00:05 So,
00:06 yeah,
00:07 I think.
00:08 We,
00:09 we are ready to go.
00:13 Good morning,
00:14 um,
00:15 everybody.
00:17 Here in DC and
00:20 Thank you for uh joining this panel here today physically and I
00:25 think we're also live streamed,
00:26 are we?
00:28 No,
00:29 yes.
00:30 My name is Yen Lai.
00:31 Um,
00:32 And I'm head of a,
00:33 a research program on globalization and development at the GIA,
00:37 that's the German Institute
00:39 for Global and Area studies.
00:41 Um,
00:42 I'm a member of the land metrics,
00:44 uh,
00:44 steering committee,
00:45 and the Land metrics Initiative is also organizing,
00:48 uh,
00:49 this distinguished panel on
00:51 policies to secure land tenure
00:53 and land intensive
00:55 climate action.
00:56 Uh,
00:57 before we delve into the session,
00:58 uh,
00:58 two organization remarks,
01:00 uh,
01:00 we have
01:01 French and,
01:02 uh,
01:02 Spanish interpretation
01:04 for those here in the room,
01:06 and we will have some time,
01:08 uh,
01:08 to discuss,
01:09 uh,
01:09 with you here in the room
01:11 towards the end
01:12 of
01:12 this panel.
01:14 Let me take a couple of minutes to introduce to you what this,
01:18 uh,
01:18 panel is about that speaks,
01:20 I think,
01:21 very well to the overall theme of that conference.
01:24 At this conference,
01:25 uh,
01:26 series,
01:26 uh,
01:26 specifically,
01:27 we,
01:28 including the Land metrics Initiative,
01:30 have been concerned for many years
01:32 about the pressures exerted by large scale
01:35 commercial,
01:36 agricultural and mining projects,
01:38 um,
01:39 on land used by indigenous peoples,
01:42 local communities,
01:43 herders,
01:43 and farmers.
01:44 At the international level,
01:46 this has triggered inter alia
01:48 policy responses such as the famous voluntary guidelines on
01:52 the responsible governance of tenure of land and the principles
01:56 for responsible investment in agriculture and the likes.
02:00 Today,
02:01 and that's also the theme of that conference,
02:04 new land pressures
02:05 and corresponding threats
02:07 to rights holders
02:08 and their livelihoods are emerging.
02:11 Large scale land deals for wind parks,
02:13 solar farms,
02:14 mining for transition minerals,
02:17 but also conservation areas and tree plantations for
02:21 biological carbon removal
02:23 take place in the context of global climate action across the globe.
02:27 Although we still need to understand better
02:30 the scope and the patterns of these new pressures.
02:34 Preliminary assessments indicate that additional land
02:38 needed
02:39 for the sum of individual country pledges in terms
02:42 of afforestation and reforestation to offset emissions in other sectors
02:46 is particularly problematic.
02:49 According to a recent estimate,
02:51 about 500 million hectares of land are needed until 2060,
02:56 and that is roughly a third of the current global crop land.
03:01 More than 2/3
03:02 of the countries in their nationally determined contributions.
03:08 plan to use carbon markets to meet their targets.
03:12 Under the Paris Agreement and uh demand from
03:15 private companies uh for nature-based carbon offsetting projects
03:19 has also proven to be highly dynamic,
03:21 as most of you know,
03:23 despite the setbacks
03:25 in the wake of the several scandals that questions the integrity of carbon markets
03:30 and the associated credit in recent
03:33 years.
03:35 In light of these developments,
03:36 we at the Land metrics um
03:38 have also decided to reinforce our efforts in collecting data
03:42 on land intensive climate action,
03:44 including
03:44 carbon offset projects,
03:46 solar and wind farms,
03:47 and I've brought to you here some
03:49 very preliminary figures that are far from complete.
03:53 Um,
03:54 but we have assessed the deals in our database,
03:56 uh,
03:57 on large scale land acquisitions and have started
03:59 adding new deals that relate to climate actions,
04:02 and we currently stand at 5 million hectares
04:05 of land just for nature-based carbon offsetting projects,
04:08 and these are only
04:10 large scale
04:11 purchases or leases,
04:13 uh,
04:13 far from complete,
04:15 um.
04:16 And also we have added up here what we call
04:19 concluded failed and intended deals in the net metrics.
04:23 And this figure here excludes the large recent MOUs that
04:29 you may have heard of by the Dubai-based Blue Carbon.
04:33 A company in several African countries that alone amounts to 24 million hectares.
04:40 Although this is a work in progress,
04:43 uh,
04:43 we can from the different deals behind that aggregate figures
04:47 already see some patterns emerge in land intensive climate actions.
04:51 And I have illustrate this here
04:52 with some examples,
04:53 but I won't go into the details of each of
04:57 these examples,
04:57 but uh try to uh show you some of those patterns.
05:01 First,
05:02 uh,
05:02 those mega deals uh.
05:04 Such as a blue carbon deal,
05:06 probably marked the culmination of
05:08 a trend that we've been seeing for a while.
05:10 These
05:11 deals tend to become larger and larger,
05:15 and land deals that include several 10 thousands of hectares are not uncommon.
05:19 Second,
05:20 uh,
05:20 the offsetting projects come in very different forms.
05:23 They come as CDM or as REDD plus projects,
05:26 as tree plantations,
05:28 and agroforestry,
05:29 and here are two examples there from Uganda,
05:33 um,
05:33 and the DRC,
05:34 often with conservation elements or even as pure conservation deals.
05:39 What we also see is a repurposing.
05:41 Of logging concessions into carbon offsetting
05:44 as in this large scale deal that you can see here,
05:47 uh,
05:47 with of 300,000 hectares in the
05:50 DRC.
05:52 Third,
05:53 um,
05:53 they involve international
05:55 actors including private firms,
05:57 foreign governments,
05:57 uh,
05:58 development actors,
05:59 and fourth,
06:00 albeit to varying degrees,
06:01 we see human rights violations and land conflicts
06:04 in many of these projects and even in those that are recognized,
06:08 uh,
06:08 through international processes.
06:10 Poor consultation of local populations continues to be
06:13 the norm.
06:14 And finally,
06:15 5th,
06:16 and related,
06:17 many of these deals are little transparent,
06:19 uh,
06:19 in particular regarding the involvement of
06:21 and benefit sharing with local communities.
06:26 And
06:27 many of them carry that uncertainty that we have also seen before
06:32 because it's uncertain how and whether whether and
06:35 how those deals will eventually be implemented.
06:38 These characteristics that I've summarized resemble those of the land deals of
06:42 the so-called global land rush that peaked in the early 2000s,
06:46 uh,
06:46 in the late 2000s.
06:47 And because of the scale of these deals,
06:50 And we find it plausible to talk of a land rush 2.0 as I have labeled it here,
06:56 and basically this is because climate change
06:59 needs to be tackled
07:00 and land is central to the NDCs under the Paris Agreement.
07:05 So these nature-based solutions as they are referred to are there to stay.
07:10 Um,
07:11 and many think that despite,
07:13 uh,
07:14 because of the risks of climate change,
07:16 they have to be part
07:17 of global climate mitigation efforts.
07:21 However,
07:22 um,
07:22 it remains,
07:23 uh,
07:24 crucial,
07:25 uh,
07:25 to recognize that land is of course integral
07:28 to the livelihoods and identity of communities and,
07:31 uh,
07:31 pivotal to many,
07:32 uh,
07:32 ecosystem services.
07:33 We have repeatedly said this at this conference,
07:36 and we all know too well that the rights of
07:38 the affected communities are not well protected in many instances,
07:41 and this gives rise to a very important trade-off that we have to deal with.
07:46 And uh
07:48 there's also hope we had that yesterday in the uh keynote
07:51 and I think the hope stems from
07:53 three factors at least.
07:55 Um,
07:55 first,
07:56 there has been progress in protecting land rights of those potentially affected,
08:01 uh,
08:01 albeit not everywhere and maybe not to the extent desirable.
08:04 Second,
08:05 it may be a good thing that this land rush
08:08 is much more state
08:09 than private sector driven.
08:11 Uh,
08:12 you may see that so it's so,
08:14 but in principle it can be better regulated.
