One of the most popular eco-friendly fashion brands in the world has been slapped with a watchdog warning after an inquiry found that it was likely misleading customers about how sustainable it really is. 

The warning was given to ethical label Matt & Nat, a pioneer of vegan bags and shoes, by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA). 

The retailer was warned it should not “exaggerate” its use of recycled material, after the ASA received a complaint that a Matt & Nat print advertisement had misrepresented the brand’s green credentials.

Advertising rules

The complaint concerned a flyer with the image of a backpack made from one of the most environmentally damaging plastics, polyvinyl chloride or PVC, but with the tagline, “Vegan.Cruelty Free.Recycled” suggesting that this bag in particular, and the brand in general, is eco-friendly.

The complainant said this was deceptive given that only the bag’s lining is made of recycled plastic bottles, while the tag stated the bag itself was made of 100 percent PVC.

A case officer at the ASA said: “We have concluded that [the Matt & Nat] flyer was likely to have breached the advertising rules we apply and we have taken steps to address this.

“We have explained [the complainant’s] concerns to the advertiser and provided guidance to them on the areas that require attention, together with advice on how to ensure that their advertising complies with the codes.”

The codes – 3.1, 3.3, 3.7 and 3.11 – state advertisements must not mislead consumers by omitting or hiding material information, presenting it in an ambiguous manner, or exaggerating the performance of a product. Advertisers must also be able to prove any claims being made.

A spokesman for the ASA added: “We told the advertiser to ensure that in future its ads do not exaggerate the amount of recycled material in its products. In addition, we set out the relevant advertising code clauses that apply. And we highlighted our guidance on Misleading Advertising and Substantiation.”

Environmental campaigners

The complainant also shared the contents of a leaked email from Matt & Nat’s customer care. It crucially revealed the brand’s extensive but unclarified use of PVC in two main collections – information that they felt contradicts the retailer’s branding as an eco-friendly label. ⁠

This means that 54 percent of all bags and shoes currently being sold on its website as eco-friendly would not qualify as such. This figure was even higher in August, at 65 percent.  The email noted the Dwell and Vintage collections are made of PVC, with only linings made out of recycled plastic bottles.

At the time of publication, Matt & Nat had not commented on this story.

The retailer’s use of toxic PVC and lack of transparency and has been called out by environmental campaigners.

Greenpeace stressed that for a fashion label to be sustainable it must not use any PVC at all. A spokesperson said: “PVC contains toxic additives and is difficult to recycle, making it harmful for people and the planet. It is made with chlorine which is very energy intensive and from ethylene, a petroleum product. 

“Brands which seek to be truly eco-friendly must completely avoid the use of PVC. It is also important that only products made wholly from recycled materials are described as ‘recycled’. Customers trying to shop ethically need to know they can trust retailer product descriptions.”

Cruelty-free

The animal charity PETA, that has previously endorsed Matt & Nat for being eco-friendly, has also stressed that the use of PVC does not qualify as sustainable.

Yvonne Taylor, director of corporate projects at PETA, said: “PETA commends all brands that use animal-free materials. However, with the huge array of animal-free, eco-friendly vegan leathers now available, we agree that there is no need for any brand to still use PVC.”

The complaint added that Matt & Nat states on its website that “PU is less harmful for the environment than PVC and we make it a point to use it whenever possible”. This gives the impression that PVC is only sparingly used whereas the email reveals otherwise.

The complaint argued that Matt & Nat’s tagline, “Vegan.Cruelty Free.Recycled”, gives the false impression that all of the retailer’s products are recycled.

Ethical fashion

The revelations in the email and the ASA’s ruling are important given the retailer’s position as a leader in the ethical, eco-friendly fashion world.

Matt and Nat was founded in Canada in 1995 as a vegan brand, selling shoes and bags that did not make use of animal products. However, the company’s marketing strategy has evolved over the years and it now presents itself as an environmentally friendly label. Its products are sold across the world in the UK, US, Japan, Germany and Australia.

The retailer was nominated at the prestigious Canadian Arts & Fashion Awards (CAFA) awards in May, for Accessory Designer of the Year, and has been repeatedly praised in publications in the UK for its eco-friendly and vegan credentials.

This Author 

Hiba Mahamadi is a freelance journalist writing about financial crime and corruption. 

One of the most popular eco-friendly fashion brands in the world has been slapped with a watchdog warning after an inquiry found that it was likely misleading customers about how sustainable it really is. 

The warning was given to ethical label Matt & Nat, a pioneer of vegan bags and shoes, by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA). 

The retailer was warned it should not “exaggerate” its use of recycled material, after the ASA received a complaint that a Matt & Nat print advertisement had misrepresented the brand’s green credentials.

Advertising rules

The complaint concerned a flyer with the image of a backpack made from one of the most environmentally damaging plastics, polyvinyl chloride or PVC, but with the tagline, “Vegan.Cruelty Free.Recycled” suggesting that this bag in particular, and the brand in general, is eco-friendly.

The complainant said this was deceptive given that only the bag’s lining is made of recycled plastic bottles, while the tag stated the bag itself was made of 100 percent PVC.

A case officer at the ASA said: “We have concluded that [the Matt & Nat] flyer was likely to have breached the advertising rules we apply and we have taken steps to address this.

“We have explained [the complainant’s] concerns to the advertiser and provided guidance to them on the areas that require attention, together with advice on how to ensure that their advertising complies with the codes.”

The codes – 3.1, 3.3, 3.7 and 3.11 – state advertisements must not mislead consumers by omitting or hiding material information, presenting it in an ambiguous manner, or exaggerating the performance of a product. Advertisers must also be able to prove any claims being made.

A spokesman for the ASA added: “We told the advertiser to ensure that in future its ads do not exaggerate the amount of recycled material in its products. In addition, we set out the relevant advertising code clauses that apply. And we highlighted our guidance on Misleading Advertising and Substantiation.”

Environmental campaigners

The complainant also shared the contents of a leaked email from Matt & Nat’s customer care. It crucially revealed the brand’s extensive but unclarified use of PVC in two main collections – information that they felt contradicts the retailer’s branding as an eco-friendly label. ⁠

This means that 54 percent of all bags and shoes currently being sold on its website as eco-friendly would not qualify as such. This figure was even higher in August, at 65 percent.  The email noted the Dwell and Vintage collections are made of PVC, with only linings made out of recycled plastic bottles.

At the time of publication, Matt & Nat had not commented on this story.

The retailer’s use of toxic PVC and lack of transparency and has been called out by environmental campaigners.

Greenpeace stressed that for a fashion label to be sustainable it must not use any PVC at all. A spokesperson said: “PVC contains toxic additives and is difficult to recycle, making it harmful for people and the planet. It is made with chlorine which is very energy intensive and from ethylene, a petroleum product. 

“Brands which seek to be truly eco-friendly must completely avoid the use of PVC. It is also important that only products made wholly from recycled materials are described as ‘recycled’. Customers trying to shop ethically need to know they can trust retailer product descriptions.”

Cruelty-free

The animal charity PETA, that has previously endorsed Matt & Nat for being eco-friendly, has also stressed that the use of PVC does not qualify as sustainable.

Yvonne Taylor, director of corporate projects at PETA, said: “PETA commends all brands that use animal-free materials. However, with the huge array of animal-free, eco-friendly vegan leathers now available, we agree that there is no need for any brand to still use PVC.”

The complaint added that Matt & Nat states on its website that “PU is less harmful for the environment than PVC and we make it a point to use it whenever possible”. This gives the impression that PVC is only sparingly used whereas the email reveals otherwise.

The complaint argued that Matt & Nat’s tagline, “Vegan.Cruelty Free.Recycled”, gives the false impression that all of the retailer’s products are recycled.

Ethical fashion

The revelations in the email and the ASA’s ruling are important given the retailer’s position as a leader in the ethical, eco-friendly fashion world.

Matt and Nat was founded in Canada in 1995 as a vegan brand, selling shoes and bags that did not make use of animal products. However, the company’s marketing strategy has evolved over the years and it now presents itself as an environmentally friendly label. Its products are sold across the world in the UK, US, Japan, Germany and Australia.

The retailer was nominated at the prestigious Canadian Arts & Fashion Awards (CAFA) awards in May, for Accessory Designer of the Year, and has been repeatedly praised in publications in the UK for its eco-friendly and vegan credentials.

This Author 

Hiba Mahamadi is a freelance journalist writing about financial crime and corruption. 

One of the most popular eco-friendly fashion brands in the world today – with former ambassadors like Fearne Cotton and Natalie Portman – has been slapped with a watchdog warning after an inquiry found that it was likely misleading customers about how sustainable it really is. 

The warning was given to ethical label Matt & Nat, a pioneer of vegan bags and shoes, by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA). 

The retailer was warned it should not “exaggerate” its use of recycled material, after the ASA received a complaint that a Matt & Nat print advertisement had misrepresented the brand’s green credentials.

Advertising rules

The complaint concerned a flyer with the image of a backpack made from one of the most environmentally damaging plastics, polyvinyl chloride or PVC, but with the tagline, “Vegan.Cruelty Free.Recycled” suggesting that this bag in particular, and the brand in general, is eco-friendly.

The complainant said this was deceptive given that only the bag’s lining is made of recycled plastic bottles, while the tag stated the bag itself was made of 100 percent PVC.

