Search Climate Insights Directory

ClientEarth has called on France to urge the Council of the EU to publish documents related to the 2020 Total Allowable Catches (TACs) in the Northeast Atlantic. This request follows a European Ombudsman recommendation for greater transparency in the decision-making process for fishing quotas, noting that past processes were neither transparent nor participatory and that documents were systematically classified as LIMITE.

The report evaluates fixed, volumetric, and capacity-based distribution network tariffs against the EU's Electricity Regulation. It argues that high fixed charges and non-dynamic contracted capacity charges may hinder the transition to a decentralised energy system by discouraging flexibility and demand response. The author suggests that volumetric time-of-use charges and critical peak capacity charges are most likely to meet the CEP's requirements for cost-reflectivity and the fostering of innovation and flexibility.

The 2019 Scorecard on Insurance, Coal and Climate Change reveals a growing trend of insurance companies exiting the coal sector. While 17 insurers have limited or ended cover for coal projects—controlling 9.5% of the primary insurance market and 46.4% of the reinsurance market—significant gaps remain. Most policies exclude new projects but continue to cover existing operations. Swiss Re and Zurich are identified as leaders in underwriting, while Legal & General leads in broader climate leadership. Conversely, many US and East Asian insurers are described as 'missing in action,' continuing to provide cover and investment for coal. The report argues that as insurance becomes harder to obtain, coal projects become less bankable, accelerating the industry's demise.

The document highlights the critical threat of bycatch to cetaceans in EU waters, specifically targeting the Baltic harbour porpoise and the Northeast Atlantic common dolphin. It asserts that numerous Member States have failed to implement the monitoring and protection mandates of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC and Regulation 812/2004. To address this, the authors propose emergency spatial and temporal closures of fisheries, mandatory on-board observations, and the use of acoustic deterrent devices (ADDs). Furthermore, the briefing warns that the EU must align its bycatch prevention procedures with the US Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) by January 1, 2022, to avoid import prohibitions on fish products.

The document argues that the absence of a dedicated EU-level legislative framework for soil protection has left soil governance fragmented and disconnected from land policies. It analyzes the failure of a 2006 proposal for a Soil Framework Directive and suggests several legal pathways to address this gap, including the adoption of a new Directive based on Article 191 or 192 TFEU, strengthening soil standards within the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), and integrating soil management into the 8th Environment Action Programme and the EU Biodiversity Strategy.

The commentary analyzes Case C-616/17, where the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) ruled that the EU Pesticides Regulation did not commit a manifest error of assessment regarding the precautionary principle. While the court clarified that competent authorities must conduct independent and transparent health risk assessments, the author argues that the case illustrates a systemic failure in EU law: environmental NGOs and individuals often cannot challenge EU measures directly under Article 263 TFEU and may only gain access to the CJEU by infringing laws to trigger national criminal or civil proceedings.

The document assesses the legal validity of Uniper's claims of 'de facto expropriation' and violations of 'fair and equitable treatment' resulting from the Dutch coal phase-out law. It concludes that the law is a legitimate exercise of state regulatory powers to meet climate goals and that Uniper had no legitimate expectation of regulatory stability for coal investments.

ClientEarth urges the Council of the European Union to increase transparency in the decision-making process for 2020 fishing opportunities, specifically requesting the public release of the 'the bible' document regarding Northeast Atlantic negotiations to align with a European Ombudsman recommendation.

A group of NGOs supports the EU's proposal to restrict lead stabilisers in PVC but argues that the current draft is insufficiently protective. They specifically oppose higher lead concentration limits for recycled PVC, claiming such derogations are based on flawed end-of-life assumptions and contradict the EU's circular economy goals. The NGOs advocate for a total phase-out of lead in PVC, regardless of its function or whether the material is virgin or recycled, citing the non-threshold neurotoxicity of lead.

A coalition of environmental and health NGOs calls on the European Commission to establish a long-term chemicals regulatory framework for 2030. The document argues that current EU legislation, including REACH, has significant compliance gaps and fails to protect vulnerable populations from hazardous substances like endocrine disruptors and nanomaterials. The authors propose a 'non-toxic circular economy' that eliminates 'toxic recycling' through full chemical disclosure and stricter standards for recycled materials. Key demands include the phase-out of the most dangerous chemical groups, the creation of an industry-funded independent safety testing system, and the reorganization of Commission governance to give DG Environment full responsibility for chemical pollution policies.