08:16 Third,
08:17 stakeholders in land for climate mitigation
08:20 often commit to sustainability agendas,
08:22 adding a layer of accountability and ethical conservation.
08:25 Yet to harness these potential positive forces,
08:28 it is crucial to understand land rights as an important part
08:32 of the climate action agenda.
08:34 And the case in point is the regulation and development of carbon markets
08:38 that pops up every,
08:39 uh,
08:39 in many of the sessions that I've attended.
08:42 These are still fairly nascent in their uh in their development,
08:47 and this also presents
08:48 a challenge,
08:49 such as defining,
08:50 uh,
08:51 for example,
08:51 what exactly should be traded
08:53 and who's qualified to participate in these markets under which conditions.
08:58 Currently in national regulations,
09:00 in particular in the,
09:01 in the global south,
09:03 of carbon markets is close to non-existent.
09:06 And and under these conditions,
09:08 it is that those carbon cohorts can get their way
09:11 with uh ignoring
09:13 uh people's rights.
09:15 Um,
09:16 sorry for that somewhat extended,
09:18 uh,
09:18 introduction,
09:19 and I have my panel,
09:21 uh,
09:21 here waiting eagerly,
09:23 but I think,
09:24 uh,
09:24 we also need to,
09:26 uh,
09:26 organize,
09:27 uh,
09:27 this discussion well,
09:29 and this panel,
09:30 um,
09:30 aims at generating,
09:32 organizing this discussion and generating
09:34 insights and concrete policy recommendations
09:36 on how to implement and improve safeguards against
09:40 this looming threat.
09:42 Um,
09:42 and I will now introduce my,
09:44 uh,
09:45 panelists,
09:45 uh,
09:46 here as we proceed,
09:48 and you will see that our panel brings,
09:50 uh,
09:50 to the four different voices on land intensive climate actions and land rights.
09:55 Our discussion will be organized around 3 themes,
09:58 uh,
09:58 so we will first look at different experiences of how land intensive climate action
10:03 unfolds on the ground and affects indigenous,
10:06 uh,
10:07 uh,
10:07 peoples and local communities.
10:09 Second,
10:10 we'll move to the international,
10:12 uh,
10:12 level,
10:12 that international frameworks and assess how
10:15 experiences of ongoing policy initiatives and programs
10:18 that try to address land related risks in climate action,
10:22 um.
10:23 Unfold and third,
10:25 we will then together think
10:27 about
10:28 what we can learn from this
10:30 and
10:30 which
10:31 should be the policy priorities that can be derived from these
10:36 experiences.
10:38 All right,
10:39 um,
10:40 I'll move to my chair down there
10:42 and I want to start,
10:44 uh.
10:45 Take that.
10:49 There's this,
10:50 yes,
10:50 perfect.
10:52 And I would like to start with Johanna von Braun.
10:56 Um,
10:56 Johanna is the
10:58 climate and nature leader of the International Land Coalition
11:02 and also serves as ILC's focal
11:06 point for indigenous peoples members' organizations.
11:10 Before joining ILC,
11:11 she spent
11:12 most of her 20 years' career working on the interface between environment and.
11:17 Human rights
11:19 and within that time she helped set up Natural justice,
11:22 one now one of the leading environmental justice organizations
11:26 on the African continent and it served as its first.
11:30 Executive director.
11:31 Johanna,
11:32 I have already provided some numbers and examples
11:34 illustrating the scale and patterns of land intensive climate
11:38 action.
11:39 And I would like you to elaborate on how this is affecting communities.
11:45 On the ground and what are the trends and
11:48 experiences that you have seen among among the members,
11:52 the members of the ILC which today unites
11:56 more than
11:57 300 organizations across the globe that focus on land rights.
12:03 Thank you Jan.
12:04 Thank you for having us on the panel.
12:06 Um,
12:06 so this issue of,
12:07 of,
12:08 uh,
12:09 climate solutions that,
12:10 uh,
12:11 that have emerged over the last few years,
12:13 last 10+ years I guess,
12:15 um,
12:15 and its impact
12:17 on land and the importance of land rights is,
12:19 is something that's really important to our members.
12:21 150 of our members are
12:23 constituency based organizations.
12:24 These are organizations who directly
12:27 live
12:27 on or from the land that they represent.
12:30 Um,
12:30 and there's obviously there's been a trend that's really affected the land,
12:33 and I think
12:34 that becomes obvious in some of the numbers that you raise 500 million hectares,
12:38 uh,
12:39 is a lot.
12:39 It's the size of Mexico,
12:40 so this is not an empty space and,
12:43 and people live there and obviously whatever land usage comes as a result of
12:47 climate solution will have an impact on their,
12:50 on them.
12:51 So for us it's so important we started a new area of work that really looks at that,
12:55 um,
12:56 and we split it between.
12:58 Two areas.
12:59 One is to lead the response to energy transition similar to what you have raised,
13:02 and then the other one to carbon markets,
13:04 and I would like to expand a little bit on the two of them.
13:07 In terms of energy transition,
13:08 we,
13:08 we see two major drivers of potential land conflicts.
13:12 One is driven by the sheer
13:14 infrastructure development and required by energy transition
13:17 towards green energy.
13:18 Um,
13:19 there are studies by Brookings and others that
13:21 indicate that,
13:22 uh,
13:23 green energy generation is 10 times as land intensive,
13:26 um,
13:27 as,
13:27 uh,
13:28 additional as traditional fossil fuel based,
13:30 I guess,
13:31 particularly nuclear unfortunately is the least land intensive
13:34 form of energy production.
13:36 Um,
13:36 and,
13:37 um,
13:37 and,
13:37 and that has an impact on indigenous
13:39 and local community and other communities' land.
13:42 So
13:42 there's some studies that indicated in the future
13:45 more than 40% of,
13:47 uh,
13:47 infrastructure development will affect indigenous people's lands driven
13:51 above all by solar and hydro power.
13:54 Um,
13:55 we actually see a lot of um pastoralist member being affected as well because,
13:59 uh,
13:59 a lot of the infrastructure development happens of what is considered empty spaces
14:04 which are of course not empty but often are used for pastoralist routes
14:08 for agriculture,
14:09 um,
14:09 and so on.
14:10 So,
14:11 so we get a lot of,
14:12 uh,
14:13 uh,
14:13 reports from our,
14:14 from our pastoralist members.
14:16 The other issue on energy transition has to
14:18 do with the minerals required for energy transition.
14:20 Um,
14:21 we now have studies that indicates that between 54 and 70%
14:26 of energy transition minerals are located in
14:28 or near indigenous people's lands and territories.
14:31 There's a study in Nature from 2023 that
14:34 looked at more than 5000 projects
14:37 across the world and,
14:38 um,
14:39 identified 17 critical minerals that
14:42 are between 68 and
14:44 95% on indigenous peoples in peasant land.
14:48 Um,
14:49 for indigenous peoples leading here is lithium,
14:51 which is uh 80% to be found on indigenous people territories
14:55 and of course of major importance to the energy transition.
14:58 Yesterday we had
15:00 a panel where our member from Argentina
15:02 was talking about the impact lithium mining has on the indigenous communities,
15:06 uh,
15:06 in the area where it's found,
15:08 um,
15:09 1 ton of lithium requires 2 million L of water
15:14 but it's only enough to produce about 16.
15:17 Uh,
15:18 batteries required for one of the,
15:21 the,
15:21 the test for the Tesla cars.
15:23 Other cars require less lithium,
15:25 um,
15:25 but it does show that the,
15:26 the water impact of some of the this extraction is,
15:30 is,
15:30 is,
15:31 uh,
15:31 is,
15:32 is extreme
15:33 and has a big impact on,
15:34 on,
15:34 on communities who live there.
15:36 Um,
15:37 governments obviously respond to that to that demand
15:40 in Argentina we've seen the local government recently
15:44 changed its constitution.
15:45 Um,
15:46 so that access to lithium is easier even if it's on indigenous people's territory
15:51 and protests are being criminalized.
15:54 Now if you mix that um the the this if you combine these
15:59 stresses on land together with
16:01 three factors one,
16:02 that 20% of indigenous people land is recognized is only,
16:06 only 20% is formally recognized,
16:09 um,
16:09 you know,
16:10 we know that mining is one of
16:11 the root causes of social environmental conflict historically
16:15 and the.
