Search Climate Insights Directory

The document analyzes how a 2025 ICJ Advisory Opinion establishes that states must include end-use emissions (downstream effects) in environmental impact assessments (EIAs) for fossil fuel projects. It highlights that while the opinion is non-binding, it provides authoritative legal guidance that is already influencing national and regional courts in the UK, Norway, and the EU. The brief recommends that governments update their regulations to require the quantification of combustion emissions and align these assessments with global climate objectives, such as IPCC 1.5°C pathways, to mitigate legal risks.

The document examines how a July 2025 International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory opinion mandates that environmental impact assessments (EIAs) for fossil fuel projects include emissions from the final combustion of the extracted fuels. It highlights that while states determine the exact content of EIAs, they must account for downstream effects to meet due diligence and Paris Agreement obligations. The briefing cites precedents in the UK and EFTA Court, as well as subsequent rulings by the European Court of Human Rights and the Borgarting Court of Appeal, to demonstrate the growing legal requirement to quantify end-use greenhouse gas emissions.

The briefing examines the legal implications of the 2025 ICJ Advisory Opinion on climate change, arguing that the provision of fossil fuel subsidies may constitute an internationally wrongful act. It extends this reasoning to other harmful subsidies, such as those in agriculture and plastics, and provides recommendations for states to reduce legal risk through transparent, phased reforms and international coordination via the Coalition on Phasing Out Fossil Fuel Incentives Including Subsidies (COFFIS).

The document argues that the ICJ's 2025 advisory opinion transforms the removal of fossil fuel subsidies from a political commitment into a legal imperative, as such subsidies may constitute an 'internationally wrongful act'. It suggests this reasoning extends to other harmful subsidies, such as those in agriculture and plastics, increasing the legal risk for states. The briefing recommends that governments implement transparent, gradual phase-out plans, prioritize social protection over production subsidies, and coordinate internationally through initiatives like the Coalition on Phasing Out Fossil Fuel Incentives including Subsidies (COFFIS).

The document argues that the ICJ's 2025 advisory opinion transforms the legal landscape for investment disputes by establishing that climate action is a binding legal obligation rather than a discretionary policy choice. This shift undermines investor claims based on 'legitimate expectations' for fossil fuel activities and provides states with stronger defenses against claims of unfair and inequitable treatment (FET) or indirect expropriation. The author recommends that states reform investment treaties to exclude climate measures from compensation claims, limit prospective damages based on future fossil fuel revenues, and negotiate agreements to neutralize survival clauses in treaties like the Energy Charter Treaty.

The document analyzes how the ICJ's 2025 Advisory Opinion rejects the 'lex specialis' doctrine, establishing that the UN climate regime and other multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs), human rights law, and customary international law mutually inform and reinforce one another. It argues that states must integrate climate considerations into the implementation of treaties such as the Convention on Biological Diversity and the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea to demonstrate due diligence and avoid legal consequences for non-compliance.

The Nature-Based Solutions Inventory for Belize catalogues 37 projects implemented from 2018 to 2025 across all districts. These initiatives, led primarily by NGOs and community-based organisations, focus on reforestation, mangrove and coral reef restoration, and climate-smart agriculture to mitigate risks from sea level rise, hurricanes, and droughts. The report highlights a shift from grey infrastructure to NbS, supported by national policies like the National Landscape Restoration Strategy and international funding from entities such as the Adaptation Fund and Global Affairs Canada.

The report details the findings of a two-part survey conducted between June and September 2025 with over 60 respondents from academia, government, and civil society. The results indicate a shift in priorities away from traditional investment protection and toward managing the negative impacts of investment and maximizing positive spillovers. While treaties are seen as useful for dispute settlement and international cooperation, national laws are overwhelmingly viewed as the most appropriate tool for addressing sustainable investment and investor accountability. The report also explores technical aspects of treaty reform, including the potential for treaties to scale up renewable energy and the preference for non-adjudicatory compliance mechanisms.

The IISD recommends that the EU uphold its Arctic fossil fuel extraction moratorium to ensure energy security, protect fragile ecosystems, and maintain policy coherence with the European Green Deal. The document argues that Arctic fossil fuels are too expensive, high-risk, and slow to develop to be viable, noting that new fields would only become operational after the EU should have advanced its net-zero pathway. It further suggests phasing out imports from the Barents and northern Norwegian seas to reduce security risks and align with partners like Canada and Greenland, who have implemented similar bans.

The report assesses the alignment of ARSO's regional agriculture and forestry standards with the EUDR. While ARSO demonstrates strong institutional governance and a solid baseline for legal compliance, it lacks critical technical requirements for EUDR readiness, specifically regarding the December 31, 2020 cut-off date, plot-level geolocation, and structured ex ante risk assessments. The author recommends that ARSO adopt EUDR-aligned definitions of deforestation, mandate polygon-level mapping for plots over 4 hectares, and increase transparency regarding audit outcomes to help African producers maintain market access to the EU.

