Search Climate Insights Directory

The report examines the legal landscape in Zimbabwe concerning the rights of local communities and indigenous peoples. It highlights a significant gap between progressive constitutional provisions and the actual implementation of laws, particularly in the mining and forestry sectors. While community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) programs like CAMPFIRE show some success in wildlife conservation, the report finds that local communities often face arbitrary evictions, lack of secure land tenure, and marginalization from decision-making processes in extractive industries. It recommends comprehensive legal reforms to align sectoral laws with the 2013 Constitution, establish a Land Commission, and formalize the recognition of Indigenous Community Conserved Areas (ICCAs).

The document analyzes Mexico's progress in establishing a National Safeguard System (SNS) and a Safeguard Information System (SIS) for REDD+, highlighting the integration of these systems with national laws like the General Law on Sustainable Forest Development (LGDFS). While Mexico is a frontrunner in REDD+ preparation, the study identifies critical gaps in the operationalization of free, prior and informed consent (FPIC), clarity on carbon ownership for avoided emissions, and the risk of diluted standards resulting from the World Bank's safeguard review process. It argues that explicit international guidance from the UNFCCC is necessary to help countries translate safeguard principles into action and avoid the conceptual confusion and sporadic progress experienced by Mexico.

The document examines Mexico's progress in implementing REDD+ safeguards, highlighting the transition from confusing the SIS with the SNS to establishing a framework based on national law and sustainable rural development. While Mexico has strong institutional capacity and a history of community forestry, the report identifies critical gaps in the operationalization of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC), clarity on avoided emission carbon rights, and the risk of weakened World Bank safeguard policies. It argues that international guidance from the UNFCCC is necessary to standardize reporting and ensure the protection of indigenous and local community rights.

Carbon Market Watch opposes expanding LULUCF activities within the CDM, citing risks to climate adaptation, a lack of market demand for offsets, and the non-permanent nature of land-based carbon sequestration compared to permanent fossil fuel emissions. The organization suggests that LULUCF activities are better suited for Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs), National Adaptation Plans (NAPs), and REDD+, emphasizing a rights-based approach to food security and land rights.

The document critiques the process of 'financialization of nature,' which it describes as the reduction of natural elements into exchangeable financial instruments. It argues that pricing biodiversity is a prerequisite for this process, leading to the creation of 'natural capital' and market-based mechanisms like biodiversity banks and green bonds. The author contends that these tools, particularly those based on 'offsetting,' allow corporations to continue destructive activities by purchasing credits, thereby bypassing genuine conservation and violating the rights of traditional land defenders. The paper advocates for community-based governance and food sovereignty as alternatives to neoliberal market logic.

The IISD guide outlines a framework for negotiating agricultural investment contracts, emphasizing the primacy of national legislation over contracts and international treaties. It provides a comprehensive model contract covering land rights, financial obligations, social and environmental commitments, and dispute resolution, while advocating for transparency and community engagement to ensure sustainable rural development.

The IISD Guide to Negotiating Investment Contracts for Farmland and Water is a comprehensive tool designed for governments and communities to manage foreign investments in agricultural land. It emphasizes the primacy of domestic law over investment contracts and international treaties, while providing a model contract to fill gaps where domestic laws are weak. The guide outlines a preparatory phase involving investor screening, community engagement, and impact assessments, and proposes specific contractual provisions covering tenure, financial obligations, social development, and environmental protections. It strongly advocates for transparency, the avoidance of stabilization clauses, and the use of domestic courts for dispute resolution to protect the national interest and ensure long-term project viability.

The report argues that conservation initiatives frequently violate the rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities, despite an increasing international legal consensus on their protections. It asserts that responsibility for upholding these rights extends beyond states to include international organisations, businesses, and NGOs. The authors analyse a vast array of international instruments and find that while normative trends are moving toward greater recognition of rights, enforcement and redress remain significant challenges. The document concludes by suggesting the creation of core standards, stakeholder guidance, and potentially a dedicated global grievance mechanism or 'Roundtable on Ethical Conservation' to ensure just conservation practices.

The document maps the extensive legal landscape of international 'hard' and 'soft' law relevant to conservation, identifying over 30 categories of rights. It highlights a normative trend toward increasing recognition of Indigenous and local community rights within the CBD and IUCN frameworks, arguing that these standards must be distilled into accessible guides to prevent human rights violations, such as forced evictions, during the establishment of protected areas.