16:16 By in COP 28 governments have committed
16:18 to tripling green energy transition by 2030.
16:22 We really have a,
16:23 a,
16:23 a,
16:23 a storm in the making in terms of land conflicts on the way and we need to,
16:28 we need to prepare for that.
16:30 In terms of carbon markets,
16:31 Jan
16:32 mentioned,
16:33 uh,
16:33 already a lot of numbers of,
16:35 of,
16:35 of what we're seeing we don't have that sort of global data in terms of
16:39 how much,
16:40 uh,
16:41 has already,
16:41 how much land has already been
16:43 affected,
16:44 um,
16:45 but we do have studies,
16:46 uh,
16:47 for example,
16:48 by,
16:48 um,
16:48 by the carbon brief that indicate
16:51 that for those,
16:53 uh,
16:53 for those,
16:54 uh,
16:55 projects that they have analyzed 72%,
16:58 um.
16:59 Uh,
16:59 cause harm to indigenous peoples and local communities,
17:03 um,
17:03 again because of similar issues,
17:05 uh,
17:05 where land rights are not clear,
17:08 uh,
17:08 it can lead to eviction of land.
17:10 Uh,
17:10 the additionality requirement of carbon markets can,
17:14 uh,
17:14 require,
17:15 uh,
17:15 land use change,
17:17 uh,
17:17 that affects traditional land uses of
17:19 indigenous peoples and pastoralist communities,
17:21 um,
17:22 so these are some of the factors that they're facing.
17:24 Uh,
17:25 we just,
17:25 uh,
17:26 recently one of our members in Kenya,
17:28 the Ogiek community in the Mau Forest.
17:32 Um,
17:33 has,
17:33 um,
17:34 who have been
17:35 for 20 years battling for the land rights and
17:37 had several African Commission decisions in their favor,
17:40 uh,
17:41 face additional eviction now,
17:42 uh,
17:43 because of carbon,
17:44 uh,
17:45 finance,
17:45 uh,
17:45 initiatives in the Mau Forest.
17:47 Um,
17:48 having said that,
17:49 we also have members who are interested.
17:50 So for example,
17:51 particularly pastoralist member in Central Asia and Mongolia
17:55 have expressed interest in carbon markets and supporting the livelihood,
17:58 and I think this is
17:59 something that we also see among um in in in other parts of the world.
18:03 Um,
18:04 however,
18:05 uh,
18:05 it is clear for them from the beginning that,
18:07 uh,
18:08 if they are to be involved in carbon markets that land rights,
18:11 uh,
18:12 as much as FPIC,
18:13 uh,
18:13 as well as benefit sharing are a critical cornerstone for,
18:17 for successful integration going forward.
18:21 Yeah,
18:21 thanks a lot,
18:22 um,
18:23 Johanna,
18:24 and,
18:24 uh,
18:25 let me now continue with,
18:26 uh,
18:26 Joanne Carning next to me
18:28 who has been working on indigenous issues
18:31 at the grassroots to the international level for more than 20 years.
18:36 Uh,
18:36 she has served in alia as the Secretary General of the Asia Indigenous Peoples Pact
18:41 and was an expert member of the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous
18:45 issues.
18:46 In 2018 she received the UN Champion of the Earth Award for Lifetime Achievement
18:51 and today she is here as the
18:53 executive director of Indigenous Peoples' Rights International.
18:57 Joan,
18:57 um,
18:58 there has been growing acknowledgement,
19:00 uh,
19:00 of course,
19:01 of the role that indigenous peoples and,
19:03 uh,
19:03 local communities can play in safeguarding,
19:06 uh,
19:06 local ecosystems
19:08 and contributing to conservation.
19:11 Yet it seems that in,
19:12 in practice,
19:13 uh,
19:13 climate action,
19:14 uh,
19:14 as we have alluded to Joanna and I are initiated and implemented.
19:19 Against rather than with the concerned communities so and further um
19:25 they continue and that's a very old problem
19:28 to benefit very little from minerals exploitation.
19:32 So
19:33 in,
19:33 in light of these developments,
19:34 where do we stand then in what is so often referred to as a just transition.
19:39 Yeah,
19:40 um,
19:40 thank you,
19:41 Yan,
19:41 um,
19:42 in relation to the,
19:43 or if we have a,
19:44 um,
19:46 progress in,
19:47 in relation to just transition,
19:48 it's actually alarming.
19:50 That we are not,
19:51 we're way behind,
19:53 uh,
19:54 the phase out from fossil fuel is just not happening.
19:58 In fact,
19:58 the target of production still for fossil fuel is 110%
20:04 more than
20:05 than what is needed for us to to,
20:08 uh,
20:09 to,
20:09 to be below 1.5.
20:11 And uh and this is uh data uh from from UNEP.
20:16 In,
20:16 in addition to that,
20:18 the,
20:18 the,
20:18 while there is a dramatic increase
20:21 also in the,
20:23 in the development of renewable energy,
20:26 we still need
20:27 2/3.
20:28 of
20:29 of of of of of that to to provide
20:32 for uh for the needs of uh of of of the people.
20:37 So on,
20:37 on both sides we are not progressing
20:40 as we should be and we should be alarmed
20:43 with this development.
20:44 But more than that,
20:46 the threat
20:47 of the transition is also
20:50 alarming,
20:51 particularly
20:52 for indigenous peoples.
20:54 It was already mentioned that that that the transition minerals are
20:59 54% found in indigenous
21:02 territories.
21:04 And what does that mean?
21:05 The legacy of mining in indigenous territories,
21:08 as we know,
21:09 is not good,
21:10 right?
21:11 Land grabbing,
21:12 loss of livelihood,
21:14 um,
21:15 um,
21:17 evictions are,
21:18 are the common,
21:19 that's the record of mining in indigenous people's
21:22 territories
21:24 and if 54% of their transition minerals,
21:28 can we have my slide?
21:31 Uh,
21:31 I just want to show where,
21:33 so,
21:33 so this is the location,
21:35 uh,
21:36 of the,
21:37 of the transition,
21:38 uh,
21:38 minerals.
21:39 The yellow,
21:40 uh,
21:40 is the,
21:41 the one,
21:42 the territories of,
21:43 of indigenous peoples,
21:45 and then if we look at the,
21:47 can we move to the next,
21:49 so,
21:49 so just to show.
21:51 Uh,
21:51 and this is the,
21:52 the,
21:53 the,
21:53 the,
21:53 the,
21:54 the worst,
21:54 uh,
21:55 one is the,
21:55 the,
21:56 the risk for water
21:58 as already mentioned,
21:59 uh,
22:00 in relation,
22:00 for example,
22:01 to lithium,
22:02 conflict,
22:03 and food insecurity.
22:05 And and that that is really critical,
22:08 but also if we look at where the the the mine the mine deposits are,
22:14 they are also in many areas overlap with biodiversity rich areas
22:20 with food production areas,
22:22 with cultural heritage areas.
22:25 Uh,
22:25 and these are under threat if we proceed,
22:28 uh,
22:28 as,
22:29 uh,
22:29 like business as usual
22:30 when there is no respect
22:32 to indigenous,
22:33 uh,
22:33 people's rights.
22:35 In,
22:35 in fact,
22:36 um,
22:36 in the,
22:37 we have recorded,
22:39 um,
22:40 uh,
22:40 violations
22:42 of,
22:43 uh,
22:43 human rights in the.
22:46 Uh,
22:47 in the,
22:47 in the transition,
22:49 uh,
22:49 minerals we have,
22:51 uh,
22:51 seen,
22:52 for example,
22:53 uh,
22:55 I
22:56 cannot,
22:56 I want to take the data,
22:58 yeah,
22:58 so from 2015 to 2022
23:03 there were 1333 documented cases of attacks,
23:08 of attacks
23:09 against human rights defenders.
23:12 And majority
23:13 are related to the transition
23:16 minerals,
23:17 uh,
23:17 for example,
23:18 in relation to lithium,
23:19 um,
23:20 nickel,
23:21 and other transition minerals.
23:24 So this is already worrying
23:26 if if the demand
23:27 and the large scale mining is going to happen.
23:30 You can already imagine
23:32 this threat
23:34 and attacks to human rights and environment defenders.
