Search Climate Insights Directory

The report outlines a stepwise process for EU Member States to develop National Restoration Plans (NRPs) to meet the legally binding targets of the Nature Restoration Law (NRL), which aims to restore 20% of land and sea areas by 2030 and all degraded ecosystems by 2050. It details legal requirements for monitoring, quantification, and stakeholder engagement, while emphasizing the need for policy coherence with the Renewable Energy Directive, Common Agricultural Policy, and Common Fisheries Policy. The document provides 14 specific recommendations to ensure NRPs are ambitious, evidence-based, and well-funded through a mix of public and private sources.

A joint contribution by ClientEarth and other NGOs proposing structural reforms to EU trade policy to align it with the European Green Deal. The authors argue for binding sustainability obligations, independent ex-post monitoring, the introduction of sanctions for non-compliance, and enhanced roles for Domestic Advisory Groups and civil society in the negotiation and enforcement of Trade and Sustainable Development (TSD) chapters.

A coalition of 28 European organisations calls for a legislative reform of EU agriculture statistics to eliminate 'blind spots' in agro-chemical data. The letter argues that current Eurostat data is incomplete and too aggregated to effectively monitor the sustainable use of pesticides or protect public health and the environment. The authors propose four key improvements: the systematic electronic collection of farmers' pesticide records, the inclusion of biocides and veterinary products in data collection, the publication of data at the Local Administrative Unit level, and unrestricted access to raw data for public authorities.

The document criticizes the European Commission's perceived imbalance in engagement, noting that corporate representatives and business associations account for 69% of meetings with Commissioners' cabinet members, compared to 16% for NGOs. It argues that the 'Antwerp Declaration' serves as a roadmap for dismantling climate and social protections in favor of industrial competitiveness. The authors highlight that European firms in energy transition sectors distributed €1.6 trillion to shareholders between 2010 and 2023, suggesting that public subsidies for these industries are unnecessary. The letter demands a shift toward evidence-based lawmaking that prioritizes the 'Polluter Pays Principle' and protects citizens from 'forever chemicals (PFAS)' and pesticide pollution.

The open letter argues that fossil gas is incompatible with the EU's climate-neutrality goals and the 1.5°C temperature limit. It claims that investing in renewable energy creates up to three times more jobs per euro than fossil fuel investments and that fossil gas infrastructure is generally incompatible with renewable gases at scale.

ClientEarth employs a legal-centric strategy to enforce environmental laws, challenge corporate pollution, and reshape financial systems. Key achievements include winning the right for the public to challenge the EU in court on environmental decisions, securing the closure of coal plants in Europe, and litigating against fossil fuel companies for misleading advertising and abandoned wells. The organization focuses on four primary pillars: breaking new legal ground for justice, aligning financial flows with planetary needs, transforming food and land use, and phasing out fossil fuels in energy and transport.

The document identifies a critical legal gap in Ghana: while the Environmental Protection Act, 2025 (Act 1124) regulates carbon market operations, it does not define who owns forest carbon. Consequently, ownership is currently inferred from a complex mix of land tenure, tree tenure, and customary law. The briefing analyzes two competing legal classifications—treating carbon as an ecosystem service versus a natural resource—and argues that the chosen model significantly impacts whether local farmers and communities receive direct benefits. It recommends a hybrid approach that maintains State regulatory oversight while statutorily guaranteeing benefit entitlements for those who steward the forests, utilizing Community Resource Management Areas (CREMAs) as a practical delivery mechanism.

The document argues that the proposed 35% environmental and climate spending target is insufficient and should be increased to 50%, while removing exemptions for defence and security spending. It identifies significant 'greenwashing' risks in Annex I, specifically regarding targeted support to farmers' income, military mobility, and critical raw materials extraction. The briefing provides a detailed technical reference document proposing changes to over 100 intervention fields, including the deletion of activities that violate the 'Do no significant harm' (DNSH) principle, such as hydropower, nuclear fission, and airport capacity expansion.

The document argues that EMFAF funds are being used in ways that contradict EU environmental goals and international obligations, specifically by underfunding marine biodiversity and failing to prioritise small-scale fisheries. It highlights a systemic gap where 5–12% of funds are allocated to environmentally harmful subsidies, exceeding biodiversity spending by more than twofold. Analysis of several Member States shows that most fall far below a recommended 25% allocation for conservation and restoration. The brief also warns that proposed changes to the next Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) risk further diluting these priorities by removing the EMFAF as a stand-alone fund and lacking mandatory spending targets for biodiversity and the decarbonisation of the fishing fleet.

