00:00 All for joining us early this morning.
00:11 Alright,
00:12 thank you all so much for coming.
00:14 Welcome to this panel session on carbon markets and climate justice,
00:19 how legal frameworks for carbon trading can protect
00:23 community rights.
00:24 We're gonna organize this session as more of a round table discussion,
00:28 and we're very keen actually to bring you all into the conversation as well,
00:31 so we'll do our best to hold a good chunk of time for discussion
00:35 at the end.
00:37 What we're seeing right now with Article 6 moving rapidly through the UNFCCC,
00:43 there,
00:44 this is spurring national legislation around the world on carbon trading.
00:49 And
00:49 to date,
00:50 the market
00:51 has been largely unregulated for the most part,
00:54 and it's expected to grow exponentially.
00:56 So this is really a pivotal moment
00:58 for ensuring that policy
01:00 centers tenure security.
01:02 There's significant evidence.
01:04 Of the crucial role that communities play
01:07 in ensuring conservation outcomes and so this is
01:10 really the the focus of the conversation today and something that we feel needs to
01:14 be central in discussions about policy and
01:17 so that's that's really where we're gonna be
01:19 um digging in.
01:21 however,
01:21 at the same time,
01:23 while on the one hand there's significant
01:25 evidence that communities play a crucial role
01:28 and that land rights need to be part of the conversation.
01:31 However,
01:32 there's a lot of pressure as well to move quickly
01:35 and um to scale,
01:37 and this can undercut that
01:40 that attention to community rights.
01:41 It leads to risks of dispossession,
01:44 um,
01:44 and
01:45 violations of human and land rights.
01:47 And so how do we navigate that in this particular moment in time?
01:51 So this session really aims to clarify
01:53 what's needed for national frameworks on carbon trading
01:56 to fully integrate protections for community land rights.
02:00 And we'll,
02:01 each of our panelists will be sharing based on experience,
02:04 um.
02:05 Supporting communities to engage with carbon credit projects and working
02:09 within government and the private sector to center
02:11 um collective land rights as part of the process
02:15 we'll highlight effective approaches for safeguarding
02:17 community rights and nature based investments,
02:19 drawing on several things.
02:21 um,
02:21 first on strong provisions in existing land laws
02:25 second
02:26 on community bylaws,
02:27 so rules that communities themselves are developing.
02:30 And then finally,
02:31 on
02:32 decades of experience with other types
02:34 of investments like mining and agribusiness.
02:38 Um,
02:39 and we hope,
02:40 again,
02:40 just when we get to the discussion portion that we can really surface priorities,
02:44 thinking from different perspectives,
02:46 from civil society,
02:47 from private sector,
02:48 and from the government.
02:50 Um,
02:51 OK,
02:52 well I will
02:53 from there,
02:54 uh,
02:54 kick us into some discussion,
02:56 and we are going to start with Eileen Wakesho who's the director of land,
03:01 Environment and Climate in Kenya for NATI,
03:04 and the question I'd like to ask you,
03:06 Eileen,
03:07 is how are carbon credit projects impacting local communities?
03:10 What opportunities and challenges are you seeing on the ground?
03:17 Um,
03:17 thank you very much,
03:18 Irene,
03:18 um,
03:19 and good morning,
03:20 everyone.
03:21 Um,
03:22 so I'll be sharing experiences from Kenya.
03:24 Um,
03:24 for those that have had a chance to interact with Kenya,
03:27 Kenya is
03:28 the home to the world's largest soil carbon.
03:31 It covers about 4 counties or states,
03:33 uh,
03:34 if that's easy to understand.
03:36 And it covers about
03:38 2 million hectares.
03:40 So that's roughly
03:41 about 4.5 million acres of land.
03:44 And this is um land that is historically
03:48 commu communally owned by largely pastoral
03:51 and indigenous communities.
03:53 And the project is anchored on grazing patterns.
03:55 And so
03:57 pastoral communities graze in a defined
04:00 um
04:00 or organized way so that then,
04:03 um,
04:04 there's more
04:05 uh carbon stored in the soil through the grazing patterns.
04:09 Now,
04:09 for those that have interacted with pastoralists,
04:11 um,
04:11 rotational grazing is one of the
04:14 ways of building their resilience.
04:16 And so the project anchors on ensuring that that happens
04:19 in a very organized way,
04:21 um,
04:21 and
04:22 in a more technical,
04:24 uh,
04:24 way to,
04:24 to,
04:24 to,
04:25 to,
04:25 to,
04:25 to say the least.
04:26 Now,
04:26 the project is a thirty-year project,
04:28 um,
04:29 conceptualized in 2012,
04:31 um,
04:31 and is
04:32 to run until 2020,
04:34 2042.
04:36 Um,
04:36 the first credits were verified from 2013 to 2016.
04:40 Um,
04:41 and communities have been benefiting from resources out of the project.
04:45 So from
04:46 the reports,
04:47 um,
04:48 the,
04:48 the communities are
04:49 organized in conservances.
04:51 So,
04:52 um,
04:53 you,
04:53 you find in some cases,
04:55 one,
04:56 conservancy has about 3 community lands,
04:59 so they've come together.
05:00 And
05:01 in total,
05:02 the project covers 14 conservances across the 4 counties that I talked about.
05:08 Now,
05:08 speaking to communities,
05:10 they're able to call out some of the key benefits that they see of the projects.
05:14 And the benefits are both in terms of
05:16 their strengthened resilience to climate change,
05:18 um,
05:19 Two years ago,
05:20 Kenya and most of the East African countries experienced the worst drought.
05:23 And so for pastoral communities,
05:25 it meant
05:26 that most of them
05:27 lost a lot of their wealth that is stored in their animals.
05:30 Um,
05:31 and so,
05:32 part of the resources have gone into ensuring that they have access to bursaries.
05:36 Um,
05:36 they've put together
05:38 in some cases,
05:39 um,
05:39 water projects,
05:40 some infrastructure projects.
05:42 Um,
05:42 and so folk from,
05:43 from community's points of view,
05:44 they're able to see some
05:46 Benefits to the projects,
05:48 um,
05:49 that,
05:49 um
05:50 You know,
05:51 they,
05:51 they can sort of call,
05:52 um,
05:53 you know,
05:53 in,
05:53 in very tangible ways.
05:55 And so thinking about um
05:57 beyond just the economic and social benefits that communities are calling out,
06:01 there are also other benefits in terms of ensuring that
06:03 there's a sense of organized,
06:05 um,
06:06 uh,
06:06 grazing.
06:07 Um,
06:07 and so
06:08 they have,
06:09 they're able to have places where they can have reserve grass,
06:12 um,
06:12 and have
06:13 only
06:15 access to that place in,
06:16 in,
06:16 in certain seasons.
06:18 And so that in itself
06:19 has played out a significant role in ensuring a slight more resilience.
06:23 They also get to develop grazing patterns before every rain season,
06:27 and that equally helps.
06:29 Now,
06:30 these are benefits that communities are calling out because then
06:33 every
06:34 financial,
06:34 every year,
06:35 communities get to receive about $320,000 USD,
06:39 um.
06:41 That money goes into
06:42 what they call community projects or communities
06:45 call out the projects and then it also gets into conservancy operations cause then
06:50 the methodology is centered on um elements of conservation.
06:54 Now,
06:54 besides some of these benefits that they're calling,
06:56 they're equally calling out a number of challenges
06:58 that they are grappling with in the project.
07:00 And key among them has been
07:02 how robust free plan and informed consent was done for the project,
07:06 um,
07:06 access to key information.
07:08 So,
07:08 as I said,
07:09 the project started in 2012,
07:11 but by the time we were engaging these communities,
07:13 early in 2023,
07:15 most of these communities had never seen the project implementation agreement.
07:18 Which means then they wouldn't know the details of what was
07:21 signed into the agreement between them and the project proponent.
07:24 And it took a number of interventions and demand
07:27 letters to get access to the project implementation agreement.
07:30 Now,
07:30 if you don't have access to information,
07:32 it becomes extremely difficult for you to be able to negotiate effectively,
07:35 um,
07:36 to get a good outcome in,
07:37 in,
07:37 in the project.
07:39 The other thing is,
07:40 even though communities are calling out the fact that they are getting monies,
07:43 um,
07:44 and for these communities,
07:45 most of whom live in abject poverty,
07:47 that money is significant to them,
07:49 but they're also asking critical questions.
07:50 These communities are pastoral communities.
07:52 When they take their cows to the market,
07:54 they know the value of a cow.
07:56 And they're able to say,
07:57 you know,
07:58 the person that helped me sell the cow,
08:00 call them the broker,
08:01 gets this amount,
08:02 for purposes of facilitating the sale of the cow.
08:04 But from their end,
08:05 they have no access
08:06 to information on what's
08:08 the gross revenue.
08:09 And then what comes to them.
08:11 And so part of
08:12 what they're asking for in terms of access to information is
08:15 beyond just the documents
08:17 of say,
08:17 the project implementation agreement,
08:19 can we get access to key
08:21 um
08:22 information around the gross revenue so that we get a sense of
08:25 what's,
08:26 um,
08:26 you know,
08:27 what exactly are we talking about in terms of the,
08:29 the,
08:29 the,
08:29 the sale of a,
08:30 of a,
08:31 of a cow.
08:32 The other thing that has been a huge challenge is
08:34 a lot of the project,
08:36 carbon project proponents,
08:37 um,
08:39 Establish bespoke
08:41 structures that they use instead of using
08:43 legitimate democratically elected structures of the communities.
08:47 So,
08:48 Kenya passed a Community Land Act in 2016
08:50 that provides clear structures for the community.
08:53 The structures are community land management committees.
08:56 And so the expectation is that project proponents would then use these structures
09:00 that are legitimate,
09:01 that are
09:02 backed by law and are democratically elected.
09:05 But in many cases,
09:06 and especially in this,
09:07 this particular project,
09:08 The project proponent opted to,
09:11 you know,
09:11 use a separate,
09:12 uh,
09:13 structure
09:13 that breeds confusion,
09:15 and breeds different centers of power within communities,
09:18 and
09:19 brings the question of
09:20 whether even that structure has the capacity to get into contractual obligations
09:25 with,
09:25 um,
09:25 the project proponent.
09:26 So,
09:27 part of the demands that communities are saying is,
09:29 can you use the legitimate structures that are in place
09:32 that are backed up,
09:33 um,
09:33 by loan?
09:34 And then
09:35 lastly,
09:35 and I'll pass the mic is,
09:37 um,
09:38 you know,
09:38 once communities get the money,
09:39 there's also a sense of
09:41 control from the project proponent
09:43 on how communities should use the monies.
09:45 And so monies gets to communities
09:47 and the project proponent has to approve
09:50 the community projects that,
09:51 um,
09:51 the communities should do.
09:53 There's a structure that the project proponent has put together.
09:56 But communities are saying,
09:57 if there's any person that knows our needs is ourselves.
10:00 Let's pick our projects and let's decide that on our own,
10:03 like,
10:04 Don't
10:05 introduce another layer of approval for projects
10:07 that are community projects.
10:09 Yet we know
10:10 the projects that are important to us.
10:12 We do have community structures
10:14 that will allow us to be able to pick projects that are extremely beneficial to us.
10:17 I'll pause there.
10:20 Thank you so much,
10:21 Eileen.
10:22 So highlighting some very significant benefits,
10:25 the practices around grazing management,
10:27 improving climate resilience in many ways.
10:30 In total,
10:31 $14 million that have gone directly to the communities,
10:35 which is hugely significant.
10:37 At the same time,
10:38 major challenges around free prior and informed consent,
10:41 access to crucial information,
10:43 including the project agreement itself,
10:45 and then
10:46 uh transparency on the financial revenue,
10:48 that is a big gap that we see
10:50 across multiple
10:51 projects.
10:52 So really some,
10:54 um,
10:54 seeing many things on both sides,
10:56 some real benefits and opportunities and some challenges
10:59 that are crucial that communities are raising.
11:01 I'd like to,
11:02 so we've been hearing about the largest soil carbon project,
11:05 um,
11:06 registered currently in the world that's based in Kenya.
11:09 I'd like to take us now to Zimbabwe,
11:11 um,
11:11 looking at forests,
11:13 um,
11:13 and I'm gonna pass it to
11:15 Shamiso Matisi,
11:16 who is the deputy director
11:18 for the Zimbabwe Environmental Law Association to share more about what
11:23 it's looking like for communities on the ground in Zimbabwe.
11:26 Uh,
11:27 thank you very much.
11:28 Uh,
11:29 so I'll,
11:29 I'll just quickly go through uh some of the key points,
11:33 um,
11:34 that,
11:34 that are important to share at this point.
