Search Climate Insights Directory

The document examines the intersection of gender justice and food sovereignty, arguing that the industrial food system relies on the patriarchal exploitation of women's labor. It advocates for a transition to agroecology and feminist economics to ensure equitable access to land, seeds, and resources, while calling for the recognition and redistribution of unpaid care work.

The report maps 103 multistakeholder initiatives (MIs) to demonstrate how transnational corporations and philanthropic entities are displacing state-led multilateralism. It argues that the 'multistakeholder' rhetoric masks deep power imbalances, allowing the private sector to set global agendas, define standards, and implement market-based solutions that often undermine human rights and democratic accountability. The analysis highlights the central role of the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation in driving this trend, particularly through the instrumentalization of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

The document examines the intersection of food sovereignty, agroecology, and gender justice, arguing that the industrial agribusiness model relies on the patriarchal exploitation of women's labor. It advocates for a transition to agroecology and feminist economies to ensure equitable access to land, seeds, and resources, while recognizing and redistributing unpaid care work.

The report examines the expansion of transnational corporations (TNCs) in Latin America and the Caribbean, specifically within the agro-industrial and energy sectors. It argues that neoliberal state reforms, free trade agreements, and investment treaties since the 1990s have facilitated the concentration of power, leading to the displacement of small-scale farmers, environmental degradation, and systemic violence. The document highlights a gendered dimension to these impacts, noting that women face severe restrictions on land ownership and increased vulnerability to violence. It concludes by proposing strategies for resistance, including the promotion of food sovereignty, agroecology, and the pursuit of a legally binding UN treaty to end corporate impunity.

The document examines the expansion of transnational corporations (TNCs) in Latin America and the Caribbean, specifically within the energy and agriculture sectors. It argues that neoliberal reforms, free trade agreements, and the dismantling of state institutions have enabled TNCs to control territories, leading to widespread dispossession, environmental degradation, and human rights violations. The report highlights a systemic pattern of anti-democratic governance and a specific, severe impact on women's rights and land tenure. It concludes by proposing strategies for resistance, including the promotion of food sovereignty, agroecology, and the establishment of a UN Binding Treaty on Human Rights and Transnational Corporations.

The report maps 103 multistakeholder initiatives (MSIs) to demonstrate how transnational corporations and mega-philanthropies are displacing traditional state-led multilateralism. It identifies a pattern where the World Economic Forum (WEF) and large foundations like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation drive a 'stakeholder capitalism' agenda, often using the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as legitimacy. The analysis reveals a significant democratic deficit, with affected communities and Global South governments largely excluded from decision-making, while the UN system often acts as a strategic partner that legitimises these corporate-led mechanisms.

Friends of the Earth International and other civil society organizations condemn the Israeli government's October 2021 decision to classify six Palestinian human rights organizations as 'terrorist organizations' and 'unauthorized'. The statement argues that this move is part of a broader trend of criminalizing defenders of land, water, and human rights. It specifically highlights the Union of Agricultural Work Committees (UAWC) for its work in sustainable agriculture and seed preservation in the West Bank's 'Zone C'. The signatories call on the international community, including the UN Human Rights Council and European governments, to pressure Israel to reverse these designations and end the occupation of Palestinian lands.

The statement condemns the Israeli government's decision to label six Palestinian civil society organizations as terrorists and 'unauthorized,' arguing that this is an escalation of the criminalization of human rights defenders. It highlights the role of these organizations in protecting land, water, and human rights under occupation, specifically mentioning the Union of Agricultural Work Committees (UAWC) and its work in the West Bank. The signatories call on the international community to pressure Israel to end the occupation and respect international law.

Friends of the Earth International views the COP26 pledge to end public financing for overseas fossil fuel projects by 2022 as a positive step but criticizes the exclusion of countries like Japan and South Korea, the continued domestic fossil fuel extraction in the UK and US, and the lack of climate finance for the Global South. The organization advocates for community-based renewable energy systems and denounces 'false solutions' such as net zero and carbon markets, while specifically calling for the UK to end financial support for gas exploitation in Mozambique.

Friends of the Earth International critiques the COP26 pledge by the UK, US, and 18 other nations to end public funding for overseas fossil fuel projects by late 2022. While welcoming the inclusion of oil and gas, the organization highlights the hypocrisy of countries like the UK and US continuing domestic extraction. It further demands a transition to community-owned renewable energy in the Global South, the cessation of 'net zero' loopholes and geoengineering, and specifically calls for the UK to stop financing gas extraction in Mozambique.

Friends of the Earth International criticizes the COP26 deforestation pledge as a rebranding of failed initiatives like REDD+, asserting that it facilitates corporate greenwashing through carbon credits and offsets. The statement highlights the hypocrisy of signatory nations, citing the EU-Mercosur agreement's impact on the Amazon and the lack of binding regulations to protect Indigenous Peoples' rights and stop industrial agriculture and extractive industries.