23:39 Then we also see that in,
23:41 in the,
23:42 in the.
23:44 Oh,
23:44 also,
23:45 I mean just to also add that these,
23:47 these attacks include mining
23:49 in relation to cobalt,
23:51 uh,
23:51 which is in Africa,
23:53 and,
23:53 and copper nickel,
23:54 which is in,
23:55 in,
23:55 in Asia
23:56 and
23:57 take note that only few mining companies
24:01 have policy on free,
24:02 prior and informed consent.
24:05 And uh just now the ICMM,
24:09 which is the International
24:11 Council for Mining and Metals,
24:13 is undertaking
24:15 an uh uh an improvement of their uh indigenous peoples policy statement.
24:22 However,
24:23 while they're seeking for in,
24:24 in uh improvement,
24:27 their policy on FBIC as it stands now
24:31 is below the IFC standard.
24:35 Particularly in relation to FBIC.
24:38 So that is why we're engaging with the ICMM
24:41 that at the minimum,
24:43 it should be
24:45 not,
24:45 cannot be below what is already existing.
24:49 And it should be able to demonstrate that they're really serious
24:53 in implementing and adhering to
24:57 free,
24:57 prior and informed consent where
24:59 no is no.
25:02 And so that's one,
25:04 the other one is also that the need for mining companies to adapt,
25:10 uh,
25:10 and even investors and other energy companies
25:13 to prevent this kind of disasters,
25:16 uh,
25:17 related to mining operation is a human rights,
25:20 a mandatory human rights due diligence.
25:23 Because
25:23 if we ignore
25:25 rights of indigenous peoples,
25:27 then that that that the,
25:29 the,
25:29 the legacy
25:30 of mining
25:31 will,
25:32 will continue.
25:34 So
25:35 the other side also,
25:36 so that's,
25:36 that's the problematic side of the of
25:39 the mining associated with the transition minerals,
25:42 but on the other side,
25:44 the generation also of renewable energy from large solar farms,
25:49 windmill farms,
25:50 large dams,
25:51 and geothermal plants is
25:53 these are also being imposed on indigenous territories,
25:57 and they're using large
25:58 tracts of lands
26:00 often used by indigenous peoples for their own livelihoods.
26:04 And even
26:05 uh uh cultural heritage sites
26:08 are being targeted and indigenous peoples are again not even consulted.
26:13 There's no free prior and informed consent so this
26:16 is also part of what we now call
26:19 as the green colonization on both counts the imposition of,
26:22 of,
26:23 uh,
26:23 the,
26:24 the transition minerals and imposition of renewable energy projects where
26:28 indigenous peoples who are the ones.
26:31 Protecting the environment who are the ones
26:34 uh uh pushing for uh conservation are again victims of of of this uh kind of
26:40 of actions
26:42 so we we need to be mindful that that that
26:44 that the that the way the transition mineral
26:50 and trans that just energy transition
26:53 is not just
26:55 the way it is going now.
26:56 Thank you,
26:58 thank you Joanne.
26:59 I think
27:00 there's,
27:01 there's too much uh still business as usual,
27:04 um,
27:05 uh,
27:05 and
27:06 I think that's probably something uh that Raymond uh
27:10 Ahu Samdog will also allude to.
27:11 Uh,
27:12 with him,
27:12 I have another panelist
27:14 here who also knows all too well the realities on the ground,
27:18 uh,
27:18 in particular in the Congo Basin.
27:21 Raymond joined the tenure facility in May 2018.
27:25 As a monitoring,
27:25 evaluation and learning manager,
27:28 he has worked as a consultant with many organizations,
27:31 including this bank,
27:35 and the Rainforest Foundation in Norway.
27:38 As well as the US Forest Service and you have in-depth expertise on uh R,
27:42 the REDD plus uh framework.
27:45 Raymond,
27:45 in,
27:46 we'll stick to a REDD plus that has shown varied success in uh
27:51 respecting uh the land rights of uh indigenous peoples and local communities.
27:56 Recently there have been new initiatives like Leave the Leave Coalition that aim
28:02 to mobilize significant funding within the
28:05 framework to support forest countries and jurisdictions
28:08 in reducing and reversing tropical deforestation.
28:12 Do you believe
28:13 uh that from
28:14 uh
28:15 the experiences and also the failures,
28:17 uh there's something that uh we have learned?
28:20 And,
28:21 um,
28:21 and do you think that new initiatives then
28:24 will be more effective in uh safeguarding uh land rights?
28:29 Yeah,
28:29 thank you Jan for the question.
28:31 Um,
28:32 yeah,
28:32 um,
28:33 what we,
28:34 uh,
28:34 from the tenure facility have learned.
28:37 From the fear is that many
28:40 communities
28:41 want carbon funds.
28:43 But they have many questions and concerns.
28:47 But these new initiatives
28:49 are doing a very poor job in addressing these questions and these concerns.
28:54 Yeah,
28:55 the red pilot program
28:57 has taught us that
28:59 securing indigenous people land.
29:02 Provides strong incentive to protect the
29:05 forests and the carbon.
29:07 But when these new initiatives are being designed
29:11 and implemented
29:12 without securing right.
29:15 Before
29:15 securing the right
29:17 It provides strong incentive for government not to guarantee this right.
29:22 Yeah,
29:23 and
29:24 because the government doesn't want to share
29:27 this,
29:27 uh,
29:27 payment,
29:28 this benefit with the rightholders,
29:30 which are the communities.
29:31 Yeah,
29:32 um,
29:32 for example,
29:33 the Left coalition which you talk about
29:35 is a
29:37 public and private
29:39 initiative that is willing to,
29:42 to pay.
29:44 For carbon
29:46 To countries,
29:47 to forest countries and states,
29:49 uh,
29:49 through a
29:50 REDD uditional program.
29:52 And these funds are used to purchase carbon
29:55 credit
29:56 that use,
29:57 uh,
29:57 require the,
29:59 um,
29:59 art,
30:00 the artery,
30:01 uh,
30:01 red,
30:02 uh,
30:02 architecture.
30:04 Uh,
30:04 which
30:05 meets the required red,
30:07 uh,
30:07 Excellency,
30:08 um,
30:08 uh,
30:09 Environmental Excellency standard,
30:10 the ARTI.
30:12 To many people have heard about this art
30:14 artery and sometimes these
30:17 terminologies are very confusing.
30:19 Yeah.
30:21 So,
30:21 what we have seen in
30:23 Guyana,
30:24 which is
30:25 the first country in the world that have received um
30:28 the RTI
30:29 payment.
30:31 And
30:33 Uh,
30:33 Costa Rica
30:34 and uh Ghana is next on the line.
30:37 Guyana,
30:38 the indigenous people in Guyana,
30:39 they manage 40% of their forests.
30:43 And
30:44 they only have land title for 15%.
30:47 And based on this,
30:48 the government
30:49 is now providing
30:51 sharing this benefit,
30:53 15%
30:54 of this um art uh payment
30:57 to this community.
30:59 This
30:59 clearly shows strong
31:02 incentive for the government not to.
31:05 Um,
31:05 title the remaining 25%
31:08 because just 15%
31:10 has been titled
31:11 while they manage 40% of the land
31:14 now with the RT payment,
31:16 the government is
31:17 sharing 15% of that payment.
31:20 Showing that they don't really want to
31:22 entitle the remaining 25.
31:25 Yeah.
31:26 Yesterday in the
31:28 The plenary,
31:30 we learned that there have been many progress,
31:32 as you said
31:33 in the policy,
31:35 but
31:35 there's huge gap in practice.
31:38 Again,
31:38 if you look at the leaf uh policy document.
31:42 They clearly underscored the critical role of indigenous people
31:46 as forest steward.
31:48 And
31:49 they will not form jurisdiction
31:51 that do not respect the right
31:53 of indigenous people.
31:55 They have ensured their full participation
31:58 and meet strong social safeguard.
32:01 But in practice,
32:03 The,
32:04 um,
32:04 unlike the World Bank
32:06 in uh independent inspection panel,
32:09 the R3 grievance
32:10 mechanism is not credible.
32:14 To secure the right of indigenous people.
32:18 Again,
32:19 in Guyana,
32:20 uh,
32:21 our partner,
32:22 uh,
32:22 the Ameridian People Association
32:25 were not properly consulted.
