Tribal Peoples Versus Carbon Cowboys
Yasmine Ryan | Take Part | February 12, 2010
Indigenous peoples from the Amazon to the Arctic, from Africa to the Pacific, are amongst those facing the most drastic changes due to the effects of climate change. Some of the very measures being proposed to counter climate change pose threats to their cultures and ways of life, many indigenous groups are arguing.
Efforts to include forestry in any post-Kyoto agreement on climate change are stimulating particularly strong opposition. The draft scheme that would offer financial reward to developing countries in return for protecting forests--and the carbon stored within them--is known as REDD, or “Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation.” The idea is that richer countries could pay money for credits to “offset” their carbon emissions.
Yet much of the world’s forests are home to tribal peoples, and there are concerns that the billions of dollars likely to circuit if REDD becomes a major component of any climate regime, will bring them massive disruption and little benefit.
“The fundamental concept that is underpinning the whole thing is antipathetic to indigenous people,” said Jonathan Mazower, Media Director of Survival International, a worldwide organization that advocates for the rights of tribal peoples.
“Where outsiders place monetary value on land where indigenous people live, the indigenous people always almost suffer,” Mr. Mazower said. Tribal peoples, many of whom have lived through notoriously destructive quests for rubber, oil or mineral wealth in the past, are hardly likely to be thrilled that a huge price tag may soon be placed on the carbon stored by the trees that surround them.
Indeed, when it comes to other initiatives to stop climate change, the experiences of many tribal peoples have been scarcely better than the dispossession suffered in the past. Biofuels and hydroelectric power have demonstrated to tribes such as the Guarani of Brazil that there is little difference whether the resource of the day is “green” or not.
REDD could lead to a massive land grab by governments and corporations, Survival International warned in a report released last November, titled “The most inconvenient truth of all: climate change and indigenous people.”
Deforestation has been devastating for many forest-dwelling peoples, but efforts by governments to protect forests could also lead to tribes being forced out, as has already happened to Kenya’s Ogiek, evicted from Mau Forest in the name of conservation.
Parallel to its eviction of thousands of hunter-gathers, the Kenyan government appealed to the international community for funding to save the Mau Forest, and to plant billions more trees – potentially setting itself up for a tidy profit on the carbon trading market. This is part of a UNEP-funded carbon forestry project.
“Everyone has been living in fear for the last month. This is very serious. The Ogiek have nowhere else to go. People are crying about the eviction. The government said it would spare no one,” Kiplangat Cheruyot of the Ogiek People’s Development Program told Survival International.
Giving forestry a central place in the carbon credits market is also likely to encourage land theft, indigenous advocates argue.
Many indigenous groups and forums have expressed doubt about the REDD schemes since it first made its way into the climate change negotiations in Bali in 2007. The International Forum of Indigenous Peoples on Climate Change released the following statement in November that year:
“REDD (schemes known collectively as Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) will increase the violation of our human rights, our rights to our lands, territories and resources, steal our land, cause forced evictions, prevent access and threaten indigenous agriculture practices, destroy biodiversity and culture diversity and cause social conflicts.”
Some companies are preparing to profit from the billions that are likely to enter into circulation as soon as REDD gets the green light. In the Amazon, Survival International is aware of companies that have begun buying land where tribal people live in order to reap the eventual “credits” expected to come gushing in.
Papua New Guinea, the Pacific nation that has done more than any other to force forestry onto the UNFCCC agenda, has itself become a frequent stomping ground for land-grabbing “carbon cowboys” – the most recent scandal involves the kidnapping of an indigenous leader of the Kamula Doso Peoples. Abilie Wape claims to have been forced at gunpoint to sign over carbon rights of his tribe’s forest.
Kevin Conrad, Special Envoy and Ambassador on Climate Change for Papua New Guinea, is revered amongst many international environmentalists for chastising the Bush Administration representative at climate change negotiations in Bali to either show leadership or "get out of the way." He is one of the main architects of the proposed forest scheme and has also been instrumental in the creation of the WBG’s Forest Carbon Partnership Facility, which has already mobilized billions in pledges from developed countries.
As The Australian reported, however, the American expat’s reputation is a little less glowing within PNG, where he is known for a string of failed business deals and allegations of corruption. The article describes REDD as a “classic 21st-century scam emerging from the global climate change industry.”
And for indigenous commentators, Mr. Conrad revealed his true agenda in Copenhagen midway through the negotiations, when he was one of those pushing to have language on indigenous rights in REDD watered down.
Whether a scheme that plays greater heed to indigenous rights and genuine ecological concerns can take shape will depend on UNFCCC negotiations later this year. For now, it seems that the carbon traders are winning.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment