Search Climate Insights Directory

The report argues that while the CFP provides a strong legal framework, it has failed to meet its 2020 deadline to end overfishing due to Member State inaction, insufficient Commission oversight, and industry resistance. It identifies nine critical challenges, including the dire state of the Mediterranean Sea, poor compliance with the landing obligation, and the absence of climate change considerations in the policy. The authors call for a transition to low-impact fisheries, the elimination of harmful subsidies, and the use of remote electronic monitoring to ensure sustainability.

The report finds a significant lack of a level playing field in the EU, with 13 Member States still relying on entirely paper-based processes for verifying catch certificates (CCs). While some states have developed national IT tools, these cannot detect the 'overuse' of CCs across different EU entry points. The European Commission's CATCH system is designed to provide a centralised EU-wide database to prevent fraud and harmonise risk analysis, but as of June 2021, no Member State was actively operating the first version due to a lack of legal requirements and data input from third countries. The report recommends that the Commission make CATCH mandatory, improve its interoperability with national systems, and develop tools to monitor trade flow variations to identify potential IUU fishing loopholes.

The EU–China Environment Project (2018–2021) facilitated policy alignment and knowledge exchange between the EU and China across several key environmental domains. Major achievements include supporting the development of China's National Pollutant Discharge Permitting Regulation, contributing to the drafting of the Yangtze River Protection Law, and co-hosting workshops to inform the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework ahead of COP15 in Kunming. The project also provided research and workshops that influenced China's 14th Five-Year Plan and the 'Guiding Opinions on Integrating and Strengthening Efforts in Climate Action and Ecological and Environmental Protection'. Additionally, the initiative addressed plastic pollution, global deforestation in supply chains, and carbon leakage, while promoting a green economic recovery following the COVID-19 pandemic.

The document argues that the European Union can legally eliminate fuel tax exemptions for vessels, including fishing boats, even in international waters. It refutes claims that such a move violates UNCLOS Article 89 by asserting that EU-flagged vessels remain under flag-state jurisdiction and non-EU vessels can be linked to the EU via the port where they refuel. Furthermore, it concludes that UNCLOS lacks the 'direct effect' necessary for individuals or companies to legally challenge these tax changes in court. The briefing also notes that while the International Maritime Organization (IMO) is slow to implement global levies, strong EU regulation often accelerates international consensus.

The document advocates for Amendment 20 to the Environment Bill, which would require the UK to reduce PM2.5 levels to 10 µg/m3 or less by January 1, 2030. It argues that current legal limits are insufficient to protect public health, citing the social cost of air pollution at over £20bn annually and the specific risks to children and those with pre-existing conditions. The briefing asserts that achieving WHO guidelines is technically feasible and necessary for the UK to demonstrate global leadership in air quality, especially ahead of COP26.

The report argues that while not explicitly stated, the Ambient Air Quality Directive (AAQD) grants EU citizens a right to air quality within legal limit values. It identifies significant barriers to justice in several Member States and advocates for the use of the Francovich doctrine to allow individuals to seek compensation for health damages. ClientEarth recommends that the European Commission explicitly codify this individual right in the revised AAQD, introduce coercive remedies for non-compliance, and alleviate the burden of proof for claimants seeking damages.

The open letter rejects the EMFAF 2021-2027 agreement, asserting that it maintains and weakens conditions for harmful fisheries subsidies that lead to overcapacity and overfishing. The authors argue that the fund fails to ring-fence spending for nature protection, contradicts the European Green Deal, and risks undermining global efforts to eliminate harmful subsidies as outlined in UN Sustainable Development Goal 14.6.

The document critiques the European Commission's December 2020 proposal for a revised TEN-E Regulation, highlighting risks of conflict of interest due to the influence of Transmission System Operators (TSOs) and a lack of transparency in selecting Projects of Common Interest (PCIs). It proposes integrating the European Scientific Advisory Board on Climate Change (ESABCC) into the decision-making process for PCI lists and Ten-Year Network Development Plans (TYNDPs) to provide independent, science-based oversight. Key recommendations include adopting PCI lists via separate delegated acts per infrastructure category, mandating public consultations on regional lists, and establishing a common assessment method across regional Groups to prevent bias.

The document challenges the European Commission's claim that 99% of fish bought by consumers come from sustainable sources, arguing this figure focuses on landing volumes rather than the number of stocks. It cites STECF data showing that 43% of North East Atlantic and 83% of Mediterranean stocks are overfished, and notes that the number of stocks outside safe biological limits in 2019 (17) is the same as in 2013.

Minister Victoria Prentis addresses concerns from ClientEarth and other eNGOs regarding their participation in fisheries consultations and the operational status of the Specialised Committee on Fisheries under the UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA).

The report analyzes the legal and economic feasibility of a social contract intended to restructure Poland's hard coal mining sector. It concludes that the contract lacks direct legal effect and violates EU competition law, particularly regarding subsidies for operating mines. The author argues that the European Commission is unlikely to authorize new state aid for coal production given the European Green Deal, and that the sector's continued preferential treatment hinders Poland's energy transition.

The document examines the gap between legal design and operational reality regarding how logging companies share benefits with forest communities in four West and Central African nations. It highlights that while laws may exist, a lack of implementing regulations, low payment amounts, and limited community negotiation capacity often lead to poor outcomes. ClientEarth has responded by developing guidance tools, templates, and training to empower communities to negotiate more effective and enforceable agreements.

ClientEarth argues that the proposed revisions to Japan's Corporate Governance Code are insufficient and recommends requiring 'Paris-aligned' strategies, extending disclosure requirements to the Standard Market, and integrating climate expertise and training into board governance.

The briefing examines two European Parliament reports: the Deforestation Report and the Corporate Governance Report. It argues that while both utilize due diligence, they serve different purposes—one being product-specific for forest-risk commodities and the other being a horizontal framework for all large undertakings. The author contends that these two approaches are complementary and that deforestation should be included as an adverse environmental impact in the horizontal corporate due diligence proposal to cover sectors not captured by the product-specific rules.

The document advocates for the EU to establish a comprehensive environmental due diligence framework within its sustainable corporate governance directive. It argues that human rights protections alone are insufficient because environmental damage can occur without direct human harm. The briefing proposes that companies be obligated to identify, prevent, and remedy adverse impacts across their entire value chains, aligned with international standards like the Paris Agreement and OECD Guidelines. It suggests a broad definition of environmental impacts—including climate change, pollution, and biodiversity loss—and calls for a robust enforcement regime combining administrative, criminal, and civil liability to ensure victims, including those outside the EU, have access to justice.

The report examines the drivers of global deforestation, specifically focusing on the role of agriculture and cattle production. It highlights China's significant influence as a major importer of these commodities and proposes a two-pronged approach—short-term demand signals and long-term systemic support—to transition toward deforestation-free supply chains. The document analyzes various certification schemes, traceability tools, and jurisdictional approaches, while providing case studies from companies like COFCO International and Mars Wrigley to illustrate practical implementation of sustainability policies.

The document analyzes the 'exceptionality' of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) compared to other EU laws, arguing that its governance, legislative processes, and funding mechanisms are designed to protect agricultural sectoral interests. It contends that the CAP fails to meaningfully incorporate environmental stakeholders, operates through non-standard legislative channels like the Special Committee on Agriculture, and lacks the strict environmental safeguards found in other EU funds, such as the Common Provision Regulation. The report specifically criticizes the 'greenwashing' of the COVID-19 recovery budget and the lack of legally binding links between the CAP and the European Green Deal.

The report criticizes the EU's REDII sustainability criteria for forest biomass, arguing that they prioritize legal formality over actual ecological sustainability. It contends that the criteria allow destructive forestry practices to continue by equating the existence of national laws with sustainability, while failing to provide rigorous verification mechanisms or incorporate NGO evidence. Through five case studies in Canada, Estonia, France, Portugal, and Finland, the document demonstrates that current rules would not prevent the logging of old-growth or high-nature-value forests for energy production.

The document outlines how fossil fuel companies use misleading advertising to appear more sustainable than they are. It specifically critiques claims regarding the sustainability of natural gas, the viability of carbon capture and storage (CCS), the effectiveness of carbon offsets and nature-based solutions, and the carbon neutrality of wood biomass energy.

The document argues that the restructuring plan for Complexul Energetic Oltenia (CEO) fails to restore long-term viability because it maintains unviable lignite assets and invests in fossil gas, which are viewed as stranded assets. The authors contend that the plan contradicts the European Green Deal and the Paris Agreement, and that the proposed State aid—including €241.4 million for 2020 CO2 allowances—violates EU law and the 'do no harm' principle. They highlight a lack of real own contribution from CEO and the absence of meaningful compensatory measures, suggesting instead a full lignite phase-out by 2030.