Search Climate Insights Directory

The document outlines seven reasons why the Transatlantic Investment and Partnership Agreement (TTIP/TAFTA) could undermine EU chemical safety regulations, potentially leading to a 'race to the bottom' in environmental and health standards. It warns that the agreement could hinder the adoption of stricter national laws, limit access to information on hazardous substances, and allow foreign investors to sue governments over public health regulations through secret arbitration panels, similar to mechanisms used in NAFTA.

The document outlines seven ways the TTIP (or TAFTA) could negatively impact the regulation of toxic chemicals, specifically warning that the drive for regulatory harmonization may lead to a 'race to the bottom' that favors industry over public health. It highlights risks such as the erosion of EU member states' authority, the potential for secret arbitration panels to penalize environmental laws, and the possible promotion of fracking through investor-state dispute mechanisms similar to those in NAFTA.

The document outlines seven ways the TTIP trade negotiations could negatively impact chemical regulation, including the risk of 'downward' harmonization of standards, the erosion of US state-level regulatory authority, and the potential to increase fracking for natural gas. It highlights the disparity between the weak US federal chemical management system and the stronger EU policies, warning that TTIP could slow global progress on toxic chemicals and limit access to hazard information.

The document argues that ISDS is an asymmetrical system that often undermines state sovereignty and public interest. It suggests reforms including the multilateral termination of bilateral investment treaties (BITs), allowing state counterclaims, creating 'public interest carve-outs' to protect the right to regulate, implementing 'clean hands' clauses to bar bad-actor investors, requiring the exhaustion of local remedies, and granting third parties full legal standing in proceedings.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) asserts that existing UNCITRAL rules, designed for private commercial disputes, are inadequate for State arbitrations which often involve public policy and significant public funds. CIEL recommends that UNCITRAL distinguish State arbitrations from private ones, conduct a participatory review involving civil society and other UN bodies, and adopt rules that ensure full transparency and public participation while protecting state secrets and confidential business information.

This document is a note from the secretariat of the intergovernmental negotiating committee to prepare a global legally binding instrument on mercury. It presents a new draft text for the instrument, incorporating views and proposals submitted by parties during the committee's second session in Chiba, Japan, and subsequent written submissions. The draft outlines various options for regulating mercury supply, international trade, mercury-added products, manufacturing processes, artisanal and small-scale gold mining, and emissions and releases to air, water, and land.

The document argues that the UNFCCC has reached a 'critical breaking point' due to systemic failures in delivering climate justice and the undue influence of the fossil fuel industry. It proposes a shift from consensus-based to majority-based decision-making to prevent a few nations from blocking progress. The authors demand a strict Conflict of Interest Policy to exclude polluting industry lobbyists from official spaces and a 'rightsizing' of COPs to end their transformation into 'global trade fairs'. Additionally, the statement calls for enhanced compliance mechanisms for Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), greater transparency in negotiations to end 'closed doors' meetings, and the protection of human rights for participants. It suggests strengthening international climate governance by aligning the UNFCCC with the other Rio Conventions and pursuing complementary legal pathways, such as the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty and the Global Plastics Treaty, to achieve a full fossil fuel phase-out.

This document consists of a draft operational manual (BP 4.12) and subsequent reports from the Committee on Development Effectiveness (CODE) regarding the World Bank's policies and procedures for Involuntary Resettlement. It outlines the mandatory steps for project teams to minimize displacement, the requirements for resettlement instruments, and the internal governance and appraisal processes used to ensure that displaced persons' livelihoods are restored or improved.

This document is a draft of the World Bank's Operational Policy (OP 4.12) on Involuntary Resettlement, dated March 6, 2001. It establishes safeguards to mitigate the economic, social, and environmental risks associated with the displacement of people or the restriction of access to natural resources resulting from Bank-assisted investment projects.

The document analyzes the transition of judicial bodies toward webcasting to enhance transparency and accessibility. It details the motivations for adoption, such as increasing public trust and educational outreach, and lists benefits including more accurate media reporting and cost savings. It also addresses challenges like financial costs, technical quality, and risks of content manipulation. Finally, it highlights the lag in webcasting within international economic dispute settlement mechanisms like the WTO and UNCITRAL, citing the ICSID Pac Rim case as a positive precedent.

