Connect with us

Published

3 years ago

on

Welcome to Carbon Brief’s Cropped.
We handpick and explain the most important stories at the intersection of climate, land, food and nature over the past fortnight.

This is an online version of Carbon Brief’s fortnightly Cropped email newsletter. Subscribe for free here.

Key developments

Nature finance

‘FORESTS FOREVER’: Brazil unveiled a new “tropical forests forever” fund proposal at the COP28 climate summit in Dubai on Friday, Reuters reported. Launched by environment minister Marina Silva and finance minister Fernando Haddad, the proposal aims to provide 80 tropical countries with finance to help maintain trees, with annual payments based on hectares conserved or restored, according to the newswire. It added that Brazil hopes to raise $250bn from sovereign wealth funds and other investors, including the oil industry. Elsewhere, Bloomberg reported that the UK pledged an additional $38m to Brazil’s Amazon Fund at the talks. According to Dubai’s Khaleej Times, French president Emmanuel Macron used his appearance at the summit to confirm funding for three forest finance packages, including $100m for Papua New Guinea, $60m for the Democratic Republic of Congo and $50m for the Republic of Congo. It added that some of this finance would be through carbon-offset credits (see Carbon Brief’s explainer on the risks of such credits).

DEBT SWAPS FOR NATURE: African leaders called for debt relief for climate action and are receiving guidance from the UN Economic Commission for Africa on how to negotiate agreements at COP28, the Economist reported. However, debt swaps for nature are questioned for their “minimal fiscal impact”, the Mail and Guardian reported. The South African outlet noted that in 35 years this mechanism has only generated $318m of the $280bn needed for the continent to adapt to climate change. Elsewhere, the Climate Finance Group for Latin America and the Caribbean and other 28 civil-society organisations called on international finance institutions and developed countries at COP28 to agree on debt treatment and restructuring. Their call to action included cancelling debt for nations with low financial capacities, enabling debt-for-climate action swaps for emerging countries and creating mechanisms to ensure that those countries can allocate the resources in climate mitigation and adaptation while conserving biodiversity. A group of eight multilateral development banks issued a joint declaration aiming to create a task force on sustainability-linked sovereign financing for nature and climate. This seeks to mobilise credit enhancement – mechanisms to lower risk by investors on sovereign debt – for sustainability-linked sovereign financing for nature and climate. 

POOR APPETITE: While much of the attention at COP28 is on fossil fuel phase-out, the latest text of the global stocktake does not mention harmful agricultural subsidies. Carbon Brief examined the text and found no explicit mention of agriculture in the draft, except in an oblique reference to food production and in “noting” the importance of switching to patterns of sustainable consumption and production, encouraging the former and silent on the latter. Oceans and other ecosystems have a slightly more pronounced presence: halting and reversing deforestation by 2030 is listed as a mitigation option to meet Paris Agreement goals in the next five years, while the need for more research on climate “tipping points” is mentioned twice, a key ask by countries of the Amazon and small island states. 

CARBON MARKET CONCERNS: Meanwhile, Indigenous activists associated with the Indigenous Environmental Network expressed “very serious concerns” about Article 6 negotiations on carbon markets in a press conference at the start of COP28. Eriel Deranger, the executive director of Indigenous Climate Action, pointed out that “carbon-trading mechanisms and fossil fuel systems depend on continued growing emissions” and that phasing out fossil fuels is a matter of “life and death for our communities”. While key decisions on market and non-market approaches will be taken this coming week, World Bank president Ajay Banga told reporters that controversial voluntary carbon offsets were the “best way to move money from the developed world to the developing world”.

COP greenwashing

MEATY: Key players in the meat industry planned a “large presence” at COP28, aiming to “tell its story and tell it well”, according to documents seen by DeSmog and the Guardian. Members of the industry-funded Global Meat Alliance, which produced the documents, were “asked to stick to key comms messages, which include the idea that meat is beneficial to the environment”, the Guardian said. They also featured a messaging summary with talking points framing meat as “sustainable nutrition” – despite meat’s high climate impact. A GMA spokesperson told the outlets that the group works to “simplify and distil public information” around global events “which are often dominated by an anti-meat narrative”. 

