Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Climate Action Network

Climate Action Network International (CAN-I) is a global alliance of more than 1,900 organizations across over 130 countries, founded in to coordinate advocacy for aggressive reductions in and the phase-out of s. Operating through 22 regional and national nodes, CAN-I mobilizes members including and to influence climate negotiations, such as those under the UNFCCC, where it pushes governments to align national plans with the Paris Agreement's 1.5°C warming limit and to integrate considerations into climate policy. The network's activities encompass mobilization, policy briefings, and public campaigns aimed at undermining interests and holding major emitters accountable, often through events at summits and protests that have led to member arrests for disrupting official proceedings. Funded largely by left-leaning foundations such as ClimateWorks, the , and contributions from affiliates like , CAN-I reported revenues exceeding $1.5 million in 2015, supporting its international secretariat and regional operations. While credited with amplifying voices in agreements like the Accord's labor and equity provisions, the has drawn criticism for promoting alarmist narratives on climate impacts that skeptics argue exaggerate risks beyond empirical observations of modest warming rates and adaptive human resilience. In 2016, CAN-I was targeted in a RICO lawsuit by Leonid Goldstein, who alleged that the network and allied groups engaged in through systematic dissemination of false claims about climate catastrophe to extract funding and policy concessions, though the case was ultimately dismissed on procedural grounds. These controversies underscore tensions between CAN-I's advocacy model, which prioritizes transformative decarbonization, and concerns over its alignment with cost-benefit analyses of climate policies that weigh economic disruptions against verifiable environmental threats.

History

Founding and Early Development (1989–1994)

The Climate Action Network (CAN) was established in 1989 by approximately 30-40 representatives from environmental non-governmental organizations primarily in and the , who gathered at a church retreat center in Loccum, , to form a coordinating body for climate advocacy efforts. This initiative emerged in the context of growing international attention to following the 1988 World Conference on the Changing Atmosphere in and the establishment of the (IPCC), aiming to facilitate joint NGO positions ahead of impending United Nations negotiations on a framework convention. Initial networks included Climate Network Europe as the first regional focal point, alongside the U.S. Climate Action Network (USCAN) and the Climate Action Network UK, with forming an unincorporated affiliate shortly thereafter. By 1992, regional coordination extended to with the establishment of CANSEA, involving members from , , and the . CAN's early operations focused on exchanging information on national climate policies, developing position papers, and advocating for greater NGO participation in global efforts to mitigate warming, without a formal international secretariat at the outset. Through 1993-1994, CAN grew to encompass several dozen organizations across seven regional networks, enabling coordinated interventions in the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) sessions that culminated in the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on (UNFCCC) at the Rio . These efforts emphasized pushing for binding commitments on reductions, though the network's influence remained limited by its nascent structure and reliance on voluntary coordination among ideologically aligned but independent NGOs.

Expansion Amid UN Climate Negotiations (1995–2014)

During the mid-1990s, as the Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) transitioned into annual (COP) meetings, Climate Action Network (CAN) expanded its coordination of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to influence negotiation outcomes. At COP1 in in 1995, CAN's membership had grown to nearly 150 groups, enabling pre-COP strategy sessions such as "Goals for Berlin" to align advocacy on strengthening emission reduction commitments beyond the UNFCCC's initial framework. This period marked CAN's shift toward systematic engagement in international forums, with the network distributing its newsletter—initially printed at COPs and later supplemented by versions—to disseminate technical analyses and policy critiques among delegates and observers. CAN played a pivotal role in advocating for the Kyoto Protocol adopted at COP3 in Kyoto, Japan, in December 1997, coordinating over 200 NGOs to push for legally binding greenhouse gas reduction targets for developed countries, averaging 5.2% below 1990 levels by 2008-2012. The network's efforts included formulating joint position papers emphasizing compliance mechanisms and rejecting voluntary approaches, viewing the Protocol as a foundational step despite criticisms from some quarters that its exemptions for developing countries undermined global efficacy. Post-adoption, CAN monitored ratification processes, launching campaigns against non-ratifying nations like the United States, while expanding its digital presence with a website in 1998 to broaden outreach. By the early 2000s, membership surpassed 300 organizations, reflecting recruitment from emerging regional networks in Asia, Africa, and Latin America amid rising global awareness of climate issues. In the 2000s, CAN's activities intensified around post-Kyoto commitments, including support for the Bali Action Plan at COP13 in 2007, where it lobbied for comparable efforts from major developing economies while critiquing insufficient ambition from Annex I countries. The network introduced its "Fossil of the Day" awards in 1999 at intersessional talks, a satirical mechanism—continued annually at COPs—to highlight countries perceived as obstructing progress, such as those resisting stringent targets or phase-outs, with awards voted daily by member NGOs. At COP15 in in 2009, CAN coordinated over 1,000 NGO participants, producing guides for engagement, hosting press conferences assessing negotiation drafts, and issuing ECO editions that condemned the resulting as inadequate for lacking binding enforcement. This era saw CAN's membership expand to over 600 organizations by the mid-2000s, reaching more than 900 across 100 countries by 2014, driven by the proliferation of national and regional nodes that localized advocacy amid protracted talks on adaptation finance and technology transfer.

Post-Paris Agreement Era and Recent Milestones (2015–Present)

Following the adoption of the on December 12, 2015, Climate Action Network (CAN) evaluated the outcome as a framework for accelerating the shift from fossil fuels to renewables, while critiquing gaps in ambition for limiting to 1.5°C. CAN emphasized integrating into implementation to enhance policy effectiveness and public support. The network shifted focus to , urging governments to strengthen nationally determined contributions (NDCs) and provide finance for adaptation in vulnerable nations. In 2019, CAN underwent a leadership transition with the appointment of as , who had prior roles including global climate policy director at International and founding director of a South African energy democracy initiative. Under Essop, CAN intensified campaigns for transformative national plans, targeting major emitters to phase out fossil fuels and prioritize equity. By this period, the network had expanded to over 1,900 organizations across more than 130 countries. CAN played a prominent role in subsequent UN climate conferences, advocating for the establishment of a loss and damage fund at COP27 in 2022, which operationalized provisions from the Paris Agreement's Article 8. At COP26 in 2021, Essop delivered key interventions highlighting solidarity and fairness in global responses. Continuing this, CAN criticized insufficient commitments at COP28 in 2023 and COP29 in 2024, demanding trillions in annual support for developing countries while pushing for annual reviews of climate goals. In 2025 intersessional talks, CAN secured advances in loss and damage finance discussions amid ongoing tensions over developed nations' contributions. These efforts aligned with CAN's vision for 1.5°C compatibility by 2030, emphasizing just transitions and protection for affected communities.

Organizational Structure

International Secretariat and Governance

The International Secretariat of Climate Action Network (CAN-I), established as the coordinating hub for the global network, operates under the legal entity CAN International e.V. It facilitates among over 1,900 member organizations across more than 130 countries, supporting , , and operational activities while maintaining legal and financial independence from regional nodes and individual members. Led by Executive Director Tasneem Essop since 2019, the staff—numbering around 15 as of 2014 and distributed across multiple countries—handles day-to-day coordination, including positioning, network communications, and administrative support for international negotiations. Essop, previously a expert, oversees senior roles such as Director of (Jana Merkelbach) and Head of Political Strategies (Jacobo Ocharan), ensuring alignment with network objectives. Governance is directed by a , consisting of 13 elected members representing diverse regions, genders, and interests, selected at the annual to reflect the network's global composition rather than specific organizations. The Board, which includes figures like Co-Chairs Larissa and Gia Ibay, as well as representatives from groups such as (Susan Sinnett) and USCAN (Colette Pichon Battle), oversees strategic direction, financial management, risk assessment, and network growth through committees like Finance & Audit and Human Resources. The functions as the supreme decision-making authority, prioritizing consensus-based processes informed by member consultations, with the secretariat aiding implementation and dispute resolution per the CAN Charter. Accountability mechanisms, including adherence to a , allow for member or node sanctions in cases of breaches, enforced by the Board.

Regional and National Networks

The (CAN) is organized into 22 regional and national nodes, each responsible for coordinating , membership, and within its geographic scope while contributing to global strategies through bottom-up input. These nodes enable localized responses to climate policy, ensuring that international efforts reflect diverse regional priorities and capacities. Autonomy in node operations allows for tailored approaches to national contexts, such as engaging domestic governments or mobilizing grassroots organizations, while fostering joint work on shared challenges like in vulnerable areas. Regional nodes serve as coordination hubs for multiple countries, facilitating cross-border campaigns and information exchange on issues like UNFCCC negotiations or regional . Examples include the CAN-Arab World network, which addresses climate impacts in the ; CAN-Eastern Africa, focusing on resilience and transitions; and CAN Eastern Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia (CAN-EECCA), which supports in aligning with goals. Other regional structures cover (CAN-Europe), (CANLA), , , and the Pacific, often prioritizing equity in and demands specific to their areas. National nodes operate within single countries or as coalitions, aggregating member NGOs for targeted domestic advocacy, such as influencing national climate plans or litigation against polluters. Notable examples are , coordinating over a dozen Australian NGOs on bushfire response and export policies; , uniting more than 190 U.S.-based organizations to push for federal legislation like the ; Réseau Action Climat (RAC-France), advocating for EU-aligned reductions in French emissions; CAN-Japan, engaging on nuclear phase-out alternatives; and Climate Action Network (SACAN), focusing on just transitions in coal-dependent economies. These nodes handle membership applications—requiring alignment with CAN's charter—and ensure that over 1,900 total member organizations across 130+ countries remain connected via the network's internal platforms.

Membership Composition

The Climate Action Network (CAN) consists of over 1,800 non-governmental organizations (NGOs) dedicated to , adaptation, and , spanning more than 130 countries across all six continents. Membership eligibility is restricted to non-profit entities actively involved in climate-related work, with explicit exclusion of or corporate representatives to maintain from vested interests. Organizations join through regional or national nodes, of which there are 22, enabling localized coordination within the global framework. The membership is predominantly composed of environmental advocacy groups, such as Greenpeace International and the (WWF), which focus on policy influence and public mobilization. Development-oriented NGOs, including and , form a significant portion, emphasizing , alleviation, and in vulnerable regions. Community-based and organizations, often addressing local impacts like disaster resilience, are also prevalent, alongside smaller numbers of faith-based groups such as . This mix underscores CAN's orientation, prioritizing non-state actors over governmental or private sector involvement. Geographically, membership skews toward and , reflecting historical advocacy strengths in those areas, but includes substantial representation from , , and the Pacific. As documented in the December 2021 membership roster of 1,527 organizations—likely an undercount relative to current totals—the accounted for 561 members, followed by (123), (107), (121), and the (62). African nodes, such as those in (52 members across countries like and ) and , highlight engagement in developing contexts, though overall numbers remain lower than in Western hubs. This distribution supports CAN's strategy of bridging Global North funding and expertise with Global South priorities, though it has drawn critiques for uneven favoring established Western NGOs.

Mission, Objectives, and Ideological Framework

Stated Goals and Policy Positions

The Climate Action Network (CAN) states its primary objectives as preventing dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system through global awareness-raising and capacity-building efforts targeted at governments and citizens, while also safeguarding , advancing , , and . Its vision encompasses a world insulated from the adverse , wherein populations coexist harmoniously with natural ecosystems, upholding universal , equity across nations, and pathways to sustainable . CAN positions itself as an advocate for holding governments accountable to the Paris Agreement's commitment to limit to well below 2°C, with efforts prioritized toward the 1.5°C threshold, emphasizing the integration of with broader development imperatives. In terms of policy advocacy, CAN demands a rapid, comprehensive, and publicly funded phase-out of fossil fuels, rejecting offsets or mechanisms under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement that could undermine stringent mitigation. It calls for nationally determined contributions (NDCs) from all countries to align with a 1.5°C trajectory, incorporating just transition principles that prioritize workers in fossil-dependent sectors through retraining and social protections funded by polluter pays mechanisms. CAN advocates for substantial increases in public climate finance from developed nations to developing ones, targeting needs-based allocations exceeding $100 billion annually by 2025 under the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG), delivered predominantly as grants rather than loans to avoid exacerbating debt burdens. Further positions include the operationalization of a loss and damage finance facility, with initial contributions from historical emitters like those in the , to compensate vulnerable nations for irreversible climate impacts such as events. CAN supports enhanced funding focused on resilience-building in , , and for least-developed countries, while opposing trade measures or carbon border adjustments that could impose unilateral burdens on global south economies without reciprocal commitments from high emitters. These stances are articulated through CAN's annual policy documents and ECO newsletters, which critique insufficient ambition in negotiations and urge binding timelines for emissions reductions peaking before 2020 and reaching net-zero by 2050 at the latest.

Alignment with Broader Environmental Narratives

The (CAN) aligns closely with dominant environmental narratives that frame as an demanding immediate, transformative global action to limit warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, as articulated in the . CAN explicitly holds governments accountable to this threshold, emphasizing the need for ambitious nationally determined contributions (NDCs) and criticizing insufficient progress in multilateral forums like the UNFCCC. This stance mirrors broader narratives from IPCC reports, which CAN frequently endorses; for instance, in response to the IPCC's Sixth Assessment Report Synthesis in 2023, CAN highlighted the "stark detail" of the crisis and called for an end to the era to avert irreversible tipping points. Such positions prioritize urgency and systemic overhaul over incremental adaptations, reflecting a consensus among international environmental NGOs that current emission trajectories risk catastrophic outcomes, though empirical projections from IPCC authors indicate only 4% likelihood of achieving 1.5°C by century's end under existing policies. CAN's advocacy extends to narratives of climate justice and equity, centering voices from Global South communities disproportionately affected by emissions originating in industrialized nations. It promotes a "just transition" to renewables, rejecting carbon offsetting as inadequate for addressing root causes and advocating for the phase-out of fossil fuels to strip their economic and social license. This aligns with radical strains within that critique capitalist structures for perpetuating fossil dependence, as seen in CAN's focus on ending industry influence and fostering grassroots-led . While CAN operates within UN frameworks, its papers and campaigns often amplify calls for binding commitments on and loss/damage, echoing broader activist demands for reparative measures from high-emitting countries, though these remain contentious amid debates over economic feasibility and verifiable mitigation impacts. In critiquing mainstream implementations, CAN diverges slightly from technocratic optimism in some environmental circles by opposing solutions like marine interventions and prioritizing people-centered, multilateral advocacy over market-based mechanisms alone. This positioning reinforces narratives of collective responsibility and anti-corporate accountability, consistent with NGO coalitions that view insufficient regulatory ambition as a of political will rather than technological limits. Empirical alignment with IPCC is evident in CAN's endorsement of land-based and protections, yet its rejection of offsets underscores a purist stance prioritizing absolute emission reductions, which contrasts with pragmatic approaches in policy circles balancing growth and decarbonization. Overall, CAN embodies the activist core of environmental narratives, advocating for profound societal shifts grounded in observed climate risks but amplified through advocacy lenses that prioritize equity and urgency over unverified economic trade-offs.

