beaching' practices.

The Cancun LCA Outcome represents the first international climate agreement to recognize the human rights impacts of climate change, explicitly stating that Parties should "fully respect human rights in all climate change-related actions." While the document marks progress by referencing UN Human Rights Council Resolution 10/4 and establishing safeguards for REDD and the Green Climate Fund, it fails to acknowledge broader obligations to "protect, promote and fulfill" rights or explicitly guarantee procedural rights like access to information and justice. The analysis highlights that these rights-related provisions have not yet been fully operationalized within UNFCCC bodies.

The Center for International Environmental Law, on behalf of La Mesa, requests amicus curiae status in the Pac Rim v. El Salvador case. They argue that the dispute is a political disagreement over sustainable development and public policy rather than a legal dispute over a specific government measure. The document highlights severe environmental risks associated with the proposed El Dorado mine, including threats to the Rio Lempa basin and local aquifers, and alleges that Pac Rim's activities have contributed to community violence and the murder of environmental defenders. Legally, the amici contend that Pac Rim's last-minute corporate reorganization to gain CAFTA benefits is an abuse of process and that the tribunal lacks jurisdiction under the ICSID Convention and CAFTA.

The document is a request and supporting brief from a coalition of Salvadoran civil society organizations (La Mesa) seeking to intervene in the Pac Rim Cayman LLC v. Republic of El Salvador arbitration. The authors argue that the claim is an abuse of process and that the tribunal lacks jurisdiction because the conflict is fundamentally a political debate about metal mining and sustainable development, not a legal dispute over a specific government measure. They highlight severe environmental risks associated with the El Dorado mine, including threats to the Lempa River basin and local aquifers, and document a pattern of violence and intimidation against anti-mining activists in El Salvador.

The report analyzes a 3.75 billion dollar World Bank loan to Eskom Holding Limited for the Eskom Investment Support Project in South Africa, which included a 4,800 MW coal-fired power plant. It asserts that the World Bank violated its own Operational Policy 10.04 (OP 10.04) by failing to fully consider environmental and social externalities in the project's Economic Evaluation. The authors argue that this failure renders the evaluation inaccurate and suggests a broader pattern where the World Bank over-invests in large-scale centralized energy projects—including coal, oil, gas, nuclear, and large hydro—by overstating benefits and ignoring negative costs.

This analysis argues that the Cancun Agreements mark significant progress in integrating human rights protections into the international climate regime, driven by NGO pressure and certain State Parties. It emphasizes that this language should guide the implementation of REDD and finance safeguards and calls for a rights-based approach leading into COP 17 in Durban, South Africa.

The report examines the World Bank's 3.75 billion dollar loan to Eskom for the Medupi coal-fired power plant, asserting that the Bank's Economic Analysis ignored critical environmental and social costs. It highlights failures to assess transboundary impacts on Botswana, Zimbabwe, and Mozambique, as well as domestic risks regarding water scarcity, water quality, and air pollution. The authors argue that this pattern of under-valuing externalities leads to over-investment in large-scale centralized fossil fuel projects at the expense of decentralized renewables.

The document argues that the IFC's draft Sustainability Framework fails to adequately protect human rights, noting that references to human rights were removed from previous drafts. The signatories call for mandatory human rights due diligence for both the IFC and its clients, alignment with the UN 'Protect, Respect and Remedy' framework, and specific safeguards regarding water rights, gender impacts, forced evictions, and environmental damage.

The document explores the intersection of climate change and the right to development (RTD), arguing that RTD is not a 'right to pollute' but a framework for a 'technological leap' toward non-carbon development. It emphasizes that industrialized countries bear the responsibility for providing financial and technological support to developing nations. The author advocates for development models integrated with biological cycles, such as agroecology, and critiques carbon-based industrial models like the American Corn Belt. The briefing also evaluates the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) under RTD criteria, finding uneven benefit distribution and a lack of human rights considerations. Finally, it positions RTD as a 'moral compass' for the transition to a green economy, referencing the Rio+20 process and the Cancun outcomes of the UNFCCC.

The authors express concern that allowing the World Bank's General Counsel to opine on specific Inspection Panel recommendations undermines the Panel's independence and creates a conflict of interest, as the General Counsel's office also supports Bank Management.

The document outlines the positions of a broad coalition of environmental and health NGOs on the European Commission's proposed definition of nanomaterials. While welcoming the initiative to establish a regulatory framework, the signatories argue for a broader size range (0.3 to 300 nm) than the proposed 1-100 nm to ensure that potentially hazardous materials are not excluded from scrutiny. They specifically support basing size distribution on particle numbers and the inclusion of aggregates, agglomerates, and materials smaller than 1 nm, such as fullerenes.

The briefing details a systemic pattern of violence, criminalization, and state neglect targeting environmental defenders in Mesoamerica, specifically those opposing mining projects. Testimonies from Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, and Panama highlight a recurring cycle where high metal prices and trade agreements drive mining expansion, while weak regulatory frameworks and state complicity lead to the murder, disappearance, and harassment of activists. The document argues that states often fail to investigate crimes or protect defenders, instead using the legal system to criminalize protest and ignore the right to free, prior, and informed consent of affected communities.

The report documents a regional trend of violence against environmental defenders in Mexico and Central America linked to industrial mining. It argues that this violence stems from state failure to manage environmental impacts and a lack of protection for defenders, often exacerbated by the influence of foreign mining companies from Canada and the United States. Through case studies in Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, and Panama, the document details threats, kidnappings, and assassinations, while recommending stronger institutional protections, the implementation of free, prior, and informed consent, and greater accountability for home states of foreign corporations.

The report documents a growing trend of repression and violence against environmental defenders in Mexico and Central America, linked to the expansion of industrial mining. It argues that this violence stems from state failure to manage environmental impacts and a lack of protection for human rights defenders, often characterized by high levels of impunity in both host and home countries of mining companies.

The report documents a regional trend of violence against environmental defenders in Mexico and Central America, linking these abuses to the social and environmental impacts of industrial mining and the failure of states to protect human rights. It provides case studies from five countries and recommends strengthening institutional protection, environmental regulations, and the right to free, prior, and informed consent.