32:27 And when they
32:28 try to use the
32:29 artery grievance mechanism.
32:32 To make a complaint,
32:33 it was realized that the system is not credible.
32:37 And
32:37 it does not provide adequate security for indigenous people,
32:42 right.
32:43 The system is
32:46 The whole uh grievance system
32:48 is
32:49 AI themselves
32:50 who are um
32:52 looking at those grievance uh complaints.
32:55 And even if the community appear,
32:57 A3
32:58 appoints
33:00 two of its 3 reviewers.
33:02 To,
33:03 to look at it and they are
33:05 communities are,
33:06 are,
33:06 are allowed uh
33:08 are ensured to share this information.
33:11 So this is not a kind of gri mechanisms that can protect indigenous people.
33:16 And recently the
33:18 Um,
33:20 the Integrity Council for Voluntary Carbon Market
33:23 has approved
33:25 this ATI standard.
33:28 So,
33:29 which is,
33:30 has been um also
33:32 incredible to protect the right of indigenous people.
33:35 Therefore,
33:36 it is expected that
33:38 both the artery and leaf
33:40 will continue
33:41 to business as usual.
33:43 Hm
33:46 Yeah,
33:47 thank you,
33:47 Raymond.
33:50 Yeah,
33:50 it's um.
33:52 We talked about hope yesterday,
33:54 but many of these experiences.
33:57 Uh,
33:57 um,
33:58 um,
34:01 suggesting that on the ground the realities are just,
34:04 uh,
34:05 in many instances too different,
34:06 um,
34:07 but,
34:08 uh,
34:08 let me,
34:09 let me now turn,
34:10 uh,
34:11 to Matt.
34:11 Maybe he has something more positive to offer.
34:14 Um,
34:15 he's a,
34:15 a senior associate,
34:17 um,
34:18 with Tetra Tech International Development Group and has served,
34:22 for example,
34:22 as a chief of party of the USAID funded 10 and Global Climate Change Program.
34:28 Matt,
34:28 you've been working in Zambia,
34:30 uh,
34:31 recently with or focus on,
34:33 on Zambia,
34:33 uh,
34:34 a country that has produced a significant amount
34:37 um
34:38 of carbon credits and uh where local communities are involved,
34:41 in fact,
34:42 in,
34:42 uh,
34:43 carbon markets.
34:44 And can you describe those recent developments in
34:47 the carbon market in Zambia to us and uh
34:50 in particular with reference to the role of community forest management schemes
34:56 and,
34:57 and tell us what we can learn from these experiences,
35:00 um,
35:01 and where there's room for improvement,
35:04 uh,
35:04 but maybe also some positive messages as regarding
35:09 potential benefits for local communities.
35:11 Great,
35:12 uh,
35:12 thanks,
35:12 Jan.
35:13 Really appreciate it.
35:14 Um,
35:14 I will have one or two slides just for reference,
35:17 even the first one could come up.
35:19 Um,
35:19 coming back to your first mention about a land rush,
35:22 yes,
35:23 and we're talking about forest carbon,
35:25 I think we do have a bit of a rush,
35:26 but I think we need to be clear,
35:28 this is not purchases or leaseholds in most cases or in many cases,
35:32 uh,
35:33 particularly in the large scale avoided redeforestation,
35:35 it's partnerships
35:37 in the best opportunity.
35:38 Uh,
35:39 and management agreements,
35:40 so this creates more of an opportunity,
35:43 uh,
35:43 for a balanced relationship,
35:44 but we know that the balance of power is never equal,
35:48 uh,
35:48 and that we need to build on it and we need to move beyond terms like benefit sharing,
35:53 which implies sharing sort of implies
35:55 it's optional or it will be there
35:57 to more of a rights framework,
35:59 uh,
36:00 around this.
36:00 I think that's clear,
36:02 um,
36:02 and as far as where countries are moving.
36:04 Uh,
36:05 the integrity work is pushing countries in
36:08 the global community to worry about registry
36:10 because of integrity of double counting.
36:13 Uh,
36:13 so registries are emerging,
36:15 which is inherently spatial,
36:17 which is inherently,
36:18 uh,
36:18 rights-based.
36:19 Uh,
36:20 so Ghana,
36:20 for example,
36:21 is an established registry,
36:23 uh,
36:23 but I'll get to some sort of risks there as well.
36:26 Uh,
36:26 so as noted,
36:27 Zambia was one of the earlier actors in nature-based solutions for forests,
36:31 um,
36:31 not necessarily carbon.
36:33 Zambia and Kenya were two of the first movers.
36:37 Kenya,
36:37 because of the implementation was happening on community ranches,
36:41 where tenure was secure.
36:43 Uh,
36:43 in the case of Zambia,
36:45 investment moved there because chiefs have constitutional rights and authority
36:50 over customary land.
36:53 Uh,
36:53 that allowed for these large scale agreements to
36:56 be agreed and signed at sort of mega,
36:59 uh,
36:59 larger levels,
37:00 not necessarily community,
37:02 but at a,
37:03 at a,
37:03 at a level that allowed for,
37:04 for authority.
37:06 Um,
37:07 I think what then became created in Zambia
37:10 and increasingly in a few other countries,
37:11 the opportunity
37:13 for viability is community forest management
37:16 uh legislation,
37:18 which occurred in Zambia under the 2015 Forest Act
37:21 and allowed for the devolution of management rights to communities.
37:25 Um,
37:26 and it is a balance once you realize,
37:28 uh,
37:29 which rights are devolved or not.
37:31 So the legal recognition of customary
37:33 and community rights is an absolute necessity
37:37 to get us there
37:38 at multiple levels,
37:40 land rights
37:41 and resource management rights,
37:43 because we know
37:43 that in many countries your land rights do not give
37:46 you the rights to cut down trees or to take commercial
37:49 opportunities out of them.
37:51 Uh,
37:51 they should go to the queen
37:53 or whomever else.
37:54 We need to break that down
37:56 and bring them back to the community.
37:59 Communities have always had subsistence rights.
38:00 Sure,
38:01 you want to cut down a tree to build a house or a forest,
38:03 why not?
38:04 You,
38:04 um,
38:05 maybe not for wildlife,
38:06 but we need to understand that these are a bundle,
38:09 and we need to understand that particularly when dealing,
38:12 uh,
38:12 with lawyers and the project developers who frankly are not steeped in
38:17 the land sector understanding of the bundle.
38:20 Um,
38:21 and in Zambia,
38:22 that has been a benefit and a negative,
38:24 uh,
38:25 piece.
38:26 Um,
38:26 but you notice that despite this 126
38:30 carbon projects in Africa,
38:32 which is relatively few
38:33 for the scale of,
38:35 um,
38:36 uh,
38:36 of the problem and,
38:37 and,
38:37 and the demand and the idea of opportunity,
38:41 um,
38:41 they are clustered in very few
38:44 countries,
38:44 and that is largely a rights issue.
38:47 Um,
38:48 but,
38:49 uh,
38:49 if we move to the next slide,
38:51 in Zambia at the same time,
38:52 it has been a rush since the creation
38:55 of community forest management groups,
38:57 uh,
38:58 just 8 years ago,
38:59 there's now 300 groups
39:01 covering potentially 3 sorry,
39:04 covering potentially,
39:05 uh,
39:05 6 million hectares.
39:07 That's almost 10% of the whole country
39:10 being established across 300 groups.
39:13 Bottom up,
39:14 great.
39:15 However,
39:15 uh,
39:16 you can imagine a bit of the,
39:17 I don't wanna say chaos,
39:18 but the divergence of opportunities that's being created.
39:21 Um,
39:23 so let's move to the next slide,
39:25 um.
39:26 And I think we need to see that 600,
39:28 you know,
39:28 6 million hectares.
39:30 There's quite a bit of speculation that goes on there.
39:33 OK.
39:34 Uh,
39:35 in some cases,
39:36 communities are establishing on their own,
39:37 but in most other cases,
39:39 they have well-wishers or supporters who are facilitating that.
39:43 This comes from the conservation sector,
39:46 uh,
39:46 often wildlife,
39:47 which is used to working on large scale areas.