Activities and Operations

Advocacy in International Forums

The (CAN) engages in international climate forums primarily through its role as an accredited civil society observer to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) negotiations. As co-lead of the Environmental Non-Governmental Organizations () constituency, CAN coordinates over 1,900 member organizations to monitor, analyze, and influence the proceedings of () meetings, which occur annually. This involvement dates back to the network's founding in 1989, predating the UNFCCC's establishment, with consistent participation shaping civil society input since the first in 1995. CAN's advocacy tactics include producing the daily ECO newsletter during COP sessions and intersessional meetings, a publication initiated in the early that provides summaries, critiques, and calls for stronger commitments from parties. For instance, at COP29 in in November 2024, ECO issues highlighted gaps in national contributions toward the 1.5°C target and urged finance mobilization. The network also organizes side events, briefings, and coalitions to lobby delegates, emphasizing equity, , and ambitious targets like and loss-and-damage funding. Public pressure mechanisms form a core of CAN's strategy, such as the "Fossil of the Day" awards, which since 1999 have singled out governments for actions undermining progress, with the receiving the escalated "Colossal Fossil" at multiple COPs for blocking agreements. Complementing this, CAN presents "Ray of the Day" awards for constructive steps, as seen at COP26 in in 2021 when executive director Tasneem Essop highlighted positive ministerial interventions. These efforts extend to intersessional meetings, where in June 2025 at SB62, CAN criticized tactics and advocated for unrestricted civic space amid reports of on non-climate issues. Beyond UNFCCC, CAN targets forums like the , , IPCC sessions, and board meetings to align advocacy across multilateral processes, focusing on holding major emitters—responsible for over 80% of global emissions—accountable for scaled-up action. In preparation for COP30 in in 2025, CAN issued calls for equitable mineral value chains, integrating and environmental safeguards into transition policies. These activities leverage CAN's global reach to amplify voices from developing regions, though outcomes depend on party negotiations, with CAN often attributing delays to resistance from high-emitting nations.

Campaigns, Publications, and Coalitions

CAN coordinates campaigns centered on advancing ambitious climate policies in international negotiations and national implementations. A key focus includes transformative national plans, launched as a strategy to sustain pressure on major emitters and wealthy nations for emissions trajectories consistent with the Paris Agreement's 1.5°C limit, emphasizing just transitions and finance for vulnerable countries. During the COP27 summit in Sharm El-Sheikh from November 6 to 20, 2022, CAN organized member-led actions to advocate for operationalizing loss and damage funding and strengthening pledges, including street protests and interventions highlighting gaps in prior commitments. Another initiative targets nations, urging them to integrate comprehensive climate plans covering , , and support for Global South priorities, with calls for alignment on reduction timelines. The network issues position papers, briefings, and reports to inform advocacy and critique policy shortcomings. In response to ongoing energy debates, CAN published a position in 2023 demanding a "fair, fast, full, and funded" global , contending that delayed action exacerbates inequities and undermines net-zero goals without adequate support for affected workers and communities. Its 2019 stance on rejected expansive subsidies and targets, citing evidence of indirect emissions from and competition with food production, while advocating strict criteria to prevent greenwashing. CAN also released a 2019 briefing on the IPCC's Special Report on and Land, analyzing pathways for land-based mitigation like reduced and soil carbon enhancement, projected to contribute up to 30% of needed emissions cuts by 2030 if scaled equitably. Annual reports, such as the 2021 edition, document network activities, including strategy shifts post-2019 global meetings toward enhanced grassroots coordination. Coalitions form the backbone of CAN's operations, comprising over 1,900 member NGOs across 130 countries organized into 22 regional and national nodes for localized yet synchronized . Thematic working groups, restricted to members and aligned with UNFCCC tracks like and , facilitate collaborative drafting of positions and joint interventions, such as those on Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). Notable partners include the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives for waste-climate linkages and the Global Catholic Climate Movement for faith-informed mobilization, enabling cross-sector campaigns that amplify demands in UN forums. This federated model supports bottom-up coalitions, as seen in coordinated pushes during COPs, where regional inputs shape global strategies without centralized vetoes.

Domestic and Regional Initiatives

The Climate Action Network (CAN) coordinates domestic and regional initiatives primarily through its 22 regional and national nodes, which conduct joint advocacy to influence local policies and ensure alignment with global climate goals such as the Paris Agreement. These nodes focus on bottom-up strategies, strengthening civil society engagement to pressure governments for ambitious Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and equitable domestic implementation. For instance, CAN's Transformative National Climate Action Plans program evaluates country-specific NDCs, critiquing shortcomings like fossil fuel dependency in Canada's targets and Australia's production policies, while praising incremental adaptation efforts in Kenya. In , CAN Europe, representing over 180 organizations, drives regional campaigns including "Europe Beyond ," which advocates for phasing out coal-fired power in member states and supports national transitions to renewables. Another initiative, "Together for 100% Renewable ," mobilizes members to accelerate and deployment, emphasizing fair rollout policies at both and national levels. Similarly, in other regions, CAN nodes facilitate input into domestic planning; examples include advocacy for stronger NDCs in , , the , and the Kyrgyz Republic, where local NGOs highlight gaps in equity and finance. National nodes, such as those in and , engage in targeted domestic advocacy, including critiques of offsets and reliance in Japan's NDC and expansion in the UAE's plans. (CANLA) supports regional coordination on legal and for climate policies, though specific campaign details emphasize broader over standalone initiatives. Across nodes in , , and the , activities prioritize holding emitters accountable through mobilization and policy guidelines released in multiple languages to aid national-level revisions ahead of 2025 NDC updates.

Funding and Financial Operations

Primary Funding Sources

The Climate Action Network International (CAN-I) primarily derives its funding from grants awarded by philanthropic foundations dedicated to environmental causes, as well as contributions from international non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and member networks. Key funders documented in CAN-I's financial disclosures include the European Climate Foundation, ClimateWorks Foundation, Greenpeace International, and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), alongside others such as , , and Misereor. These sources support CAN-I's operational budget, which in 2015 totaled approximately $1.57 million in revenue, with expenses of $1.53 million, largely allocated to advocacy and coordination activities. While CAN-I solicits individual and recurring donations through its website to bolster global operations, such contributions appear secondary to institutional grants, which dominate reported inflows. Annual reports, such as those from and 2021, confirm reliance on these foundation and NGO partnerships, though detailed breakdowns of recent donor allocations remain limited in public access, reflecting a pattern of selective financial common among advocacy networks. No evidence indicates direct government funding as a , distinguishing CAN-I from state-supported initiatives. This funding model aligns CAN-I with broader climate philanthropy ecosystems, where intermediaries like the European Climate Foundation channel resources from high-net-worth donors and endowments toward international advocacy. Critics have noted potential implications for , given the ideological alignment of these funders with aggressive emissions reduction agendas, but CAN-I maintains that such support enables its coordination of over 1,900 member organizations across 130 countries.

