{"id":8730,"date":"2021-11-08T08:30:00","date_gmt":"2021-11-07T22:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/testblogs.griffith.edu.au\/asiainsights\/?p=8730"},"modified":"2024-03-17T11:36:26","modified_gmt":"2024-03-17T01:36:26","slug":"land-culture-livelihood-what-indigenous-people-stand-to-lose-from-climate-solutions","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/testblogs.griffith.edu.au\/asiainsights\/land-culture-livelihood-what-indigenous-people-stand-to-lose-from-climate-solutions\/","title":{"rendered":"Land, culture, livelihood: What Indigenous people stand to lose from climate \u2018solutions\u2019"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

ROB HALES<\/a>, ROWAN FOLEY, TIM CADMAN AND TONI HAY | <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the first major deal of the Glasgow climate summit, more than 100 nations have pledged to end<\/a>, and reverse, deforestation by 2030. As the declaration states, forests store vast amounts of carbon dioxide and are essential to stop global warming beyond 1.5\u2103 this century.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This new pledge is an example of so-called \u201cnature-based solutions\u201d \u2013 using ecosystem restoration and protection, better forest management and forest plantations to tackle climate change. Research suggests<\/a>, if done appropriately, they could provide 30\u201340% of the CO\u2082 reductions required by 2030.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But these approaches should not take away from the need to stop burning fossil fuels. There\u2019s also a glaring omission in the new declaration: no mention of the need for Indigenous people to give our\/their prior informed consent, or be the decision makers on our\/their own land.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is significant, because some nature-based solutions can negatively affect<\/a> Indigenous people around the world. For this reason, more than 250 organisations, networks and movements have signed a new statement<\/a> against<\/em> nature-based solutions, calling them nature-based \u201cdispossessions\u201d, and a scam.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Indigenous people should have a seat at the table in Glasgow, and a voice in decisions about our\/their lands. The best pathway forward for Indigenous people is to manage carbon projects themselves. This is true self determination.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Disrupting livelihood and culture<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Indigenous people manage or have tenure rights over at least 38 million square kilometres in 87 countries<\/a> on all inhabited continents. This represents over a quarter of the world\u2019s land surface, intersecting about 40% of all land-based protected areas and ecologically intact landscapes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And yet, disadvantage is still widespread. International carbon policies such as nature-based climate schemes continue to contribute to a variety of poverties.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"girl
The rights of Indigenous people to their land should be respected. EPA<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Examples abound. Take, for instance, the REDD+ program which operates under the auspices of the United Nations. It aims to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, such as through sustainable management of forests to increase carbon stocks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A review<\/a> in 2018 revealed how REDD+ projects disrupted local peoples\u2019 livelihoods and culture in various ways. The more serious impacts included:<\/p>\n\n\n\n