The document asserts that the World Health Organization (WHO) has a mandate to evaluate how intellectual property provisions in bilateral and regional free trade agreements (FTAs) impact public health. It warns that these agreements, often between industrialized economies and developing nations, frequently impose 'TRIPS-plus' standards that restrict access to affordable medicines and undermine the 2005 Amendment to the TRIPS Agreement and the Doha Declaration. The author contends that the WHO should be extensively consulted on these provisions to ensure that health outcomes remain a priority in trade policy.

CIEL argues that WIPO's response to the CBD must recognize the CBD's leading role in biodiversity and focus on creating mandatory international rules to prevent the misappropriation of genetic resources. The document criticizes the first draft for failing to emphasize the prevention of intellectual property system misuse and for not sufficiently incorporating the views of developing countries and NGOs. CIEL suggests that equitable principles, such as the 'unclean hands' doctrine, should be used to justify mandatory disclosure requirements and sanctions for non-compliance to ensure that intellectual property rights do not reward inequitable conduct.

This memorandum from World Bank President James D. Wolfensohn, dated September 28, 2001, proposes the adoption of Operational Policy and Bank Procedure (OP/BP) 4.12 on Involuntary Resettlement. The document outlines the conversion of the previous Operational Directive (OD 4.30) into the new format, detailing revisions aimed at removing ambiguities and incorporating implementation lessons. It describes the consultation process with internal and external stakeholders, the specific policy changes regarding displaced persons and indigenous peoples, and the reasons why certain external recommendations—such as a mandatory 'prior, informed consent' for indigenous peoples—were not adopted.

The document argues that WTO rules do not prevent the implementation of an ambitious plastics treaty, as multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) can restrict trade without violating trade law. It highlights that GATT Article XX provides general exceptions for measures necessary to protect human, animal, or plant life and health, or the conservation of exhaustible natural resources. To avoid trade challenges, the brief recommends that the treaty use precise, science-based obligations, ensure non-Party trade measures mirror those between Parties, and explicitly articulate the links between plastic pollution and public health and biodiversity.

The document provides a detailed breakdown of how WTO documents are restricted or derestricted, categorizing them into automatic, scheduled, and unscheduled processes. It argues that the current system allows members to keep politically sensitive documents secret indefinitely and ensures that information is only released after policy decisions are finalized. The authors recommend a shift toward a presumption of immediate public availability, except for proprietary or national security information, and propose a formal agreement to grant NGOs and individuals the right to participate in WTO meetings and dispute settlement procedures.

The document outlines the processes for accessing WTO documents, distinguishing between those that are automatically derestricted and those requiring Member intervention. It argues that current transparency levels are insufficient for meaningful public participation in sustainable development and recommends that the WTO adopt a case-by-case restriction policy based on specific criteria. The guide provides practical steps for NGOs to influence policy through national governments and lists specific WTO contact personnel for document requests.

The document contains an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for Reconnaissance Energy Namibia (Pty) Ltd's proposed drilling of stratigraphic wells in the Kavango Basin, Namibia, and a technical report on shale oil and gas resources in South Africa's Karoo Basin.

The Alto Maipo Hydroelectric Project in Chile, funded by the IFC, IDB, and OPIC, resulted in severe environmental degradation and human rights violations, including threats to the water security of millions in Santiago. Despite these harms, the project's financiers used procedural loopholes and premature divestments to avoid accountability. However, strategic campaigns by Chilean activists and CIEL leveraged Independent Accountability Mechanisms (IAMs) to force institutional changes, resulting in the repeal of the IDB's legal exclusion clause and the creation of the IFC's Remedial Action Framework and Responsible Exit Approach.

The document catalogues alleged human rights implications across numerous international projects in sectors such as mining, energy, and forestry. It organizes these cases by the specific right implicated, including the rights to adequate food, housing, health, and life, as well as freedoms from forced labor and torture. The case studies highlight recurring issues such as forced resettlement, environmental contamination of water and land, the use of military force to suppress protests, and inadequate compensation for displaced populations.

The document analyzes the 1992 Framework Convention on Climate Change, detailing the scientific consensus on global warming and the diplomatic tensions between industrialized and developing nations during its creation. It highlights the lack of binding emissions targets and the complexities of the financial mechanism and technology transfer.