Budget Allocation and Transparency Issues

Climate Action Network-International (CAN-I) reported total expenditures of €2,223,514 in its 2021 financial summary, with the largest allocation to personnel costs at 57% (€1,270,566), reflecting heavy in staffing for coordination across its of over 1,900 member organizations. Sub-grants to regional nodes accounted for 33% (€734,847), supporting activities in affiliates via the Node Development Fund, which distributed €293,893 that year—a 47% increase from 2020. Remaining funds went to coordination and administration (5%), publications (5%), travel (1%), and events (1%), indicating a focus on and outputs rather than direct on-the-ground projects. Funding for these expenditures derives primarily from institutional grants by philanthropic foundations, including the Children's Investment Fund Foundation (CIFF), ClimateWorks Foundation, Oak Foundation, KR Foundation, IKEA Foundation, and others such as AirClim, Friedrich Ebert Stiftung (FES), and , alongside minor individual donations. This donor composition, dominated by entities aligned with progressive environmental agendas, raises questions about potential influence on CAN-I's policy priorities, though the organization lists these sources in its reports without detailing grant-specific restrictions. Historical data from 2010 shows a similar pattern, with expenditures of $1,144,920 USD, where salaries and benefits comprised 26% ($301,037) and travel-related costs exceeded 52% ($597,242 combined), underscoring consistent emphasis on operational and convening expenses over program delivery. CAN-I maintains transparency through annual reports that include financial breakdowns and audited statements, as evidenced in publications up to , but lacks publicly available detailed financials for 2022–2024 on its , potentially limiting scrutiny of recent trends amid growing scale. Sub-grant allocations to nodes, while substantial, are not itemized by recipient or project outcome, which could obscure end-use efficacy given varying standards among affiliates in over 130 countries. Broader critiques of environmental NGOs, including opaque donor influences and high administrative overheads, apply indirectly to CAN-I's model, where personnel and coordination dominate budgets, though no specific allegations of mismanagement have surfaced in analyses.

Policy Influence and Impact

Contributions to Global Agreements

The Climate Action Network (CAN), established in 1989 to coordinate non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in climate negotiations, played a pivotal role in advocating for the during the late 1990s UNFCCC processes. CAN facilitated the coordination of environmental NGOs (ENGOs) under its umbrella, enabling unified strategies that emphasized binding emissions reduction targets for industrialized countries, as outlined in the protocol adopted on December 11, 1997, and entering into force on February 16, 2005. Through initiatives like the launch of the newsletter—providing daily policy recommendations to negotiators—and the Fossil of the Day awards starting in 1999 to publicly criticize countries delaying progress, CAN amplified pressure on parties to achieve the protocol's differentiated responsibilities framework. In the lead-up to the 2015 Paris Agreement, CAN mobilized over 1,900 member organizations across 130 countries to push for ambitious elements, including the 1.5°C temperature goal, integration of into , and enhanced financial commitments from developed nations under Article 9. Their advocacy contributed to the agreement's emphasis on nationally determined contributions (NDCs) with progressive ambition, as CAN produced position papers urging alignment with and equity principles during COP21 negotiations. Post-adoption, CAN has sustained influence by monitoring NDC submissions—reporting in February 2025 that over 90% of countries missed the January 2025 deadline for updates—and critiquing implementation gaps at subsequent COPs to enforce accountability. CAN's broader contributions to UNFCCC agreements include fostering coalitions for mechanisms, such as proposals for the Belem Action Mechanism at COP30, and opposing loopholes like surplus Assigned Amount Units carryover from eras that could undermine mitigation stringency. These efforts, while rooted in advocacy rather than formal decision-making, have shaped negotiation dynamics by bridging NGO inputs with party positions, though their impact is debated given persistent gaps in global emissions trajectories relative to pledged targets.

Measurable Outcomes and Effectiveness Critiques

Global anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions have risen by approximately 51% from 1990 to 2021, reaching 57.4 GtCO₂-eq in 2022, despite the Climate Action Network's (CAN) sustained advocacy for rapid decarbonization and international agreements like the Kyoto Protocol and Paris Agreement. This increase, driven primarily by economic growth in Asia (accounting for 77% of the net rise since 1990), underscores a lack of global peak in emissions following CAN's push for binding targets and fossil fuel phase-outs since its founding in 1989. CAN's influence on policy rhetoric, such as the Paris Agreement's 1.5°C goal, has yielded non-binding nationally determined contributions (NDCs), yet current implementations project 2.5–2.9°C warming by 2100, with atmospheric CO₂ concentrations continuing to climb. Critics argue this reflects limited effectiveness, as CAN-backed strategies fail to account for causal drivers like poverty alleviation and industrialization in developing economies, where emissions from and have surged to meet energy demands unmet by intermittent renewables. Effectiveness critiques further emphasize suboptimal resource allocation; for instance, the trillions spent on subsidies and mandates aligned with CAN's positions have not proportionally curbed global trends, with emissions decoupling minimally from GDP growth only in select nations. Analysts like highlight that such advocacy prioritizes high-cost mitigation over innovation in R&D, yielding marginal temperature benefits (e.g., 0.1–0.3°C averted by 2100 under aggressive scenarios) at the expense of broader development priorities like and . Empirical assessments of similar NGO-orchestrated initiatives show variable outputs but no systemic improvement in emission trajectories tied to network scale or ambition. These outcomes suggest CAN's model excels in mobilization but struggles with enforceable, economically viable pathways that transcend voluntary pledges.

Economic and Societal Consequences of Advocated Policies

The policies advocated by the , including a rapid and full phase-out of fuels, a swift transition to systems, and stringent emissions reductions aligned with a 1.5°C warming limit, have been associated with substantial economic disruptions in empirical analyses of similar decarbonization pathways. Studies modeling aggressive decarbonization scenarios indicate potential annual global GDP reductions of 0.15 to 0.25 percentage points due to shifts in energy demand, capital reallocation, and higher transitional costs, with fuel-producing economies facing disproportionate losses of up to 60% in rents under ambitious policies. In , for instance, replacing with renewables under rapid timelines has been estimated to impose annual costs of up to $37.7 billion, reflecting elevated infrastructure and reliability expenses during the shift. Sectoral employment impacts from such policies reveal net job creation in renewables but significant losses and penalties in carbon-intensive industries, with laid-off workers in sectors experiencing hourly reductions of 24% and unemployment rates of 26% post-displacement, based on U.S. from decarbonization-driven layoffs. administrative on mass layoffs in carbon-intensive sectors similarly document long-term earnings losses and reemployment challenges, underscoring the costs of abrupt transitions without adequate retraining. While aggregate welfare effects may remain limited in integrated models, value-added shifts from to low-carbon power generation amplify vulnerabilities in energy-exporting regions, potentially exacerbating fiscal strains. Societally, CAN's push for accelerated risks heightening , particularly in where green transition policies have contributed to elevated household energy expenditures amid volatile renewable integration. Between 8% and 16% of the —equating to 35 to 72 million people—faced in recent years, driven by high energy costs, low incomes, and inefficient building stocks, with the 2022 amplifying these effects through policy-induced price spikes. Lower-income households bear the largest relative burdens from rising energy prices under decarbonization, as evidenced by distributional analyses showing regressive impacts absent targeted subsidies. In fossil-dependent developing economies, rapid phase-outs without funded transitions could trigger "traumatic decarbonization," sparking political crises, unrest, and inequality exacerbation due to sudden revenue and job collapses. Empirical evidence from countries highlights persistent labor market mismatches in high-polluting sectors, where displaced workers face prolonged unemployment and skill gaps, disproportionately affecting vulnerable communities.