A case officer at the ASA said: “We have concluded that [the Matt & Nat] flyer was likely to have breached the advertising rules we apply and we have taken steps to address this.

“We have explained [the complainant’s] concerns to the advertiser and provided guidance to them on the areas that require attention, together with advice on how to ensure that their advertising complies with the codes.”

The codes – 3.1, 3.3, 3.7 and 3.11 – state advertisements must not mislead consumers by omitting or hiding material information, presenting it in an ambiguous manner, or exaggerating the performance of a product. Advertisers must also be able to prove any claims being made.

A spokesman for the ASA added: “We told the advertiser to ensure that in future its ads do not exaggerate the amount of recycled material in its products. In addition, we set out the relevant advertising code clauses that apply. And we highlighted our guidance on Misleading Advertising and Substantiation.”

Environmental campaigners

The complainant also shared the contents of a leaked email from Matt & Nat’s customer care. It crucially revealed the brand’s extensive but unclarified use of PVC in two main collections – information that they felt contradicts the retailer’s branding as an eco-friendly label. ⁠

This means that 54 percent of all bags and shoes currently being sold on its website as eco-friendly would not qualify as such. This figure was even higher in August, at 65 percent.  The email noted the Dwell and Vintage collections are made of PVC, with only linings made out of recycled plastic bottles.

At the time of publication, Matt & Nat had not commented on this story.

The retailer’s use of toxic PVC and lack of transparency and has been called out by environmental campaigners.

Greenpeace stressed that for a fashion label to be sustainable it must not use any PVC at all. A spokesperson said: “PVC contains toxic additives and is difficult to recycle, making it harmful for people and the planet. It is made with chlorine which is very energy intensive and from ethylene, a petroleum product. 

“Brands which seek to be truly eco-friendly must completely avoid the use of PVC. It is also important that only products made wholly from recycled materials are described as ‘recycled’. Customers trying to shop ethically need to know they can trust retailer product descriptions.”

Cruelty-free

The animal charity PETA, that has previously endorsed Matt & Nat for being eco-friendly, has also stressed that the use of PVC does not qualify as sustainable.

Yvonne Taylor, director of corporate projects at PETA, said: “PETA commends all brands that use animal-free materials. However, with the huge array of animal-free, eco-friendly vegan leathers now available, we agree that there is no need for any brand to still use PVC.”

The complaint added that Matt & Nat states on its website that “PU is less harmful for the environment than PVC and we make it a point to use it whenever possible”. This gives the impression that PVC is only sparingly used whereas the email reveals otherwise.T

The complaint argued that Matt & Nat’s tagline, “Vegan.Cruelty Free.Recycled”, gives the false impression that all of the retailer’s products are recycled.

Ethical fashion

The revelations in the email and the ASA’s ruling are important given the retailer’s position as a leader in the ethical, eco-friendly fashion world.

It was founded in Canada in 1995 as a vegan brand, selling shoes and bags that did not make use of animal products. However, the company’s marketing strategy has evolved over the years and it now presents itself as an environmentally friendly label. Its products are sold across the world in the UK, US, Japan, Germany and Australia.

The retailer was nominated at the prestigious Canadian Arts & Fashion Awards (CAFA) awards in May, for Accessory Designer of the Year, and has been repeatedly praised in publications in the UK for its eco-friendly and vegan credentials.

This Author 

Hiba Mahamadi is a freelance journalist writing about financial crime and corruption. 

The US lobby groups representing the fossil fuel and automotive industries are world leaders when it comes to stalling government action on climate change, new research shows.

Of the top 10 trade associations considered to be the most effective at opposing climate-friendly policies globally, seven are based in Washington DC, according to a report published this week by lobbying watchdog InfluenceMap.

Many of the organisations, which include the American Petroleum Institute and the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, have had their wishes granted since President Donald Trump’s election. As part of a broader deregulatory agenda, the Trump administration has scrapped regulations on methane emissions and automotive fuel efficiency standards.

Cap-and-trade

Analysis by the NYU School of Law’s State Energy and Environmental Impact Center suggests these regulatory rollbacks will add an estimated 200 million tonnes of extra greenhouse gas emissions annually by 2025.

The report coincides with a UN Climate Action Summit taking place in New York this week, which aims to strengthen countries’ emissions reduction plans, with an overall goal of “net zero” by 2050.

The lobby groups highlighted in the report have been working to undermine efforts to introduce climate policies since long before Trump’s election, however.

The National Association of Manufacturers, which tops the list, coordinated the now-defunct Global Climate Coalition, which tried to influence the UN’s IPCC process and spread doubt about climate science during the 1990s.

In 2009, the American Petroleum Institute and the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers funded rallies against the proposed Clean Energy Act which would have established a “cap-and-trade” emissions scheme across the country.

