Search Climate Insights Directory

The document critiques soil carbon sequestration markets, asserting they allow major polluters to avoid real emission reductions while increasing corporate control over agriculture. It highlights how these systems favor large-scale industrial farms, marginalize smallholders, and rely on unreliable measurement methods. The text further details the role of governments and corporations, such as Yara, in promoting these mechanisms despite scientific evidence suggesting that 'climate-smart' practices do not significantly increase soil carbon storage.

The briefing by Friends of the Earth International critiques carbon trading and offsetting, specifically the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), as mechanisms that lock in fossil fuel dependency and facilitate human rights abuses. It warns that proposed expansions at COP 17—including sectoral crediting, soil carbon markets, and the inclusion of carbon capture and storage (CCS)—will further undermine global climate goals. The author advocates for a systemic transition to renewable energy and the provision of public, additional climate finance instead of market-based mechanisms.

Friends of the Earth International provides a template letter for organizations to urge embassies to pressure the Brazilian government to investigate the murders of activist Bruno Araújo Pereira and journalist Dom Phillips in the Vale do Javari indigenous territory. The document highlights the high risk faced by human rights and territorial defenders in Latin America and the Caribbean, specifically citing threats against the Union of Indigenous Organizations of Vale do Javari (UNIVAJA). It calls for the identification of the perpetrators, punishment for those invading indigenous territories, and the guarantee of territorial rights and self-determination for Indigenous peoples in Brazil.

The document is a model letter addressed to Brazilian embassies, calling for an investigation into the 'Masacre Guapoy' and the protection of Guaraní and Kaiowá indigenous territories against agribusiness and mining interests.

The document argues that community-based forest governance (CFG) is essential for halting unprecedented forest destruction, which it attributes to consumerism, unfair distribution of goods, and colonial legacies. It defines CFG as the collective regulations and practices used by communities for the conservation and sustainable use of forests, contrasting this with 'forest science' models that often facilitate devastation. The report identifies key characteristics of successful CFG, including clear boundary definition, traditional resource knowledge, and participatory regulation. It highlights the critical role of women, who often possess distinct knowledge of non-timber forest products and water protection, and emphasizes that their inclusion is vital for holistic governance. Through various case studies, the document illustrates the struggle for land tenure and the impact of industrial pressures, such as palm oil in Indonesia and pulp production in Brazil. It further critiques the role of International Financial Institutions (IFIs) and environmental services markets, arguing that the commodification of nature often privatizes heritage and marginalizes the poor. Finally, it links forest conservation to food sovereignty, public health, and disaster resilience, proposing a shift toward local production and fair timber markets.

The report argues that while state and private ownership still dominate global forests, community forest management (CFM) is a more effective strategy for forest conservation, poverty reduction, and climate mitigation. It identifies a set of key rights—including territorial, consultation, and cultural rights—that underpin successful CFM and maps these against 17 international agreements, such as the UN Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and UNDRIP. The document concludes that while no single agreement mandates the creation of community forests, the collective weight of these international norms provides a strong legal and moral basis for states to devolve forest authority to local communities.

The report argues that community forest management (GCB) is a vital tool for environmental conservation and social justice, contrasting it with industrial logging and monoculture plantations. It provides a framework for successful GCB, including the need for clear boundaries, participatory regulation, and legal recognition. The document details case studies from India, Papua New Guinea, Malaysia, Indonesia, France, Greece, Chile, Bolivia, Brazil, El Salvador, and Haiti, illustrating both successful community-led conservation and the violent resistance against corporate land grabs. It further critiques the role of International Financial Institutions (IFIs), the impact of global consumerism on forest destruction, and the risks associated with 'environmental services' markets, while advocating for food sovereignty and the restoration of native forests.

The document argues for a rights-based approach to conservation, contrasting the effectiveness of governance by Indigenous Peoples and local communities (IPLCs) with the harms of 'fortress conservation'. It advocates for the recognition of Indigenous Peoples’ and Local Community Conserved Territories and Areas (ICCAs) and sets specific criteria for the quality, connectivity, and governance of protected areas to be counted toward global biodiversity targets.

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) advocates for a shift from 'fortress conservation' to a rights-based approach in the design of protected areas (PAs). The document emphasizes that the most effective conservation outcomes occur when lands are governed by indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLCs). It highlights the significance of Indigenous and Community Conserved Areas (ICCAs), which potentially cover 21% of the global territory, and calls for the post-2020 global biodiversity framework to recognize and protect 100% of these areas. FoEI proposes a hierarchy for expanding PAs that prioritizes the recognition of historical IPLC contributions, the protection of critical ecosystems in uninhabited regions, and the improvement of ecological representativeness and connectivity, all while ensuring public funding and the exclusion of biodiversity offsets.

