AIM-Progress and Proforest have released a new briefing series on the just transition, offering business-focused guidance for practitioners and senior leaders (November 2025). The series offer three briefings on the following topics: 1) making climate mitigation work for people; 2) managing climate impacts on people; and 3) integrating human rights across climate planning and action.
Human Level’s Take:
As companies accelerate their climate actions, the link between the environment and human rights has never been more important
So, how do they link together? Climate mitigation measures - such as reducing greenhouse gas emissions - can adversely impact people’s rights if not designed with safeguards. For example, regenerative agriculture programmes may favour larger producers while smallholders experience early yield reductions and income loss
At the same time, climate change itself is harming people across supply chains: field and factory workers, smallholders, and their families are facing unsafe heat, water scarcity, and shrinking harvests that undermine their lives and livelihoods. When workers cannot adapt, these human impacts drive supply chain and operational disruption, creating a resilience gap and significant business risks
Companies that align their climate and human rights strategies, however, are better positioned to anticipate risks, protect their reputation, comply with regulations, attract investment, and operate more efficiently
So, what can companies do? To make climate mitigation work for people, companies can conduct due diligence to identify potential human rights impacts before climate projects begin; engage stakeholders meaningfully and respect FPIC; ensure climate initiatives create tangible local benefits such as job creation and local hiring; and provide accessible grievance mechanisms to raise and resolve issues early
To manage climate impacts on people, companies can first expand their climate risk assessments to include people in supply chains. This involves identifying climate and environmental hazards in sourcing regions and mapping how these affect people. They can then take action once the risks have been identified, which involves protecting workers from immediate physical risks and strengthening long-term community resilience (e.g., climate risk insurance, access to credit, income diversification, and training in climate-smart practices). In addition, they can take a smart-mix approach to ensure effective action. This includes directly working with suppliers and producers, partnering with industry bodies, governments, NGOs and rights holders to tackle root causes, and strengthening standards and practices across entire industries
To integrate human rights and climate strategies, companies can establish governance structures that align climate and human rights decisions and clarify accountability; conduct integrated risk assessments to identify intersecting risks; design mitigation, adaptation, and resilience projects with human rights safeguards from the start; develop sector or commodity roadmaps for emission reduction and adaptation, embedding just transition principles throughout; support larger suppliers with immediate action and smaller suppliers with flexibility, technical assistance, and finance; and avoid disengagement unless absolutely necessary, ensuring social impact assessments and transition support beforehand
Some key takeaways:
Making climate mitigation work for people: Climate mitigation means taking actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and enhance carbon sinks in order to tackle climate change. These actions, if taken without clear policies and alignment across business functions, can harm people and exacerbate existing inequalities; thereby, increasing the risks of adverse human rights impacts and undermining companies’ long-term sustainability goals. Examples of key risks include: 1) switching suppliers or sourcing regions to lower carbon intensity can destablise local economies and drive smallholders out of markets; 2) renewable energy projects launched without consultation can restrict Indigenous land use and displace communities; 3) farmers are often burdened with heavy compliance demands in carbon markets, while intermediaries capture most of the financial benefit; 4) afforestation and reforestation projects can drive tenure conflicts and inequitable benefit-sharing; and 5) regenerative agriculture programmes may favour large producers, while smallholders face yield reductions and income loss in the early years. The briefing recommends four steps that companies can take to embed human rights into their emission mitigation programmes. First, conduct due diligence to assess potential adverse human rights impacts before projects begin. This involves identifying vulnerable groups, including women, young people, Indigenous Peoples, migrant workers, and smallholders. It also involves assessing impacts on land right, livelihoods and other salient human rights issues, and planning mitigation measures, such as financial or technical support. Second, conduct meaningful stakeholder engagement to ensure projects reflect local priorities and respect Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC). This engagement must be inclusive (so that all affected groups have a voice), culturally appropriate (to ensure local languages and decision-making norms are respected), and ongoing throughout the project lifecycle. Third, ensure that climate projects deliver tangible outcomes for local peoples including job creation and local hiring; income-sharing arrangements and access to microcredit; land tenure recognition and protection; and equitable revenue allocation from carbon credits. Fourth, provide access to grievance channels to ensure that issues can be raised and resolved promptly. These channels must have clear, safe and inclusive complaint processes, as well as ensure the timely and fair resolution of disputes.
Managing climate impacts on people: Rising temperatures and unstable weather are putting millions of people at risk. This includes field and factory workers, smallholders, and their families as they face unsafe heat, water scarcity and shrinking harvest that threaten their lives and livelihoods. Many companies routinely assess the risks that climate change poses to their assets and operations. However, far fewer consider the impact of climate change on people in their supply chains, even though their business models are dependent on them. This creates a resilience gap and tangible business risks including 1) supply chain and operational disruption when workers cannot adapt; 2) regulatory and investor pressure; 3) reputational damage; and 4) economic damage from lower household income, affecting livelihoods, health and consumption. Companies can integrate human rights and environmental due diligence (HREDD) into their climate adaptation planning to help close the resilience gap. The briefing recommends three steps that companies can take to build a people-centred approach to climate adaptation measures. First, assess climate impacts on people, not just assets. Expand climate risk assessments to include people in supply chains. This involves identifying hazards in sourcing regions such as extreme heat, drought, floods, storms, and mapping how these affect people through unsafe working conditions, water access, food security, and displacement. It also involves recognising compounding effects – that one climate event can trigger multiple human rights impacts, and exacerbate existing issues such as child labour, forced labour, and discrimination. Second, take action once the risks have been identified. For effective adaptation, this involves protecting workers from immediate physical risks (e.g., adjusted working hours during heat and shade, hydration stations, and upgraded housing) and strengthening long-term community resilience (e.g., climate risk insurance, access to credit, income diversification, and training in climate-smart practices). Third, take a smart-mix approach to ensure effective action. This includes directly working with suppliers and producers, partnering with industry bodies, governments, NGOs and rights holders to tackle root causes, and strengthening standards and practices across entire industries.
Integrating climate action and human rights: Companies that align their climate and human rights strategies are better able to anticipate risks, protect their reputation, meet regulations, unlock investment, and increase efficiency. To fully align strategies, the briefing recommends that companies focus on five key areas: 1) create a governance structure that aligns climate and human rights decisions, clarifies accountability, and avoids duplicated efforts. This could mean setting up cross-functional teams with regular coordination meetings, and formalising board-level oversight that covers both climate and human rights outcomes; 2) set up integrated risk assessments and identify where climate and human rights risks intersect (see visual below). This involves combining climate modelling data with human rights risk data, socio-economic indicators, and supplier information. It also involves mapping physical climate risks (heat, drought, floods), transition risks (policy changes, market shifts), and salient human rights issues in the same assessment, as well as prioritising vulnerable groups; 3) develop sector or commodity roadmaps for emission reduction and adaptation, embedding just transition principles throughout; 4) design projects for emissions reduction, adaptation, or resilience, that build in human rights safeguards from the start. For instance, pre-assessments to identify risks, stakeholder consultations to understand local needs, benefit-sharing mechanisms, accessible grievance procedures, and internal escalation protocols when concerns arise. In addition, develop joint KPIs that track progress on both climate and human rights; and 5) prioritise larger suppliers for immediate action while supporting smaller ones with flexible timelines, technical assistance, and access to finance. If suppliers struggle to meet requirements, don't immediately disengage. If disengagement becomes unavoidable, assess social and economic impacts on workers and communities, provide transition support, communicate early and clearly, and only disengage as a last resort. In addition, plan for community and worker impacts when shifting supply chains and support affected suppliers and communities through the transition.