Activism

The National Mining Association currently runs an astroturf campaign called ‘Count on Coal’, while the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a recipient of Koch and ExxonMobil funding, has developed numerous “model bills” for states to adopt over the years. They include opposition to renewable energy targets and support for the controversial Keystone XL tar sands pipeline.

Three trade associations from other countries feature in the top 10: the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, the Minerals Council of Australia and the Japan Business Federation. BusinessEurope, a coalition of trade federations that has opposed the EU increasing its action on climate change, sits at number 12.

InfluenceMap argues that while the groups have so far managed to avoid significant public scrutiny, they are being “increasingly challenged by investors, the media and politicians that recognise the role they play in holding back effective action to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions.”

Beau O’Sullivan, Communications Manager at the shareholder activism charity ShareAction, said the findings reinforce growing calls for companies to sever ties with organisations working to kill off strong climate policies:

Dire

“This report rightly quantifies the insidious nature of the anti-climate lobby powerhouse. Investors are indeed alert to this and are taking action.”

“Most recently, investors have filed an ambitious shareholder resolution at mining company BHP to ask it to cut ties with the worst offenders in obstructive lobbying, namely the Minerals Council of Australia, Business Council of Australia, and USchamber of commerce. Voting for this proposal will be a real test of investor action.”

Ed Collins, Project Lead on Climate Lobbying at InfluenceMap, told DeSmog the trade associations were also “facing increasing pressure from more progressive parts of their membership”.

 “We are at a crucial time for climate action. But against a backdrop of huge public concern around climate change and increasingly dire warnings from scientists, these trade groups continue to frustrate progress on climate policy, especially in the US, which should be leading the world in terms of climate ambition,” he said.

This Author

Richard Collett-White writes for Desomg.uk, where this article first appeared.

One of the most popular eco-friendly fashion brands in the world today – with former ambassadors like Fearne Cotton and Natalie Portman – has been slapped by a watchdog warning after an inquiry found that it was likely misleading customers about how sustainable it really is. 

The warning was given to ethical label Matt & Nat, a pioneer of vegan bags and shoes, by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA). 

The retailer was warned it should not “exaggerate” its use of recycled material, after the ASA received a complaint that a Matt & Nat print advertisement had misrepresented the brand’s green credentials.

Advertising rules

The complaint concerned a flyer with the image of a backpack made from one of the most environmentally damaging plastics, polyvinyl chloride or PVC, but with the tagline, “Vegan.Cruelty Free.Recycled” suggesting that this bag in particular, and the brand in general, is eco-friendly.

The complainant said this was deceptive given that only the bag’s lining is made of recycled plastic bottles, while the tag stated the bag itself was made of 100 percent PVC.

A case officer at the ASA said: “We have concluded that [the Matt & Nat] flyer was likely to have breached the advertising rules we apply and we have taken steps to address this.

“We have explained [the complainant’s] concerns to the advertiser and provided guidance to them on the areas that require attention, together with advice on how to ensure that their advertising complies with the codes.”

The codes – 3.1, 3.3, 3.7 and 3.11 – state advertisements must not mislead consumers by omitting or hiding material information, presenting it in an ambiguous manner, or exaggerating the performance of a product. Advertisers must also be able to prove any claims being made.

A spokesman for the ASA added: “We told the advertiser to ensure that in future its ads do not exaggerate the amount of recycled material in its products. In addition, we set out the relevant advertising code clauses that apply. And we highlighted our guidance on Misleading Advertising and Substantiation.”

Environmental campaigners

The complainant also shared the contents of a leaked email from Matt & Nat’s customer care. It crucially revealed the brand’s extensive but unclarified use of PVC in two main collections – information that they felt contradicts the retailer’s branding as an eco-friendly label. ⁠

This means that 54 percent of all bags and shoes currently being sold on its website as eco-friendly would not qualify as such. This figure was even higher in August, at 65 percent.  The email noted the Dwell and Vintage collections are made of PVC, with only linings made out of recycled plastic bottles.

At the time of publication, Matt & Nat had not commented on this story.

The retailer’s use of toxic PVC and lack of transparency and has been called out by environmental campaigners.

Greenpeace stressed that for a fashion label to be sustainable it must not use any PVC at all. A spokesperson said: “PVC contains toxic additives and is difficult to recycle, making it harmful for people and the planet. It is made with chlorine which is very energy intensive and from ethylene, a petroleum product. 

“Brands which seek to be truly eco-friendly must completely avoid the use of PVC. It is also important that only products made wholly from recycled materials are described as ‘recycled’. Customers trying to shop ethically need to know they can trust retailer product descriptions.”

Cruelty-free

The animal charity PETA, that has previously endorsed Matt & Nat for being eco-friendly, has also stressed that the use of PVC does not qualify as sustainable.

Yvonne Taylor, director of corporate projects at PETA, said: “PETA commends all brands that use animal-free materials. However, with the huge array of animal-free, eco-friendly vegan leathers now available, we agree that there is no need for any brand to still use PVC.”

The complaint added that Matt & Nat states on its website that “PU is less harmful for the environment than PVC and we make it a point to use it whenever possible”. This gives the impression that PVC is only sparingly used whereas the email reveals otherwise.T

The complaint argued that Matt & Nat’s tagline, “Vegan.Cruelty Free.Recycled”, gives the false impression that all of the retailer’s products are recycled.

Ethical fashion

The revelations in the email and the ASA’s ruling are important given the retailer’s position as a leader in the ethical, eco-friendly fashion world.

It was founded in Canada in 1995 as a vegan brand, selling shoes and bags that did not make use of animal products. However, the company’s marketing strategy has evolved over the years and it now presents itself as an environmentally friendly label. Its products are sold across the world in the UK, US, Japan, Germany and Australia.

The retailer was nominated at the prestigious Canadian Arts & Fashion Awards (CAFA) awards in May, for Accessory Designer of the Year, and has been repeatedly praised in publications in the UK for its eco-friendly and vegan credentials.

This Author 

Hiba Mahamadi is a freelance journalist writing about financial crime and corruption. 

The US lobby groups representing the fossil fuel and automotive industries are world leaders when it comes to stalling government action on climate change, new research shows.

Of the top 10 trade associations considered to be the most effective at opposing climate-friendly policies globally, seven are based in Washington DC, according to a report published this week by lobbying watchdog InfluenceMap.

Many of the organisations, which include the American Petroleum Institute and the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, have had their wishes granted since President Donald Trump’s election. As part of a broader deregulatory agenda, the Trump administration has scrapped regulations on methane emissions and automotive fuel efficiency standards.

Cap-and-trade

Analysis by the NYU School of Law’s State Energy and Environmental Impact Center suggests these regulatory rollbacks will add an estimated 200 million tonnes of extra greenhouse gas emissions annually by 2025.

The report coincides with a UN Climate Action Summit taking place in New York this week, which aims to strengthen countries’ emissions reduction plans, with an overall goal of “net zero” by 2050.

The lobby groups highlighted in the report have been working to undermine efforts to introduce climate policies since long before Trump’s election, however.

The National Association of Manufacturers, which tops the list, coordinated the now-defunct Global Climate Coalition, which tried to influence the UN’s IPCC process and spread doubt about climate science during the 1990s.

In 2009, the American Petroleum Institute and the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers funded rallies against the proposed Clean Energy Act which would have established a “cap-and-trade” emissions scheme across the country.

Activism

The National Mining Association currently runs an astroturf campaign called ‘Count on Coal’, while the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a recipient of Koch and ExxonMobil funding, has developed numerous “model bills” for states to adopt over the years. They include opposition to renewable energy targets and support for the controversial Keystone XL tar sands pipeline.

Three trade associations from other countries feature in the top 10: the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, the Minerals Council of Australia and the Japan Business Federation. BusinessEurope, a coalition of trade federations that has opposed the EU increasing its action on climate change, sits at number 12.

InfluenceMap argues that while the groups have so far managed to avoid significant public scrutiny, they are being “increasingly challenged by investors, the media and politicians that recognise the role they play in holding back effective action to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions.”

Beau O’Sullivan, Communications Manager at the shareholder activism charity ShareAction, said the findings reinforce growing calls for companies to sever ties with organisations working to kill off strong climate policies:

Dire

“This report rightly quantifies the insidious nature of the anti-climate lobby powerhouse. Investors are indeed alert to this and are taking action.”

“Most recently, investors have filed an ambitious shareholder resolution at mining company BHP to ask it to cut ties with the worst offenders in obstructive lobbying, namely the Minerals Council of Australia, Business Council of Australia, and USchamber of commerce. Voting for this proposal will be a real test of investor action.”

Ed Collins, Project Lead on Climate Lobbying at InfluenceMap, told DeSmog the trade associations were also “facing increasing pressure from more progressive parts of their membership”.

 “We are at a crucial time for climate action. But against a backdrop of huge public concern around climate change and increasingly dire warnings from scientists, these trade groups continue to frustrate progress on climate policy, especially in the US, which should be leading the world in terms of climate ambition,” he said.

This Author

Richard Collett-White writes for Desomg.uk, where this article first appeared.

Boris Johnson has announced that the sum spent on helping developing countries reduce their carbon emissions will double to more than £11.6 billion.

The prime minister said the increase in the international climate finance pot would come between 2021/22 and 2025/26, as he made a series of commitments to tackle the climate crisis.