PARAGUAY PLANS: In Paraguay, agribusiness groups allegedly “modified” the guidance document for the country’s stance on talks at COP28, El Surtidor reported. The news outlet looked at a previous draft of this document and found that mentions of “reaffirming” commitment to the Paris Agreement and increasing heatwaves were removed from the final text, following comments from agribusiness representatives. El Surtidor said the final document also “call[s] into question” official figures on greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture. 

MAMMOTH TASK: In a woolier story from Dubai, a Russian billionaire who “made a fortune in coal and fertiliser” outlined a plan to “bring a slice of Russia’s ecology back 14,000 years”, Bloomberg reported. Andrey Melnichenko proposed an “eccentric” way to control methane emissions from the thawing Siberian permafrost by “recreating a time when woolly mammoths roamed the tundra”, the outlet said. (For the latest science on methane emissions and permafrost thaw, read Carbon Brief’s recent coverage of a report on how climate change is affecting the cryosphere.) 

Spotlight

Food systems declaration garners 134 signatures

In this spotlight, Carbon Brief explains the Emirates Declaration on food systems – released at COP28 in Dubai last week – and the reaction on the ground from food-systems experts and civil society groups.

During the world climate action summit on the first day of COP28, UAE climate and environment minister Mariam Almheiri announced the Emirates Declaration on Sustainable Agriculture, Resilient Food Systems and Climate Action, a three-page document endorsed by 134 governments. Among the notable signatories are Brazil, China, EU, Indonesia, UK and US. 

Almheiri pointed out that the countries who had signed the declaration were home to more than 5.7 billion people and responsible for more than three-quarters of the world’s total food systems emissions. (Research shows that food systems overall account for nearly one-third of total global greenhouse gas emissions.)

The declaration begins with a recognition of the “unprecedented” impacts that climate change is having on food systems and the importance of food and agriculture to lives and livelihoods around the world. It also recognises the “need to ensure access to safe, sufficient, affordable and nutritious food for all”.

The document then lays out five objectives: to enhance food-systems resilience; to promote food security and nutrition; to support agricultural workers; to strengthen freshwater management; and to maximise the climate and environmental benefits of agriculture. Alongside these are areas where countries have promised to strengthen their efforts: integrating food systems into national plans and strategies, scaling up finance and science and strengthening trade.

Among these, several observers pointed to the integration of food systems into plans such as nationally determined contributions (NDCs) and national adaptation plans as a promising step. As with all such declarations at COPs, the food declaration is not legally binding. But that is not to say it carries no weight, Ed Davey, partnerships director at the Food and Land Use Coalition, told Carbon Brief. He added that while declarations are “not as important as the negotiated outcome and they never will be…they are a way of signalling that something is important”.

Representatives of several civil society groups told Carbon Brief that the declaration was a mixed bag. “There are some good elements there – it’s about transformation,” said Million Belay, the general coordinator of Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa and a member of the International Panel of Experts on Sustainable Food Systems. “But there’s heavy reliance on ‘technology will solve the problem’ kind of thinking…What kind of technology? Who owns the technology?”

A non-state actors call to action, released on the same day, was signed by more than 150 farmers’ groups, businesses, philanthropies, research institutions and other groups. That document calls for parties to “act with appropriate urgency, effort and scale” to create food systems that “deliver significant, measurable progress for people, nature and climate”.

News and views

EU BUMPER: There have been three notable EU policy updates related to agriculture. First, lawmakers rejected a plan to significantly cut pesticide use, the Associated Press reported, which one green politician described as a “black day” for the environment and farmers. The proposed nature restoration law, on the other hand, is one step closer to the finish line after it was approved by the European parliament’s environment committee, according to Carbon Pulse. And, finally, plans to sign off on the EU-Mercosur trade deal (covered previously in Cropped) look unlikely in the coming weeks, partly due to political hesitancy in Argentina, CNN Brasil reported. 

