DOBLE RIESGO

The document argues that 'net zero' targets are a 'smoke screen' allowing corporations to maintain fossil fuel and industrial agriculture business models. It specifically critiques 'nature-based solutions' (NbS) and carbon offsets as mechanisms that lead to land grabbing, the displacement of Indigenous and peasant communities, and the co-optation of agroecology. The report highlights the technical failures of carbon offsets, the volatility of biological carbon storage compared to fossil carbon, and the risks of 'digital soil carbon' platforms that allow agribusinesses to control farmer data and land use.

• Corporate 'net zero' promises are described as a deceptive strategy to protect profits and avoid real emission reductions, allowing companies to continue using fossil fuels while claiming to offset emissions through unverified carbon credits.
• Carbon offsetting is characterized as a failed system where projects frequently exaggerate emission savings through the use of unrealistic 'reference regions' or by protecting forests that were never under threat.
• Nature-based solutions (NbS) are presented as a re-branding of the discredited REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) framework, which has historically led to land conflicts and the restriction of traditional community land use.
• The report argues that biological carbon storage in plants and soils is too volatile and short-term to offset the millennial-scale impact of releasing fossil carbon into the atmosphere.
• Agroecology is being co-opted by the 'nature-based solutions' narrative, which strips away its social and political dimensions of justice and food sovereignty to focus narrowly on carbon sequestration as a financial asset.
• Digital soil carbon monitoring platforms used by agribusinesses and tech companies (such as Microsoft, IBM, and Yara) are viewed as tools for 'data grabbing' that allow corporations to dictate land use and sell proprietary seed and fertilizer packages.
• The scale of land required to meet corporate net-zero ambitions through NbS is deemed unrealistic and a driver for massive land grabbing; for example, meeting Nestlé's annual offset goal could require planting trees on 4.4 million hectares every year.

APA

Kill, J., Chandrasekaran, K., Drago, M., & Race, M. (2022). DOBLE RIESGO. Friends of the Earth International. https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/ati-doble-riesgo-informe-ES-2.pdf

Chicago

Kill, Jutta, Kirtana Chandrasekaran, Martin Drago, and Madeleine Race. DOBLE RIESGO. Friends of the Earth International, 2022. https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/ati-doble-riesgo-informe-ES-2.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Kill |first1=Jutta |last2=Chandrasekaran |first2=Kirtana |last3=Drago |first3=Martin |last4=Race |first4=Madeleine |title=DOBLE RIESGO |publisher=Friends of the Earth International |date=November 2022 |url=https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/ati-doble-riesgo-informe-ES-2.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{kill2022doble, author = {Kill, Jutta and Chandrasekaran, Kirtana and Drago, Martin and Race, Madeleine}, title = {{DOBLE RIESGO}}, institution = {Friends of the Earth International}, year = {2022}, month = nov, url = {https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/ati-doble-riesgo-informe-ES-2.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }