Search Climate Insights Directory

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) argues for a legally binding UN Treaty that establishes civil and criminal liability for transnational corporations (TNCs) and their executives. The submission emphasizes the need for a World Court on TNCs and Human Rights to overcome national judicial weaknesses and the 'pattern of impunity' enjoyed by corporations. FoEI specifically calls for the primacy of human rights over investment treaties, the elimination of Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanisms that undermine public health and environmental policies, and the protection of the treaty negotiation process from corporate lobbying. The document supports these claims with case studies of corporate abuses in Nigeria, Brazil, Indonesia, and other regions.

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) advocates for a legally binding UN treaty to end the systemic impunity of transnational corporations (TNCs). The submission argues that the treaty must establish civil and criminal liability for TNCs, their executives, and financiers across global supply chains. FoEI proposes the creation of an independent international court to judge environmental crimes and human rights abuses, emphasizing the need for a hierarchy where human rights obligations prevail over trade and investment agreements, specifically targeting the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanism. The document highlights cases of corporate abuse in Nigeria, Brazil, Mozambique, and elsewhere to illustrate the failure of current voluntary standards and national judicial systems.

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) advocates for a binding UN Treaty to end corporate impunity. The proposal emphasizes the need for direct legal obligations for transnational corporations (TNCs) and their executives, the creation of a World Court on TNCs and Human Rights, and the primacy of human rights over investment treaties. FoEI highlights systemic failures in national courts and the harmful impact of Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanisms, calling for a process free from corporate lobbying that prioritizes the rights of affected communities and environmental defenders.

Friends of the Earth International concludes that the Paris Agreement fails the 'People's Climate Test' due to its lack of binding emission targets, insufficient financial commitments for developing nations, and the absence of concrete mechanisms for loss and damage. The organization criticizes the agreement for not mentioning renewable energy or the phase-out of fossil fuels, while leaving the door open to 'false solutions' like geo-engineering and carbon markets.

Friends of the Earth International concludes that the Paris Agreement fails to provide climate justice, citing a lack of binding emissions targets for developed nations, insufficient financial commitments for developing countries, and the absence of concrete mechanisms for loss and damage reparations. The organization criticizes the agreement for not mentioning renewable energy or energy efficiency and for leaving the door open to 'false solutions' like carbon markets and geoengineering.

Friends of the Earth International concludes that the Paris Agreement fails the 'People’s Test on Climate' due to a lack of binding emissions targets, insufficient financial commitments for developing nations, and the absence of protections for vulnerable communities. The assessment highlights that the agreement does not mandate a phase-out of fossil fuels, lacks mentions of renewable energy or energy efficiency, and relies on unproven technologies like BECCS. Furthermore, it argues that the agreement weakens the principle of 'Common But Differentiated Responsibilities' and excludes compensation and liability for loss and damage.

The statement criticizes the Paris Agreement for abandoning people and the planet, citing a lack of political ambition and the undue influence of corporate lobbyists. It contrasts this political failure with the rise of a global movement of indigenous peoples, youth, and activists who demand climate justice, agroecology, and community-managed forests over 'false solutions' and corporate greenwashing.

The statement asserts that the Paris climate negotiations were a failure of political leadership, characterized by a lack of ambition and the undue influence of polluting corporations. It highlights the rise of a global movement demanding climate justice, food sovereignty through agroecology, and community-led forest management, contrasting these grassroots efforts with 'false solutions' and cynical deforestation offsets promoted within the UN framework.

Friends of the Earth Africa criticizes the draft Paris agreement for failing to provide adequate resources for adaptation, ignoring climate debt, and promoting market-based mechanisms like REDD that may facilitate land grabs. The organization warns that the current trajectory could lead to 5 to 8 degrees of warming in Africa, causing systemic ecological collapse and mass casualties.

The statement criticizes the impunity of transnational corporations, specifically Vale, BHP, and SAMARCO, following a catastrophic dam collapse on the Rio Doce watershed in Brazil. It highlights the failure of voluntary corporate social responsibility measures and calls on the UN to move beyond voluntary guidelines toward a legally binding treaty for corporate accountability.

The document criticizes the trend of transforming the VGGT from a human rights-based framework into a corporate tool for risk management and 'greenwashing'. It argues that guides produced by entities like USAID and the G7 New Alliance shift state responsibilities to the private sector, legitimize land grabbing, and falsely equate the power of corporations with that of local communities. The signatories call for states to implement the VGGT in line with human rights obligations, establish a robust monitoring mechanism within the Committee on World Food Security (CSA), and adopt a legally binding instrument for corporations regarding human rights.