11:36 Uh.
11:37 So in Zimbabwe,
11:38 uh,
11:40 carbon credit uh
11:41 projects uh started off with uh what is called the Karibare Project,
11:45 which covers about
11:48 785,000 hectares of forest in Zimbabwe,
11:52 which included communal,
11:54 communal land.
11:56 It also covers uh agriculture-related activities,
11:59 wildlife uh management activities,
12:01 and many other
12:03 um aspects uh that are critical for us to uh
12:07 think about when it comes to carbon credited projects.
12:10 So the Calibrate project,
12:12 you might be aware that there has been a lot of,
12:14 uh,
12:15 uh,
12:16 publicly available information,
12:19 media coverage of the project.
12:21 Of how not to do things when it comes to uh carbon credits.
12:25 I think you might be aware
12:28 that in
12:29 uh the company that was running the Kalibare project uh
12:34 uh has left
12:35 uh or suspended its operations
12:38 and
12:38 canceled some of its operations in Zimbabwe
12:42 because of allegations of failure to plow back to local communities.
12:47 When I say plow back to local communities,
12:49 it means making sure that the communities,
12:52 one,
12:53 access uh adequate um uh uh revenues from uh the project itself,
13:00 whether it's uh as promised,
13:02 building schools,
13:03 uh,
13:03 clinics,
13:04 uh,
13:05 water points or boreholes,
13:07 and other social amenities that are critical for,
13:10 for the community.
13:11 So there are allegations that Karibare did not managed to do that.
13:15 In Zimbabwe,
13:16 so communities didn't benefit,
13:18 but
13:18 it doesn't mean uh it was total gloom.
13:21 Uh,
13:21 nothing was done.
13:22 There,
13:23 there were some uh investments as well
13:26 that were done by uh the Karibare uh project,
13:29 which included some schools,
13:30 uh,
13:31 uh,
13:31 clinics,
13:31 uh,
13:32 but
13:33 not so significant
13:35 that uh it would turn heads.
13:37 Uh,
13:38 so,
13:39 Karibare is uh one of the pioneering projects,
13:42 I would say,
13:43 even around the world when it comes to carbon credit,
13:46 uh,
13:46 um,
13:47 projects.
13:48 Uh,
13:49 the key
13:51 issue in terms of impact was around revenue sharing mechanisms.
13:55 At that time,
13:57 when the project,
13:58 uh,
13:58 started,
13:59 um,
14:00 uh,
14:01 there were no,
14:02 uh,
14:02 legal or policy uh frameworks in place to,
14:06 uh,
14:06 prescribe.
14:07 Uh,
14:08 the percentages of benefit sharing.
14:10 So that
14:12 legal gap,
14:12 for example,
14:13 created problems for communities
14:16 because it resulted in the project entering into uh agreements
14:20 or the project proponents entering into agreement with the communities
14:24 and the rural district councils,
14:26 uh,
14:27 subnational uh
14:28 uh authorities,
14:30 but without the knowledge of central government.
14:33 So,
14:33 if you ask uh central government officials,
14:35 they will tell you,
14:36 even now,
14:37 uh,
14:37 yesterday,
14:38 There is an ongoing,
14:39 uh,
14:40 yesterday and today,
14:40 there's an ongoing uh carbon credits regional meeting in,
14:44 in,
14:44 in,
14:44 in Victoria Falls in Zimbabwe.
14:47 And the,
14:47 the director um
14:49 uh of the climate change department indicated that we
14:52 were not aware of uh the Kalibare project.
14:56 It's because uh central government was not involved in the project,
15:00 but it was at the local authority or local level where things were happening.
15:05 So
15:06 that shows that the access to information even for government officials and
15:11 for communities is not adequate or at that point was not adequate
15:15 in the Karibare project,
15:17 which led the government of Zimbabwe to cancel
15:20 all projects.
15:21 They declared all carbon credit projects in Zimbabwe
15:24 null and void as a result of that.
15:28 Then the second issue is around the transparency
15:30 and accountability in terms of what was generated,
15:34 how much money went to the communities.
15:36 It's not yet clear,
15:37 but of course,
15:38 there are figures that are being
15:40 uh stated in the media and that although South Pole,
15:43 for example,
15:44 is stating in the,
15:45 in,
15:45 in the media.
15:46 But
15:47 now because of the new legislation,
15:50 all projects
15:51 that were existing
15:53 before December 2023.
15:57 are supposed to reapply.
15:59 Uh,
15:59 so.
16:01 Uh,
16:01 once a project reapplies,
16:03 uh,
16:04 for
16:05 authorization,
16:07 uh,
16:07 they are supposed to also indicate,
16:10 uh,
16:11 the financial statements,
16:13 how much money did they generate,
16:14 which communities did they,
16:16 uh,
16:16 support,
16:16 and so forth and so on.
16:18 I'm sure if the project is to move forward
16:21 with the uh the new uh
16:24 project developers,
16:26 they will definitely have to supply that information.
16:29 So just a quick rundown of some of the,
16:32 the,
16:32 the impacts,
16:33 uh,
16:33 definitely in terms of uh revenue sharing,
16:36 it wasn't uh uh good.
16:38 Transparency and accountability issues uh were also problematic.
16:42 Access to information
16:44 and public participation uh within the communities for,
16:47 for them to understand that,
16:49 that the project was not uh really,
16:52 really done well.
16:53 Um,
16:54 however,
16:55 It also reviewed some of the problems with the uh the methodologies
17:00 that are being used uh when it comes to carbon credits.
17:03 And I'm sure
17:05 a lot of other uh validation,
17:08 verification,
17:09 and certification groups are
17:11 uh reworking uh methodologies and a lot
17:14 of standards being developed after learning from,
17:16 from Zimbabwe.
17:18 So I,
17:18 I think that is an opportunity
17:20 for uh the carbon market um
17:24 uh uh sector.
17:25 To really and closely look at community safeguards and the
17:30 uh other lessons that we can learn from there.
17:33 But we can say so much about the Kariba Red such that one
17:37 person from Texas said the Kariba Red Project is a,
17:41 a big hat,
17:43 uh but no cattle.
17:44 Uh,
17:44 it's a,
17:45 it's a Texas uh saying,
17:47 big hat,
17:48 no cattle,
17:48 which means a big name.
17:50 But no benefits to the local community.
17:53 So,
17:54 I think that's how they treated it.
17:55 But
17:56 for me,
17:56 I think there are opportunities based on what we have learned from Zimbabwe.
18:02 The first,
18:03 uh being uh revising methodologies and making sure that the communities benefit.
18:08 The second is ensuring that there's transparency and accountability
18:12 when it comes to um uh carbon credit projects.
18:16 The third one being that government,
18:19 for example,
18:20 uh,
18:20 has to develop legislative frameworks that can
18:25 promote safeguards for the local communities.
18:28 And I'm sure
18:29 even now as we speak,
18:31 a lot of African states seem to be afraid to legislate because
18:36 you never know if what you are going to
18:38 legislate will scare away the investors or not.
18:41 And whether
18:42 if you protect communities too much,
18:44 you may not attract investments.
18:46 But if you also uh uh protect investments too much,
18:50 communities will be disgruntled.
18:52 So there has to be a balance,
18:53 and I think this is very,
18:54 very critical.
18:55 We are learning it from Zimbabwe.
18:57 I don't want to take a lot of time,
18:58 yeah,
18:59 but thanks.
19:00 Thank you so much,
19:01 Shamiso.
19:02 So in both of these cases,
19:03 the scale of these projects is significant.
19:07 We're talking about 2 million hectares in Kenya,
19:09 nearly 800,000 hectares for this project in Zimbabwe,
19:14 massive
19:15 um in terms of the land area they cover.
19:17 Again,
19:17 some,
19:18 some benefits,
19:18 but major issues around how communities are involved,
19:22 level of transparency,
19:24 participation in decision making,
19:25 and then ultimately,
19:27 what benefits,
19:27 what revenue is flowing to them.
19:29 Um,
19:30 and in both cases,
19:31 so these have both been very high profile projects
19:34 and issues,
19:35 um,
19:36 exactly around this point around community rights and community involvement
19:40 led to um obstacles to operations.
19:42 So the project in Kenya was put on hold
19:45 while this concern around FPIC was investigated and ultimately
19:50 the Kariba Red project in Zimbabwe was canceled by the government.
19:52 So
19:54 they have important impacts ultimately on
19:56 whether these projects are successful as well.
19:59 I want to pick up on,
20:00 we will
20:00 come to the question of how can we imagine
20:03 frameworks specifically on carbon policy,
20:06 but before we do that,
20:07 I want to pick up Shamiso's point about.
20:10 Protections and legislation and looking actually at what already exists,
20:14 so land policy um as an important space where there are
20:18 protections set out um for
20:21 community land rights and what what can we draw on there
20:23 and so I'm gonna take us to Sierra Leone now
20:26 um
20:27 with Doctor Alpha Joe Cham.
20:29 Um,
20:29 who
20:30 is with the Ministry of Lands and is leading a project right now to implement the,
20:35 um,
20:35 customary Land Rights Act that was passed in 2022,
20:39 and Doctor Chan would like to ask
20:41 what,
20:41 what protections for community rights are set out
20:44 in existing land laws and how can that be
20:47 a first point of reference and a guide when we think about
20:51 how carbon credit projects operate.
20:54 Yeah,
20:54 thank you very much.
20:55 And again,
20:56 thanks to Lomati for the invitation.
20:58 Um.
21:01 Yes,
21:03 in carbon markets,
21:05 you know,
21:06 they are new in Sierra Leone.
21:09 But there are a few of them really
21:12 operating.
21:14 At the moment,
21:15 we do not have specific
21:18 policy or regulation that targets,
21:21 you know,
21:21 carbon
21:22 projects
21:24 in Sierra Leone.
21:25 However,
21:27 we have existing
21:28 laws
21:30 and regulations that actually
21:32 regulate
21:34 large scale land investment in Sierra Leone.
21:37 So we've started this,
21:39 we started that reform process
21:41 with the establishment or
21:43 the development of the national alarm policy in
21:47 2015.
21:49 And um
21:50 we've been able to move
21:52 from that point to develop two
21:56 laws,
21:56 primary laws,
21:57 which are the National Land Commission Act to provide an institutional framework
22:02 for effective land management
22:04 under general law as well as under customary law.
22:08 And at the same time,
22:09 we've been able to
22:12 Enact the Customary Land Rights Act that provide
22:15 to a large extent
22:17 adequate safeguards,
22:21 grievance red mechanisms,
22:23 you know,
22:23 that will protect community and family rights
22:27 and,
22:27 and
22:29 And we're also
22:30 um um
22:32 in the process of even developing more
22:35 new land laws
22:36 that will provide much stronger,
22:38 you know,
22:39 protections,
22:40 you know,
22:40 for land community rights as well as community
22:43 rights under customary law and general law.
22:46 And um
22:47 the customary land rights,
22:49 I'll just go briefly through some of the protections
22:53 that are within that
22:57 within that act.
22:58 um.
23:00 The first one is the free prior and informed consent,
23:03 and that is very key.
23:04 Um,
23:06 if you have to
23:08 utilize
23:10 natural resources of communities,
23:12 they should be at the center
23:14 of the whole process.
23:16 That means
23:17 they should be able to give informed consent,
23:20 you know,
23:20 to any investment in their community
23:24 to ensure that their rights are protected.
23:27 As well as that they
23:29 gain the benefit,
23:31 you know,
23:31 from such investment.
23:33 And and some of the requirements
23:35 for free,
23:36 prior and informed consents,
23:37 one,
23:39 there should be at least 60%
23:41 of the male of
23:43 male and female adult members
23:46 of either the family who owns owns the land or the community.
23:52 And um,
23:54 And the investor should be in a position to provide adequate information
24:00 on the investment,
24:02 on the scope of the investment,
24:04 the management plan,
24:05 and in a format that communities can understand
24:10 such an investment,
24:11 what the impacts are,
24:12 and what the benefits are.
24:14 So those are requirements for,
24:16 you know,
24:16 for a free,
24:17 prior and informed consent.
24:19 And um
24:20 government may also provide legal
24:23 support to this community so that they understand what kind of
24:27 legal agreement they're entering into.
24:29 Um,
24:30 and
24:31 um
24:32 social consent again should be written.
24:39 And,
24:39 and
24:40 properly documented,
24:42 uh,
24:42 so that uh before such an agreement is signed
24:46 between communities and investors,
24:48 um,
24:49 the investors should be able to
24:51 provide that evidence
24:52 of consent,
24:53 written consent by the communities.