The document examines the challenges Indigenous Peoples and local communities face when seeking redress for human rights violations linked to conservation, such as the eviction of the Endorois in Kenya. It categorizes redress mechanisms into state-based (national courts, NHRIs) and non-state-based (UN systems, regional human rights courts, financial institution accountability mechanisms, and corporate mechanisms). While state-based systems can issue binding decisions, they are often inaccessible due to discrimination and lack of recognition of collective rights. Non-state judicial mechanisms often have high procedural hurdles, such as the exhaustion of domestic remedies, while non-judicial mechanisms frequently lack enforcement power. The author suggests exploring a 'Roundtable for Ethical Conservation' as a specialized mechanism to ensure compliance with human rights standards.

The document argues that LULUCF should be treated separately in the EU's 2030 climate framework to prevent its carbon sink from being used to reduce mitigation efforts in energy, industry, and transport. It emphasizes that land-use policies must prioritize biodiversity and environmental integrity over simple carbon sequestration, specifically recommending the rewetting of peatlands and the end of subsidies for unsustainable farming. Globally, it calls for the EU to address its role as a major importer of deforestation-embodied products through mandatory standards and a new EU Action Plan on deforestation.

A coalition of organizations requests UN intervention regarding the Santa Rita hydroelectric project in Guatemala, alleging severe human rights abuses, including extrajudicial killings and state-sponsored violence, and criticizing the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) for registering the project despite a lack of genuine indigenous consultation.

The document is a formal request to the UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to address serious human rights abuses linked to the Santa Rita hydroelectric dam in Guatemala. The authors argue that the project, registered under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) in June 2014, has been imposed without the free, prior, and informed consent of the Q’eqchí and Poqomchí indigenous communities. They report a pattern of violence, including the deaths of seven people, including two children, and state-sponsored repression involving the deployment of 1,500 police officers in August 2014. The document calls for the Government of Guatemala to provide information on its plans and for the CDM Board to investigate and potentially withdraw the project's registration due to non-compliance with consultation standards.

The document critiques the REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) mechanism, asserting that it prioritizes private finance and corporate interests over indigenous rights and genuine climate mitigation. Through case studies in Indonesia, Mozambique, and Peru, it demonstrates how REDD projects can exacerbate land conflicts, threaten food security, and fail to achieve carbon reduction goals. The report concludes that REDD is a 'false solution' that allows industrial polluters in the Global North to continue emitting via carbon offsets. It proposes an alternative based on community-led forest management, the resolution of land tenure issues, and a systemic reduction in the consumption of resources by rich countries.

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) critiques the REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) mechanism, claiming it exacerbates land tenure conflicts, threatens food security, and allows industrial polluters in the Global North to avoid domestic emission cuts. Through case studies in Indonesia, Mozambique, and Peru, the report illustrates failures in carbon accounting, financial instability, and the marginalization of Indigenous peoples. FoEI proposes an alternative model of community forest management, citing Bolivia's proposal to the UNFCCC as a viable path toward climate justice and sustainable forest preservation.

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) contends that REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation) fails to deliver permanent emissions reductions and often harms Indigenous Peoples and local communities. Through case studies in Indonesia, Mozambique, and Peru, the report illustrates how REDD+ can exacerbate land tenure conflicts, threaten food security, and facilitate continued pollution in industrialised countries via carbon offsets. FoEI proposes replacing these market-based mechanisms with community-led forest management based on traditional knowledge and a global reduction in the demand for forest-derived products.

The document outlines the critical role of rural women in economic growth and food security while highlighting the systemic barriers they face, including gender-based violence, lack of land rights, and limited access to education and technology. It argues that empowering rural women through legal reforms, capacity building, and strategic networking is essential for sustainable development and climate adaptation.

The paper examines the legal obligations of conservation actors regarding the rights of indigenous peoples, tribal peoples, and local communities. It argues that while states are the primary duty-bearers, international organizations, corporations, and NGOs also have responsibilities to respect human rights based on international customary law and 'social licenses'. The text specifically links these obligations to the implementation of Aichi Target 11 for biodiversity.

The document serves as a prevention manual for forest communities, specifically in equatorial regions of Asia, Africa, and the Americas, to avoid signing REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) and similar conservation contracts. It argues that these projects often use deceptive language and long-term commitments (30 to 80 years) to strip communities of their land rights, prohibit traditional agricultural and forestry activities, and transfer biodiversity benefits to private companies. The guide advocates for community-led forest management, the legal recognition of territorial titles, and public policies that support traditional conservation practices instead of market-based carbon offsets.

The document warns forest communities in tropical regions about the dangers of signing REDD and forest conservation contracts, which it argues can lead to 'deterritorialization' and loss of autonomy. It details how these contracts often use technical language to hide restrictive obligations, such as banning traditional agriculture and wood use, while granting companies extensive access to biodiversity and carbon credits for long periods (30 to 80 years). The guide advocates for the recognition of indigenous land rights and the implementation of public policies that support collective, non-market-based community forest management as a more effective way to preserve biodiversity and prevent deforestation.