The document is a declaration by social movements and civil society organizations criticizing the trend of adapting the UN's Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure (VGGT) into business-centric tools. The authors argue that guides produced by entities like USAID, the G7 New Alliance, and the Interlaken Group transform a human rights framework into a corporate social responsibility (CSR) tool, effectively legitimizing land grabbing. They contend that these guides erroneously treat states and corporations as equal stakeholders and dangerously suggest that private investors can manage land rights recognition and conflict resolution—tasks that are the sole legitimate mandate of the state. The statement calls for states to implement the VGGT based on human rights obligations, for the FAO to provide technical support for state regulation of businesses, and for the adoption of a legally binding international instrument on multinational corporations and human rights.

The statement criticizes recent guides developed by agencies like USAID and the Interlaken Group that frame the VGGT as a tool for corporate risk management and corporate social responsibility. The authors argue that this 'multi-stakeholder' approach wrongly transfers state duties—such as identifying tenure rights and resolving conflicts—to private investors, thereby legitimizing land grabs and ignoring power asymmetries. They call for states to enact laws regulating transnational corporations, ensure free prior and informed consent, and establish a robust monitoring mechanism within the UN Committee on World Food Security.

Friends of the Earth International argues that failing to stop catastrophic climate change will exacerbate poverty, hunger, and conflict, making just climate action a critical peace-building tool. The organization criticizes the French government's state of emergency for restricting civil liberties and cancelling climate justice mobilizations ahead of the December 2015 UN climate negotiations, while asserting that democratic decision-making must be reclaimed from corporate influence.

The document critiques industrial agriculture as a primary driver of climate change and social inequality, while presenting agroecology as a viable, small-scale alternative. It specifically attacks 'Climate Smart Agriculture' (CSA) as a corporate-led 'false solution' designed to greenwash industrial practices. The text advocates for a transition toward food sovereignty and the relocalisation of food systems, highlighting the role of women and traditional knowledge in building climate resilience.

The document contrasts industrial agribusiness with agroecology, asserting that the former is a primary driver of climate change and social inequality. It dismisses 'climate-smart agriculture' as a marketing tool for corporations to maintain power structures without addressing the root causes of the climate crisis. Instead, it advocates for a transition to agroecology, which supports small-scale producers, protects biodiversity, and enhances climate resilience. The text highlights the role of women and traditional knowledge in this transition and calls for public policies that shift resources away from industrial meat and crop production toward food sovereignty.

The Coal Atlas 2015 examines the systemic damage caused by coal extraction and combustion, highlighting its role as a primary driver of global CO2 emissions and its associated health and human rights violations. It analyzes the economic instability of the 'carbon bubble' and the failure of technologies like carbon capture and storage, while documenting the rise of renewable energy and grassroots protests against the coal industry across various nations, including China, India, the US, Russia, and Germany.

The Green Climate Fund (GCF), an operating entity of the UNFCCC, aims to support low-emission and climate-resilient development in developing countries. It operates through a 24-member Board divided equally between developed and developing nations and distributes funds via 'Accredited Entities' rather than directly. The fund maintains a 50/50 aspirational split between adaptation and mitigation, with half of adaptation funds targeted at particularly vulnerable countries. However, the document highlights concerns regarding the lack of an explicit exclusion list for fossil fuels, the potential for funding 'false solutions', and the limited requirements for national designated authorities (NDAs) to engage with civil society and affected communities.

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) is the primary multilateral fund for climate adaptation and mitigation in developing countries. It operates through accredited entities and National Designated Authorities (NDAs), with a target of splitting funding equally between adaptation and mitigation. While it lacks a formal exclusion list for polluting technologies, it employs investment criteria to avoid high-emission infrastructure. Civil society organizations, including Friends of the Earth, act as observers and advocates to ensure transparency and community involvement.

The briefing advocates for Community Forest Management (CFM) as a superior model for protecting biodiversity and mitigating climate change compared to industrial forestry and absolute protection regimes. It highlights that CFM can reduce deforestation rates and enhance carbon storage while securing the rights and livelihoods of Indigenous Peoples and local communities. The document warns against 'false solutions' like REDD+ and the 'financialization of nature,' which it claims risk land grabbing and the erosion of traditional governance. It recommends that governments recognize collective land tenure and that international frameworks, such as the Convention on Biological Diversity, prioritize CFM over traditional Protected Areas to meet conservation goals.