Planet Earth is facing a climate crisis, manifested in increasingly frequent and deadly heat waves and floods, which the UN Secretary-General has called a \u201ctrue climate collapse.\u201d These extremes disproportionately affect those who they do not have the means to adapt, and addressing this injustice must be central to climate policy.<\/p>\n
Land use and land use change are major drivers of climate change. However, land also offers significant opportunities for climate change mitigation. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) states that limiting global warming to 1.5\u00b0C will require not only emission reductions but also measures to remove carbon dioxide (CO\u2082). CO\u2082 removal involves processes that remove carbon dioxide that has already been or will be released into the atmosphere.<\/p>\n
The most commonly used approaches to remove CO\u2082 include afforestation and reforestation. However, these methods sometimes come at the expense of other important ecosystems, such as grasslands. At the same time, we are increasingly seeing deforestation of tropical forests and catastrophic forest fires. This raises the question of what could be wrong with planting more trees.<\/p>\n
The problem is that trees often have to be planted on areas that are not currently forested. However, these areas are usually inhabited. indigenous peoples and local communities<\/strong>who depend on them for their agriculture and livelihoods. Establishing new forests requires changes in land use patterns, which can have serious consequences for these people, including loss of livelihoods. Climate justice requires that measures to achieve global climate goals do not harm people already living in vulnerable situations.<\/p>\n Many governments and companies have committed to achieving net zero emissions by 2050, in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement. However, many of these commitments are over-reliance on carbon sequestration through tree planting<\/strong>. This approach shifts the focus away from the main source of the problem: fossil fuel emissions. National climate commitments anticipate a land need for carbon sequestration of around 1 billion hectares by 2060 \u2013 an area roughly twice the size of the European Union. Such huge demand for land puts pressure on the already limited physical capacity of land and exacerbates competition between different needs (agriculture, housing, energy, biodiversity, climate).<\/p>\n This growing demand for land, often driven by expanding carbon markets, has triggered a new wave of land grabs<\/strong>. This threatens people\u2019s rights, particularly in customary land tenure systems. Land-based projects to sequester carbon have already led to human rights abuses. In areas characterised by weak land rights and inadequate law enforcement, carbon offset projects can lead to land grabbing, environmental damage and community displacement. In Africa, where customary land rights prevail, these systems offer limited protection from exploitation by carbon markets. Examples include the curtailment of traditional pastoral practices in Kenya or forced evictions and denial of access to land in Uganda due to the establishment of carbon offset plantations.<\/p>\n Indigenous peoples and local communities play a key role<\/strong> in protecting landscapes, forests and other ecosystems. Approximately 80 percent of the world\u2019s biodiversity is found on the 22 percent of global land that is still managed by indigenous peoples. Protecting their legitimate land rights and traditional stewardship practices is essential for effective biodiversity conservation and climate change mitigation. Studies show that communities are successful stewards of ecosystems when they have the rights and resources to do so. Participatory management of protected areas is associated with better conservation outcomes.<\/p>\n Current efforts to achieve climate neutrality often overlook the land rights of local populations and indigenous peoples. Investors in land-based carbon projects often have more power than local communities. To redress this imbalance, policymakers must Prioritize community land rights and inclusiveness<\/strong>to ensure that these interventions benefit communities. Protecting land rights is a first step towards achieving this goal. Communities need decision-making power over land use, including the right to reject projects that interfere with their rights, livelihoods or cultural practices. A human rights framework for regulating carbon markets at the national level is essential.<\/p>\n