The document presents a series of recommendations from a coalition of NGOs to strengthen the EU Fisheries Control System. Key priorities include the mandatory implementation of Remote Electronic Monitoring (REM) to ensure compliance with the Landing Obligation, extending tracking and reporting requirements to small-scale vessels, and improving the traceability of seafood products. The NGOs also call for the establishment of an EU Fisheries Control Data Centre to address data gaps and the introduction of transparency requirements, such as making audit reports and sanction data public. Additionally, the document advocates for a strengthened mandate for the European Fisheries Control Agency (EFCA) and the digitalization of the EU IUU Regulation's catch certification system.

A coalition of 32 NGOs supports a total ban on intentionally added microplastics in the EU to prevent irreversible environmental pollution. While endorsing ECHA's risk assessment that no 'safe level' of microplastics exists, the NGOs argue that proposed exemptions for 'biodegradable' plastics and long transitional periods for cosmetics and fertilizers would undermine the restriction's effectiveness.

The document is an annex containing a detailed table of fish species, their scientific names, TAC codes, and ICES advice codes used for a core analysis. It specifies the validity of comparisons for various stocks, including cod, sole, haddock, and Norway lobster, across different years and regulatory contexts.

The document provides a detailed annex of fish species and specific TAC codes excluded from a core analysis. The exclusions are primarily attributed to missing ICES advice, mismatches in geographic areas, or the use of different or unclear processes for setting TACs.

The document provides statistical annexes detailing the frequency and magnitude of Member State requests for Total Allowable Catches (TACs) that exceeded scientific advice between 2017 and 2019. It tracks metrics for France, the United Kingdom, Portugal, Ireland, Spain, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, Sweden, and Denmark, focusing on the number of comparisons where TACs were greater than advice and the average percentage by which they exceeded that advice.

The report finds that progress toward ending overfishing by 2020 has been too slow, with a majority of agreed TACs for 2019 still exceeding scientific advice. It highlights a systemic lack of ambition for stocks subject to precautionary advice and those classified as bycatch, while identifying specific Member States—including France, Ireland, and Spain—as frequent advocates for unsustainable catch limits. The document also criticizes the lack of transparency in the TAC-setting process and the potential for misleading reporting by the European Commission.

The document argues that the EU has failed to make sufficient progress toward the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) goals, with many stocks remaining overfished. It criticizes the AGRIFISH Council for setting total allowable catches (TACs) above scientific advice and for the poor implementation of the Landing Obligation (LO). The NGOs recommend setting 2020 TACs strictly within scientific limits, improving the transparency of the TAC-setting process, and ending the use of 'bycatch TACs' without robust reduction plans.

ClientEarth proposes four priority areas to enhance the environmental ambition of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP): the establishment of an EU-wide strategic plan with SMART targets, increased transparency and stakeholder participation in line with the Aarhus Convention, the provision of independent agroecological farm advisory services, and the strengthening of conditionality rules to include key environmental directives.

The report concludes that Denmark has failed to implement the necessary control measures required by EU law to ensure all fish catches are landed and reported. Evidence from last-haul inspections shows significant discrepancies between actual catches of undersized fish and those reported in logbooks, particularly in the Baltic and North Seas. The document highlights that traditional surveillance is ineffective and advocates for Remote Electronic Monitoring (REM) as the only viable tool to deter illegal discarding and 'high-grading'. It also criticizes the European Commission for passivity in enforcing the landing obligation across member states, which undermines the 'level-playing-field' for fishers.

The document argues that TAC Regulations, while sui generis non-legislative acts, must operate within the legal framework of the CFP Basic Regulation. Because the CFP Basic Regulation requires fishing opportunities to be consistent with the MSY exploitation rate, any TAC Regulation that exceeds this rate would be incompatible with a higher norm of EU law and thus subject to annulment under Article 263 TFEU.