Controversies and Criticisms

Allegations of Exaggerated Climate Alarmism

Critics have accused the Climate Action Network (CAN) of promoting exaggerated claims about the severity of to advance policy agendas and secure funding. In 2016, mathematician and climate skeptic Leonid Goldstein filed a civil against CAN and over 40 other environmental organizations, foundations, and investment funds, alleging they formed a "Climate Alarmism Enterprise" engaged in a long-term criminal scheme since 1988. The complaint claimed CAN and affiliates falsely asserted that anthropogenic CO2 emissions cause dangerous , while suppressing evidence that CO2 increases and that observed warming is minor and net beneficial. Goldstein alleged predicate acts including , of public officials, and attempted , such as demands for trillions in based on these purported falsehoods, seeking damages for from retaliation against skeptics. The suit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of , was dismissed in 2017 for failure to state valid claims. CAN has been criticized for organizing publicity stunts that amplify alarmist narratives during UN climate negotiations. At the 2015 COP21 in , CAN collaborated with groups like to distribute over 1,000 "Wanted" posters and fliers targeting climate skeptics such as and , branding them " criminals" with alleged fossil fuel connections and urging their prosecution. CAN also advocated ejecting skeptics from the talks, framing dissent as obstruction to urgent action, though these efforts failed. Observers, including , described such tactics as stunts designed to vilify opponents rather than engage scientifically. Broader critiques portray CAN as a coordinator of synchronized alarmist messaging among NGOs, allegedly prioritizing advocacy over empirical scrutiny. The Heartland Institute has highlighted CAN's role in funding global activism that portrays climate impacts as apocalyptic to justify stringent emissions cuts and wealth transfers, despite data showing slower-than-predicted warming rates and adaptive benefits from CO2 fertilization. CAN's U.S. affiliate received over $13 million from foundations like the Sea Change Foundation between 2006 and 2014, which critics link to sustaining these campaigns. Detractors argue such efforts erode public trust when predictions of imminent catastrophe, like widespread crop failures or mass extinctions tied directly to CO2, fail to materialize as forecasted. CAN maintains its positions align with from bodies like the IPCC, dismissing accusations as denialism funded by industry interests.

Questions on Political Neutrality and Bias

Critics have questioned the political neutrality of the Climate Action Network (CAN), arguing that its advocacy prioritizes progressive policy demands over impartial analysis, despite its framing as a collaborative NGO network focused on climate solutions. CAN's positions, such as calls for rapid fossil fuel phase-outs and integration of labor and equity provisions into international agreements like the , align closely with left-leaning priorities, including opposition to despite its role as a low-emissions baseload power source. This stance has drawn accusations of ideological bias, as evidenced by internal feuds with more moderate environmentalists over issues like wind energy opposition and aggressive tactics, including protests against and symbolic actions like dumping coal on the U.S. lawn. Funding sources further fuel concerns about partisan alignment. CAN-International received support from donors including , , ClimateWorks Foundation, and the , organizations known for advancing left-progressive environmental agendas; in 2015, its revenue totaled $1,571,917, with expenses of $1,533,617, partly from these and anonymous contributors. Similarly, its U.S. affiliate (USCAN) drew grants from entities like Sea Change International ($1,125,000 in 2016) and the ($46,106), which fund advocacy aligned with regulatory and equity-focused climate policies. Such financing, lacking diverse ideological input, raises questions about whether CAN's outputs reflect balanced empirical assessment or donor-driven narratives, particularly given the progressive bent of these funders' broader portfolios. CAN's affiliations and activities amplify perceptions of non-neutrality. Partnerships with labor unions like the and groups such as the Center for Social Inclusion emphasize framing of climate policy, often critiquing market-oriented or conservative approaches while supporting multilateral frameworks with redistributive elements. Its regional networks, including CAN-Europe and USCAN, engage in targeted campaigns, such as "wanted posters" against skeptics and smears of climate policy opponents, which mirror partisan tactics rather than neutral facilitation. Evaluations of affiliates, like USCAN's left-center bias rating due to selective advocacy for stringent action, suggest a pattern where CAN amplifies critiques of insufficiently ambitious governments (e.g., awarding " of the Day" to conservative-led nations) while offering measured praise for left-aligned initiatives, such as Canada's 2022 Liberal-NDP climate supply-and-confidence agreement. These elements prompt scrutiny of CAN's claim to apolitical coordination, as its emphasis on "systems transformation" and often intersects with ideological battles, potentially sidelining first-principles evaluations of trade-offs like reliability or economic impacts. While CAN maintains it bases demands on peer-reviewed , critics contend this selectively interprets to favor alarmist or redistributive outcomes, echoing broader institutional biases in environmental where left-leaning perspectives dominate and . No formal legal findings of partisanship exist, but the network's operational choices underscore ongoing debates about whether climate NGOs like CAN function as neutral brokers or ideological actors. In September 2016, Climate Action Network was sued under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) by plaintiff Leonid Goldstein, who alleged that the organization, along with 39 other environmental groups and individuals, participated in a fraudulent enterprise by disseminating false claims of an imminent climate catastrophe to induce governments and donors to provide funding. The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, claimed this constituted a pattern of racketeering activity aimed at financial gain through exaggerated threats unsupported by empirical evidence. Defendants, including CAN, filed motions to dismiss, which were granted, leading to the case's termination on June 12, 2017. The allegations in the Goldstein suit highlighted ethical concerns over the integrity of advocacy claims, positing that overstating climate risks could mislead policymakers and the public, potentially diverting resources from evidence-based priorities. Although the dismissed the claims without reaching the merits—typically on grounds such as lack of standing or failure to state a viable predicate—the case underscored broader debates on the of NGOs to substantiate alarmist narratives with verifiable data rather than relying on consensus-driven assertions prone to institutional biases. Critics have also questioned CAN's funding transparency, particularly for its U.S. chapter (USCAN), noting opaque sourcing that complicates assessments of potential influences on its positions. Charity evaluations, such as a 3/4-star rating from , reflect operational strengths but do not fully resolve accountability gaps in donor disclosures, raising ethical issues about undue reliance on untraceable contributions in climate campaigning. These concerns align with wider scrutiny of environmental NGOs, where undisclosed has historically enabled agenda-driven over rigorous of impacts.