The report analyzes the escalating extraction and consumption of natural resources, highlighting a stark divide between wealthy and poor regions. It argues that while resource efficiency has improved, absolute consumption continues to rise due to economic growth, a phenomenon termed the 'rebound effect'. The document emphasizes the environmental degradation and social injustices resulting from resource extraction in the Global South, and calls for a transition toward development models based on well-being rather than constant material growth.

The document provides a comprehensive list of requirements for a successful Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF). It advocates for a rights-based approach, the adoption of a 'Whole Government Approach' to mainstreaming, and the prohibition of destructive activities like deep-sea mining and fracking. It argues against voluntary commitments, biodiversity offsetting, and the use of high-risk technologies such as geoengineering and synthetic biology, while calling for public finance from developed countries to support biodiversity conservation in developing nations.

The document argues that the Global Biodiversity Framework must be based on binding norms rather than voluntary commitments and must address the structural economic drivers of biodiversity loss. It advocates for a rights-based approach that protects indigenous peoples and environmental defenders, the elimination of harmful subsidies, and the prohibition of high-impact industrial activities like deep-sea mining and Arctic oil extraction. The text explicitly rejects the commodification of nature, biodiversity offsets, and the use of geoengineering or synthetic biology as solutions to the environmental crisis.

The document provides a comprehensive guide for the Global Biodiversity Framework, emphasizing the need for binding rules over voluntary commitments and the integration of human rights, especially for Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities. It argues that biodiversity loss is driven by the current economic system and unsustainable consumption, calling for a 'Whole Government Approach' to integrate biodiversity across all sectors. Key recommendations include the elimination of harmful subsidies for industrial farming and aquaculture, the prohibition of high-risk technologies like geoengineering, and the rejection of biodiversity offsetting and market-based solutions. The text stresses that conservation must prioritize existing habitats and be supported by public funding, particularly from developed nations to developing ones.

The report examines the EIB's operations in the Global South, specifically in Zambia, Chad, Cameroon, Laos, Philippines, Indonesia, Mexico, and Brazil. It contends that the EIB functions as a demand-driven institution that finances high-yield projects for European firms rather than prioritizing social or environmental goals. Key criticisms include a lack of transparency, failure to adhere to EU environmental and social standards, and the promotion of harmful projects such as large dams and extractive industries. The document concludes with recommendations for a fundamental review of the EIB's project selection, accountability, and monitoring processes.

The document analyzes the French corporate duty of vigilance law passed on March 23, 2017, which requires large companies to prevent human rights and environmental violations in their supply chains. It uses case studies involving Total's palm oil biorefinery, Société Générale's financing of LNG terminals in the US, and French supermarkets' banana sourcing in Ecuador to demonstrate the law's necessity. The report concludes by advocating for a binding UN treaty to internationalize these standards and ensure victims' access to justice globally.

The report argues that excessive financial speculation in agricultural commodity derivatives and the financing of land grabs by European banks, pension funds, and insurance companies contribute to food price volatility and human rights abuses. It identifies key institutions such as Deutsche Bank, Barclays, and BNP Paribas as significant actors in these markets and recommends strict EU regulations, including position limits and bans on index funds for agricultural commodities, to protect the right to food.

The report argues that ArcelorMittal's operations in Liberia have failed to deliver promised development benefits due to systemic corruption and mismanagement of the County Social Development Fund (CSDF). It highlights how funds intended for affected communities were diverted to political projects in Gbarnga and criticises the company for complicity in this mismanagement. The document also details environmental risks to the Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve and reports poor labour conditions and health services. Finally, it concludes that ArcelorMittal violated OECD guidelines by donating 100 pick-up trucks that were used by legislators rather than for agricultural purposes.

The document critiques the 'new' Green Revolution in Africa, which it describes as a corporate takeover driven by multinational agribusinesses and philanthropic foundations. It highlights the risks of genetically modified (GM) crops and synthetic fertilisers, contrasting these with the benefits of agroecology. The report argues that small-scale farmers, who produce 80% of the food consumed in Africa, are the key to food security and should be supported through policy reforms that prioritise public goods and ecological sustainability over private corporate profit.

The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is a global infrastructure and economic cooperation framework led by China, focusing on energy and transport connectivity across Asia, Europe, and Africa. While marketed as a 'win-win' development strategy, the document argues it often serves Chinese domestic interests, such as exporting industrial overcapacity and asserting geopolitical influence. The briefing highlights significant environmental risks, particularly the funding of coal-fired power plants and large hydropower projects, and a lack of transparent environmental, social, and governance (ESG) safeguards. It identifies a 'debt trap' risk for recipient countries and calls for a shift toward a 'Green BRI' aligned with international sustainability standards.

The document provides a comprehensive overview of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), describing it as a strategic framework for Chinese foreign investment and global influence. It highlights a systemic lack of environmental and social safeguards, the dominance of Chinese state-owned enterprises, and the tendency of BRI financing to favor fossil fuel projects over renewables. The briefing also details the 'debt trap' risks for recipient nations and the efforts of civil society organizations to advocate for a 'Green BRI' and greater corporate accountability.