COLOMBIA LEADS: Colombian president Gustavo Petro announced at COP28 that his country will officially join an alliance of countries seeking a fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty. The group is calling for a global transition away from fossil fuels and now counts 10 countries as its members, the Guardian reported. Petro said that, although his country relies on fossil fuels, “being here, we are trying to halt a suicide, the death of everything that is alive”. According to Spanish newswire EFE Verde, the Latin American country is also pushing debt-for-nature swaps at the climate negotiations in Dubai, after setting up that agenda at a meeting of Latin American and Caribbean environment ministers held in Panama earlier this year.

INDIGENOUS VOICES: A Brazilian minister became the first Indigenous head of a UN climate negotiations delegation, Carbon Brief’s Daisy Dunne reported. Sônia Guajajara took on the position after environment minister Marina Silva departed the climate summit. She will hold the role until 7 December, according to a press release. Guajajara said in a statement: “Indigenous peoples are often the first to bear the harmful effects of climate change…They are also ideally positioned to bring forward solutions for climate adaptation and mitigation, so it is essential that their voice is heard.” Elsewhere, Grist reported on the Indigenous advocates at COP28 hoping to “ensur[e] that their communities aren’t overlooked by global leaders”. 

DEEP-SEA DEVELOPMENTS: The Norwegian government has given a “green light” to deep-sea mining in an area of the Arctic Ocean south-west of the Svalbard archipelago, in a decision that Norway Greenpeace head Frode Pleym said was “a disaster for the sea”, according to the Associated Press. The deal was struck between four political parties, including the ruling Labor and Center party coalition government and two conservative parties, the newswire said. Norway’s parliament will reportedly “approve the first development projects, in the same way as it has done for certain extraction projects in the petroleum sector”. The country’s petroleum and energy minister said the country “will do this carefully” and gather knowledge before assessing whether extraction is feasible.

UPS AND DOWNS: Blue whales have returned to the Seychelles archipelago, within the Indian Ocean, after being wiped out in that area by whaling ships in the 1960s, BBC News reported. Researchers and filmmakers recorded the largest animal on Earth both on film and using a “sound trap”, which captured whale calls during breeding season. Scientists described the whales’ return as a “conservation win”. However, on western Australia’s Pilbara coast, whales are reportedly threatened by a new gas extraction project by Woodside, the country’s top oil and gas producer, Australia’s ABC News wrote. The company won approval for seismic testing, which is used to identify fossil gas reserves under the seafloor. In response, traditional owner and Indigenous woman Raelene Cooper told the outlet that she would consider legal actions against the project. Woodside told ABC News that the seismic testing would not occur near known whale migration routes.

OLIVE HARVEST: Palestinian olive farmers are experiencing “growing violence” and “economic devastations” from the impact of the Israel-Hamas conflict on their harvest, Mongabay reported. Ghassan Najjar, a farmer in the West Bank, told the outlet: “Many farmers rely completely on their olive harvest…It’s our livelihood, our source of life.” More than 3,000 olive trees have been “destroyed by the illegal settlers” in recent weeks. Mongabay said. According to Human Rights Watch, satellite imagery “shows that orchards, greenhouses and farmland in northern Gaza have been razed since the beginning of Israel’s ground invasion” in October. 

Watch, read, listen

DARK HEDGES: The Economist explained how an avenue of ancient beech trees in Northern Ireland is being lost due to tourism after Game of Thrones made them famous.

MEAT PHASEDOWN: BBC Future Planet looked at Denmark’s new dietary roadmap for discouraging the consumption of meat and dairy and boosting plant-based foods.

‘PLASTIC RICE’: A three-part series in the Wire outlined concerns from farmers and health experts about a rice fortification scheme in India.

CALL OF THE WILD: Perk your ears up to an album of Australia’s most threatened mammals – featuring “a chorus of shrieks, screams and bellowing”. 