39:50 Um,
39:51 and then we also have,
39:53 uh,
39:53 project developers,
39:54 the traditional carbon cowboys,
39:55 but also
39:56 well-meaning carbon cowboys,
39:59 uh,
39:59 and,
39:59 and the sector has cleaned up somewhat.
40:02 But what this has created is a rush
40:05 to lock up areas,
40:06 uh,
40:07 and if you move to the next slide.
40:09 Uh,
40:09 not even lock up areas,
40:10 but we are operating,
40:11 uh,
40:12 and actually this is only about half of the forests
40:15 that have been mapped.
40:16 There's 150 others that have not been mapped,
40:19 so this is just a partial piece.
40:21 But let's go to the next one and zoom in onto an area.
40:24 So what you have are,
40:26 um,
40:28 well-meaning groups
40:29 who may have no carbon experience,
40:31 but may be working in a wildlife conservation moment.
40:35 They don't want to see carbon cowboys coming in.
40:37 So they
40:39 rush to initially secure these rights and supports communities.
40:42 They're not securing them,
40:43 so they're supporting communities to establish rights.
40:46 So we have sort of a first come,
40:47 first serve
40:49 nature to carbon at the moment,
40:50 similar to mineral exploitation.
40:53 The difference is that in mineral exploitation,
40:56 in the end,
40:56 you're probably only gonna be working in a very relatively small area
41:00 within that.
41:01 With forest carbon and land-based carbon,
41:04 you actually need all of that area.
41:07 Even agricultural concessions
41:09 are often much more
41:11 uh initially than,
41:12 than companies ever plan or are able to,
41:14 to,
41:14 to work on.
41:15 But uh forest
41:17 and uh avoided deforestation in particular,
41:20 they sort of need the whole area.
41:21 So we have this speculation.
41:24 By nature of the rush,
41:26 by nature of the need,
41:27 with individual communities,
41:29 with government,
41:30 for example,
41:30 the blue carbon deal,
41:32 but people going out and signing with individual communities.
41:35 I get equally concerned when I hear of the bond challenge and 30 by 30.
41:39 When you're starting a goal
41:41 with a biophysical goal,
41:42 as opposed to having the initial socio-cultural goal,
41:46 you have some risks there.
41:48 So based on these relationships,
41:50 we do have risks.
41:51 There's opportunities,
41:53 communities are signing
41:55 deals in some ways or making agreements
41:58 in the same way that in Liberia,
42:00 DRC when the community forester rules were established,
42:05 uh,
42:05 logging companies would come in
42:07 to help a community establish a community forest,
42:10 and those relations create a bond
42:13 that,
42:14 Isn't er impossible to break,
42:16 but it's harder for a community to break those bonds,
42:19 which highlights that governance need at the community level,
42:23 um,
42:24 as well.
42:25 So it's at all levels.
42:26 Um,
42:27 if you move to just the next,
42:28 I think the next slide,
42:30 um,
42:30 these overlaps.
42:32 If we're not doing this with a spatial perspective
42:34 and communities or groups are doing very bottom up.
42:38 You start to get overlaps and conflicts that we're jumping into
42:42 in some of these areas,
42:44 uh,
42:44 these are often bordering chiefdom boundaries
42:47 that are,
42:48 um,
42:48 what would you say,
42:49 still contested.
42:51 These lines are being placed on top of former chiefdom boundaries,
42:54 and you're actually getting into conflicts over benefit sharing and rights,
42:58 uh,
42:59 by putting,
43:00 um,
43:01 carbon uh projects on top of
43:04 ostensibly resolved rights,
43:06 but not really uh resolved customary
43:09 rights.
43:10 Uh,
43:10 and then the final
43:11 little slide here puts the risk of wrong expectations.
43:14 You see this one on the left,
43:16 um,
43:17 that is,
43:17 uh,
43:17 over a million hectares or,
43:19 or thereabouts,
43:20 uh,
43:20 maybe not quite a million,
43:21 but it's quite huge.
43:22 That will generate a certain amount of credits.
43:24 You also see communities thinking,
43:27 uh,
43:27 that,
43:27 that community forest of,
43:29 uh,
43:29 of 80 hectares there on the right.
43:32 That won't generate benefits.
43:34 I think our understanding of the scale of benefits and the scale
43:37 of opportunity and the transaction cost can be a little bit,
43:41 uh,
43:41 out of whack.
43:42 So we need to help communities
43:44 understand what the opportunities are,
43:46 how to bundle them,
43:46 etc.
43:47 And then finally,
43:48 just the governance piece,
43:49 putting money into a problem,
43:51 the governance challenge
43:53 can create more problems,
43:55 uh,
43:55 rather than.
43:56 Uh,
43:57 than less,
43:57 so we all know underlying this is the governance issue.
44:00 More money is not necessarily the solution
44:03 until we sort this out.
44:05 Yeah,
44:05 thanks a lot,
44:06 Matt.
44:06 Um,
44:07 yeah,
44:07 thanks for,
44:08 for showing us how that,
44:09 uh,
44:10 unfolds,
44:11 unfolds on the ground in a,
44:12 in a specific country and
44:14 alluding to the governance issues at
44:17 various
44:18 levels,
44:18 and I would like to take us back to the,
44:21 uh,
44:21 international level and come back to you,
44:23 uh,
44:23 Johanna.
44:25 Since all this discussion has,
44:27 as we have seen,
44:28 an important international dimension,
44:31 and
44:31 I would like to
44:33 ask you how those discussions that we are having
44:36 here and the experiences that we are hearing about.
44:39 Uh,
44:39 how they are reflected in the Rio Conventions and in particular
44:45 how are land rights now being discussed at the COPs
44:50 and um
44:52 and maybe what does that mean for us or how do we have
44:55 to think about the way forward and potential priorities in these processes.
45:00 Thanks,
45:01 um,
45:02 yeah,
45:02 I think it's fair to say that over the last
45:04 few years,
45:05 10,
45:05 well,
45:06 since the Rio Convention came about and then the subsequent protocols,
45:09 land rights have increasingly found a space in the Rio conventions,
45:14 uh,
45:14 to different degrees.
45:15 My,
45:15 my personal favorite
45:16 in spite of the 30 by 30 goals is the,
45:19 the newly,
45:20 uh,
45:20 adopted Kunming
45:22 Montreal Global biodiversity framework under the CBD
45:25 which has very specific language
45:27 on land rights and not.
45:28 Only land rights,
45:29 it's also speaks,
45:30 uh,
45:31 about FPIC.
45:32 It speaks about
45:33 participation of indigenous peoples and local community and spatial planning.
45:37 Uh,
45:38 it speaks about access to justice for environmental defenders,
45:41 women's land rights,
45:42 um,
45:42 and another a number of other important things,
45:45 uh,
45:45 and beyond that there's a discussion.
45:47 It has specific targets which is obviously useful,
45:50 um,
45:51 but then also there's a discussion currently
45:53 underway actually at this moment in Nairobi.
45:56 Uh,
45:56 for,
45:56 for the finalization of the monitoring framework of this
46:00 of these targets which include very specific land indicators,
46:03 um,
46:04 if those land indicators actually
46:06 become
46:07 what's called headline indicators there will be
46:09 mandatory reporting requirements on governments on land,
46:13 land,
46:13 uh,
46:14 rights and tenure security so this,
46:16 this is quite tangible compared to what we had before
46:20 in the UNCCD,
46:21 um,
46:22 which is the UN Convention on combating desertification.
46:26 Land rights has also been recognized
46:28 in a decision,
46:28 I think the first time the decision was in 2019.
46:31 There was a follow up decision
46:33 confirming
46:33 tenure as an important element of reversing land degradation
46:37 and since then they've developed a number of,
46:40 uh,
46:40 technical guides together with the to together with FAO,
46:44 um,
46:45 on the use of the VGTTs in this context
46:47 and there's a number of national consultation processes currently underway.
46:51 Um,
46:52 in terms of looking at how that can be implemented in practice
46:56 at the UNFCCC,
46:58 um,
46:58 we heard yesterday that land is mentioned,
47:01 that's right,
47:01 but we don't really see a reference to land rights,
47:04 um,
47:04 we see reference to human rights
47:07 in general recognition of human rights but not.