References

  1. [1]
    Climate Action Network – Home
    Tackling the climate crisis ... Climate Action Network (CAN) is a global network of more than 1,900 civil society organisations in over 130 countries driving ...About CANWork with usMembersGet InvolvedJoin CAN
  2. [2]
    Climate Action Network International (CAN-I) - InfluenceWatch
    Climate Action Network International was founded in 1989 a year after the creation of the World Meteorological Organization and the U.N. Environmental Program.
  3. [3]
    US Climate Action Network - MacArthur Foundation
    The U.S. Climate Action Network supports more than 150 U.S.-based civil society organizations that seek to influence local, national, and international climate ...
  4. [4]
    Climate sceptic files Texas lawsuit against 'alarmism'
    Oct 17, 2016 · A computer engineer has lodged a lawsuit in Texas against “climate alarmist bodies”, under legislation aimed at tackling organised crime.Missing: details | Show results with:details
  5. [5]
    Goldstein v. Climate Action Network et al 5:2016cv00211
    Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations case filed on September 13, 2016 in the Texas Northern District Court.
  6. [6]
    [PDF] History of the Climate Movement - Folkrörelser och protester
    - 30-40 people from European and gather at Loccum, a church retreat center in Germany to estab- lish Climate Action Network (CAN) as a coordination of ...
  7. [7]
    [PDF] Organising to influence the global politics of climate change
    In 1989, there was a 2 or 3 day meeting at a Church sponsored. Conference Centre in Loccum, Germany” (Marshall Fund Interviewee 2005). This meeting was attended.
  8. [8]
    About CAN - Climate Action Network
    Our history. 1988–1994: Founding of CAN and first regional and national networks. In 1989, organisations from primarily Europe and the US agreed to establish ...
  9. [9]
    In the time machine - a short history of CAN South East Asia ...
    CANSEA was established in 1992 with CAN members from Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines. The first Steering Committee meeting was held the following year.
  10. [10]
    Our History | Us Climate Action Ne
    In 1989, a pivotal moment unfolded as organizations from Europe and the United States came together to forge a loose yet official network, named the Climate ...
  11. [11]
    [PDF] The Kyoto Protocol Negotiations on Global Climate Change
    ENGOs coordinated their participation in the Kyoto Protocol nego- tiations under the umbrella of the Climate Action Network (CAN). CAN was formed in 1989 for ...
  12. [12]
    Why the Kyoto Protocol is a Historic Milestone
    Feb 16, 2005 · Why the Kyoto Protocol is a Historic Milestone. On February 16th ... Climate Action Network-International (CAN) is the world's largest ...
  13. [13]
    [PDF] Implementing Kyoto - Digital Commons @ American University ...
    Kyoto Protocol negotiations as the lead expert on compliance for the Climate Action Network (CAN), a coalition of over 235 non-governmental organizations ...
  14. [14]
    [PDF] Climate aCtion Network-INterNatIoNal
    Established in 1989, the Climate Action Network (CAN) is now a worldwide network of over 900 non-governmental organizations in more than 100 countries, working ...
  15. [15]
    Fossil of the Day Archives - Climate Action Network
    Fossil of the Day. Awards given by CAN to the countries who are “doing the most to achieve the least” in terms of the progress on climate change.
  16. [16]
    CAN COP15 Guide - Climate Action Network
    The COP15 is located at the Bella Center, which is outside the city center, but right next to a metro station. Furthermore there will be shuttle buses between ...
  17. [17]
    Copenhagen Climate Negotiation News Update: Today @ COP15
    COP15 CAN press conference. Directors of some of the world's major environment and development NGOs assess the state of the negotiations.
  18. [18]
    Civil society responds as final Paris Climate Agreement released
    Dec 12, 2015 · Members of the Climate Action Network today assess how far the Paris outcome will go to speed up the transition from fossil fuels to ...
  19. [19]
    CAN Position: Integrating Human Rights into the Paris Agreement ...
    The Paris Climate Conference thus provides a crucial opportunity to establish a new framework for climate action that strengthens mitigation and adaptation ...Missing: post- | Show results with:post-
  20. [20]
    Transformative national climate action plans
    CAN's strategy aims to build, sustain and renew pressure on governments, particularly the world's largest emitters and the richest countries.
  21. [21]
    Climate Justice and Loss and Damage: The Story So Far - Earth.Org
    Mar 28, 2024 · A controversial footnote to Article 8 of the Paris Agreement confirmed that loss and damage ... Climate Action Network (CAN) International.Missing: post- | Show results with:post-
  22. [22]
    Tasneem Essop - Climate Action Network
    Tasneem Essop is an expert on climate, energy, poverty and social justice issues and is the Founding Director of the Energy Democracy Initiative in South ...
  23. [23]
    COP29: Climate Action Network Media Reaction to Latest text for the ...
    Nov 21, 2024 · ... loss and damage. We urge the Parties not to waste another year while ... Erin Ryan, Senior International Campaigner, Climate Action Network ...Missing: post- | Show results with:post-
  24. [24]
    Breakthrough for Justice at Bonn climate talks amid a system in crisis
    Jun 26, 2025 · ... loss and damage finance. The refusal to put public finance on the ... Climate Action Network-International (CAN) is the world's largest ...Missing: post- | Show results with:post-
  25. [25]
    [PDF] CAN Charter Our Network Rules and Governance Principles
    CAN International Association E.V. is a legal organisation established to create a secretariat that coordinates activities of CAN Nodes and their members at the ...
  26. [26]
    People - Climate Action Network
    The CAN International Secretariat coordinates and steers the network to achieve the network's strategic objectives. Executive Team. Tasneem Essop. Executive ...Missing: structure | Show results with:structure
  27. [27]
    Governance - Climate Action Network
    CAN is governed by an international Board of Directors elected from the membership at the annual General Assembly.Board Of Directors · Susan Sinnett, Greenpeace · Anti-Bullying And Harassment...Missing: Secretariat | Show results with:Secretariat
  28. [28]
    Members - Climate Action Network
    All non-governmental organisations working on climate issues are eligible to join the CAN Network. Those organisations based in regions or countries where ...Missing: 1990s 2000s
  29. [29]
    CAN Working Groups - Climate Action Network
    Climate Action Network-International (CAN) is the world's largest ... CAN Networks. Arab World · East Africa · Eastern Europe, Caucasus & Central Asia ...
  30. [30]
    South East Asia Archives - Climate Action Network
    Climate Action Network-International (CAN) is the world's largest environmental network of over 1,800 non-governmental organisations in over 130 countries ...<|separator|>
  31. [31]
    USCAN Members (List) | Us Climate Action Ne
    Climate Action Network International. USCAN is a vital network of over 190 nonprofit organizations actively working to address the climate crisis.
  32. [32]
    [PDF] Membership List Website Version - Climate Action Network
    Rajputana Society for Natural History. CAN SA. 1462. (R)Evolution Let's Change Now! (RLCN). CAN SA. 1463. Samvad. CAN SA. Page 134. No. Member Organization.
  33. [33]
    CAN Positions Archives - Climate Action Network
    Climate Action Network Position: The world needs a fair, fast, full, and funded fossil fuel phase-out.
  34. [34]
    ECO 1, COP29 - Climate Action Network
    Nov 11, 2024 · ... loss and damage, and a yearly review mechanism that builds up to a ... Climate Action Network-International (CAN) is the world's ...Missing: post- | Show results with:post-
  35. [35]
    COP26 Five-Point Plan for Solidarity, Fairness and Prosperity