New science

Community forest governance and synergies among carbon, biodiversity and livelihoods
Nature Climate Change

Empowering local forest governance may support multiple objectives of forest restoration, a new paper found. The researchers used a dataset of more than 300 “forest commons” in human-dominated landscapes in 15 tropical countries across Africa, Asia and Latin America. They looked at the links between carbon storage, tree species richness and livelihoods of local communities. The analysis showed that formal recognition of the community’s role in forest management, including local participation in rule-making, was a predictor of positive outcomes. The study said that considering governance and interconnections among those benefits may contribute to “effective interventions” for tropical forests.

Tillage agriculture and afforestation threaten tropical savanna plant communities across a broad rainfall gradient in India
Journal of Ecology

Agricultural conversion of and tree-planting in old-growth savannahs in India imperil plant communities that are hard to later recover, according to a new paper. The researchers analysed the impacts of tillage agriculture, agricultural fallows and tree plantations on herbaceous plant communities of old-growth savannahs in western Maharashtra, India. They found that the three types of land conversion decreased native species richness and cover of native plants, and increased cover of invasive species. The study suggested that conservation in India should account for the savannah biome and limit the conversion of old-growth savannahs.

Risk to rely on soil carbon sequestration to offset global ruminant emissions
Nature Communications

A new study noted that relying solely on grasslands to sequester global ruminant emissions – those from cattle, sheep, goats and buffalo – “is not feasible”, since it would require nearly twice the global carbon stock currently in grasslands. Researchers found that about 135bn tonnes of carbon sequestration is required to offset ongoing methane and nitrous oxide emissions from this sector. The authors argued that previous studies used a methodology that does not account for the climate impacts of short- and long-term emissions, and that their new research overcomes those shortcomings while accounting for historical warming. The study concluded that reducing sources of emissions and increasing soil organic carbon stocks is needed.

In the diary

Cropped is researched and written by Dr Giuliana Viglione, Aruna Chandrasekhar, Daisy Dunne, Orla Dwyer and Yanine Quiroz. Please send tips and feedback to cropped@carbonbrief.org

The post Cropped 6 December 2023: COP28 greenwashing; Nature finance; Food pledge appeared first on Carbon Brief.

Cropped 6 December 2023: COP28 greenwashing; Nature finance; Food pledge

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Climate Change

Greenpeace launches legal challenge against Australia’s biggest meat company

Published

5 hours ago

on

July 22, 2026

By

AMSTERDAM, Netherlands, 22 July 2026 – Greenpeace Netherlands has launched legal proceedings against a multi-billion-dollar global expansion plan by the biggest meat producer in Australia, JBS, in an escalation of climate litigation against the livestock industry.

Greenpeace petitioned a Dutch court to compel the meat giant to disclose information in order to challenge its business policies in court, including a US$6 billion global expansion, for which almost half is earmarked for Nigeria.

Elizabeth Atieno, Food Campaigner at Greenpeace Africa, said: “JBS’ meat empire expanded hand-in-glove with Amazon destruction, colossal emissions, human rights and corruption scandals, all with barely a semblance of transparency. This is the business model it wants to export to sub-Saharan Africa. JBS promises food security, but its expansion in Nigeria risks causing irreversible environmental damage and the displacement of smallholder farmers to line the pockets of wealthy global elites.

“Nigerians know well from the legacy of companies like Shell the destructive impact wrought by unchecked corporate power. As Greenpeace Africa has argued before the African Court of Human Rights, states with jurisdiction over multinationals must hold those corporate actors accountable – wherever they operate in the world. We welcome this bold legal action: the Netherlands and other European states must not be safe havens for corporations like JBS seeking to evade their responsibilities.”