Friends of the Earth International criticizes the COP26 deforestation pledge as a 'greenwashing' effort similar to failed REDD+ initiatives. The organization contends that the reliance on carbon offsets and private financing—exemplified by the UK's funding of the LEAF coalition—enables corporations like Amazon and Unilever to continue emitting while risking land grabs in the Global South. The statement highlights contradictions, such as the EU-MERCOSUR trade agreement's impact on the Amazon and Brazil's treatment of indigenous peoples, and calls for binding human rights instruments and immediate emission cuts over market-based sinks.

Friends of the Earth International criticizes the COP26 deforestation promise as a 'relooking' of failed initiatives like REDD+, claiming it facilitates corporate carbon offsetting rather than actual emission reductions. The statement highlights the hypocrisy of signatory nations, citing the EU-Mercosur trade agreement and Brazil's treatment of indigenous peoples, and calls for binding regulations and direct climate finance instead of market-based mechanisms.

The report provides a comprehensive 'behind-the-scenes' look at the litigation brought by Milieudefensie and over 17,000 co-plaintiffs against Royal Dutch Shell. On May 26, 2021, the District Court of The Hague ruled that Shell must reduce its net carbon emissions by 45% by 2030 compared to 2019 levels. The court based its decision on a 'duty of care' and the necessity to respect human rights, aligning corporate policy with the Paris Agreement. The document serves as a manual for other climate litigants, detailing strategies for funding, community mobilization, and legal argumentation, while analyzing Shell's defenses and the broader implications for corporate accountability and the energy transition.

The report examines the influence of multi-stakeholder initiatives (MSIs) and corporate actors on the UN Food Systems Summit (UNFSS). It argues that the transition from multilateralism to multi-partnership governance allows powerful multinationals and private foundations, such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the World Economic Forum, to steer global food policy toward 'technofixes' and market-based solutions. The analysis of 26 MSIs shows that corporate actors are the most influential stakeholders, often holding leadership positions. The report specifically highlights the role of the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) in promoting industrial agriculture and carbon offset mechanisms, which the authors claim undermine food sovereignty and exacerbate global inequalities.

The report argues that the UN Food Systems Summit has been 'captured' by corporate interests through the use of multi-stakeholder initiatives (MSIs), which shift governance from state-led multilateralism to a model dominated by transnational corporations and philanthropic foundations. An analysis of 26 MSIs reveals that the private sector holds the most influence, often occupying leadership roles. The document highlights the roles of the World Economic Forum (WEF), the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD), and the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) in promoting industrial agriculture and 'nature-positive' solutions that the authors claim are 'false solutions' designed to maintain corporate dominance. It specifically criticizes the appointment of AGRA's president as the UN Special Envoy for the Summit as a conflict of interest and details how companies like Nestlé and Shell use nature-based solutions to offset emissions without reducing production.

The report documents the legal victory of Milieudefensie et al. v. Royal Dutch Shell PLC, where the District Court in The Hague ordered Shell to reduce its net carbon emissions by 45% by 2030 relative to 2019 levels. It explains the use of the 'duty of care' and human rights arguments to hold a corporate actor liable for its contribution to climate change, including Scope 3 emissions. The document also provides a 'mini-toolkit' for other NGOs planning strategic climate litigation, covering research, fundraising, and media strategies.

The document critiques the current global energy system as a driver of climate change and systemic oppression, particularly affecting women in the Global South. It warns against 'false solutions'—such as greenwashing and 'purplewashing'—where corporations adopt environmental or feminist rhetoric without challenging underlying power structures. The report advocates for a 'Feminist Just Energy Transition' based on energy democracy, public ownership, and the centrality of care work and life sustainability over profit accumulation.

The report by Friends of the Earth International contends that the current energy system is built on systemic oppression, including patriarchy and neocolonialism, which disproportionately affects women, indigenous peoples, and the Global South. It warns against 'false solutions' such as greenwashing and 'purplewashing' (superficial feminism), where corporations use renewable energy or gender equality rhetoric to mask continued exploitation. The authors advocate for a feminist energy transition centered on the 'sustainability of life,' public ownership, degrowth, and the recognition of care work, rather than market-led technical fixes.

The document critiques the current global energy system as a product of patriarchal extractivism and capitalism that disproportionately harms women, particularly in the Global South. It warns against 'greenwashing' (maquillaje verde) and 'purplewashing' (maquillaje violeta), where corporations use environmental and gender-equality narratives to mask continued exploitation. The authors advocate for a 'just and feminist energy transition' centered on the sustainability of life, public ownership, and the recognition of care work, rather than market-driven technological fixes.