    The COP26 talks will address key issues regarding the Paris Agreement such as the promised financial support from rich, polluting nations to poorer, vulnerable ...
  36. [36]
    COP29 Expectations Document (Annual Policy Document)
    There is no climate action without justice. Summary of key demands. On achieving need based and equitable climate finance in the context of the NCQG: Finance is ...
  37. [37]
    Multilateral processes and advocacy - Climate Action Network
    CAN has a long and successful record of steering climate policy advocacy and communications in various multilateral fora. ... Climate Action Network-International ...United Nations Framework... · Intergovernmental Panel On... · Green Climate Fund
  38. [38]
    Civil Society Representatives React to the IPCC Synthesis Report
    Mar 20, 2023 · The IPCC AR6 Synthesis Report published today holds a mirror up to the scale of the climate crisis and lays out in stark detail why the end of the fossil fuel ...
  39. [39]
    why some climate activists are unwilling to abandon the 1.5 °C target
    Apr 22, 2024 · Nature's survey of IPCC authors found that only 4% of scientists predict global warming will be limited to 1.5 degrees by the end of the century ...
  40. [40]
    Position on Carbon Offsetting - Climate Action Network
    It is clear that many offset projects, for instance, under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) in the Kyoto Protocol ... Climate Action Network ...
  41. [41]
  42. [42]
    Overview briefing on the IPCC Special Report on Climate Change ...
    Land has a crucial role to play in climate mitigation​​ Key land based measures are required to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement and there is a huge ...Missing: views | Show results with:views
  43. [43]
    Overview briefing on the IPCC Special Report on the Ocean and ...
    Achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement would substantial reduce climate change impacts. The IPCC assessment reveals the benefits of ambitious mitigation ...Missing: views | Show results with:views
  44. [44]
    ECO Newsletter - Climate Action Network
    COP 30 · Resources · Publications · CAN Positions · Fossil of the Day · ECO ... Climate Action Network-International (CAN) is the world's largest environmental ...
  45. [45]
    ECO Newsletter at COP27 - Climate Action Network
    Climate Action Network-International (CAN) is the world's largest environmental network of over 1,800 non-governmental organisations in over 130 countries ...Eco Issues · Subscribing To Eco · Support Can
  46. [46]
    Side Events and Exhibits - UNFCCC
    By participating in side events, these organizations present their work or foster discussions on key issues, often engaging the audience in a Q&A session.
  47. [47]
    Presenting the worst of the worst: USA goes home as Colossal Fossil
    Climate Action Network-International (CAN) is the world's largest environmental network of over 1,800 non-governmental organisations in over 130 countries ...
  48. [48]
    UNFCCC Parties must help protect civic space in climate talks, says ...
    Jun 24, 2025 · Civil society constituencies participating in the UNFCCC climate negotiations have today shared an open letter with all Parties to the Convention.Missing: meetings | Show results with:meetings
  49. [49]
    UNFCCC Censorship of Palestine Solidarity: NGOs at Bonn SB 62 ...
    Jun 21, 2025 · Climate Action Network-International (CAN) is the world's largest environmental network of over 1,800 non-governmental organisations in over 130 ...
  50. [50]
    A Global Call for Equity in Mineral Value Chains at COP30
    Oct 13, 2025 · They ask negotiators to recognize human rights, environmental protection and equity in mineral value chains as central pillars of climate action ...
  51. [51]
    Actions and Campaigns during COP27 - Climate Action Network
    Climate Action Network-International (CAN) is the world's largest environmental network of over 1,800 non-governmental organisations in over 130 countries ...
  52. [52]
    The world needs a fair, fast, full, and funded fossil fuel phase-out
    Climate Action Network-International (CAN) is the world's largest environmental network of over 1,800 non-governmental organisations in over 130 countries ...
  53. [53]
    Climate Action Network Position on Bioenergy
    Climate Action Network-International (CAN) is the world's largest environmental network of over 1,800 non-governmental organisations in over 130 countries ...Overview · Harm To The Climate · Can Principles /...
  54. [54]
    Climate Action Network Annual Report 2021 - World - ReliefWeb
    May 19, 2023 · Coming out of a crisis that resulted in a change in leadership, Tasneem Essop was appointed as the Interim Executive Director (later appointed ...
  55. [55]
    Our Work - Climate Action Network
    Help us build power in the climate movement by contributing a one-time or recurring donation that will go to supporting our global work as well as various ...<|separator|>
  56. [56]
    Campaigns - CAN Europe
    CAN Europe empowers civil society organisations to influence the design and development of effective climate change policy in Europe, both in the European Union ...
  57. [57]
    Together for 100% Renewable Europe
    This campaign brings forces within CAN Europe's network together and pushes for a faster and fairer rollout of solar and wind energy in Europe.
  58. [58]
    People's Voices in National Climate Action Plans: Civil society ...
    Climate Action Network-International (CAN) is the world's largest environmental network of over 1,800 non-governmental organisations in over 130 countries ...Missing: initiatives | Show results with:initiatives
  59. [59]
    Felipe Pino Zúñiga, CAN Latin America (CANLA)
    Felipe Pino Zúñiga, CAN Latin America (CANLA). Governance & Strategy, Legal & Risk Management and Network Development Committees Member. Felipe Pino is an ...
  60. [60]
  61. [61]
  62. [62]
    [PDF] annual report 2017 - Climate Action Network
    In 2017, CAN built on its trusted relationship with the Climate. Vulnerable Forum (CVF) composed of 48 countries amongst the most vulnerable to climate change ...
  63. [63]
    Climate Action Network Annual Report 2021 - Climate Action Network
    ### Summary of Climate Action Network (CAN) Annual Report 2021
  64. [64]
    [PDF] CAN-I-Annual-Report-2021-1.pdf - Climate Action Network
    Dec 22, 2022 · It was the Climate Action Network (CAN) Global Annual Strategy. Meeting in 2019, in Costa Rica, that marked a turning point for the network.Missing: statements | Show results with:statements
  65. [65]
    [PDF] annual report - Climate Action Network
    in the years since its founding in 1989, the climate action network has grown to over 600 organizations in. 90 countries. can's mission is to support and ...Missing: history | Show results with:history
  66. [66]
    Reports Archives - Climate Action Network
    Subscribe to receive monthly updates on the latest on the climate movement including the content from across the network, upcoming climate change events.Missing: budget allocation
  67. [67]
    Climate Action Network - UNFCCC
    The Paris Agreement should stipulate that collective targets for the provision of finance should be set and updated in 5-‐year cycles, with separate mitigation ...Missing: influence | Show results with:influence
  68. [68]
    [PDF] Climate Action Network
    The Paris Agreement must recognize that all actions on climate change shall significantly contribute to Agenda 2030. This will enable closer alignment of.
  69. [69]
    Over 90% of countries fail to submit new NDCs by deadline
    Feb 11, 2025 · Only 13 out of 195 countries have updated their NDCs, with the majority of rich nations not submitting on deadline, exposing the alarming lack of political ...
  70. [70]
    CAN Position: Carry over of surplus Kyoto Assigned Amount Units ...
    The Climate Action Network International (CAN-I) urges the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol to fully address the issue of surplus AAUs and makes the following ...
  71. [71]
    [PDF] THE BELEM ACTION MECHANISM FOR A GLOBAL JUST ...