In light of JBS’ longstanding failure to publish accurate and reliable information on its climate, nature and human rights impacts or its expansion plans, Greenpeace Netherlands views accessing this data as a necessary precursor to formal litigation in order to support its case. The case has the potential to be the first climate litigation of this scale against the livestock industry. This could set a major precedent for future legal challenges against the industrial agriculture sector, a major source of global emissions, particularly of methane, a potent greenhouse gas, responsible for 0.5°C of warming since the Industrial Revolution.[1]

JBS, via its subsidiary JBS Foods Australia, is the largest meat and food processing company in Australia. With a weekly processing capacity of over 50,000 cattle, it accounts for almost a quarter of all beef processing in the country, as well as a significant presence in the lamb, pork and farmed fish markets. [2] In 2022, ABC’s Four Corners accused the company of ‘repeatedly failing to protect its workers from horrific injuries.’ [3]

Marieke Vellekoop, Executive Director at Greenpeace Netherlands, said “In a month where JBS has thrown its flagship environmental commitments onto the scrap heap, JBS’ disdain for basic transparency only adds to the impression that this meat giant has something to hide and is desperate to prevent its expansion plans from going public. We were hoping we wouldn’t have to trouble a judge with this matter, but JBS has left us no choice but to seek our right to information through the Dutch courts.

“JBS appears to believe that despite moving to the Netherlands, our rules do not apply to it. This legal action aims to prove it wrong – and lay the ground for a first major climate and nature lawsuit against the dangerous expansion of the global meat industry.“

At the centre of the dispute is JBS’ planned US$ 2.5 billion investment in industrial livestock production in Nigeria.[2] Civil society groups in Nigeria have raised urgent warnings that the aggressive expansion will threaten local food security, drive regional instability, and accelerate ecological degradation. There is no available evidence that JBS has conducted any impact assessments or community consultations in Nigeria, and local efforts to gather more information via Freedom of Information requests have reportedly been ignored.[3]

The escalation to the courts follows the refusal of JBS, the world’s largest meat company, to comply with a formal disclosure demand delivered by Greenpeace Netherlands in April. The environmental group is utilising new Dutch legislation, which grants parties with a legitimate interest the right to demand access to specific corporate data necessary to build litigation against Dutch companies.[4]

Greenpeace Netherlands’ lawyers allege that JBS’ historic business practices and future expansion plans are inconsistent with the company’s climate and biodiversity obligations and represent a breach of its Dutch duty of care, which requires companies to act in line with international human rights law.[5]

If the court rules in favor of Greenpeace Netherlands, it is entitled to seek the required information in the form of documents and from senior JBS figures under oath, raising the prospect of the Batista brothers being forced to testify in Dutch court. JBS reincorporated as a Dutch entity (JBS N.V.) last year to facilitate a dual listing on the New York Stock Exchange.

In April, JBS was forced to temporarily suspend its first annual general meeting since moving its headquarters to Amsterdam after it was disrupted by dozens of Greenpeace Netherlands activists.

Last week, JBS scrapped two flagship commitments to reach Net Zero emissions by 2040 and eradicate deforestation from its supply chain. It also removed any explicit reference to Indigenous lands from all of its current policies. Greenpeace Netherlands is concerned this indicates JBS is seeking to expand unconstrained by the climate, nature and human rights impacts of its business.

–ENDS–

Notes:

[1] The livestock sector is estimated to be responsible for 31% of global methane emissions (more than oil and gas operations). In comparison to CO2, methane is shorter lived (around 12 years) but has a much stronger ability to trap heat in the atmosphere over its lifetime: it has approximately 80 times more climate impact than CO2 when measured over 20 years. This means that changes in methane emissions have a more rapid effect on the climate than changes in CO2. See Greenpeace Netherlands letter to JBS dated 30 April 2026.

[2] JBS Foods Australia, Our Business

[3] ABC, Australia’s biggest meat company JBS is repeatedly failing to protect its workers from horrific injuries, 25 April 2022

[4] JBS announcement

[5] Experts raise concerns over the risks of industrial animal farming (The Sun Nigeria)

[6] Simplification and modernisation of Dutch evidence law (Fieldfisher)

[7] Greenpeace Netherlands petition to Dutch court available here. Media briefing with further details on JBS expansion plans, including in Nigeria, available here.