The document critiques the European Commission's proposal to update the Aarhus Regulation, asserting it fails to meet international law standards set by the Aarhus Convention. It highlights gaps regarding 'national implementing measures', 'external effects' of acts, and the exclusion of state aid decisions. The authors propose specific legislative amendments to broaden the scope of internal review, remove cost barriers for NGOs, and explicitly link the Regulation to the Aarhus Convention to ensure effective judicial review of EU environmental decisions.

The document argues that the European Commission's proposal to amend the Aarhus Regulation contains loopholes that would leave the EU in breach of the Aarhus Convention. It specifically criticizes the exclusion of acts requiring national implementing measures and state aid decisions from internal review. The paper proposes amendments to broaden the scope of reviewable acts, ensure that costs of litigation are not prohibitive for NGOs, and explicitly link the Regulation to the EU's international obligations under the Aarhus Convention.

A joint letter from NGOs calling for an increase in EU funding for fisheries monitoring and enforcement to ensure compliance with the Common Fisheries Policy.

The document advocates for the adoption of Remote Electronic Monitoring (REM)—an integrated system of sensors and cameras—to address non-compliance with the EU Landing Obligation (LO). It highlights that traditional monitoring is insufficient and that REM provides a cost-effective way to verify catch data, improve stock assessments, and satisfy retailer demands for sustainable sourcing. While citing successful implementations in Canada, the US, Australia, and New Zealand, the text identifies privacy concerns and a lack of political will as primary barriers. It concludes by recommending that the European Commission strengthen its revised Control Regulation to mandate REM for high-risk fleet segments and remove exemptions for small catches.

The document examines how fuel subsidies in the EU fishing fleet incentivise overfishing, increase greenhouse gas emissions, and provide a competitive advantage to environmentally damaging, fuel-intensive fishing methods like trawling. It argues that removing these subsidies—estimated at €1 billion to €1.5 billion annually—would promote energy efficiency, support fish stock recovery, and benefit small-scale fishers, who currently receive less support than large-scale and distant-water fleets.

Commissioner Virginijus Sinkevičius outlines the European Union's commitment to transparency and civil society engagement in fisheries negotiations with the UK, specifically through the use of domestic advisory groups and a Civil Society Forum established under the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA).

The document asserts that the current EU Fisheries Control System fails to deter IUU fishing due to a lack of implementation and harmonisation of sanctions across Member States. It highlights that negligible fines allow offenders to treat sanctions as a "basic cost of doing business" and notes that the penalty point system is "not fit for purpose" because seriousness criteria vary by state. The factsheet supports the European Commission's proposal to introduce mandatory administrative sanctions with minimum fine levels and objective EU-wide criteria for serious infringements. ClientEarth further recommends expanding the list of serious infringements to include turning off AIS transmitters and failing to mitigate the accidental catch of sensitive species.

ClientEarth and the European Environmental Bureau are calling on EU Environment Ministers to support the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee's finding that the EU lacks effective access to justice. They argue that the European Commission's proposal to reject these findings is legally weak, creates a double standard between EU institutions and Member States, and undermines the rule of law and environmental democracy in Europe and Central Asia.

The document addresses claims that a proposed EU Directive on collective redress would lead to abusive litigation, forum shopping, and the creation of shell organizations by law firms. ClientEarth argues that the proposal's requirements for 'Qualified Entities'—including non-profit status and funding disclosure—prevent law firms from controlling cases. It further asserts that the proposal maintains safeguards against abusive litigation, noting that a 2018 Commission study found no substantiated instances of such abuse in the EU over the preceding five years. The document concludes that the EU system is more restrictive than existing mechanisms and is distinct from the US class action model.

This factsheet highlights the governance gaps in the EU's management of small-scale fisheries (SSF), specifically vessels under 12 metres. It argues that the lack of mandatory tracking and catch reporting for these vessels leads to insufficient data for stock assessments and undermines marine conservation. The document recommends the adoption of cost-effective tracking devices and electronic logbooks for all vessels, regardless of size, to ensure a level playing field and more reliable fisheries management.

The document highlights a significant disparity in EU fisheries funding, noting that while small-scale fishers make up 70% of the European fleet, they receive only 20% of EU funds. It identifies administrative complexity, bank guarantee requirements, and a lack of tailored support as primary barriers that favor industrial operators over sustainable, artisanal fishing. The brief recommends streamlining application procedures, removing banking barriers, creating dedicated budgets for small-scale fishers, and increasing the representation of these fishers in EU decision-making processes.