    Oct 11, 2025 · The Belem Action Mechanism for a Global Just. Transition (BAM) is designed to transform Just. Transition principles into a coherent, practical,.
  72. [72]
    4 Charts Explain Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Sector
    Dec 5, 2024 · Global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions grew by 51% from 1990 to 2021. These emissions are causing the planet to warm at an alarming rate and ...
  73. [73]
    Emissions Gap Report 2023: Broken Record | UNEP
    Nov 9, 2023 · Global GHG emissions set new record of 57.4 GtCO2e in 2022. Global GHG emissions increased by 1.2 per cent from 2021 to 2022 to reach a new ...<|separator|>
  74. [74]
    Chapter 2: Emissions trends and drivers
    Most global GHG emission growth occurred in Asia and Pacific, which accounted for 77% of the net 21 GtCO2-eq increase in GHG emissions since 1990, and 83% of ...
  75. [75]
    Emissions pathways to 2100 - Climate Action Tracker
    Nov 14, 2024 · Limiting warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels means that the greenhouse gas emissions need to be reduced rapidly in the coming years.
  76. [76]
    Global Climate Agreements: Successes and Failures
    Paris Agreement, 2015. The most significant global climate agreement to date, the Paris Agreement requires all countries to set emissions-reduction pledges.What Are The Most Important... · Why Are Countries Aiming To... · Which Countries Are...<|separator|>
  77. [77]
  78. [78]
    CO₂ and Greenhouse Gas Emissions - Our World in Data
    Human greenhouse gas emissions have increased global average temperatures · Global emissions have increased rapidly over the last 50 years and have not yet ...Where do CO₂ emissions... · Global aviation · CO₂ emissions by fuel
  79. [79]
    Bjorn Lomborg on the Costs and Benefits of Attacking Climate Change
    Jun 10, 2019 · Lomborg argues that we should always be aware of tradeoffs and effectiveness when assessing policies to reduce global warming. He advocates for ...
  80. [80]
    Assessing the effectiveness of orchestrated climate action from five ...
    Jul 7, 2022 · Here using a dataset of 276 climate initiatives we show important differences in output performance, with no improvement among initiatives associated with more ...
  81. [81]
    Further Delaying Climate Policies Will Hurt Economic Growth
    Oct 5, 2022 · The results show that such a policy package could slow global economic growth by 0.15 percentage point to 0.25 percentage point annually ...
  82. [82]
    The economic and fiscal transition costs of global climate mitigation ...
    Forty fossil fuel dependent economies are vulnerable to global decarbonization. Countries could lose 60 percent of oil rents under ambitious decarbonization.
  83. [83]
    Forced transition to wind and solar will impose real costs on ...
    Oct 27, 2021 · It will cost up to an estimated $37.7 billion annually for Canada to move from coal to renewables.
  84. [84]
    Fossil Fuel Layoff: Capturing Decarbonization Impacts on Workers ...
    Nov 4, 2024 · Workers experienced post-layoff median hourly wage losses of 24 percent, a 26 percent unemployment rate, and reported frustrating job search ...
  85. [85]
    [PDF] The cost of job loss in carbon-intensive sectors - OECD
    Nov 6, 2023 · This study contributes to the literature by using German administrative labour market data coupled with data on mass layoffs to investigate the ...
  86. [86]
    The multi-level economic impacts of deep decarbonization ...
    In energy industries, value-added and employment shift from fossil fuel to low-carbon power industries. Aggregated GDP and welfare impacts are limited but ...
  87. [87]
    What is the status of energy poverty in the European Union?
    Nov 20, 2024 · According to the European Commission (EC), between 8% and 16% of the EU population faces energy poverty (35 to 72 million people).
  88. [88]
    Decarbonization: It Ain't That Easy - Resources Magazine
    Apr 20, 2018 · First, lower income households will bear the largest relative burdens of the higher energy costs that are likely as a result of climate policies ...Missing: consequences | Show results with:consequences<|separator|>
  89. [89]
    How 'Traumatic Decarbonization' Can Impact Political Stability and ...
    Apr 10, 2024 · The rapid, unplanned decarbonization of these countries would spark political crisis, a process known as “traumatic decarbonization.”Missing: consequences | Show results with:consequences
  90. [90]
    Lost in the green transition: Measurement and stylised facts - CEPR
    May 28, 2024 · This column presents new OECD research using labour force data from a large sample of European countries that suggests green and high-polluting jobs are ...Missing: decarbonization | Show results with:decarbonization
  91. [91]
    EXCLUSIVE: Climate skeptic files sweeping RICO lawsuit against ...
    Sep 12, 2016 · Leonid Goldstein writes: I have filed a civil RICO complaint against the Climate Alarmism Enterprise – Climate Action Network, Generation ...
  92. [92]
    Lawsuit Targets 'Climate Alarmism Enterprise' - The Heartland Institute
    Oct 11, 2016 · ... Climate Action Network, and the World Wildlife Fund. Lawsuit Pros and Cons. Although he shares Goldstein's frustration with environmentalists ...
  93. [93]
    [PDF] UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN ...
    Leonid Goldstein,. Plaintiff, v. Climate Action Network; Ceres Inc.;. Rockefeller Brothers Fund Inc.; Generation. Investment Management LLP; the Ford.
  94. [94]
    Goldstein v. Climate Action Network et al - PacerMonitor
    Sep 12, 2016 · Goldstein v. Climate Action Network et al ; Texas Northern District Court ; Judge: Sam R Cummings ; Case #:, 5:16-cv-00211 ; Nature of Suit, 470 ...Missing: lawsuit details
  95. [95]
    The Climate Action Network: Funding Climate Alarmist Stunts ...
    Oct 17, 2016 · USCAN is an affiliate of the Climate Action Network International (CANI), a worldwide network headquartered in Bonn, Germany.
  96. [96]
  97. [97]
    Immediate Release: Climate Denier's SLAPP RICO case thrown out ...
    Sep 11, 2017 · This is a civil suit against Climate Action Network and other corporations, who engaged in a long-term criminal scheme, involving a false claim ...Missing: details | Show results with:details
  98. [98]
    U.S. Climate Action Network (US-CAN) - InfluenceWatch
    US-CAN has received multiple grants from Sea Change International, a major left-leaning environmental advocacy organization founded by Nathaniel Simons, son of ...
  99. [99]
    U.S. Climate Action Network (USCAN) - Bias and Credibility
    Mar 25, 2024 · We rate the US Climate Action Network as Left-Center biased based on advocacy for climate action. We also rate them as mostly factual in reporting rather than ...
  100. [100]
    Supply and confidence agreement means government must deliver ...
    Mar 22, 2022 · Climate Action Network – Réseau action climat (CAN-Rac) Canada welcomes today's announcement that the Liberal Party and New Democratic Party ...Missing: left- wing
  101. [101]
    Goldstein v. Climate Action Network
    A Texas resident filed a Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) action against Climate Action Network and 39 other organizations, as well as ...
  102. [102]
    Goldstein V Climate Action Network Et Al | PDF | 501(C) Organization
    Rating 4.0 (1) It was filed on September 13, 2016 and assigned to Judge Sam R. Cummings. The plaintiff, Leonid Goldstein, has brought a Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt ...
  103. [103]
    Goldstein v. Climate Action Network
    Lawsuit asserting Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act claims against environmental organizations alleging that false claims regarding ...Missing: controversies | Show results with:controversies
  104. [104]
    Rating for The US Climate Action Network - Charity Navigator
    Rating 3/4 · Review by Charity NavigatorThe US Climate Action Network has earned a 3/4 Star rating on Charity Navigator. This Educational Organization is headquartered in WASHINGTON, DC.Missing: critiques | Show results with:critiques