The aid money helps poorer nations deal with the environmental emergency by preventing deforestation and reducing carbon emissions, as well as to prepare for the effects of global warming.

Technology

The announcement at the United Nations General Assembly in New York on Monday came as the PM launched the Ayrton clean energy fund.

Named after British physicist and suffragette Hertha Ayrton, it will allow scientists to use up to £1 billion of the aid budget inventing new technology to tackle the climate crisis in developing countries.

The PM has put an emphasis on technology’s potential to answer the climate emergency and also announced a further £220 million from the overseas aid budget to save endangered species from extinction.

But environmental groups have warned changes to economic policies are essential to thwart environmental disaster, rather than relying on new inventions.

This Author

Sam Blewett is the PA political correspondent and is reporting from New York.

Charbel Tawk, a Lebanese environmental activist from Bcharre, a small town in the country’s north, said: “Give a tree a holy meaning and it will be protected in a faith community”.

The Cedars of God, a forest of cedrus libani, is nestled into the mountains above Bcharre, and Maronite Christians, who make up the majority of residents in this area, believe that the cedars are holy.

Cedars are mentioned in the Bible, but reverence for the trees transcends religion and they are displayed prominently on Lebanon’s flag. Across the country, interfaith collaboration drives efforts to protect them. 

Climate change

Experts forecast that by the year 2100, most of the cedars will disappear due to climate change. The trees require cold winters to reproduce, and a recent study predicted that they would only grow in three areas in Mount Lebanon by the end of the century.

Cedars thrive at altitudes between 1400 and 1500 meters, but can survive between 800 and 1800 meters, shares Charbel Tawk. The danger posed by climate change is not the first time human activity has threatened the cedars.

The Phoenicians, who lived on Lebanon’s shores, used cedar wood for their ships. Later, the Ottomans relied on the tree for railroad construction. Today, deforestation continues to threaten cedars. 

In Bcharre, a group called the Friends of the Cedar Forest Committee, with whom Charbel Tawk works, have carefully stewarded over the area known as the Cedars of God since 1996. In 1998, UNESCO designated the Cedars of God, along with the nearby Qadisha Valley, as a World Heritage Site.

The Maronite Church, whose crest features a cedar tree, officially own the land, but the Committee manage conservation efforts in and around the forest. Religion is at the heart of this commitment to the cedars, says Charbel Tawk. Youssef Tawk, a doctor who is well known for his love of the cedars said: “What saved the Cedars of God was the sacred space.” 

Ecosystems

The Committee spearheads an initiative to create a corridor of cedars linking Bcharre, Ehden, and Tannourine, three adjacent towns. Charbel Tawk explained: “In order to protect the forest, it’s not enough to protect it from the inside. You need to create an ecosystem.” 

Planting the now barren mountains will make forests more resilient to future environmental pressures, an approach taken by other organizations throughout Lebanon. Sandra Saba, the manager of Horsh Ehden Nature Reserve, described the reforestation project as “social and biological.” 

In Lebanon’s civil war, fighters loyal to Bachir Gemayel, a political leader from Bcharre, massacred Tony Frangieh, a leader from Ehden, and killed 40 others including Frangieh’s wife and young daughter. Thirty years later, tensions linger for some residents of the two towns.

Like Saba, Charbel Tawk sees the cedar corridor as an ecological and social endeavor. He said: “Nature is the easiest way to make people move closer together.” But others committed to the cedars are more skeptical.

Youssef Tawk said: “We will go, plant trees and clap, but when something happens, people are willing to pick up guns against each other. Our main preoccupations are communal and political, not environmental.” 

Return to roots

In August, the Committee organized an event called “Return to Roots,” aimed at merging environmental concerns with communal ones.

Historically, Maronite Christian and Muslim communities celebrated the Festival of God together in the cedar forest near Bcharre. Charbel Tawk explained: “They came to venerate their god, and we came to venerate ours.”

When the Committee took over its management in 1996, they closed the forest to the public for six years to allow for regrowth. The shared tradition ended—until the group relaunched it this past year. Elie Barakat, the current president of the Committee, said: “We are not just here to say no to the society, we are also part of it.” 

Sheikh Nizam Bou Khzam, the founder of the Shouf-based Lebanese House Establishment for the Environment (LHEE), commented: “The earth is holy for all religions.” In Shouf, a region south of Bcharre, multi-confessional communities also rally behind environmental concerns. Sheikh Nizam, a Druze religious leader, founded LHEE in 1999 with the goal of organizing Lebanese from across sects to take environmental action.

The nearby Shouf biosphere reserve, implements reforestation projects aimed at restoring the range of species that exist in a healthy cedar forest—from the cedars to shrubs and plants. Nizar Hani, a coordinator at the reserve, said: “Nature can be a common space for everyone.”

