Search Climate Insights Directory

The document argues that a proposed resolution by the PECH Committee to reduce inadmissibility periods for EU fisheries funding is unlawful and disproportionate, as it would allow operators who commit serious offences, such as fishing without a licence, to access funds sooner than the one-year minimum established in the EMFAF Regulation.

A coalition of civil society organisations advocates for a more ambitious EU regulation on deforestation-free products. They propose expanding the scope to include other natural ecosystems like peatlands and savannahs, broadening the list of covered commodities to include all livestock, rubber, and maize, and implementing stricter due diligence requirements. The statement emphasizes the need for mandatory traceability to the plot of land, the removal of 'simplified' due diligence, and the inclusion of civil and criminal liability for non-compliance to protect indigenous peoples' rights and global biodiversity.

The document assesses the UK's proposed law to minimise deforestation linked to 'forest risk commodities', arguing that its reliance on 'relevant local laws' creates a loophole that would allow commodities from Brazil to enter the UK market even if they result from legalised deforestation. It details several Brazilian legislative proposals (such as PL 2633/2020 and PL 490/2007) that aim to legalise land grabbing and restrict Indigenous land rights. ClientEarth recommends that the UK adopt an objective standard covering all deforestation, mandate free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) for Indigenous Peoples, and explicitly include cattle, soy, and non-agricultural commodities like mining and oil and gas in the framework.

The document offers detailed guidance on defining, regulating, and supporting Renewable Energy Communities (RECs) and Citizen Energy Communities (CECs) under the EU's Clean Energy Package. It emphasizes the need for non-commercial purposes, democratic governance, and the removal of administrative barriers to empower citizens in the energy transition. The guide provides specific recommendations on legal forms, effective control, market access, and the design of support schemes, while drawing on examples from various EU Member States and the US to illustrate best practices for implementation.

ClientEarth calls for a systemic legal shift in the EU to prioritize planetary boundaries, proposing the appointment of a Vice-President for People and the Environment and the removal of fossil fuel subsidies. The document advocates for binding sustainability requirements in trade, a transition to 'energy sufficiency', and the adoption of a Sustainable Food System legislative framework to address gaps in the European Green Deal.

ClientEarth argues that the European Commission's December 2025 proposals to accelerate environmental assessments and permit-granting for infrastructure projects will lead to irreversible environmental harm and human health risks. The report claims these measures undermine the Birds and Habitats Directives, restrict access to justice, and violate the precautionary and proportionality principles of EU law. Specifically, it warns that the proposals normalize the killing of protected species, create a biased 'strategic sector' permitting regime, and restrict the ability of Member States to exclude ecologically sensitive areas from Renewable Acceleration Areas (RAAs).

The document argues that the lack of chemicals traceability in industry creates significant legal, financial, and environmental risks, hindering the EU's Green Deal and circular economy goals. It advocates for a horizontal traceability strategy combining strong regulatory incentives via the ESPR and capacity building for industry to ensure companies know the chemical composition of their products.

The paper examines the history and current state of EU environmental governance, detailing the roles of the Commission, Parliament, Council, and Court of Justice. It highlights a systemic failure in the enforcement of environmental law by Member States and the Commission, noting that economic interests frequently override environmental concerns. The author argues that the EU's 'good governance' principles of openness and participation are poorly implemented, leaving environmental NGOs with limited influence and citizens with minimal access to justice. While the EU has a comprehensive body of legislation, the author concludes that the lack of political will makes much of it a 'paper tiger'.

ClientEarth calls for the European Union to strengthen the rule of law and governance to address climate, biodiversity, and pollution crises. The organization advocates for the creation of a European Commission Vice-President for People and the Environment to oversee the European Green Deal's implementation and urges the EU to end public financial support for harmful activities, specifically fossil fuels and energy-intensive industries. The manifesto emphasizes the need for increased enforcement capacity at both EU and national levels and the strengthening of environmental democracy to ensure public participation and access to justice.

ClientEarth proposes a set of priorities for a new EU leadership role, emphasizing the enforcement of Nature Directives, the alignment of agricultural and fisheries policies with biodiversity laws, and the creation of an EU Ocean Deal and Ocean Fund. The document also calls for the alignment of state aid with climate goals, the phasing out of environmentally harmful subsidies, and the requirement for companies to implement transition plans for climate, biodiversity, and the circular economy.