24:58 And so,
24:59 so that's one of the,
25:00 the,
25:00 the,
25:00 the,
25:02 the,
25:02 the
25:03 safeguards within,
25:05 within the customary Land Rights Act.
25:07 There are other safeguards um
25:09 provided which,
25:11 which are one,
25:12 a fair market compensation in the case of
25:15 loss of crops
25:17 or the lease of um
25:19 um.
25:21 The the
25:21 the the lease of the land
25:24 um
25:25 within within this community.
25:27 There are also provisions for the
25:30 development or the establishment of grievance redress mechanisms
25:33 at the national level,
25:35 the chiefdom level,
25:36 and the village
25:38 and the village level
25:39 to address,
25:40 you know,
25:40 any issues around dispute,
25:42 you know,
25:43 between communities and,
25:45 and,
25:45 um,
25:46 investors.
25:48 Um,
25:50 another,
25:50 another interesting thing,
25:51 another interesting provision,
25:52 um,
25:54 uh,
25:55 is the,
25:56 um,
25:57 Sharescom shares.
25:59 Um,
26:02 investment,
26:03 large scale investment,
26:04 foreign investment
26:06 should provide at least
26:07 10% of shares
26:09 to civil unions
26:11 with a priority to
26:14 community
26:15 owners,
26:16 landowners.
26:18 So this is to ensure that
26:20 Um,
26:21 that communities or families,
26:23 landowning families enjoy the benefit
26:25 of social investment,
26:27 right?
26:28 So they have a right,
26:29 you know,
26:30 to at least 10%
26:32 of the shares of foreign investment.
26:34 Um,
26:35 there are also limitations on how much land
26:38 you can acquire for any single investment,
26:41 uh,
26:41 so that we don't want to see a situation where a
26:44 company will come in and acquire almost all the land within
26:48 within the community without.
26:49 Um,
26:51 making sure there are adequate provision for all the
26:54 uses for the community.
26:56 And so we have um
26:59 a maximum of 15,000 hectares for
27:02 agricultural purposes,
27:03 and then you have 10 10,000 for mining,
27:07 and then 5000 hectares for any other,
27:10 you know,
27:11 investment.
27:11 So those are
27:12 limitations in size,
27:15 but also there's a limitation on the number of years you can you can lease,
27:19 uh,
27:19 socialize,
27:20 um.
27:22 Um,
27:24 acquisitions,
27:25 um,
27:27 the,
27:27 the,
27:29 uh,
27:29 the maximum
27:30 number of years is 50 years,
27:32 which you can renew,
27:33 you know,
27:33 for another 21 years.
27:35 So those are limitations and safeguards to ensure
27:38 we are in a position to really protect
27:41 the rights of community and families.
27:44 Um.
27:47 Also,
27:48 the protection of natural resources is also key.
27:52 Um,
27:53 Community shall adopt and enforce rules,
27:55 you know,
27:56 for the sustainable use of the natural resources,
27:58 which will include rules governing or outlawing
28:01 extraction of natural resources.
28:06 And then um.
28:09 The
28:12 Yeah,
28:12 so,
28:13 so those are the um
28:15 The key,
28:16 um,
28:16 there are so many more,
28:17 but I'm not going to all of that,
28:19 but those are the key,
28:20 uh,
28:20 protections,
28:21 um,
28:22 uh,
28:22 within
28:23 the,
28:24 the Customer Land Rights Act
28:26 to ensure that uh we are able to,
28:29 you know,
28:31 protect their rights.
28:32 At the same time,
28:33 ensure that,
28:34 um,
28:35 they benefit directly,
28:37 you know,
28:37 from socialized skill investment in,
28:40 in Sierra Leone.
28:41 Thank you.
28:43 Thank you so much Doctor Cham.
28:45 We were hearing,
28:46 as Eileen and Shamiso were telling us,
28:48 um,
28:48 these examples of carbon credit projects on the ground,
28:51 how important FPIC is,
28:53 and I think the examples you were just sharing of
28:56 it,
28:56 how this shows up in policy in Sierra Leone
28:58 get very concrete,
29:00 um,
29:00 not just what is this as a norm,
29:01 but what does it take to make it real,
29:03 and so that's incredibly helpful to hear.
29:05 And then one other thing I will highlight,
29:07 really,
29:08 what the Customary Land Rights Act is doing in Sierra Leone,
29:11 it's
29:12 um ensuring that investment,
29:13 foreign investment is supporting local development.
29:16 And so a paradigm shift there and just to highlight one example that you mentioned,
29:20 this idea that there is co-ownership,
29:21 a level of co-ownership by Sierra Leoneans
29:24 with priority to local landowners,
29:26 that is,
29:27 um.
29:29 And,
29:29 and I think a really important,
29:31 uh,
29:31 innovation and points in the direction of how do we make these projects
29:35 work for local livelihoods and then for the national development of the places,
29:39 uh,
29:39 where they are taking place.
29:40 So just a couple of things I wanted to pull out in what you shared,
29:43 um,
29:44 staying on this question of how can land policy.
29:48 Be a point of reference for protecting
29:50 community rights um as nature-based investments unfold.
29:53 I,
29:53 I'd like to take us back to Kenya.
29:55 Eileen,
29:55 one of the things you were mentioning as
29:57 you were telling us about the soil carbon project
29:59 had to do with um.
30:01 Structures,
30:02 local land governance structures and whether or not the project is working
30:07 um with the entities that are recognized under law.
30:09 We'd love for you to tell us a bit more about that and how you see,
30:13 again,
30:13 what,
30:13 what is in the land policy offering important guidance.
30:18 Um,
30:18 thanks,
30:18 Erin.
30:19 So as briefly mentioned,
30:20 Kenya did enact a Community Land Act in 2016.
30:24 And what the Act does is,
30:25 it is,
30:25 is first recognizes customary land rights,
30:28 but also provides a framework
30:29 that communities can use to be able to register their lands.
30:33 So quite a good step,
30:34 I mean,
30:34 a step in the right direction in terms of ensuring
30:36 that tenure rights for communities
30:38 are secured.
30:40 Um,
30:41 the
30:41 Community Land Act introduces two key structures.
30:45 The first one being the community assembly,
30:47 which is
30:48 members of that community.
30:49 And that's
30:50 like a key governance structure
30:51 that should approve every
30:54 project in the community.
30:55 And then there is another structure which
30:57 is the Community land Management Committee.
30:59 Those are elected to support day to day running of,
31:02 um,
31:02 you know,
31:03 uh,
31:03 affairs of the community land.
31:05 And
31:05 an interesting safeguard that the Community Land Act introduces
31:09 is that
31:10 for any
31:11 project
31:11 to be approved,
31:13 it needs to go to the assembly,
31:14 um,
31:15 and introduces a threshold.
31:17 So at least 2/3
31:18 of the community assembly needs to approve a project,
31:22 um,
31:22 you know,
31:23 to,
31:23 to,
31:23 to come to that,
31:24 to the community.
31:25 Now,
31:25 this is like a
31:26 clear,
31:27 good shift from,
31:28 um,
31:29 an era where just
31:30 a few people would make decisions on behalf of the entire community.
31:34 And in many cases,
31:35 a lot,
31:35 a lot of these decisions were detrimental to the community.
31:38 And so,
31:39 that,
31:39 um,
31:40 safeguard is extremely important
31:42 in ensuring that
31:44 Um,
31:44 the larger community has
31:46 overall say
31:48 on the projects that they want in the community.
31:50 Now,
31:50 of course,
31:51 um,
31:52 you know,
31:52 2016,
31:53 2024,
31:55 you know,
31:55 a few years down the line,
31:56 we're still having challenges in terms of ensuring
31:58 that the act is implemented in a way
32:00 that genuinely
32:02 ensures that these rights are safeguarded in communities,
32:04 and there are a number of challenges,
32:06 um,
32:06 that are existing in terms of ensuring that this is rolled out.
32:10 Um,
32:10 in November,
32:11 we did do an audit of how far we've gone in terms of securing tenure rights in Kenya.
32:16 Um,
32:16 and the Community Land Act provides for a process to be able to secure
32:21 largely two categories of lands that are communally owned.
32:24 And these are former group branches for those that understand the context.
32:27 So previously,
32:28 Kenya had group ranches.
32:29 And so communities,
32:30 pastoral communities largely will come together
32:32 and register as groups.
32:34 And then we had trust lands,
32:35 which were lands that were
32:36 largely held in trust by the
32:38 county councils,
32:39 also sort of county structures than in the previous
32:43 constitutional dispensation.
32:44 Now,
32:45 we,
32:45 in our audit,
32:46 we focused just on one,
32:47 which is the group ranches.
32:49 And the group ranches needed to transition from
32:51 The group branches to community land in compliance with the Community Land Act.
32:55 And I think our statistics were about 14% thereabout.
32:59 So about,
33:00 you know,
33:00 almost
33:01 8 years down the line,
33:02 just about 14% of group ranches have transitioned to community land.
33:06 So that ideally means that we still
33:07 have extensive community lands that are unsecured.
33:10 And yet,
33:11 the conversations around carbon rights,
33:13 carbon markets continues.
33:14 And so,
33:15 in,
33:15 you know,
33:15 communities are finding themselves to be finding
33:18 themselves in spaces that they have to interface
33:21 with project proponents
33:22 in a context where the itinerary rights itself is not secured.
33:26 And so that in itself does not create a fair playing field for communities to
33:29 effectively,
33:30 um,
33:31 you know,
33:31 negotiate with,
33:32 um,
33:33 with,
33:33 with,
33:33 with project proponents.
33:35 However,
33:35 I think
33:36 if
33:37 we are able to implement the Community Land Act as
33:39 envisioned and ensuring that the structures that are in place,
33:42 the community land management committees
33:44 and the assembly
33:46 and all decisions are passed through the assembly,
33:48 then we are likely to see,
33:50 um,
33:51 a more robust,
33:53 free prior and informed consent that brings together every
33:56 community along in,
33:57 in,
33:58 in,
33:58 in,
33:58 uh,
33:58 in,
33:58 in,
33:59 in carbon,
34:00 um,
34:00 market
34:01 projects in,
34:01 in the country.
34:03 Um.
34:04 I think the other interesting thing is,
34:06 um,
34:07 we've moved and
34:08 amended our climate,
34:09 um,
34:10 Climate Change Act to be able to provide a framework
34:13 to,
34:14 um,
34:14 you know,
34:15 guide how carbon markets should operate.
34:17 And I think
34:18 we should be among a few countries that have gone ahead to be able to provide,
34:22 um,
34:22 a framework,
34:23 a legal framework for carbon markets.
34:25 Now,
34:26 whether,
34:26 you know,
34:27 sometimes I think the rush is
34:29 the urgency to have a framework to be able to govern carbon markets.
34:33 And sometimes in the rush to be able to put in place these markets,
34:37 then we've got,
34:37 we find ourselves compromising a number of key things,
34:40 um,
34:40 that at the end of the day hurt
34:42 or have huge implications to communities.
34:44 And one of them is
34:45 ensuring sink.
34:46 I mean,
34:47 you have the Community Land Act that has clear provisions
34:50 on how community lands should be managed.
34:52 And then you have an amendment to the Climate Act.
34:55 That fails to provide that sync and
34:57 connection with lands that are communally owned.
35:00 And so,
35:00 at the end of the day,
35:02 you find a lot of centralization of functions,
35:05 um,
35:05 that should otherwise
35:07 involve communities back to the state.
35:09 Um,
35:10 I mean,
35:11 carbon,
35:11 carbon markets provide opportunities and everybody's seeing the opportunities,
35:15 including the state.
35:16 And so you find states,
35:17 as someone said yesterday,
35:18 being regulators,
35:19 but also having an interest in these markets.
35:21 And so how then
35:23 these legislations are being enacted.
35:25 Reflects the complexities of a regulator,
35:28 but also as an interested parties.
35:29 And so a lot of centralization
35:31 of functions,
35:33 um,
35:34 and,
35:34 and,
35:34 you know,
35:35 still seeing communities purely as
35:37 beneficiaries and not necessarily as core
35:41 parties to this carbon projects.
35:43 Um,
35:44 you know,
35:44 it's still something that we're seeing within the legal frameworks that,
35:47 that,
35:47 that are in place.
35:51 Thank you Eileen.
35:51 So that's an important frontier that communities
35:53 really need to be seen as partners,
35:56 um,
35:56 in these projects,
35:57 not merely beneficiaries.
35:59 An important
36:00 message,
36:00 um,
36:01 that we're hearing across all of these places that Eileen spoke to as well
36:04 is that really as a precondition we need to be recognizing community tenure rights.
