Connect with us

Published

2 days ago

on

Manuel Pulgar-Vidal is WWF’s Global Climate and Energy Lead and a former Peruvian environment minister and President of COP20 in Lima in 2014

In 2015, the world celebrated the Paris Agreement as a landmark in the global fight against climate change. The principle of “leave no one behind,” carried over from the Sustainable Development Goals, was recognised as a core ethical foundation of the agreement. It represented values of equity, inclusiveness, and justice—ideas essential to tackling both the causes and consequences of climate change. 

Yet, in the years that followed, these values drifted into the background. Ethical discussions became marginal, often confined to faith-based initiatives such as Pope Francis’ Laudato Si and Laudate Deum.

Now, in 2025, there are signs of change. On the road to COP30, Brazil has introduced the Global Ethical Stocktake, putting ethics squarely back at the centre of the climate negotiations. It acknowledges what has long been missing from the process and challenges us to rebuild climate action on the foundations of justice, responsibility, and solidarity.

WWF’s visualisation of ethics at the heart of global climate action

Building the Climate Narrative on Ethical Values

The climate crisis is not just a scientific or political problem—it is also a deeply moral one. Rising emissions and warming temperatures are tied to inequitable development, unchecked consumption, and a reliance on fossil fuels, even when their dangers are well known. 

Embedding ethics into climate talks means recognizing the values that should guide us: respect, responsibility, justice, integrity, solidarity, freedom, tolerance, empathy, and equity. These are not abstract ideals. They are the compass we need to navigate the crisis and ensure the planet remains liveable for current and future generations. 

If we ignore this ethical dimension, the goals of the Paris Agreement and the UN climate process risk becoming hollow commitments—fine words without meaningful action. 

The Role of Courts in Advancing an Ethical Climate Narrative

In recent months, two international courts have issued landmark opinions that reshape the conversation about responsibility and justice in the climate crisis.

-The Inter-American Court of Human Rights recognized that the right to a healthy environment is inseparable from the right to a healthy climate. It laid out three obligations for states: to respect rights, to guarantee rights with reinforced due diligence, and to embed these responsibilities in domestic law. 

-The International Court of Justice reaffirmed that climate treaties are built on the principles of equity and intergenerational justice.

These decisions bring ethics and law closer together. They highlight that access to food, water, housing, and a safe climate are fundamental human rights—and that governments cannot ignore their obligations without consequence. 

Restoring Credibility Through Ethics 

One of the biggest criticisms of global climate negotiations is the gap between promises and delivery. Emissions are not falling fast enough. Adaptation is underfunded. Finance for vulnerable countries lags commitments. The result is widespread frustration and a loss of credibility in the process. 

Restoring credibility is not just a technical matter—it is a moral imperative. Countries must not only increase the ambition of their NDCs but also fully implement them. Accountability rules are essential to identify those who delay or fail to act.

The same applies to the private sector. Many corporations make bold claims about being “carbon neutral” or “net zero,” yet their pathways often lack scientific rigor and independent monitoring. When such claims amount to greenwashing, they erode trust. 

Ethics provides the framework to rebuild credibility—by linking obligations with accountability and connecting responsibilities directly to citizens and consumers. 

Ethics as a Guide for Negotiators 

As we approach COP30—more than three decades after the creation of the UNFCCC—negotiators continue to face slow and politicized processes. Too often, meetings are delayed by disputes over agendas, while the climate emergency worsens in real time. 

Negotiators may represent their states, but they must also reckon with the moral consequences of inaction. Every year of delay brings more lives lost, more ecosystems destroyed, and more communities displaced. 

The Global Ethical Stocktake should serve as a constant reminder of these consequences, awakening the moral conscience that must guide climate diplomacy.

Just as the Global Stocktake in 2023 (COP28) assessed progress and recommended next steps, the ethical debate must reach the heart of negotiations to unlock what political posturing has left unresolved.

Centring Adaptation, Resilience, and Loss and Damage 

Since the early 1990s, countries have committed to both decarbonization and building resilience. Yet adaptation lags far behind. Communities most exposed to climate impacts—particularly in the Global South—still lack the resources to protect themselves. 

This failure is not only practical but ethical. Without adaptation, vulnerable populations lose the material conditions for survival: food, water, housing, and livelihoods. 

The ethical debate must focus strongly on adaptation, loss and damage, and just transition policies. It must highlight the values of solidarity, justice, empathy, and equity in building resilience. 

Respecting Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities 

Any ethical climate debate must put inclusion at its core. Indigenous peoples and local communities, who have often borne the brunt of exclusion and rights violations, must be central actors in climate solutions. 

Their traditional knowledge is not a relic of the past but a living resource. It complements scientific expertise and offers proven pathways for adaptation and ecosystem stewardship. Recognizing and respecting these contributions is both an ethical obligation and a practical necessity. 