ClientEarth filed a complaint with UN Special Procedures alleging that Saudi Aramco is responsible for the world's largest climate-linked breach of human rights law. The UN experts issued Communications to Saudi Aramco, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and several global financial institutions, asking them to clarify their compliance with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. The document highlights Aramco's role as a massive corporate emitter and the responsibility of banks—including JPMorgan Chase and HSBC—that facilitate its operations. It further argues that the Saudi government is failing in its duty to regulate Aramco and that the company's sustainability claims are misleading.

A coalition of NGOs recommends strict Total Allowable Catches (TACs) for Baltic Sea fish stocks for 2022, emphasizing the need to adhere to Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) and the precautionary approach. The document calls for zero catches for several critically depleted stocks, including eastern and western Baltic cod and western Baltic spring spawning herring. It advocates for an ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management, increased monitoring to combat the failure of the Landing Obligation, and improved transparency in the EU's decision-making process.

A coalition of NGOs urges the EU to set 2023 Baltic Sea fishing limits at or below scientific advice, specifically recommending zero catches for several cod and herring stocks. The document argues that current management fails to account for ecosystem dynamics, climate change, and widespread non-compliance with the Landing Obligation, calling for mandatory remote electronic monitoring and a transition away from bottom trawling.

The document argues that current EU legislation on pesticide statistics is inadequate for assessing environmental and health risks. The signatories call for the reform to mandate annual data collection from professional users' records, including biocidal and veterinary medicinal products, and for the proactive publication of this data by active substance, product, and at a regional level to align with the Aarhus Directive and public interest needs.

The author contends that the requirement to integrate environmental protection into EU policies is a binding objective, not a mere principle, and is essential for achieving sustainable development. The paper argues that EU institutions have largely abandoned governance mechanisms intended to operationalize this integration, such as the 'Cardiff process'. To remedy this, the author proposes that citizens and civil society use their fundamental right of access to environmental information (via the Aarhus Convention) to force EU bodies to explain and justify how specific legislative acts and policies ensure a high level of environmental protection and improvement.

The document defines key scientific terms used in event attribution, such as 'factual' and 'counterfactual' worlds, and outlines legal tests for proving causation, including the 'but for' and 'material contribution' tests, primarily within the context of UK law.

The document advocates for the UK government to commit to World Health Organization guideline levels for particulate matter by 2030 and establish a 'clean air duty' for all public bodies. It proposes a national Healthy Air Plan and the creation of a centralized, transparent monitoring network to better protect vulnerable populations, including children and the elderly. Additionally, it calls for the statutory enshrining of the right to breathe clean air in domestic law following the UK's exit from the EU, alongside urgent policies such as a national network of Clean Air Zones and restrictions on domestic solid fuel burning.

The document examines the technical, environmental, and economic drawbacks of using hydrogen as a primary energy carrier. It highlights extreme energy losses across the value chain, where total system efficiency is only 20-30%, and notes that over 98% of current hydrogen is produced from fossil fuels. The text warns that 'hydrogen-ready' infrastructure risks locking in fossil fuel dependence and diverting resources from more efficient direct electrification. Environmental concerns include high water and land footprints for green hydrogen, as well as the indirect warming effect of hydrogen leaks. The author concludes that low-carbon hydrogen should be reserved for chemical feedstocks and niche industrial applications where direct electricity is not feasible.

The document examines how ISDS mechanisms are used by foreign investors to challenge environmental and climate policies, often resulting in 'regulatory chill' where states avoid enacting laws for fear of costly arbitration. It highlights the lack of transparency in these proceedings and the limited role of public participation and amicus briefs. The authors argue that investment treaties have a negligible effect on promoting foreign direct investment (FDI) but impose significant costs on human rights and the environment, particularly in the Global South. The submission recommends the termination of old-generation treaties, the carving out of climate measures from ISDS scope, and a shift toward resolving disputes in domestic courts.

The document examines five international case studies to guide Ghana in operationalizing its Environmental Protection Act, 2025. It highlights the risks of transacting carbon before establishing legal frameworks, as seen in Liberia, and the benefits of statutory community benefit-sharing floors, as implemented in Kenya. The analysis contrasts state-centered models in Zambia and Indonesia with Australia's property-law approach, where carbon rights are registrable interests in land. The briefing concludes with seven specific recommendations for Ghana, including the definition of carbon rights as transactable interests and the mandate of community development agreements to ensure free, prior and informed consent.