36:08 That has to be the starting point,
36:10 um,
36:10 if we are serious about free,
36:12 prior and informed consent,
36:14 um,
36:15 and then one other thing I will just highlight that uh was mentioned,
36:18 um.
36:19 Is the importance of alignment between national policy on land,
36:23 conservation and climate.
36:24 Those have to be speaking to each other,
36:26 need to be working together rather than in um
36:29 potentially contradictory directions.
36:31 So,
36:31 another important element.
36:32 We've had a chance to hear,
36:33 to think about it from a community perspective,
36:36 um,
36:36 hear from civil society groups that are working with communities to respond.
36:40 Also what this is looking like from,
36:42 uh,
36:42 government and Ministry of
36:43 Lands perspective.
36:44 I'd like to pass it now to Nitia Sunil,
36:47 who's the director of legal
36:49 ESG.
36:50 And policy for West Africa Blue.
36:53 So,
36:53 to tell us a bit more,
36:54 why is this important,
36:56 um,
36:56 from the perspective of a project developer?
36:59 Um,
36:59 what,
36:59 what role does clear policy,
37:01 what role does uh protection for community rights have?
37:04 And how do you see national policy playing into that?
37:08 Thank you so much,
37:09 Erin.
37:09 Nice to meet everyone in the room as well.
37:12 Um,
37:12 I'm working,
37:13 uh,
37:13 with our company.
37:14 We're developing a community-led,
37:16 uh,
37:17 carbon project in Sierra Leone.
37:19 Uh,
37:20 we have other projects in West Africa as well.
37:22 Our focus really is on designing and co-designing projects with communities.
37:27 Uh,
37:27 I'll speak a little bit about our project in Sierra Leone where we,
37:31 it's a conservation and restoration project focused on mangroves,
37:35 and,
37:35 um.
37:36 Um,
37:37 I'll just go into,
37:38 should I go into the Fic steps now,
37:40 or?
37:41 All right.
37:42 OK.
37:43 Sure,
37:43 so,
37:43 uh,
37:44 what I will cover is what it really means,
37:47 uh,
37:48 in implementing FPIC on the ground and what are the steps that we have taken,
37:52 uh,
37:53 to ensure that we are respectful of the laws that Sierra Leone has brought out,
37:56 which specifically prescribes FPIC
37:59 and what that does look like on the ground for a project like ours.
38:04 So I just have a couple of slides,
38:05 uh.
38:08 Sorry,
38:08 am I
38:09 supposed to be directing it?
38:13 I was working
38:16 Any notes for us on the clicker?
38:18 Sorry.
38:19 OK.
38:21 I'll start with,
38:22 uh,
38:22 some of the key points that we are sort of focusing on in our approach to FPIC.
38:28 First and foremost is
38:30 extensive and scale up.
38:32 Now you can't have a process where
38:36 you just have a couple of meetings,
38:38 only a few leaders attend,
38:40 and then we decide to go to the,
38:42 uh,
38:42 sign an agreement.
38:44 But the way we've sort of approached implementing EPIC,
38:47 and as you can see on that is
38:49 a map of only phase one of our project,
38:51 where we have covered over 127 villages,
38:56 where we've gone to each of these villages personally,
38:59 and we've conducted workshops.
39:01 So we've told communities,
39:03 so it's about.
39:05 We've had 10+ town hall meetings.
39:07 We've engaged with more than 5 paramount chiefs.
39:10 We've had leaders meetings where 100+ local leaders
39:14 have come to certain spots for meetings and workshops.
39:17 We've covered about 100+ kilometers,
39:20 123+ villages.
39:22 We've covered about 3500 community members
39:26 during our workshops.
39:27 The workshops have been done in three languages,
39:30 that's Cherbro,
39:31 Mende,
39:31 and Creole.
39:32 So I think one.
39:33 The key points is,
39:35 where do,
39:36 where do we start with disclosure of information and sharing of project details,
39:41 and I think the where can't be just a few spots in the big cities of your project area,
39:47 but it needs to be extensive enough to sort of
39:50 percolate to the levels of the villages where
39:52 you are engaging communities beyond just leadership as well.
39:56 So that's sort of our first approach to FPIC.
40:00 The second one is.
40:06 Second one is community outreach,
40:08 that's awareness building and information disclosure
40:11 is really what,
40:12 what are you disclosing to communities?
40:15 So we've sort of approached it by designing over 7 modules.
40:20 Um,
40:20 our 1st 3 modules are on topics like what is climate change,
40:25 uh,
40:25 why are mangroves important and how does it help all of us,
40:29 and what is a carbon credit or a carbon project.
40:32 Once these 3 modules are completed,
40:35 we then go on to a module 4,
40:37 which is really,
40:38 OK,
40:38 we've given you a lot of details,
40:40 but what,
40:41 what do you think as communities?
40:43 So,
40:44 Why do you think deforestation is happening?
40:47 What do you identify as the drivers of deforestation?
40:50 So to get the community's perspectives on what are the drivers of deforestation,
40:55 what are the preferences and benefits,
40:57 what types of activities or alternatives do you
41:00 need to get that perspective from communities?
41:03 And then our module 5 focuses on
41:06 project information.
41:07 What is this?
41:07 Project about?
41:09 What are the roles of the communities?
41:11 What are the roles of the project developer?
41:13 What are the roles of the different institutions in place?
41:16 What are the risks?
41:17 What are the challenges?
41:19 What does it all come down to?
41:20 Are you going to sign an agreement?
41:22 What is a benefit share agreement?
41:24 So what does the whole process look like?
41:26 So that's,
41:27 that's really the what,
41:28 what is
41:29 that you're disclosing to communities?
41:31 And the next point is um.
41:37 Is that the FPIC process needs to be iterative,
41:40 so our policy has really been consult,
41:43 pilot,
41:44 and adapt.
41:45 Now this is really the how.
41:47 Now you know what to disclose,
41:48 you know where to go,
41:49 you know whom your target audience is,
41:51 but how do you do it?
41:53 So
41:54 our approach.
41:54 Really has been you need to co-design with communities,
41:57 but that's not just about your modules or your workshops,
42:01 but what are the project activities going to be?
42:04 Do the community communities even want these project activities?
42:08 Is it a sustainable option for them?
42:10 Are these viable alternatives for them?
42:13 So
42:13 really work with communities.
42:15 So in one of those pictures,
42:17 uh,
42:17 what we've identified along with the communities is that
42:20 communities use a lot of mangrove firewood for cooking.
42:24 But
42:25 communities need to cook.
42:27 So how do we come up with a solution or an alternative?
42:31 So here in one of the pictures,
42:32 one of our coordinators is helping measure the amount of firewood,
42:36 uh,
42:36 one of the ladies use every day.
42:39 So you can see them measuring it and the community is able to see it.
42:43 And then we work with communities to sort of design a cook stove
42:47 or a cleaner cooking or a more efficient cooking method.
42:50 So we've one part of our project activity is
42:52 we've worked with communities using locally available materials,
42:57 and the women themselves have built certain cook stoves.
43:01 We've iterated the design.
43:03 Some of them wanted bigger size because they wanted to be able to cook in bigger pots.
43:08 So over a period of several months we've
43:11 Piloted certain cook stoves,
43:13 made changes,
43:14 adapted it based on the requirements of the communities,
43:17 and then sort of,
43:17 uh,
43:18 now we're trying to see if this is a viable option that more households can take up.
43:22 So that's part of our project activity.
43:24 So discuss alternatives such that
43:27 it helps address the trade-offs because ultimately
43:30 communities are going to be giving up a lot
43:33 if they are participating in a carbon project.
43:36 So the alternatives need to make long term.
43:39 Um,
43:39 solutions for communities,
43:41 uh,
43:42 the next sort of approach is,
43:44 and I think our biggest asset really is
43:47 our entire FPIC process
43:49 is led by local teams.
43:51 We don't have people from outside,
43:54 from outside Sierra Leone,
43:55 or even from
43:56 Freetown,
43:57 the capital city,
43:58 going into.
43:59 Our project areas for the workshops.
44:02 We've
44:03 taken,
44:04 we've spent a lot of time
44:06 in training
44:07 community members who are from the project areas on everything about the project.
44:12 So they are able to go out to these communities and
44:15 the different villages and talk about the project with our communities.
44:19 So over a period,
44:20 and RFP process has been long,
44:22 it's been 2 years now.
44:23 So we've had 11 community coordinators representing different chiefdoms.
44:28 We've had 20+ community facilitators who are able to
44:31 facilitate workshops and training in 3 different local languages.
44:36 We have 10+ cluster representatives who've been able
44:39 to do leaders' meetings in different clusters.
44:42 We have 270
44:44 cook stove captains who are helping us design a cleaner cooking solution.
44:48 And 90 Woodlots attendees who was helping us think through
44:51 the types of alternatives in terms of seeds and other options that we can use
44:56 to provide community woodlots and alternatives,
44:59 uh,
44:59 and,
44:59 and it's been really excellent because
45:01 the community members have helped us sort of iterate the.
45:03 Process.
45:04 They said,
45:04 OK,
45:05 your
45:05 workshops are good,
45:06 123 is good,
45:07 but we need more infographics.
45:09 We need calendars with like pictures of mangroves or saying why we
45:12 should be preserving mangroves that needs to be part of your curriculum.
45:16 And that way we've been able to sort of make changes and,
45:19 uh,
45:20 adapt our modules.
45:22 And sort of our last point,
45:24 uh,
45:24 and is really that
45:26 FPIC is not a one and done exercise.
45:29 Uh,
45:30 there are certain,
45:31 uh,
45:31 trigger points,
45:32 uh,
45:32 in the FBIC process,
45:34 like,
45:34 for example,
45:35 uh,
45:35 at some point you need to have some
45:37 indication whether the communities even want to participate.
45:41 At some point,
45:42 there is going to be an agreement signing.
45:44 And there's going to be a point where project activities are going to be selected,
45:48 so there are different trigger points,
45:50 uh,
45:51 in the EPIC process,
45:52 but that doesn't mean that the process ends,
45:55 uh,
45:55 and communities themselves have said we
45:57 need to conduct ongoing sensitization workshops.
46:00 We need to be going back into communities,
46:02 ensuring that there are
46:04 repetitive meetings,
46:05 uh,
46:06 fixed times,
46:06 fixed places where people can meet
46:08 and talk about the project and ensure that there are strong feed feedback
46:12 loops that are created.
46:14 Long after all of the initial education,
46:17 awareness
46:18 and outreach activities.
46:20 And really,
46:21 I think ultimately our FPI policy really has been
46:25 that local communities need to be at the front and center of the project.
46:29 And that's really how we've been trying to think through the project and
46:32 that's really one of the reasons why our FPIC process has taken about
46:36 two long years.
46:37 And like I said,
46:38 the 123 villages and the 3500 people that we've
46:41 covered is only phase one of our project.
46:45 Uh,
46:45 thanks,
46:46 and,
46:46 uh,
46:46 I think in terms of just national policy and legislation,
46:50 uh,
46:50 really,
46:51 I think just supporting what Eileen and Dr.
46:54 Cham also said
46:55 is that
46:57 there are a lot of progressive changes that are happening in local laws,
47:00 providing customary rights,
47:02 providing land tenure rights,
47:04 and um
47:05 I think if climate policies are and the Article 6 framework are built in such a way
47:11 that you incentivize even the local infrastructure of these new.
47:14 Progressive changes to land laws,
47:16 there's an incentive for them to be strengthened.
47:19 It can go hand in hand with Article 6.
47:21 So,
47:22 as Erin also said,
47:24 the climate policy and land laws need to align because that's the easiest
47:29 and most clear way to create a direct link
47:32 between the benefits of a carbon project and the
47:35 communities who are so central to these projects.
47:39 Thank you.
47:40 Thank you so much,
47:41 Nita.
47:42 So a very detailed view of what if we're taking FPIC seriously,
47:46 what does that actually require?
47:48 So an iterative long term process of rooted engagement,
47:52 I think also a great example of going
47:55 from what often is treated merely as consultation,
47:57 so inviting communities to one or two meetings
48:00 to a much deeper view of co-design of how really,
48:03 as Nia said,
48:04 communities can be
48:05 at the center of the project,
48:06 and I think something
48:08 um.
48:09 That is,
48:09 is useful again here is
48:11 this is.
48:12 This is not incidental,
48:13 it's actually crucial.
48:14 It is crucial from a rights perspective.
48:16 It's also crucial to the success of any of these projects.
48:19 And so I think a wonderful job highlighting that.