47:10 Um,
47:10 a,
47:10 a recognition of land rights as such apart from in safeguards,
47:13 I think under the REDD plus we have,
47:15 uh,
47:16 the mentioning of land rights and I'm sure there are other safeguards out there.
47:19 What we do know though is that there's,
47:21 there's a lot of more data that emerged over the
47:23 last few years recognizing the links between tenure security,
47:27 uh,
47:27 the protection of forest,
47:29 and the,
47:30 the,
47:31 I think it's what is it 300,000 metric tons of carbon that's stored in.
47:36 Uh,
47:36 in forests held by indigenous peoples,
47:38 which is,
47:39 as we learned yesterday,
47:40 I believe,
47:41 33 times the emissions of 2017,
47:44 so that link,
47:44 that data that was generated allowed for,
47:47 uh,
47:48 uh,
47:48 uh,
47:49 um,
47:49 commitment by governments that original pledge of $1.7 billion
47:54 to reckon to the supporting indigenous peoples
47:57 and forest protection.
47:59 Um,
48:00 so even though we don't have it in the language,
48:02 we do have a recognition that there is a link between land rights
48:06 and and fighting climate change.
48:08 Um,
48:09 we always advocate that this needs to go beyond forest
48:12 rangelands are incredibly important in terms of carbon sinks.
48:16 Uh,
48:16 they don't get the attention of forest,
48:18 um,
48:18 so,
48:19 so,
48:19 so that's something where I feel more attention could actually be very helpful.
48:24 Um,
48:24 now the trick is of course how this gets implemented
48:27 on the national level and that is where the,
48:29 what is it,
48:30 the,
48:31 the,
48:31 the proof hits the pudding,
48:32 what's the term,
48:33 something like that,
48:35 yeah,
48:35 things like that
48:36 anyway,
48:37 so,
48:37 um,
48:37 we,
48:38 we have,
48:39 uh,
48:39 there's a study that was done by
48:40 the International Working Group on Indigenous Affairs,
48:43 um,
48:44 that.
48:44 Analyze to what extent indigenous peoples are actually
48:47 involved in the national processes surrounding NDCs,
48:50 um,
48:50 and,
48:51 and while it is increasing it is still not very high.
48:54 I think it's about 20% or so
48:57 25% that mentioned indigenous peoples in NDCs so
49:01 there's that's an opportunity where we can do more
49:04 um.
49:05 We have had in the last couple of months 3
49:08 dialogues among our members and others looking at to what extent
49:11 the national implementation processes of the Rio Convention has served
49:15 members to advocate for land rights on the national level
49:19 and there are some,
49:20 some experiences of farmers' organization,
49:23 pastoralist groups,
49:24 women's land rights even,
49:26 but it is still minimum it's still quite abstract,
49:28 and I think this is where,
49:30 um,
49:30 the next sort of hurdle is we have the recognition globally.
49:34 More recognition at least
49:36 um now we need to translate that into tangible outcomes on the national level.
49:41 The UNCCD is starting that with this
49:44 with this 5 consultations that are happening right now,
49:46 but it's only 5,
49:47 so we need more of those,
49:49 um,
49:49 and then we have a real opportunity
49:51 with respect to NDCs.
49:53 The next set of NDCs are up in 2025,
49:55 so there's a great opportunity to include,
49:58 uh,
49:58 land rights into the discussion on NDCs,
50:00 involve relevant constituency group.
50:03 Um,
50:03 in the discussion on what these NDCs and climate action plans should look like,
50:08 and then with the national biodiversity strategies and action plans,
50:11 they're due already in 20 like at the end of October this year,
50:14 so the time is a little shorter,
50:16 um,
50:17 but,
50:17 um,
50:17 I,
50:18 I'm very hopeful with respect to the new targets
50:20 that.
50:21 You know,
50:22 even if that doesn't become a headline indicator on tenure security,
50:26 it's still the targets out there and there will
50:28 be an obligation to report against them so I think
50:31 that's where I think the the next challenge and opportunity lies going forward.
50:36 Yeah,
50:36 um,
50:37 thanks a lot for,
50:38 uh,
50:38 illustrating the,
50:39 the international,
50:40 uh,
50:41 picture,
50:42 and I would now
50:44 like to come back to you,
50:46 Raymond,
50:46 um,
50:47 I mean,
50:47 you basically,
50:49 um,
50:50 told us how we currently do,
50:52 uh,
50:52 and that left me a bit puzzled.
50:54 And
50:56 I wonder
50:58 where you see priorities,
50:59 how we can do better
51:02 in terms of how can we make sure that these projects eventually
51:07 turn out to be to create.
51:09 Um,
51:10 benefits to local communities and in,
51:12 in particular I would like to know,
51:14 I mean there's a community and,
51:15 and Matt has also shown us that the that the different governance
51:18 levels matter and you in particular pointed out the role of governments uh
51:24 in between.
51:25 Um,
51:26 so what,
51:27 what is the role of governments,
51:29 uh,
51:29 in particular in the region that you're working on,
51:32 and,
51:32 and how does the interplay then with the governance at the local level,
51:37 level make sure that
51:40 the communities can benefit?
51:44 I think uh
51:45 the most important um things
51:48 ingredient to do better here is
51:51 sequencing is crucial.
51:54 You cannot design those type of programs before securing rights.
51:59 Yeah,
51:59 if you look at the development of this carbon
52:03 market in Congo.
52:05 We are seeing growing interest in the carbon market
52:09 uh
52:09 because of the forest potential.
52:12 And many of these initiatives and the actors,
52:15 they are working in silos.
52:17 At
52:18 the risk of creating disorder
52:21 where the communities.
52:23 are also very vulnerable
52:25 because they don't understand this market.
52:28 And
52:29 they are exposed to exploitation and manipulation.
52:33 So
52:34 we need a regulatory framework.
52:36 You need somebody to regulate,
52:37 to put these
52:38 different actors,
52:40 um,
52:40 to work together,
52:42 how to harmonize this.
52:43 And based on this,
52:45 we are also seeing,
52:47 for example,
52:48 the DRC government
52:49 last year rush to enact
52:51 a national uh legislation for carbon market.
52:55 And this legislation,
52:57 if you look at it,
52:58 favoring government control over
53:00 uh this
53:01 initiative and their benefit streams.
53:05 And
53:06 in part of that legislation,
53:07 the prime minister also
53:09 established a public entity
53:12 which is called the
53:14 Carbon Market Regulatory Authority,
53:17 which is responsible for regulating and managing this
53:20 new carbon market initiative.
53:23 But however,
53:24 this rush in enacting this legislation.
53:28 Many communities and even the civil society organizations were not consulted
53:31 and they have really criticized this
53:34 legislation because
53:35 this legislation.
53:38 Um,
53:38 promote or reinforce government control on this
53:41 huge conserve uh conservation area,
53:45 uh,
53:45 forest reserve
53:47 at the detriment of the communities that lives within an urgency to this,
53:51 uh,
53:52 um,
53:52 um,
53:53 huge forest area.
53:56 So the civil society in Congo,
53:58 they are calling on the government to complete this.
54:01 Legislation by establishing
54:03 A very strong regulatory framework.
54:07 That we put the right of indigenous people
54:10 and local community at the center of our action.
54:14 Why does it,
54:15 er,
54:15 why is it that?
54:16 Because
54:18 Indigenous community as uh Met said should not only be seen as
54:23 beneficiaries,
54:25 they should also be seen as partners
54:28 and shareholders because they are contributing their land and their forests
54:32 to this initiative.
54:33 They need to be part of the decision making.
54:35 They need to be part of the uh
54:38 the design of this program and also share the profit
54:41 equally.
54:43 Another um um dimension in the DRSC is where the government
54:49 agitated um.
54:52 Carbon rights
54:53 And sign using similar provisions for logging concession.
54:58 Sign agreement with
54:59 companies that have logging
55:01 concessions
55:03 who are willing to convert
55:05 that logging concession into conservation
55:08 concession for carbon
55:09 market.
55:11 These agreements,
55:12 the way they are signed is not very clear,
55:14 it's not very transparent.
55:15 And we know the government in the past
55:18 have not been very transparent in
55:20 allocating
55:22 or sharing
55:23 forest royalty
55:24 with community.