The ICJ's 2025 Advisory Opinion establishes that states have binding legal obligations to protect the climate system, which includes phasing out fossil fuel production and subsidies. This finding challenges the legal basis for many investor-state claims, as it undermines the 'legitimate expectations' of investors in carbon-intensive industries and provides states with stronger defenses against claims of fair and equitable treatment (FET) violations. The brief argues that the prospect of ISDS can cause 'regulatory chill,' deterring necessary climate action. It recommends that states reform investment treaties through sector-based carve-outs, restrict forward-looking damages based on projected fossil fuel revenues, and coordinate withdrawals from outdated agreements like the Energy Charter Treaty.

The document examines the 2025 ICJ advisory opinion, which establishes that climate obligations are not isolated to the UN climate regime but are reinforced by other multilateral environmental agreements and human rights law. It argues that states must implement these obligations in an integrated manner to demonstrate due diligence and avoid legal consequences for inaction.

The report analyzes the systemic invisibility of the care economy in national statistics, specifically how GDP overlooks unpaid care work disproportionately performed by women. It reviews five primary measurement approaches: time-use surveys, economic valuation (opportunity and replacement costs), policy indices/scorecards, quality-of-life metrics, and household satellite accounts. Using case studies from Canada, Bangladesh, the UK, and Africa, the document demonstrates that unpaid care can represent a significant portion of national wealth—for example, estimated at 25% to 37% of Canada's GDP in 2021. The report concludes that moving beyond GDP requires a cohesive, integrated system of measurement to recognize care as a structural pillar of development and a fundamental investment in human capabilities.

The assessment evaluates the viability of nature-based solutions (NbS) in Johannesburg's Jukskei River catchment, including riparian restoration and urban tree planting. Using the SAVi methodology, the report finds that these interventions are economically viable, with a discounted benefit-to-cost ratio (BCR) of 3.06 and cumulative net benefits of ZAR 152 million from 2025 to 2050. The most significant benefits are avoided health costs from water pollution and avoided infrastructure damage from flooding.

The report examines a diverse array of transition mechanisms, including Just Energy Transition Partnerships (JETPs), national sectoral processes in countries like Germany and Chile, and first-mover alliances such as the Powering Past Coal Alliance. It highlights the necessity of national ownership, structured social dialogue, and blended finance to overcome political gridlock and ensure a just transition. The analysis reveals significant gaps in international support, particularly a shortfall in grants and concessional finance for Global South countries and a lack of coordinated global guidance for designing transition roadmaps.

The document outlines a structured approach to the global transition away from fossil fuels (TAFF), emphasizing that current production and consumption plans are misaligned with 1.5°C pathways. It proposes that effective TAFF roadmaps must be anchored in science, justice, and national ownership, while integrating elements such as subsidy reform, economic diversification, and decommissioning. The guide highlights the necessity of international coordination between producer and consumer countries to manage systemic risks, reform global finance, and ensure a just and orderly transition.

The document highlights a critical gap in investment governance: while international investment treaties have undergone significant reform, investor-state contracts remain largely marginalized and outdated. These contracts often contain stabilization clauses and tax incentives that restrict a state's regulatory space and can neutralize treaty-level safeguards. The brief also notes a rise in contract-based investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS), which is often more opaque than treaty-based arbitration. To address these risks, the authors recommend strengthening national institutional coordination, centralizing and assessing existing contracts, and developing national model contracts. Globally, they advocate for integrating contract reform into broader investment governance discussions and developing regional guidance to reduce negotiation asymmetries.

The policy brief highlights how investment contracts—often overlooked in favor of treaty reforms—can create regulatory restrictions and financial losses for states. It identifies risks from outdated stabilization clauses and tax incentives, and notes a rise in contract-based investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) cases. The authors propose a three-pronged national strategy: strengthening inter-ministerial coordination, creating centralized contract inventories, and developing national model contracts aligned with international sustainability standards.

The document highlights the risks posed by outdated and opaque investment contracts, such as stabilization clauses and tax incentives, which can limit a state's regulatory space and lead to costly international arbitration. It proposes a three-step national reform strategy: improving inter-ministerial coordination, centralizing and evaluating existing contracts, and developing standardized model contracts. It also calls for greater alignment between contract reform and broader regional and global efforts to modernize investment governance.

The report argues that South Africa must elevate the Southern Ocean and Antarctica in its strategic planning, as the region is critical for global climate regulation, food security, and maritime safety. While South Africa is the only African state party to the Antarctic Treaty, its diplomatic engagement has been inconsistent. The document highlights rising risks from climate change, such as sea-level rise threatening African coasts, and geopolitical tensions, including Russia's seismic surveying and the blocking of Marine Protected Areas by China and Russia. It suggests South Africa leverage its non-claimant status and role as a logistical gateway to enhance its influence, while warning that its under-resourced navy may struggle with increasing search and rescue demands from growing Antarctic tourism and rerouted shipping traffic around the Cape of Good Hope.