48:22 Um,
48:22 well,
48:23 coming back then
48:25 to thinking about how do we integrate all of this into policy
48:28 that is specifically focused on climate goals and on carbon trading.
48:33 Um,
48:33 there are some examples as,
48:34 as we said this.
48:36 Rapidly across,
48:37 particularly in the African continent but certainly seeing examples in Asia,
48:41 Latin America,
48:42 and elsewhere,
48:43 national legislation is being developed very quickly,
48:46 um,
48:46 and so what can we learn from
48:49 emerging legislation,
48:50 uh,
48:50 will take us first to Kenya
48:53 to hear about
48:55 what we see in the policy which Eileen was mentioning earlier,
48:58 the amendment to the Climate Change Act.
49:00 What do we see and how does it compare to
49:02 some of the important principles that we've been surfacing.
49:05 Um,
49:05 for projects to be successful and to center community rights.
49:11 Uh,
49:11 thanks,
49:11 Erin.
49:12 So,
49:13 we enacted the Climate
49:15 Change Amendment Act in 2023.
49:18 And it was um.
49:20 An interesting time because Kenya was hosting the Africa Climate Summit.
49:23 And so we needed to have
49:25 that legislation in place before the summit,
49:27 um,
49:27 to be able to show the continent how well we're doing.
49:31 And so,
49:31 of course,
49:31 that meant the speed at which we enacted that particular legislation.
49:35 Um,
49:36 was kind of
49:37 spurred by the summit.
49:38 Um,
49:39 and so
49:40 the
49:40 whole process of ensuring that the legislation was consultative,
49:44 um,
49:45 wasn't properly done.
49:46 Um,
49:47 I think
49:48 we had calls,
49:48 I mean,
49:49 the state had calls to make submissions on the,
49:52 by the 3 I think 30th of August and by 1st of September,
49:56 the
49:56 president signed the,
49:58 um,
49:59 The law,
49:59 I mean,
50:00 the,
50:00 the,
50:00 the,
50:00 the bill into um an act of parliament.
50:03 Um,
50:04 and so,
50:05 A number of interesting things are reflected in,
50:08 in,
50:08 in,
50:09 in the,
50:10 the,
50:10 the act,
50:10 and there are still efforts to be able to put in place the regulations.
50:13 Um,
50:14 there's,
50:14 there's been at least more time that's been given to regulations and the
50:17 regulations are still in draft and a lot of consultations are happening.
50:21 But as you know,
50:21 you don't cure a bad act uh by regulations.
50:24 And so,
50:24 there's still a number of,
50:26 um,
50:26 unfortunate things that have found themselves in the,
50:28 in the act
50:29 that might not necessarily be cured by the regulations.
50:32 So the,
50:33 among the interesting things that the Act provides is,
50:35 um,
50:37 um,
50:37 so it classifies
50:38 carbon projects,
50:39 um,
50:40 whether they are land-based or non land-based.
50:42 And they do provide for,
50:44 um,
50:45 at least for land-based uh uh carbon projects that
50:48 at least 40% should go into community development projects.
50:51 However,
50:52 it introduces,
50:53 um,
50:55 State as the core negotiator for even land-based projects.
50:59 And so,
51:00 you know,
51:01 like at the moment,
51:02 the um carbon project that I talked about,
51:04 communities have had a chance to
51:06 interact and engage with the project proponent.
51:09 Um,
51:12 Sorry.
51:13 So,
51:14 so the communities have had a chance to interact with the
51:17 project proponent because the contract is between
51:19 communities and the project proponents.
51:21 But then reflecting on what's happening now in the act,
51:25 uh,
51:25 the act introduces a state
51:27 and equally introduces a number of structures that
51:29 the state will be putting in place.
51:32 Some of these structures replace the community's
51:34 ability to directly interface with the,
51:36 um,
51:37 project proponents.
51:38 Um,
51:39 and so,
51:40 When,
51:40 when you centralize the um
51:43 carbon market projects,
51:44 um,
51:46 you know,
51:46 it,
51:47 it becomes a little more difficult for communities to be able to then,
51:49 um,
51:50 you know,
51:50 negotiate and,
51:51 and,
51:51 and,
51:51 and,
51:51 and get
51:53 what would be
51:54 better deals for them.
51:56 Um,
51:56 the other thing I think that's,
51:58 I think I highlighted this is a
52:00 a missed link
52:01 between
52:02 being able to acknowledge what is provided for within the Community Land Act,
52:05 which is,
52:06 you know,
52:06 ensuring that community land rights are secured
52:08 and the structures within the Community Land Act are upheld
52:12 for projects,
52:13 especially that are being done in lands that are communally owned.
52:16 And so there's definitely a missed,
52:17 um,
52:18 a total missed,
52:18 uh.
52:19 You need to be able to acknowledge those structures
52:21 and ensure that for land-based projects that are happening in community lands,
52:25 that the structures that should then be used
52:27 are those structures that are prescribed for under the Community Land Act,
52:30 which I strongly feel is,
52:31 you know,
52:31 a lot more progressive coming from a place where,
52:34 you know,
52:34 previously,
52:35 a lot of projects
52:36 were centered among just a few community leaders and did not necessarily
52:40 get approval of the larger community.
52:43 Um,
52:44 I think,
52:44 um,
52:45 the,
52:45 the,
52:45 the,
52:45 the last one is
52:47 the approval process.
52:48 Um,
52:49 So at the moment,
52:50 um,
52:51 Most carbon projects have been centered between
52:54 project proponents,
52:56 um,
52:56 and communities.
52:58 Without necessarily the approval of the state.
53:00 So at the moment now,
53:01 the com the
53:03 Climate Change Amendment Act introduces
53:05 the cabinet secretary who's,
53:06 you know,
53:07 for,
53:07 for many countries is a Minister for Environment,
53:10 would be the person that provides licensing for all carbon,
53:13 um,
53:14 projects.
53:14 And there's going to be a process which is,
53:17 you know,
53:17 thinking
53:18 quite bureaucratic to be able to go through.
53:19 And so this could potentially,
53:22 um,
53:22 you know,
53:23 could be,
53:24 um,
53:25 a lengthy process.
53:27 And,
53:27 and lastly is,
53:27 of course,
53:29 you know,
53:29 the state also sees this as any other market,
53:31 so a space to be able to introduce taxes.
53:33 And so the state has introduced taxes both at the national level
53:36 and at the state level to be able to get resources
53:39 from carbon market projects.
53:41 And so the share that,
53:41 that goes to communities is going to be
53:44 progressively declining because
53:46 there's a share of taxes.
53:47 There are also huge bureaucratic.
53:48 Processes that are being introduced,
53:50 which,
53:51 you know,
53:51 um,
53:52 project proponents could
53:53 want to pass the burden,
53:55 um,
53:55 and,
53:55 you know,
53:56 because then project proponents also want to
53:57 ensure that they maximize their profits.
53:59 And so at the end of the day,
54:00 a lot of the costs will be passed to communities
54:03 and the,
54:04 um,
54:04 the,
54:05 the share that should then go to communities
54:06 keeps declining even for land-based uh carbon projects.
54:09 Yeah.
54:13 Thank you,
54:13 Eileen.
54:14 Um,
54:15 so
54:16 highlighting a number of important points of what needs to be considered again
54:19 if we're to maximize the opportunities and address some of the risks,
54:24 um,
54:24 I'd like to turn to Zimbabwe and some of
54:27 the lessons we're seeing from the policy there.
54:29 So Shamiso,
54:30 um,
54:30 reflections you would share
54:31 and if I,
54:32 Shamiso,
54:32 you are also involved in
54:34 Article 6 and the development of the on
54:37 the steering committee for the Sustainable Development Mechanism,
54:39 uh,
54:40 so perhaps would invite you.
54:41 Uh,
54:41 after you've
54:43 shared key reflections from Zimbabwe to draw out any connections that you see
54:47 in how Article 6,
54:49 sets
54:50 a framework or could shape discussions happening nationally.
54:54 Uh,
54:55 yeah,
54:55 thank you.
54:56 Uh,
54:56 so,
54:57 so.
54:58 What,
54:58 what Zimbabwe did
55:00 was to
55:02 address the,
55:03 the mischief
55:04 brought about by
55:06 the Karibare project.
55:08 So,
55:09 the country developed a policy framework,
55:12 the carbon credit uh uh strategy.
55:15 Then he uh
55:18 um
55:19 the
55:21 uh government also
55:23 developed the regulations
55:25 which are called the carbon credit
55:28 trading regulations.
55:30 So that's the law that now exists in Zimbabwe,
55:33 and this law
55:35 provides for authorization of all
55:39 Different categories of carbon credit markets that you can
55:42 think about whether it's the voluntary carbon credit market,
55:46 the
55:47 Article 6.2,
55:49 uh,
55:50 the Article 6.4,
55:52 uh,
55:52 or compliance uh market,
55:54 uh,
55:55 if you want.
55:56 So all those are regulated under the
55:58 uh carbon credit trading regulations.
56:01 So,
56:02 The idea was basically to make sure that government is able to authorize
56:06 and issue uh permits for those who want to trade in carbon credits.
56:11 Now,
56:12 when it comes to um
56:14 how the legislation is aligned to uh the uh carbon
56:18 justice uh principles that we have been advocating for,
56:21 I can just quickly state those carbon,
56:23 uh those uh uh principles which include,
56:26 uh,
56:27 definitely the FPIC that uh people have been talking about.
56:30 Then fair participation is very key as well as
56:33 a um climate justice or carbon justice uh concept,
56:39 then uh compensation and access to accountability.
56:42 Those are some of the critical points.
56:44 So,
56:44 if you look at the Zimbabwean legislation,
56:46 it satisfies all those elements,
56:49 but I think there are
56:51 critical gaps here and there.
56:53 So,
56:53 uh,
56:54 firstly,
56:55 uh,
56:55 if you look at uh how the legislation or the regulations are structured,
57:00 Uh,
57:01 there is what we call FFPIC is included,
57:04 and in Zimbabwe,
57:06 it is a criminal offense not to
57:08 undergo the process of FFPIC.
57:11 That is what the carbon credit,
57:13 uh,
57:14 uh,
57:14 regulations in Zimbabwe state.
57:16 If you fail
57:17 to undertake a community consultation as part of EFPIC
57:22 and ensuring that there is free prior informed consent,
57:26 It is a criminal offense.
57:28 That's
57:29 the extent to which the government in Zimbabwe um uh legislated on,
57:33 on,
57:34 on FPIC.
57:35 The second point is around the um which is um
57:40 important as well.
57:41 When it comes to fair participation of communities.
57:45 The regulations provide
57:47 for community consultation,
57:49 stakeholder consultation,
57:51 and ensuring that the local communities are
57:54 consulted when consulted whenever there is a,
57:57 a carbon credit uh
57:59 project.
58:00 However,
58:00 I think the omission in the regulations is around uh uh NGOs.
58:05 I know that the regulations,
58:07 for example,
58:07 provide for consultation of local
58:10 uh communities,
58:11 um,
58:12 the leaders
58:13 and uh other uh stakeholders,
58:16 but it omits uh uh uh civil society groups.
58:20 That's an omission that I observed
58:22 in the regulations,
58:23 which,
58:24 which may need to be re-looked at because
58:27 Uh,
58:27 local civil society groups are very critical when it
58:30 comes to protecting the rights of local communities,
58:33 and the legal empowerment tools may actually be important to look at.
58:37 So if you haven't,
58:38 don't have a situation
58:40 where the uh local NGOs may participate in that process,
58:43 I think it's a,
58:44 it's a,
58:44 it's a major omission.
58:46 Then the other element around compensation
58:48 or fair compensation in Zimbabwe's legislation
58:51 on carbon credits relates to benefit sharing.
58:54 And this has been problematic,
58:55 I think even for the private sector or for investors.
58:59 The reason being,
59:00 The government prescribed about 70% for the project developer,
59:04 which means the person who develops or a company which develops a project
59:08 gets 70% of,
59:10 of,
59:11 of the revenue.
59:12 Uh,
59:12 that's of the uh gross.
59:14 Then also,
59:15 uh,
59:16 the government
59:18 through what is called an environmental fund gets
59:21 30% of the project.
59:23 Originally,
59:24 in December 2023,
59:27 Government had indicated that 25% of the 75 of the 70%
59:33 that goes to the project developer,
59:36 25% will be allocated to communities,
59:39 and it was clearly stated in the regulations.
59:41 However,
59:42 in January,
59:43 February,
59:44 government then changed
59:45 and removed the community benefit,
59:47 the 25%.