Greenpeace launches legal challenge against Australia’s biggest meat company

Continue Reading

Climate Change

“Next year is too late for regulations”: Beetaloo Energy’s 2GW gas-powered AI data centre a “disaster proposal” destined to cause climate chaos

Published

13 hours ago

on

July 21, 2026

By

SYDNEY, Wednesday 22 July 2026 — Beetaloo Energy has secured land from the NT Government for a massive $40 billion “hyperscale” AI data centre near Darwin, which would be powered by 2 gigawatts (GW) of gas power fracked directly from the Beetaloo basin, prompting calls from Greenpeace for urgent federal legislation.

The proposal marks a dangerous escalation in the AI data centre industry’s expansion, which threatens to entrench fossil fuel infrastructure for decades and put immense pressure on the region’s fragile water resources — while continuing to be unregulated.

Joe Rafalowicz, Head of Climate and Energy at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said: “This disaster proposal for a 2GW gas-powered AI data centre in the NT is a shocking example of the unchecked expansion of hyperscale data centres in Australia. It is also, critically, more evidence for the urgent need for a moratorium on all new data centres until strong, binding regulations are put in place to protect our communities and climate.

“This proposal mirrors the frenzied, unchecked expansion currently wreaking havoc on communities in the US. We are seeing cowboy data centre operators treat Australia like a playground, steam-rolling ahead with projects that would lock down precious water resources and spike emissions, despite the overwhelming community opposition.

“Every day, more councils, communities and environmental groups are joining Greenpeace’s call for a moratorium on data centres, yet as of today there is still no system of safeguards or rules in place to regulate these companies.  

“While Beetaloo Energy and the NT Government prepare to bulldoze ahead with this climate and water disaster, the Prime Minister is asleep at the wheel, promising to legislate a vague set of standards next year.

“Next year is too late, and anything less than mandating data centres cover their own energy demand, and then some, with new renewable energy is not enough.” 

-ENDS-

Media contact

Lucy Keller on 0491 135 308 or lucy.keller@greenpeace.org

“Next year is too late for regulations”: Beetaloo Energy’s 2GW gas-powered AI data centre a “disaster proposal” destined to cause climate chaos

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Allegations of harms at China-backed transition minerals projects rise

Published

14 hours ago

on

July 21, 2026

By

Reports of human rights and environmental abuses linked to Chinese companies’ overseas investments in the mining and refining of minerals needed for the clean energy transition are on the rise, research by a monitoring group has found.

The number of recorded allegations of harm at projects tied to Chinese firms have increased every year since 2021, rising to 148 in 2025, according to the Business and Human Rights Centre (BHRC). On Wednesday it released new data showing that a total of 434 allegations of abuse were made against Chinese-backed projects over the five-year period in projects across the world.

The world’s top cleantech manufacturer, China is also the leading financier of critical minerals projects worldwide. The country has committed more than $120 billion in foreign direct investment into mineral mining and processing since 2023, Australian think-tank Climate Energy Finance recently found.

“China plays a central role in global transition mineral supply chains, and as such has a unique opportunity to raise the bar on human rights and community engagement at every stage of mining,” said Michael Clements, BHRC’s executive director.

“While there have been encouraging developments, from stronger regulations to more company engagement, there remains a gap between human rights commitment and action,” he said.

The report comes as communities affected by Chinese-backed mineral projects have filed the first two cases to a Beijing-based mediation mechanism intended to bring willing Chinese companies to the discussion table with affected communities.

Allegations of harms on the rise

BHRC’s latest analysis – including data for the period 2023-2025 – covered mining, smelting and refining projects for 11 minerals considered key to manufacturing clean energy technologies such as batteries, EVs and solar panels needed to move away from climate-heating fossil fuels.

The highest number of abuses was recorded in Indonesia, the world’s largest producer of nickel, which is used to make EV batteries. After the Indonesian government banned exports of raw nickel, Chinese firms invested billions of dollars to develop a large-scale nickel smelting and processing industry in the Southeast Asian country, largely powered by coal.