But he emphasized that rapid urbanization is a central challenge for both cedar forests and rural communities in Shouf. Reflecting on coexistence between himself and his Christian neighbors, Sheikh Nizam said: “When my neighbor has a problem, I help. This helps us to find a solution for environmental problems in Lebanon. Without each other, we wouldn’t know how to live.” 

This Author 

Catherine Cartier studies history and Arab studies at Davidson College. Her work has been featured in the New Arab, Syria Untold and Calvert Journal. She is a Beyond Religion Reporting Fellow at the Pulitzer Center on Crisis Reporting. Follow her on Twitter: @cartier_cath.

This story was produced with support from the Pulitzer Center for Crisis Reporting.

Image: Paul Saad, Flickr. 

The growth in demand for flights must be curbed to tackle greenhouse gas emissions as part of the UK’s climate targets, government advisers have said.

Extra levies on those who fly frequently, reformed taxes or a price on carbon and management of the amount of airport capacity in the UK are among the potential measures suggested by the Committee on Climate Change.

They are needed to limit the growth in demand for flights to no more than 25 percent above current levels by 2050 as part of efforts to reduce the UK’s emissions to net zero by mid-century, the committee said.

Atmosphere

And it warned the government it needed to assess its strategy for providing airport capacity in the context of cutting emissions, and make sure investments make “economic sense” in a net-zero world.

Current planned additional capacity in London, including a third runway at Heathrow “is likely to leave at most very limited room for growth at non-London airports”, the committee said.

The recommendations come in a letter from Lord Deben, the committee’s chairman to Transport Secretary Grant Shapps on including international aviation and shipping emissions in the UK’s targets to cut greenhouse gas emissions to zero overall by 2050.

The letter said aviation was likely to be the largest emitting sector in the UK by 2050, even with strong progress on technology to provide greener fuels and limiting demand for international flights.

Including the emissions in the legally-binding net zero target emissions will show the scale of deployment needed for measures to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere to offset the emissions caused by flying.

International

As far as shipping is concerned, the committee said net zero was likely to be feasible and cost-effective through use of alternative fuels, such as hydrogen or ammonia.

Chris Stark, CCC chief executive, said: “Now is the time to bring the UK’s international aviation and shipping emissions formally within the UK’s net-zero target.

“These are real emissions, requiring a credible plan to manage them to net-zero by 2050.

“Their inclusion in the UK target will complement international approaches and increase confidence that the government is prioritising their reduction, ensuring the net-zero target covers all of the UK’s emissions.

“As the UK prepares to host the next major climate summit in 2020, we are well placed to show global leadership on this fundamental issue of international concern.”

Frequent 

Leo Murray, director at campaign group 10:10 climate action, said aviation had been given a “free ride” in climate policy for too long, with politicians putting it in the “too hard” box.

He said the government was talking up electric planes, which should be an innovation priority, but the potential for technology to contribute to carbon cuts in a short time frame was limited.

“The CCC make it very clear that growth in demand for flights from UK airports cannot continue unchecked. That’s why we need to introduce a frequent flyer levy.

“Most of the environmental damage from air travel is caused not by annual family holidays but by very frequent leisure flights by those at top end of the income spectrum.

“A frequent flyer levy is the fairest and most effective way to keep aviation emissions within safe limits, at the same time as protecting access to some air travel for all,” he said.

Aviation

Dr Doug Parr, chief scientist for Greenpeace UK, said the Government’s current aviation strategy is incompatible with the net zero target, “and must be revised”.

“The new strategy must focus on restricting demand growth, and will either require Heathrow’s third runway being cancelled, or capacity restrictions on other airports to balance Heathrow’s expansion.”

A Department for Transport spokeswoman said: “The fight against climate change is the greatest and most pressing challenge facing the modern world and this Government recognises that aviation and shipping have a crucial role to play in tackling it.

“The government has already made clear its commitment to zero emission shipping in the Clean Maritime Plan, which was published earlier this year.

“We are also committed to setting a clear ambition for the aviation sector and will carefully consider the advice of the Committee on Climate Change when we publish our position on aviation and climate change for consultation shortly.”

This Author

Emily Beament is the PA environment correspondent.

Large-scale mining is the deadliest industry in the world for those who oppose it. It is a contributor to systematic human rights violations, devastating losses of climate critical ecosystems and over 20 percent of global carbon emissions.

And yet, at a time of ecological and climate breakdown, the mineral and metal mining industry is in rude health. Mining companies are taking advantage of new demand created by the energy transition and the digitalisation of war and industry. They’re scouring the globe for new sources of ‘critical minerals’, like lithium, copper and cobalt, and expanding into new territories, including the deep sea.