59:49 So,
59:50 the regulations are now silent on community benefits,
59:53 and that's a major omission,
59:55 uh,
59:55 again,
59:55 or um
59:58 Uh,
59:58 so,
59:59 so
59:59 there are ongoing consultations that I know are,
1:00:02 are happening around uh revising,
1:00:05 again,
1:00:05 that,
1:00:05 uh that,
1:00:06 that element to see
1:00:08 whether the communities can benefit as well from the 30%.
1:00:12 There's a formula that is used or thresholds that are used to distribute the 30%.
1:00:17 For example,
1:00:17 part of the money goes to the uh loss and damage uh fund.
1:00:22 Part of the money goes to the treasury and other uh uh um
1:00:27 another percentage goes to the rural district councils and,
1:00:30 and so forth.
1:00:31 So that formula is there in the regulations,
1:00:34 but I think uh
1:00:35 the problematic provision is around how communities will,
1:00:38 will,
1:00:38 will benefit.
1:00:40 Um,
1:00:41 so I think uh uh government made um uh a mistake by uh removing
1:00:47 The community benefit the aluminum.
1:00:49 I,
1:00:49 maybe because there's an explanation to it.
1:00:52 I think they uh um received some resistance from the private sector.
1:00:56 We really have to be real about it
1:00:58 because companies were going to uh
1:01:01 uh be left maybe with 65% or so
1:01:05 effectively.
1:01:06 Or 55% uh effectively,
1:01:08 which uh uh maybe for,
1:01:10 for business might not have been attractive.
1:01:12 So I'm sure that's why they,
1:01:14 they ended up uh revising the,
1:01:17 the thresholds,
1:01:18 but at the detriment of
1:01:19 communities.
1:01:20 But I'm sure,
1:01:21 uh,
1:01:21 negotiations will,
1:01:22 will,
1:01:23 will help in this respect.
1:01:25 Then when it comes to accountability and redress mechanism,
1:01:28 grievance redress mechanism,
1:01:30 Mechanisms.
1:01:31 The regulations also provide for um appeals if the uh any community member
1:01:37 or uh any stakeholder
1:01:40 is not or is aggrieved by any action,
1:01:43 maybe uh of the government
1:01:46 uh or any uh
1:01:49 actor
1:01:50 in the process,
1:01:50 they can appeal against that decision uh uh to the minister.
1:01:55 There's also a provision for uh one to
1:01:58 approach the administrative court if you are aggrieved,
1:02:01 and that provides uh uh at least scope
1:02:05 for uh legal,
1:02:06 legal,
1:02:07 legal action or
1:02:08 administrative action that may be taken by any interested group.
1:02:12 Then,
1:02:13 I think like I indicated earlier on as well,
1:02:16 the issue of criminal offenses for failing to conduct
1:02:19 Uh,
1:02:20 FPIC.
1:02:21 The other
1:02:22 provision is around cancellation and suspension of projects.
1:02:26 So,
1:02:26 the regulations provide for cancellation or
1:02:28 suspension of projects in the event that
1:02:30 a company misrepresent facts
1:02:33 or uh is involved in corruption.
1:02:35 It's very clear.
1:02:36 I think the reason why they are doing that is to make
1:02:39 sure that we don't have a repeat of the allegations around uh
1:02:43 Karibared that I,
1:02:44 I mentioned earlier on,
1:02:46 and also to assure the market that at least Zimbabwe
1:02:49 has advanced when it comes to um
1:02:52 uh FPIC issues and also ensuring access to justice.
1:02:55 Now,
1:02:56 turning back to the issue of Article 6.4,
1:03:00 so I,
1:03:00 I sit in the um
1:03:03 Article 6.2 accreditation expert panel,
1:03:06 which is a newly established
1:03:09 under Article 6.4.
1:03:11 So it reports to the supervisory body um
1:03:14 of the Paris Agreement and
1:03:16 the idea is uh for us to assess
1:03:19 some of the designated operational entities or applicants.
1:03:24 That will conduct assessments.
1:03:27 So,
1:03:27 the,
1:03:28 the,
1:03:28 the issue is about ensuring that they have very good standards.
1:03:32 Uh,
1:03:32 uh,
1:03:33 2,
1:03:34 they have uh good human resources,
1:03:36 they are also in a strong financial position,
1:03:40 that they have risk-based systems and processes that they are using,
1:03:44 correct and credible methodologies.
1:03:47 So we assess all that.
1:03:49 Before
1:03:50 they are accredited.
1:03:51 So
1:03:51 I think that panel will definitely enrich the
1:03:54 work of um the supervisory body on Article 6.4
1:04:00 is uh uh um.
1:04:03 Uh,
1:04:03 the,
1:04:03 the,
1:04:04 the carbon market,
1:04:05 uh,
1:04:05 uh,
1:04:06 sector is,
1:04:07 is coming up.
1:04:08 Then the other issue to uh take note of is that
1:04:12 you might be aware that all projects that were under CDM
1:04:15 will be transitioned
1:04:17 to Article 6.4.
1:04:18 So that means there will be a lot of work,
1:04:20 uh,
1:04:21 uh,
1:04:21 to do and uh under that in terms of
1:04:25 Uh,
1:04:26 looking at how
1:04:27 VVCs,
1:04:28 uh,
1:04:29 do their work,
1:04:30 those organizations or entities that are into validation,
1:04:33 verification,
1:04:34 and certification of carbon,
1:04:36 uh,
1:04:36 credit projects.
1:04:38 So I think that can,
1:04:39 uh,
1:04:39 that's what I can,
1:04:40 uh,
1:04:40 say,
1:04:41 but for me,
1:04:42 sitting there,
1:04:43 the important thing is to ensure that the,
1:04:45 uh,
1:04:46 uh designated operational entities are able to
1:04:49 Uh,
1:04:50 incorporate
1:04:51 and assess community
1:04:54 safeguards and the,
1:04:56 and,
1:04:56 and issues to do with environmental
1:04:59 standards.
1:04:59 Uh,
1:05:00 so,
1:05:00 uh,
1:05:01 let me stop there.
1:05:01 I know,
1:05:02 uh,
1:05:03 yeah.
1:05:04 Thanks so much,
1:05:05 Shamiso.
1:05:06 Um,
1:05:07 do you mind if I ask for the clicker?
1:05:13 So,
1:05:13 again,
1:05:14 seeing um
1:05:16 Some important commitments that are being upheld in national policy,
1:05:19 FPIC uh being a big one,
1:05:21 that that is a guarantee in Zimbabwe,
1:05:23 also accountability,
1:05:24 that there have been specific mechanisms set up.
1:05:28 On the other hand,
1:05:29 some important gaps um that still need to be addressed.
1:05:33 So who gets to participate in decision making,
1:05:34 what's the role of civil society,
1:05:36 and importantly,
1:05:37 revenue sharing that that is
1:05:39 revenue sharing with communities,
1:05:41 again,
1:05:41 is is really crucial.
1:05:42 Um,
1:05:43 Shamiso mentioned
1:05:44 the carbon justice principles.
1:05:47 In September,
1:05:48 um,
1:05:48 at UN Climate Week,
1:05:49 we had a similar multi-stakeholder discussion there,
1:05:53 um,
1:05:53 bringing together
1:05:54 civil society groups from around the world,
1:05:56 uh,
1:05:57 organizations from the private sector and,
1:05:59 uh,
1:05:59 representatives of government to think about this question of what,
1:06:02 what principles.
1:06:04 Are
1:06:06 uh important touchstones as policies developed
1:06:08 certainly at the national level also thinking about
1:06:10 the voluntary carbon market and how it functions
1:06:12 and coming out of that there was a lot of alignment um on a number of fronts
1:06:17 and then since we've continued to
1:06:19 in the Grassroots Justice Network,
1:06:20 uh,
1:06:20 which is a community of practice of
1:06:22 civil society organizations who support communities on the ground
1:06:26 have been continuing to think about this and
1:06:28 refine it and so I'm just gonna very quickly
1:06:30 um mention
1:06:31 those principles,
1:06:33 um.
1:06:34 The first one,
1:06:34 which we haven't talked much about today,
1:06:36 but
1:06:36 it's thinking about the buyers,
1:06:37 how is,
1:06:38 how is the carbon market?
1:06:41 Supporting climate action and how can we make sure that it's leading to
1:06:45 meaningful mitigation outcomes and here it's just making sure
1:06:48 that anyone who's participating in the carbon market,
1:06:50 who's buying credits,
1:06:51 that they're reducing emissions in their own supply chain too.
1:06:54 That's an important piece um it hasn't come up much today,
1:06:57 but does feel like a crucial
1:06:59 principle and honestly one that's not getting much discussion um
1:07:03 as yet.
1:07:05 A central one that we did talk a lot about today is this idea that we
1:07:08 need to recognize community land rights as a
1:07:10 precondition to a carbon credit project happening.
1:07:13 This is crucial and it has to be,
1:07:15 um,
1:07:16 has to be centered if we want projects to be
1:07:18 successful and if we want meaningful safeguards for communities.
1:07:23 A third is FPIC,
1:07:24 free prior and informed consent.
1:07:26 Again,
1:07:26 this is a widely accepted norm,
1:07:28 um,
1:07:28 but thinking very seriously about what does it take to implement in practice,
1:07:31 and we heard excellent examples from multiple perspectives today.
1:07:35 But how do we think about that?
1:07:36 What does it require?
1:07:37 Certainly,
1:07:38 I would highlight the transparency,
1:07:39 access to information is a crucial part of this as a starting point,
1:07:43 um,
1:07:43 but also widespread engagement,
1:07:45 going from consultation to consent.
1:07:47 These are,
1:07:48 are really crucial
1:07:49 elements.
1:07:50 Um,
1:07:51 the fourth,
1:07:52 again,
1:07:52 a lot of discussion of this today,
1:07:53 but thinking about compensation.
1:07:55 If carbon credit projects really are going to support local development,
1:07:59 national development,
1:08:00 and livelihoods,
1:08:01 there has to be revenue sharing with communities,
1:08:03 and it really needs to be a significant part
1:08:06 of the,
1:08:07 uh,
1:08:07 the project for land-based and nature-based investments.
1:08:10 And we would,
1:08:11 we're arguing that it should be
1:08:12 the majority,
1:08:13 at least 50% going directly to communities.
1:08:16 Um,
1:08:16 and this is really recognizing that much of the work of conservation is,
1:08:20 um.
1:08:21 is reliant upon communities,
1:08:23 and if they are giving their,
1:08:24 their land to a project that that needs to be fully recognized.
1:08:28 Um
1:08:29 Fifth principle is participation.
1:08:31 So ideally making it,
1:08:33 Nia is giving an example of uh how
1:08:36 uh project developers can partner with communities so
1:08:38 that it really is a community-led project.
1:08:40 That is really crucial.
1:08:41 Also,
1:08:42 in the setup of legislation and in the set up of the voluntary carbon market,
1:08:46 some of how that's being designed,
1:08:47 making sure it's possible for communities
1:08:50 to put together and register their own projects,
1:08:52 really thinking about accessibility there.
1:08:54 Um,
1:08:55 and certainly that idea of putting communities
1:08:57 at the center of projects that,
1:08:59 that is crucial,
1:09:00 and that they have a role in decision making.
1:09:02 And then the last one that we also heard a lot about today,
1:09:05 really is enforcement,
1:09:07 accountability,
1:09:07 making sure that these underlying principles,
1:09:10 and any protections and safeguards that do exist in
1:09:13 national law,
1:09:14 um,
1:09:15 or in the voluntary carbon market as well,
1:09:17 that they're really enforced in practice and
1:09:19 that there are clear mechanisms for that.
1:09:21 So,
1:09:21 I wanted to share those as principles
1:09:23 that are emerging in some of these
1:09:24 collective conversations that feel like important touchstones,
1:09:27 and we're keen to,
1:09:28 to just discuss that with all of you.
1:09:30 Um,
1:09:31 and so from there would,
1:09:32 uh,
1:09:32 uh,
1:09:33 would like to open it up for questions from the audience,
1:09:36 would love to hear,
1:09:37 uh,
1:09:37 thoughts that you have on some of what's been shared,
1:09:39 questions or perspectives you would share,
1:09:41 and we will have microphones circulating.
1:09:43 Um,
1:09:44 so I think I see 3 already here,
1:09:46 here and here.
1:09:48 Um,
1:09:52 Thank you very much,
1:09:53 uh,
1:09:54 for this very rich panel.
1:09:55 I'm Brenda Brito from Brazil from Amazon based in the Amazon region
1:10:01 where we have recently had many issues,
1:10:03 problems regarding,
1:10:04 um,
1:10:05 uh,
1:10:05 voluntary for carbon market projects,
1:10:08 mostly about the same issues that you are
1:10:11 bringing this panel.