Making the Global Ethical Debate Permanent 

If the Global Ethical Stocktake remains a one-off event, its potential will be wasted. It must become a permanent feature of the climate process. 

Brazil should present the results of the Global Ethical Debate at COP30 and propose that future ethical stocktakes align with the Global Stocktake cycle. Champions could be appointed to ensure follow-up, and mechanisms should be created to embed ethics into national planning processes, from NDCs to adaptation plans. 

Such steps would make ethics not just a side conversation but a structural element of climate governance. 

A Call to Conscience 

The climate crisis is a test not only of our science and technology but of our values and humanity. Denialism, polarization, and geopolitical rivalries continue to stall progress. Re-centring ethics offers a bridge between governments and citizens, between technical negotiations and lived realities.

As we look toward COP30 and beyond, the message is clear: ethics is not an optional extra. It is the foundation on which meaningful climate action must be built. If we embrace this truth, guided by both intergenerational and intergenerational responsibility, we can turn commitments into action and leave behind a liveable planet for all.

The post Why ethics must be at the heart of global climate action  appeared first on Climate Home News.

Why ethics must be at the heart of global climate action 

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Climate Change

Colombia proposes expert group to advance talks on minerals agreement

Published

17 hours ago

on

October 4, 2025

By

Colombia wants countries to discuss options for a global agreement to ensure that the extraction, processing and recycling of minerals – including those needed for the clean energy transition – don’t harm the environment and human wellbeing.

The mineral-rich nation is proposing to create an expert group to “identify options for international instruments, including global and legally-binding instruments, for coordinated global action on the environmentally sound management of minerals and metals through [their] full lifecyle”.

Colombia hopes this will eventually lead to an agreement on the need for an international treaty to define mandatory rules and standards that would make mineral value chains more transparent and accountable.

The proposal was set out in a draft resolution submitted to the UN Environment Assembly (UNEA) earlier this week and seen by Climate Home News. UNEA, which is constituted of all UN member states, is the world’s top decision-making body for matters relating to the environment. The assembly’s seventh session will meet in Kenya in December to vote on countries’ proposals.

    Soaring demand for the minerals used to manufacture clean energy technologies and electric vehicles, as well as in the digital, construction and defence industries have led to growing environmental destruction, human rights violations and social conflict.

    Colombia argues there is an “urgent need” to strengthen global cooperation and governance to reduce the risks to people and the planet.

    Options for a global minerals agreement

    The proposal is among a flurry of initiatives to strength global mineral governance at a time when booming demand is putting pressure on new mining projects.

    Colombia, which produces emeralds, gold, platinum and silver for exports, first proposed the idea for a binding international agreement on minerals traceability and accountability on the sidelines of the UN biodiversity talks it hosted in October 2024.

    Since then, the South American nation has been quietly trying to drum up support for the idea, especially among African and European nations.

    Its draft resolution to UNEA7 contains very few details, leaving it open for countries to discuss what kind of global instrument would be best suited to make mineral supply chains more transparent and sustainable.

    Does the world need a global treaty on energy transition minerals?

    Colombia says it wants the expert group to build on other UN initiatives, including a UN Panel on Critical Energy Transition Minerals, which set out seven principles to ensure the mining, processing and recycling of energy transition minerals are done responsibly and benefit everyone.

    The group would include technical experts and representatives from international and regional conventions, major country groupings as well as relevant stakeholders.

    It would examine the feasibility and effectiveness of different options for a global agreement, consider their costs and identify measures to support countries to implement what is agreed.

    The resolution also calls for one or two meetings for member states to discuss the idea before the UNEA8 session planned in late 2027, when countries would decide on a way forward.

    No time to lose for treaty negotiations

    Colombia’s efforts to advance global talks on mineral supply chains have been welcomed by resource experts and campaigners. But not everyone agrees on the best strategy to move the discussion forward at a time when multilateralism is coming under attack.

    Johanna Sydow, a resource policy expert who heads the international environmental policy division of the Heinrich-Böll Foundation, said she had hoped that the resolution would explicitly call for negotiations to begin on an international minerals treaty.

    “Treaty negotiations take a long time. If you don’t even start with it now, it will take even longer. I don’t see how in two or three years it will be easier to come to an agreement,” she told Climate Home.

      Despite the geopolitical challenges, “we need joint rules to prevent a huge race to the bottom for [mineral] standards”. That could start with a group of countries coming together and starting to enforce joint standards for mining, processing and recycling minerals, she said.

      But any meaningful global agreement on mineral supply chains would require backing from China, the world’s largest processor of minerals, which dominates most of the supply chains. And with Colombia heading for an election in May, it will need all the support it can get to move its proposal forward.

      ‘Voluntary initiative won’t cut it’

      Juliana Peña Niño, Colombia country manager at the Natural Resource Governance Institute, is more optimistic. “Colombia’s leadership towards fairer mineral value chains is a welcome step,” she told Climate Home News.

      “At UNEA7, we need an ambitious debate that gives the proposed expert group a clear mandate to advance concrete next steps — not delay decisions — and that puts the voices of those most affected at the centre. One thing is clear: the path forward must ultimately deliver a binding instrument, as yet another voluntary initiative simply won’t cut it,” she said.

      More than 50 civil society groups spanning Latin America, Africa and Europe previously described Colombia’s work on the issue as “a chance to build a new global paradigm rooted in environmental integrity, human rights, Indigenous Peoples’ rights, justice and equity”.

      “As the energy transition and digitalisation drive demand for minerals, we cannot afford to repeat old extractive models built on asymmetry – we must redefine them,” they wrote in a statement.

      Main image: The UN Environment Assembly is hosted in Nairobi, Kenya. (Natalia Mroz/ UN Environment)

      The post Colombia proposes expert group to advance talks on minerals agreement appeared first on Climate Home News.

      Colombia proposes expert group to advance talks on minerals agreement

      Continue Reading

      Climate Change

      California Sanctions Stark Disparities in Pesticide Exposure During Pregnancy

      Published

      1 day ago

      on

      October 3, 2025

      By

      If you’re young, pregnant and Latina, chances are you live near agricultural fields sprayed with higher levels of brain-damaging organophosphate pesticides.

      By Liza Gross

      A baby in the womb has few defenses against industrial petrochemicals designed to kill.

      California Sanctions Stark Disparities in Pesticide Exposure During Pregnancy

      Continue Reading

      Climate Change

      DeBriefed 3 October 2025: UK political gap on climate widens; Fossil-fuelled Typhoon Ragasa; ‘Overshoot’ unknowns

      Published

      2 days ago

      on

      October 3, 2025

      By

      Welcome to Carbon Brief’s DeBriefed.
      An essential guide to the week’s key developments relating to climate change.

      This week

      Shattered climate consensus

      FRACKING BAN: UK energy secretary Ed Miliband has announced that the government will bring forward its plans to permanently ban fracking, in a move designed to counter a promise from the hard-right Reform party to restart efforts to introduce the practice, the Guardian said. In the same speech, Miliband said Reform’s plans to scrap clean-energy projects would “betray” young people and future generations, the Press Association reported.

      ACT AXE?: Meanwhile, Kemi Badenoch, leader of the Conservatives, pledged to scrap the 2008 Climate Change Act if elected, Bloomberg reported. It noted that the legislation was passed with cross-party support and strengthened by the Conservatives.
      ‘INSANE’: Badenoch faced a backlash from senior Tory figures, including ex-prime minister Theresa May, who called her pledge a “catastrophic mistake”, said the Financial Times. The newspaper added that the Conservatives were “trailing third in opinion polls”. A wide range of climate scientists also condemned the idea, describing it as “insane”, an “insult” and a “serious regression”.

      Around the world

      • CLIMATE CRACKDOWN: The US Department of Energy has told employees in the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy to avoid using the term “climate change”, according to the Guardian.
      • FOREST DELAY: Plans for Brazil’s COP30 flagship initiative, the tropical forests forever fund, are “suffer[ing] delays” as officials remain split on key details, Bloomberg said.
      • COP MAY BE ‘SPLIT’: Australia could “split” the hosting of the COP31 climate summit in 2026 under a potential compromise with Turkey, reported the Guardian.
      • DIVINE INTERVENTION: Pope Leo XIV has criticised those who minimise the “increasingly evident” impact of global warming in his first major climate speech, BBC News reported.

      €44.5 billion

      The  cost of extreme weather and climate change in the EU in the last four years – two-and-a-half times higher than in the decade to 2019, according to a European Environment Agency report covered by the Financial Times.

      Latest climate research

      (For more, see Carbon Brief’s in-depth daily summaries of the top climate news stories on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.)

      Captured

      Bar chart showing that Great Britain has been fully powered by clean energy for a record 87 hours in 2025 to date

      Clean energy has met 100% of Great Britain’s electricity demand for a record 87 hours this year so far, according to new Carbon Brief analysis. This is up from just 2.5 hours in 2021 and 64.5 hours in all of 2024. The longest stretch of time where 100% of electricity demand was met by clean energy stands at 15 hours, from midnight on 25 May 2025 through to 3pm on 26 May, according to the analysis.

      Spotlight

      ‘Overshoot’ unknowns

      As the chances of limiting global warming to 1.5C dwindle, there is increasing focus on the prospects for “overshooting” the Paris Agreement target and then bringing temperatures back down by removing CO2 from the atmosphere.

      At the first-ever Overshoot Conference in Laxenburg, Austria, Carbon Brief asks experts about the key unknowns around warming “overshoot”.

      Sir Prof Jim Skea

      Chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and emeritus professor at Imperial College London’s Centre for Environmental Policy

      So there are huge knowledge gaps around overshoot and carbon dioxide removal (CDR). As it’s very clear from the themes of this conference, we don’t altogether understand how the Earth would react in taking CO2 out of the atmosphere.

      We don’t understand the nature of the irreversibilities and we don’t understand the effectiveness of CDR techniques, which might themselves be influenced by the level of global warming, plus all the equity and sustainability issues surrounding using CDR techniques.

      Prof Kristie Ebi

      Professor at the University of Washington’s Center for Health and the Global Environment

      There are all kinds of questions about adaptation and how to approach effective adaptation. At the moment, adaptation is primarily assuming a continual increase in global mean surface temperature. If there is going to be a peak – and of course, we don’t know what that peak is – then how do you start planning? Do you change your planning?

      There are places, for instance when thinking about hard infrastructure, [where overshoot] may result in a change in your plan – because as you come down the backside, maybe the need would be less. For example, when building a bridge taller. And when implementing early warning systems, how do you take into account that there will be a peak and ultimately a decline? There is almost no work in that. I would say that’s one of the critical unknowns.

      Dr James Fletcher

      Former minister for public service, sustainable development, energy, science and technology for Saint Lucia and negotiator at COP21 in Paris.

      The key unknown is where we’re going to land. At what point will we peak [temperatures] before we start going down and how long will we stay in that overshoot period? That is a scary thing. Yes, there will be overshoot, but at what point will that overshoot peak? Are we peaking at 1.6C, 1.7C, 2.1C?

      All of these are scary scenarios for small island developing states – anything above 1.5C is scary. Every fraction of a degree matters to us. Where we peak is very important and how long we stay in this overshoot period is equally important. That’s when you start getting into very serious, irreversible impacts and tipping points.

      Prof Oliver Geden

      Senior fellow and head of the climate policy and politics research cluster at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs and vice-chair of IPCC Working Group III

      [A key unknown] is whether countries are really willing to commit to net-negative trajectories. We are assuming, in science, global pathways going net-negative, with hardly any country saying they want to go there. So maybe it is just an academic thought experiment. So we don’t know yet if [overshoot] is even relevant. It is relevant in the sense that if we do, [the] 1.5C [target] stays on the table. But I think the next phase needs to be that countries – or the UNFCCC as a whole – needs to decide what they want to do.

      Prof Lavanya Rajamani

      Professor of international environmental law at the University of Oxford

      I think there are several scientific unknowns, but I would like to focus on the governance unknowns with respect to overshoot. To me, a key governance unknown is the extent to which our current legal and regulatory architecture – across levels of governance, so domestic, regional and international – will actually be responsive to the needs of an overshoot world and the consequences of actually not having regulatory and governance architectures in place to address overshoot.

      Watch, read, listen

      FUTURE GAZING: The Financial Times examined a “future where China wins the green race”.

      ‘JUNK CREDITS’: Climate Home News reported on a “forest carbon megaproject” in Zimbabwe that has allegedly “generated millions of junk credits”.
      ‘SINK OR SWIM’: An extract from a new book on how the world needs to adapt to climate change, by Dr Susannah Fisher, featured in Backchannel.

      Coming up

      Pick of the jobs

      DeBriefed is edited by Daisy Dunne. Please send any tips or feedback to debriefed@carbonbrief.org.

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

      DeBriefed 26 September 2025: China leads new climate pledges; Trump calls warming a ‘con job’; What comes next

      DeBriefed

      |

      26.09.25

      DeBriefed 19 September 2025: EU ducks UN climate target; Australia delivers; Tracing beef’s impact on the Amazon

      DeBriefed

      |

      19.09.25

      Debriefed 12 September 2025: Africa calls for promised finance; Deadly heat linked to big oil; How to tackle net-zero backlash

      DeBriefed

      |

      12.09.25

      DeBriefed 5 September 2025: Pakistan floods hit 1.8m people; UK ‘eco-populism’; How warming threatens a man-made lake

      DeBriefed

      |

      05.09.25

      The post DeBriefed 3 October 2025: UK political gap on climate widens; Fossil-fuelled Typhoon Ragasa; ‘Overshoot’ unknowns appeared first on Carbon Brief.

      DeBriefed 3 October 2025: UK political gap on climate widens; Fossil-fuelled Typhoon Ragasa; ‘Overshoot’ unknowns

      Continue Reading

      Trending

      Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com