This is disaster capitalism at its finest, say the authors of a new report that was launched just ahead of the Global Climate Strike. This disaster capitalism is jeopardising urgent climate action.

Dirty mining 

A Just(ice) Transition is a Post-Extractive Transition reveals how the mining industry is greenwashing its operations, positioning itself as a deliverer of the minerals and metals critical to the renewable energy transition, whilst expanding destruction globally.

Benjamin Hitchcock Auciello, researcher and report author, said: “Mining corporations are aggressively and cynically marketing their destructive activity as a solution to the climate emergency.

“It’s critical that we stop extractive industries from greenwashing their crimes and capturing the narrative around the transition to renewable technologies.”

Launched by the London Mining Network and War on Want, and supported by the global Yes to Life, No to Mining Network, the report de-bunks the mining industry’s false claims.

It reveals that the majority of projected future demand for ‘critical’ minerals and metals does not come from the renewable energy sector at all, but rather from heavy industry, consumer electronics and military and other sources.

De-growth

The report delves deeper still to reveal how governments, International Financial Institutions and even progressive movements are clinging to economic growth and material expansion as primary societal and developmental goals. This is creating the space for extractive industries to reinvent themselves as friendly change agents.

Technical fixes and the ‘de-coupling’ of climate and ecological impacts from economic growth will not be sufficient to avoid catastrophic warming above 1.5 degrees centigrade, says the report.

To curb climate breakdown and achieve a just and ecologically viable transition, the Global North must embrace de-growth and help redistribute global demand for energy and resources, not expand their extraction. 

In other words, a just transition must be post-extractive. The first steps for achieving this shift in transition logic is to listen to communities on the frontline of extractivism and centre their voices in the transition.

Hitchcock Auciello continued: “The climate movement must listen to and learn from frontline communities pushing back the expansion of the extractive economy: communities who are simultaneously advancing solutions that embody social, ecological and climate justice.”

Emblematic cases

A series of interactive case studies from the Yes to Life, No to Mining Network have been launched in tandem with the new report. They explore the work of communities resisting mining, restoring damaged ecosystems and protecting and developing climate-just alternatives to extractivism around the planet. 

The case studies reveal the violence of extractivism for community leaders harassed, beaten and killed, for ecosystems torn apart, and for the climate. They hint at the immense costs and injustices that are inherent in expanding mining for whatever purpose, and the mass resistance that can be expected.

The case studies also reveal how communities are stopping mining projects, protecting old and innovating new ways of living that are regenerative, life-sustaining and compatible with a climate-safe future. 

In Myanmar, the indigenous Karen People have declared the Salween Peace Park as a space to practice their Earth-centred culture and as a strategy to block the intertwined threats of mega-hydro and mining.

In Galicia, the villagers of Froxán are re-planting forests and asserting their commons-based forms of land and water care in response to the threat of tungsten mining.

In Colombia the community of Cajamarca stopped a gold mine through popular democracy, triggering a national movement and new initiatives to strengthen their regenerative local economy.

In Finland the people of Selkie closed down a peat mine after pollution events poisoned the Jukajoki River and have re-wilded their water systems using a blend of traditional knowledge and science.

In Papua New Guinea, the Alliance of Solwara Warriors and their allies are fighting and winning their battle against the world’s flagship deep sea mining project in the sacred waters of the Bismarck Sea.

Living examples

Authors of Pluriverse: A post-development dictionary, said: “We are exploring and innovating towards a future where all the worlds (human and non-human) can co-exist and thrive in mutual dignity and respect, without a single so called ‘developed’ world living at the expense of others”.

The struggles and ‘alternatives’ shared in YLNM’s case studies are living examples of this future emerging now.

The climate emergency is our clear and present reality, but we will not solve our problems with the same universalised, de-politicised, corporate-dominated approaches that caused them.

Communities, not extractive corporations or captured states, have the answers to the climate and ecological crises. They are living these solutions every day and it is time to listen to them.

This Author 

Hannibal Rhoades is head of communications at the Gaia Foundation, a UK-based organisation working internationally to support indigenous and local communities to revive their knowledge, livelihoods and healthy ecosystems. 

The YLNM emblematic case studies were developed directly by member communities and organisations with the support of YLNM’s Regional Coordinators. The network’s deepest thanks go to: Snowchange Cooperative and the village of Selkie (Finland), Froxán Commoning Community and ContraMINAccíon (Galicia), Karen Environmental and Social Action Network and Kalikasan PNE (Myanmar and Philippines), Comité Ambiental en Defensa de la Vida and COSAJUCA (Colombia), Alliance of Solwara Warriors (Papua New Guinea).

Read all the case studies here.

Read A Just(ice) Transition is a Post-Extractive Transition here.