1:10:13 Uh,
1:10:13 one of the.
1:10:15 One of,
1:10:16 uh,
1:10:16 I would have many questions,
1:10:17 but I was only one,
1:10:18 about FPIC,
1:10:19 uh,
1:10:19 process.
1:10:20 One of the discussions we have back there is about who should actually
1:10:25 conduct the FPIC pro uh process because
1:10:29 many understand that,
1:10:30 uh,
1:10:30 it's a
1:10:32 state obligation,
1:10:33 so it should be conducted
1:10:36 by the government or somehow supervised by the government,
1:10:39 um.
1:10:40 So some fear that when the companies are actually conducting the process,
1:10:43 it's hard to guarantee appropriate.
1:10:47 Free consultation,
1:10:48 for example.
1:10:49 So
1:10:50 I'd like to hear your opinion on that and uh in the case of um
1:10:55 Nitia Nia
1:10:56 yeah
1:10:57 uh just to hear whether there is any uh
1:11:00 participation of governmental representatives in the process that you are
1:11:04 uh making and and how you actually see that as well.
1:11:07 Thank you.
1:11:09 And maybe we can go ahead and take a few,
1:11:11 uh,
1:11:11 the lady in green here had her hand up.
1:11:14 Mm.
1:11:16 Thank you so much for an excellent um panel and discussion.
1:11:20 Uh,
1:11:20 my name is Hara Muhair.
1:11:21 I'm a legal counsel here at the bank
1:11:24 and I've had the enormous pleasure of working on
1:11:28 the Kenya Community Land
1:11:31 Rights Act or Customary Land Rights Act
1:11:35 and the Sierra Leone with Doctor Cham.
1:11:37 Um,
1:11:40 I think
1:11:41 there's huge value in thinking about.
1:11:45 Curing
1:11:46 defects in an act
1:11:48 through regulation.
1:11:49 So I think that's definitely something
1:11:52 you know the universe of
1:11:56 graceful and elegant legal drafting allows us to do
1:11:59 and it's something that we've been working quite closely in supporting.
1:12:03 I think Doctor Cham and his team
1:12:07 do in Sierra Leone.
1:12:08 I think my question relates to whether
1:12:11 this should be seen as,
1:12:13 you know.
1:12:14 Kind of
1:12:15 carbon
1:12:17 rights
1:12:18 and regulations under climate change,
1:12:22 um,
1:12:22 as separate and then bringing in land
1:12:25 as a subset or whether it's something that really should go hand in hand.
1:12:29 Um,
1:12:30 I think a lot of times,
1:12:32 like carbon rights are land rights.
1:12:36 Um,
1:12:36 and you can't really
1:12:38 take them in isolation.
1:12:40 And so,
1:12:41 perhaps
1:12:42 not just thinking about acts
1:12:44 or regulations,
1:12:44 but again,
1:12:45 what I think
1:12:46 something
1:12:47 Nita had raised in terms of
1:12:51 the procedural requirements that
1:12:53 companies have to go through.
1:12:55 Um,
1:12:56 I think that was kind of,
1:12:58 I'm curious to know what you think about that.
1:13:00 And then the other point is kind of a tag
1:13:03 on the EPIC
1:13:05 question or point.
1:13:07 Within the bank's environmental social framework,
1:13:10 ESS
1:13:12 7 requires certain circumstances where EPIC applies,
1:13:17 and there are different ways and
1:13:21 And the recommendation is for to have an independent expert.
1:13:25 So,
1:13:25 I don't think it should be
1:13:27 the project proponent or the finance,
1:13:31 the IFI or whoever,
1:13:33 or the borrower
1:13:34 conducting EPIC,
1:13:35 but really should be an independent.
1:13:40 Entity that works hand in hand and advises.
1:13:42 So I think that's really quite important,
1:13:45 um,
1:13:45 as well as kind of
1:13:47 looking at
1:13:49 The governance structures of how communities convey and
1:13:52 and and and
1:13:54 and kind of guide the EPIC process and I think NIA probably
1:13:58 has a lot of more on ground experience on that,
1:14:01 and that's all.
1:14:02 Thank you so much.
1:14:02 And then there was a third here on the far side.
1:14:08 Hi,
1:14:09 uh,
1:14:09 my name is Steve Laurie.
1:14:10 I'm with C4,
1:14:11 and um,
1:14:13 I have a concern with respect to the formulation.
1:14:17 Of the principles.
1:14:19 And of course,
1:14:19 an important principle uh stated was
1:14:22 honoring uh customary tenure.
1:14:25 And of course,
1:14:25 we're really talking about security of tenure
1:14:28 writ large.
1:14:29 And when we unpack,
1:14:31 you know,
1:14:31 what we,
1:14:32 what we,
1:14:32 how we characterize or define security of tenure,
1:14:35 we can refer to the OSRM formulation,
1:14:37 the bundle of rights,
1:14:39 which consists of
1:14:41 management,
1:14:42 exclusion,
1:14:44 transaction,
1:14:45 transfer,
1:14:46 so on and so forth.
1:14:48 As it turns out,
1:14:49 or,
1:14:49 and some have argued in the literature
1:14:52 that the carbon,
1:14:53 the,
1:14:54 the climate finance.
1:14:56 Including Red Plus and other initiatives.
1:14:59 And PS,
1:15:00 of course.
1:15:01 Uh,
1:15:02 basically entail a transfer.
1:15:04 Of those rights
1:15:07 To
1:15:08 the the,
1:15:08 the carbon market actors.
1:15:11 That these are the control rights.
1:15:13 OK,
1:15:14 so in Zimbabwe,
1:15:16 Sierra Leone,
1:15:17 so on.
1:15:18 The rights to actually manage,
1:15:20 to determine how the resources are going to be managed
1:15:23 and used or not used.
1:15:26 Go to other actors.
1:15:28 Now,
1:15:28 there's a consultation process,
1:15:30 for sure.
1:15:31 But
1:15:32 I'm,
1:15:32 you know,
1:15:33 one wonders.
1:15:35 The degree to which there's actual awareness
1:15:38 or understanding
1:15:39 on the part of those consulted with,
1:15:41 or even of those who are
1:15:43 leading the discussions,
1:15:45 that those rights are gone.
1:15:47 OK,
1:15:48 that arguably,
1:15:49 they're gone.
1:15:51 Uh,
1:15:51 and what communities are left with
1:15:53 is what,
1:15:54 uh,
1:15:55 Thomas Sicher on a journal article characterizes
1:15:57 compensated exclusion.
1:16:00 They're excluded
1:16:02 from exercising,
1:16:03 from managing,
1:16:04 from managing,
1:16:05 which is
1:16:06 almost
1:16:06 the most important right.
1:16:08 You can have.
1:16:10 You're no longer a manager,
1:16:12 uh,
1:16:12 you're a laborer.
1:16:14 Perhaps you're paid for
1:16:16 performance of certain services.
1:16:18 You,
1:16:19 the loss of agency.
1:16:21 Is extreme
1:16:24 Yeah,
1:16:24 we all want to manage our lives and our resources,
1:16:27 but in this case,
1:16:28 we're no longer able to do that
1:16:30 or
1:16:30 the people are no longer able to do that.
1:16:33 So this is a kind of a very large.
1:16:36 I say existential question
1:16:38 with respect to how people.
1:16:41 Are,
1:16:42 are able to
1:16:43 manage government,
1:16:45 govern and shape their resources.
1:16:47 Now,
1:16:48 in the case of Zimbabwe,
1:16:49 one has to point out
1:16:51 that there isn't even.
1:16:53 The compensation
1:16:54 for exclusion
1:16:56 because it's farmers
1:16:57 in Zimbabwe
1:16:59 who are
1:17:00 adding carbon.
1:17:02 To the landscape
1:17:03 And uh they're not getting anything.
1:17:06 From what I can tell,
1:17:07 thank you.
1:17:12 Great,
1:17:12 a number of powerful questions there.
1:17:14 Um,
1:17:15 perhaps we'll start with the one on
1:17:17 free,
1:17:17 prior and informed consent.
1:17:18 Whose responsibility is it?
1:17:20 What roles are involved?
1:17:21 What role does,
1:17:22 uh,
1:17:22 government have as well?
1:17:24 Um,
1:17:24 I think several,
1:17:25 almost everyone would have something to say on this.
1:17:28 Um,
1:17:29 perhaps we can start with Nita if you would like to speak to it and then.
1:17:35 I think in hindsight,
1:17:36 maybe I should have also included an additional slide,
1:17:39 and
1:17:40 I think,
1:17:41 um,
1:17:42 one of the reasons why we've sort of,
1:17:44 well,
1:17:44 why I've had an opportunity to be on this panel is that,
1:17:47 The way we've approached FPIC and thought through FPIC hasn't
1:17:51 been something that we've started and developed from scratch.
1:17:54 We've had a lot of consultations with civil society organizations,
1:17:57 and that's a big point that Shamiso is making as well
1:18:01 is,
1:18:02 you know,
1:18:02 working with civil society organizations that represent communities.
1:18:07 So when you develop a module or you let,
1:18:09 let,
1:18:10 let civil society organizations know
1:18:12 that,
1:18:12 hey,
1:18:12 we're going to go do these workshops.
1:18:14 Would you like to come and observe?
1:18:16 Do you have.
1:18:16 Any feedback,
1:18:18 how can we sort of improve what we're already doing and
1:18:20 make it better so that it's more accessible to communities?
1:18:23 So maybe that's an aspect that I didn't include in my slides,
1:18:25 but this is not something that
1:18:27 we are developing in isolation.
1:18:29 But having said that,
1:18:30 um,
1:18:31 should it be the responsibility of the
1:18:33 government or should it be the responsibility of
1:18:36 project developers?
1:18:37 I think you have to co-implement FPEC.
1:18:41 I think the responsibility of the government is through the laws to mandate it.
1:18:46 And ensure that there are local institutions that are aware of their rights.
1:18:51 Now,
1:18:51 if in a perfect world where we have strong laws that prescribe FPEC
1:18:55 and really strengthen local institutions,
1:18:58 then all the project developer would need to do is.
1:19:01 Go to each of these local institutions,
1:19:03 provide all the information,
1:19:05 and then hand it over.
1:19:06 You need to go talk to all of your communities,
1:19:09 go back to them and tell us your perspective,
1:19:11 but we don't live in that ideal world or
1:19:13 all these perfect systems are already in place.
1:19:17 So the laws in Sierra Leone have gone a long way in
1:19:20 trying to establish that through the new land customary Act as well,
1:19:25 where there is a requirement to establish
1:19:27 chieftain land committees and village land area committees
1:19:30 and once this infrastructure is set up,
1:19:33 I think there is a lot of.
1:19:35 FPIC process that can be transitioned to
1:19:37 these committees to,
1:19:40 to take forward and ensure that the consultations
1:19:42 happen along with civil society organizations being involved.
1:19:45 But until then,
1:19:46 unfortunately,
1:19:47 I do think the project developers,
1:19:49 it's their onus because how else and who else is going to do it?
1:19:57 Yeah,
1:19:58 can I,
1:19:58 yeah,
1:19:59 I,
1:20:00 I think on the issue of uh FPI,
1:20:02 um,
1:20:03 my,
1:20:04 my thinking is that uh
1:20:06 It might be good to have an independent uh
1:20:10 panel of uh uh individuals or entities
1:20:15 that uh
1:20:16 can be accredited by,
1:20:18 by government.
1:20:20 And uh the companies will then
1:20:23 go into that database of people who are listed or rather accredited people
1:20:28 and then they can
1:20:30 maybe select from there
1:20:32 um uh the people who can conduct FPI uh processes.
1:20:36 I'm,
1:20:37 I'm saying this from the experience of
1:20:39 EIA's in Zimbabwe,
1:20:41 Environmental Impact assessments where
1:20:44 The Environmental Management Agency actually accredits any person
1:20:48 or entity that intends to conduct uh EIAs.
1:20:53 So,
1:20:53 companies are not very free to just pick from
1:20:56 the street whoever they want to conduct the EIAs.
1:20:59 So I think that
1:21:00 in a,
1:21:00 in a sense,
1:21:01 can one
1:21:03 enhance,
1:21:03 if well done,
1:21:04 if well implemented,
1:21:06 can one
1:21:06 Enhance uh some level of independence to
1:21:10 some level of oversight by government because government will do due
1:21:14 diligence or uh checks on those uh individuals or entities.
1:21:18 So I think that might also allay the fears of uh conflict of interest and the
1:21:24 Uh,
1:21:24 selection of people who are aligned to particular companies.
1:21:28 But,
1:21:29 you know,
1:21:30 sometimes uh human nature in,
1:21:32 in,
1:21:32 in some countries where systems are not working well,
1:21:35 you might have some companies sponsoring people
1:21:38 or creating
1:21:39 uh uh subsidiaries to conduct
1:21:42 FP processes.
1:21:44 That happens in some uh jurisdictions.
1:21:48 But anyway,
1:21:48 uh,
1:21:49 um,
1:21:50 apart from that,
1:21:50 I think there was a question around transfer of rights,
1:21:54 which is uh
1:21:55 a very critical uh component.
1:21:57 I think there isn't a lot of literature now on uh carbon,
1:22:00 carbon rights.
1:22:02 And I think this is the time to,
1:22:03 uh,
1:22:04 for a lot of people to be writing on this subject.
1:22:07 I think for me,
1:22:07 um,
1:22:08 it's,
1:22:08 it's important from,
1:22:10 to look at it from a property rights perspective.
1:22:13 In Zimbabwe,
1:22:13 for example,
1:22:14 the communities
1:22:15 do not have uh ownership rights over uh the,
1:22:19 the land and some of the uh forests that we are talking about.
1:22:24 So
1:22:24 um they just have use rights.
1:22:27 So
1:22:28 once government says this whole area
1:22:31 has to go to a,
1:22:32 a,
1:22:33 a private company,
1:22:34 definitely the rights are,
1:22:35 are gone.
1:22:37 Yeah,
1:22:38 they're gone.
1:22:38 So,
1:22:39 the best uh government can do is uh to uh
1:22:44 uh closely look at uh uh uh protecting
1:22:48 uh
1:22:49 the,
1:22:49 the,
1:22:49 the benefits that may come out of that project.
1:22:52 Uh,
1:22:54 can they be continuous
1:22:55 uh payments to the local communities out of the project
1:22:58 after 10 years or 20 years or 50 years,
1:23:01 depending on how long the project takes to,
1:23:04 to mature or to be a
1:23:06 Uh,
1:23:07 carbon credits.
1:23:08 So I think it's a,
1:23:09 it's a,
1:23:10 it's a,
1:23:11 it's a,
1:23:11 it's an academic uh uh potentially
1:23:15 uh
1:23:16 important area for academic uh uh research
1:23:20 um which uh definitely some of you might be involved in and uh we'll be happy to
1:23:26 uh hear more insights from those with uh,
1:23:28 with the experience.
1:23:29 But uh interesting uh question,
1:23:31 yeah.
1:23:31 Thank you.
1:23:33 Yeah,
1:23:34 thank you very much.
1:23:35 Um,
1:23:36 I think that every stakeholder has a role to play in the whole process,
1:23:40 right,
1:23:41 and I don't think there should be one institution
1:23:44 that will conduct the FP process,
1:23:46 right?
1:23:47 Um,
1:23:48 you have government,
1:23:49 you have the investor,
1:23:51 the company,
1:23:52 you,
1:23:53 you,
1:23:53 you have the family owners,
1:23:55 the landowning families.
1:23:57 Each one of them,
1:23:58 you know,
1:24:00 has a responsibility.
1:24:02 Now,
1:24:02 if you,
1:24:02 if you take the company,
1:24:05 they have a responsibility to ensure they disclose
1:24:09 this full scope and context of the
1:24:12 of the project or investment
1:24:14 so that the community understand
1:24:17 exactly,
1:24:18 you know,
1:24:18 what the benefits are,
1:24:19 what the impacts are.
1:24:20 And that's part of the
1:24:22 process.
1:24:23 Now,
1:24:24 families also have a responsibility
1:24:26 to ensure
1:24:27 that the
1:24:29 Conduct
1:24:30 their meetings,
1:24:32 you know,
1:24:32 within within their families or within the community as the case may be,
1:24:35 you know,
1:24:36 to provide that um consent,
1:24:38 a written consent.
1:24:39 So they also have a role to play.
1:24:41 Government has a responsibility,
1:24:42 oversight responsibility to ensure
1:24:44 the process is transparent,
1:24:46 right,
1:24:47 and fair,
1:24:48 and we also ensure that the structures are there.
1:24:53 Uh,
1:24:53 in the case of Australia,
1:24:54 as has been mentioned,
1:24:55 um.
1:24:56 That we
1:24:57 we're establishing the structures from the national down to the local level.
1:25:00 At the local level you have the local land committees,
1:25:03 we'll be establishing
1:25:05 land committees in every village or town
1:25:08 up to the chiefdom level.
1:25:10 And and and that puts the people,
1:25:12 the communities
1:25:14 in control because they are members of
1:25:16 those committees and they make those decisions.
1:25:18 So
1:25:19 in short,
1:25:19 I don't want to take much time,
1:25:20 but
1:25:21 I think every
1:25:23 stakeholder
1:25:24 has a responsibility,
1:25:26 and we should ensure
1:25:27 that the process is transparent
1:25:29 and
1:25:31 And,
1:25:32 and fear.
1:25:33 Thank you.
1:25:34 Um,
1:25:35 I think the issue of who has extensively been addressed,
1:25:38 so I will skip that.
1:25:39 Um,
1:25:40 if you look at some of the documents that project proponents ensure are in place,
1:25:44 um,
1:25:44 when,
1:25:45 when developing their,
1:25:46 their projects,
1:25:47 one is a letter of intent,
1:25:48 which is,
1:25:49 you know,
1:25:49 ideally an intent of a project.
1:25:51 But the other critical document is a waiver where
1:25:53 communities get to waive a number of their rights.
1:25:55 Um,
1:25:56 and then if you look at,
1:25:57 for instance,
1:25:57 the project implementation agreement for the project that I was articulating,
1:26:01 in the preliminary sections of the agreement,
1:26:03 clearly it states that communities are passing their rights
1:26:05 exclusively,
1:26:07 which means the communities cannot pass that right to any other person.
1:26:10 So I totally hear you and it's something worth,
1:26:12 you know,
1:26:12 reflecting deeply.
1:26:13 And then on the issue of um
1:26:15 how much regulations can cure.
1:26:18 Some
1:26:18 missing things.
1:26:19 I think there is space,
1:26:20 but not exclusively.
1:26:21 I think
1:26:22 there are opportunities that you've missed in the act,
1:26:24 what might be most useful is going back to amend some of those things.
1:26:27 Um,
1:26:28 um,
1:26:28 this space for sure,
1:26:29 um,
1:26:30 and,
1:26:30 and I'm glad that the government has been
1:26:32 quite,
1:26:32 you know,
1:26:33 has ensured extensive consultation for the climate regulations.
1:26:36 Um,
1:26:37 there's also space to ensure,
1:26:38 even though these are separate regulations,
1:26:40 we have the climate,
1:26:40 uh,
1:26:40 amendment,
1:26:41 um,
1:26:42 regulations and the
1:26:43 Community Land Act regulations,
1:26:44 for instance,
1:26:45 there's space to be able to acknowledge that there is existing legal
1:26:48 frameworks for projects that are going to be done under community land.
1:26:52 And so
1:26:52 the Climate Amendment Act and its regulations should
1:26:55 be able to make reference and say,
1:26:57 for projects that are
1:26:58 happening under community land,
1:27:00 you know,
1:27:00 the structures to be used are those prescribed under the Community Land Act.
1:27:04 And in that case,
1:27:04 then you ensure sink
1:27:06 and no confusion in terms of structures.
1:27:08 Thank you.
1:27:10 And maybe just to this,
1:27:12 this,
1:27:12 these questions about carbon rights,
1:27:14 how are they defined and what are the implications for communities,
1:27:17 it is indeed an existential question.
1:27:19 I think that is
1:27:20 appropriately said.
1:27:22 Um,
1:27:23 I think this is one of the things that it's often implicit in policy,
1:27:26 and actually we need to be making it very explicit,
1:27:29 um.
1:27:31 And in doing so,
1:27:31 I think some of what we're hoping
1:27:34 can be surfaced as principles.
1:27:36 One is that it should be tied to a history
1:27:38 of using that land,
1:27:40 and that should include recognition of customary rights.
1:27:42 And so we're not talking solely about
1:27:45 communities who might have land title,
1:27:47 but really recognizing a long standing history of use that that's crucial,
1:27:51 um,
1:27:51 and that those those those rights should Be the starting point,
1:27:54 um,
1:27:55 that's,
1:27:55 that's I think where we want to get to,
1:27:57 but it's tricky because of all of the interests involved
1:27:59 and I think to the point about transfer of rights
1:28:02 really in our mind I think management rights is
1:28:04 the,
1:28:04 the power over decision making that is the piece
1:28:07 that communities
1:28:08 living on collectively used lands need to retain and that
1:28:12 should be very clear and explicit as a policy commitment.
1:28:15 I think a real challenge,
1:28:16 um,
1:28:17 again,
1:28:17 just the level of financial interest here from different parties
1:28:20 and something that is baked into how the markets operate
1:28:24 is that the rights to trade,
1:28:25 the one part of the bundle,
1:28:26 the rights to trade in carbon,
1:28:28 those are
1:28:29 transferred those.
1:28:30 are transferred
1:28:31 and because the markets are so complex,
1:28:33 it's very difficult for communities who are who own the land,
1:28:37 who have the carbon rights
1:28:38 to be doing that trading and so I think that is one of the biggest
1:28:42 challenges that we have to find a way to bridge and it's a real
1:28:46 Risk because of how the market is set up that it can lead to exclusion.
1:28:49 Um,
1:28:50 and that I think would be a horrible outcome
1:28:52 for local development,
1:28:53 for livelihoods,
1:28:54 and ultimately even I think for
1:28:56 some of the climate outcomes we want to see from the markets because again,
1:28:59 there is very clear evidence
1:29:01 that communities
1:29:02 stewarding the land,
1:29:04 that that's one of the best ways to actually get
1:29:06 some of the climate outcomes that we're committed to.
1:29:08 So very much I think these questions about how are carbon rights defined,
1:29:12 how does it link to land rights,
1:29:14 both formal and customary,
1:29:16 and how can we reconcile that with the trading like that really is at the crux of it.
1:29:20 So I,
1:29:21 I appreciate that being named as an existential
1:29:23 question because I think that gives it the gravity
1:29:25 that it deserves.
1:29:26 Well,
1:29:26 a
1:29:27 huge,
1:29:28 uh,
1:29:28 sure,
1:29:28 I think we have maybe
1:29:30 30 seconds,
1:29:30 but that's.
1:29:32 Directly to the
1:29:38 11 o'clock session.
1:29:40 350
1:29:43 Great.
1:29:44 So 350,
1:29:45 let's continue the conversation.
1:29:46 Think about stewardship.
1:29:48 Um,
1:29:48 a big thank you to our panelists for sharing their rich experience.
1:29:53 Um,
1:29:53 thank you so much,
1:29:53 Eileen,
1:29:54 Doctor Chen,
1:29:54 Shamiso,
1:29:55 Nitia,
1:29:55 really appreciate you,
1:29:57 um,
1:29:57 sharing these reflections from each of these very diverse perspectives,
1:30:01 and thank you all for joining us.
1:30:08 One other thing I'll say if you're interested
1:30:10 in following where some of this conversation goes,
1:30:12 I do have,
1:30:13 um,
1:30:14 just the principles written up up here.
1:30:16 I have a few handouts if you would like those.
1:30:17 I also have just a,
1:30:18 a card where you can sort of follow um in the Grassroots Justice Network where,
1:30:22 where we're gonna keep,
1:30:23 keep talking about this and keep trying to push
1:30:25 some of these ideas in the coming months.
1:30:27 So feel free to come up and grab those.
1:30:31 Thank
1:30:31 you
1:30:33 Take
- add-style
- lp-body-content
A video recording of the Carbon Markets and Climate Justice session on day two of the 2024 World Bank Land Conference, focused on how carbon trading frameworks can protect community land rights.
The World Bank Land Conference is the premier forum for the land sector, bringing together participants from governments, development partners, civil society, academia, and the private sector to showcase research, discuss issues and good practice, and inform policy dialogue.
Chair: Erin Kitchell, Managing Director, Climate, Land, and Environmental Justice, Namati
Speakers:
- Shamiso Mtisi, Head of Research, Zimbabwe Environmental Law Association
- Nitya Sunil, Director of Legal, ESG & Policy at West Africa Blue
- Alphajoh Cham, Director of Planning, Policy & Project Development, Government of Sierra Leone
- Sonkita Conteh, Co-Founder and Director, Namati
- Eileen Wakesho, Director of Land, Environment, and Climate, Namati