Other countries with a high number of recorded harms include the Democratic Republic of Congo, where Chinese firms dominate cobalt and copper production; Myanmar, where unregulated rare earths mining has caused widespread environmental destruction; Serbia, where Chinese-backed mining of some of Europe’s most significant copper and gold deposits is swallowing land and homes, and Zimbabwe, where Chinese investments have turned the nation into Africa’s top lithium producer.

Growing risks for people and nature

Allegations tracked by BHRC included negative impacts on local livelihoods, health and land rights, workers’ health and safety and work-related deaths, as well as water pollution and environmental contamination. In addition, 18 people were attacked for raising concerns about Chinese transition mineral projects between 2023 and 2025.

The report shows that 10 Chinese companies, including Zijin Mining, Tsingshan Group and Zhejiang Huayou Cobalt, accounted for nearly two-thirds of all allegations recorded in the last five years. It found that some Chinese companies “still appear to turn a blind eye to these issues” but noted that several others have been more responsive to allegations of abuse. However, even among companies with human rights policies, implementation remains a challenge, BHRC warned.

    Zijin Mining and Zhejiang Huayou Cobalt repeatedly responded to the allegations of harm by saying they take environmental and social risks seriously and adhere to international standards. Tsingshan Group never responded to BHRC’s requests for comment.

    Platform for dialogue between communities and Chinese firms

    At the same time, Chinese authorities have made “significant progress” on introducing a more specific framework for managing environmental and social risks in overseas investment, BHRC said.

    This includes global consultation on a draft Sustainable Mining Code, adherence to UN guiding principles on business and human rights, and greater emphasis on oversight of companies operating overseas.

    The China Chamber of Commerce of Metals, Minerals & Chemicals Importers & Exporters (CCCMC) set up a mediation and consultation mechanism intended to provide a platform for dialogue between affected communities or civil society groups that have raised concerns and Chinese companies.

    More than three years since its launch, the mechanism has now received its first two complaints from local communities and many more are considering filing a case, Margaux Day, executive director at the nonprofit Accountability Counsel, told an event hosted by Climate Home News last month.

    “This is incredibly exciting in that it fills a governance and accountability gap where often communities who are seeking to protect their rights and the environment can’t reach someone who will respond to them,” she told the panel discussion at London Climate Action Week.

    Climate Home News understands that the complaints were filed by communities in Latin America and Southeast Asia over labour rights and resettlement issues. No information about the cases has yet been made public. The mechanism’s secretariat did not respond to Climate Home News’ questions.

    The mechanism was set up after the Chinese regulator for banks and insurers called on investor-level institutions to establish complaints bodies to hear from communities outside of China. But whether the new initiative will prove effective in tackling grievances remains an open question.

    “Real potential” for better mining practices

    Participation in the mechanism is voluntary for Chinese firms and it doesn’t have a fact-finding function, nor can it impose provisions for compensation or compliance with human rights standards.

    But Day told Climate Home News that, if successful, it could bring companies to negotiate an outcome that is better for people and the planet and leads to more sustainable mining practice.

    Chen Yu, an independent China advisor for campaign group Global Witness, agreed that the mechanism holds “real potential”.

    “There exists nothing else at a similar level to promote dialogue between communities and Chinese mining companies in particular,” she said.

    For companies, the mechanism opens “a channel for problem-solving and dialogue with communities”, she added, as “Chinese companies often remain cautious of approaching affected communities directly, afraid of making the problem bigger”.

    However, Chen said the mechanism remains at an early stage of development, faces resourcing challenges and is not yet sufficiently understood by communities in mining areas or Chinese firms.

    To help it address some of these challenges, the secretariat is currently seeking technical support from a range of organisations, including civil society groups. But, Chen said, “it will take time for the mechanism to show its value”.

    The post Allegations of harms at China-backed transition minerals projects rise appeared first on Climate Home News.

    Allegations of harms at China-backed transition minerals projects rise

    Continue Reading

    Trending

    Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com