55:26 So signing this agreement with these private companies like
55:30 I'm talking the case of Eirakungo in Maindumbe
55:33 and the RED program in Isani in Shoppo province,
55:37 these are
55:37 companies that are already benefit from carbon credit.
55:41 But within that agreement,
55:42 it shows
55:43 an obligation for taxation,
55:46 obligation to engage with the community to
55:48 sign social agreements for community to benefit.
55:52 But when you go down to the fee
55:54 with
55:54 the
55:55 carbon credit that has been
55:57 sold from this
55:59 initiative,
55:59 nothing is done in the community.
56:02 And these communities,
56:04 they are
56:04 legitimate climate.
56:06 But this benefit because of the type of agreement
56:09 where the government signed with this private sector is not very clear.
56:13 They are being excluded and they are being left out.
56:18 Yeah,
56:18 thanks a lot,
56:19 uh,
56:19 Raymond.
56:20 Maybe Matt,
56:21 I can ask you whether,
56:23 where you see potential policy priorities and entry points.
56:28 Yeah,
56:29 I didn't mean to be perhaps so,
56:31 so critical in the first round to get caught up in that,
56:34 um,
56:34 but in Zambia,
56:35 things are going relatively well.
56:38 Millions of dollars,
56:39 hundreds of thousands per year are flowing to
56:44 the chiefdoms,
56:45 to the communities in their own way.
56:47 Uh,
56:48 similar to what Raymond was saying regarding
56:50 the forest concessions in Southern Africa,
56:53 people are relying on existing tenure rights,
56:55 which are the wildlife hunting concessions.
56:58 So those are the areas,
56:59 the,
57:00 the border areas outside of the,
57:02 the protected areas.
57:03 So that's where you're layering on this new place.
57:06 Those groups and relying on those historical
57:08 governance groups to then distribute benefits.
57:11 And then we get into the inter-community
57:13 governance challenges of new funds coming.
57:16 Uh,
57:17 lack of awareness about how much you should be receiving.
57:20 Should it be 100,000?
57:21 Should it be a million?
57:23 When you,
57:23 uh,
57:26 let's say kill an impala,
57:27 the value of that is fairly well known.
57:29 When you cut down a tree,
57:31 the value is,
57:31 you know,
57:32 known a little bit less,
57:33 but it's there.
57:34 But when you have a ton of carbon,
57:35 that value is not understood.
57:37 The generation,
57:38 uh,
57:39 of the benefits is not well understood.
57:41 So I,
57:41 I do think that there are good things happening and it's hap,
57:45 you know,
57:45 when the money gets there,
57:46 that creates the next problem,
57:48 and we're,
57:48 we're ready for these.
57:49 Um,
57:50 for me,
57:51 the,
57:51 the policy solution is the understanding
57:53 that everyone wants security of investments.
57:56 Uh,
57:56 unfortunately,
57:57 we know the timeline for securing community rights is
58:00 sometime in the next 5 to 200 years,
58:03 and we're patient with that.
58:04 We keep coming back.
58:06 The climate community,
58:07 perhaps even the bio and the biodiversity as well,
58:09 they are not patient.
58:10 They say we don't have 200 years.
58:12 So they do shortcuts.
58:14 They say tenure is good enough.
58:16 We know it's not,
58:17 but we don't want to
58:19 stop these good investments.
58:21 So,
58:22 for me,
58:22 the key is providing
58:24 not a rights recognition
58:26 prerequisite,
58:27 uh,
58:28 but a requirement that it's part of a process.
58:31 Cause once you get that signature of rights,
58:32 people just go off and say,
58:33 oh,
58:34 it's there.
58:35 But it's a process.
58:36 We know it has to be renegotiated over time.
58:39 And I think that is something we need to do.
58:41 We need to build in.
58:42 The Forest Investment Program,
58:44 for better or worse,
58:45 started doing that with their indigenous people's funds.
58:48 I'm not sure how it's gone,
58:50 but
58:50 to recognize that
58:51 even after you get that signature to deliver benefits,
58:54 that's when the
58:56 challenge starts.
58:57 The financiers think it's done once you sign the paperwork.
59:00 Implementers know that that's when it starts.
59:03 So again,
59:04 elite capture,
59:05 the focus on governance.
59:07 And really start to break through on carbon rights.
59:10 We had carbon rights meetings 1015 years ago.
59:13 I've just jumped back in.
59:15 We're not really any closer
59:17 to,
59:17 to knowing what to do,
59:18 how to distribute those
59:20 between a government,
59:21 as you note,
59:22 as a regulator,
59:23 but also as an interested party who wants to capture.
59:26 And I think that,
59:27 that lack of a fair,
59:29 fair group.
59:30 Avoid groups,
59:31 goals that are rooted in biophysical opportunities.
59:33 And,
59:34 and just build awareness
59:36 as we know,
59:36 but we don't have all the awareness quite yet.
59:39 I know that didn't answer your question on the policies,
59:41 Jan,
59:41 but
59:42 yeah,
59:43 well,
59:44 maybe we become more specific towards the end,
59:46 um,
59:47 and well I will have one more question for Joan,
59:50 um,
59:50 but meanwhile you can already
59:53 start thinking about the questions that you may have since I will then open,
59:57 uh,
59:57 to questions from the audience
1:00:00 and I think you can use that
1:00:02 mic
1:00:02 over there,
1:00:04 uh,
1:00:04 so you can maybe already start
1:00:07 preparing.
1:00:08 Um,
1:00:09 but Joan,
1:00:09 um,
1:00:10 a final,
1:00:10 uh,
1:00:11 question from,
1:00:12 uh,
1:00:13 my,
1:00:13 from me here,
1:00:14 um,
1:00:15 so
1:00:16 what,
1:00:17 what is your,
1:00:17 uh,
1:00:18 what are your concrete
1:00:20 policy,
1:00:21 uh,
1:00:21 or suggestions to policy makers and other decisions,
1:00:24 decision makers?
1:00:25 What,
1:00:25 what can we draw from this?
1:00:27 Uh,
1:00:27 what,
1:00:27 what should be our priorities?
1:00:30 Um,
1:00:30 yeah,
1:00:30 thank you for that.
1:00:31 I,
1:00:31 I think the,
1:00:32 uh,
1:00:32 uh,
1:00:33 earlier speakers have already mentioned the need to secure land rights
1:00:37 and that it's not just land rights in the physical sense,
1:00:41 but the bundle of rights that goes with it,
1:00:44 particularly for indigenous peoples and the way they,
1:00:46 the,
1:00:47 the right.
1:00:48 To be able to decide how their lands,
1:00:50 territories,
1:00:51 and resources are,
1:00:52 are going to be used,
1:00:53 the right to practice their traditional knowledge and sustainable
1:00:57 use and and management of,
1:00:59 of resources,
1:01:00 um,
1:01:01 so that's one,
1:01:02 but the bigger one that I want to mention is we need policy coherence.
1:01:07 Because even
1:01:08 uh in in I I give you an example in my country,
1:01:11 the,
1:01:12 the Philippines,
1:01:13 we have a strong law recognizing indigenous people's rights,
1:01:18 including rights to our lands,
1:01:19 territories and resources and to free prior and informed consent.
1:01:24 But this is,
1:01:25 this is systematically violated because we have other laws like the mining law.
1:01:33 That allows foreign liberalized our mining industry and foreign companies can
1:01:40 own 100%
1:01:42 uh
1:01:43 mineral concessions,
1:01:44 and that law is given more importance
1:01:47 than
1:01:49 than implementing
1:01:50 the rights of indigenous peoples.
1:01:52 So free prior and informed consent
1:01:55 is engineered or
1:01:57 or not properly implemented to give way to mining.
1:02:02 Right,
1:02:02 so,
1:02:03 so that,
1:02:03 that's 11 example.
1:02:05 The other one is,
1:02:06 uh,
1:02:06 and I want to relate this also to,
1:02:09 uh,
1:02:09 what has been mentioned as the,
1:02:11 the global target for conservation,
1:02:13 right?
1:02:14 That,
1:02:14 that,
1:02:14 that is really encouraging that in,
1:02:16 in,
1:02:16 uh,
1:02:17 that we need to have a clear target on,
1:02:19 on conservation and that
1:02:21 the,
1:02:22 the global biodiversity framework provide for the recognition of,
1:02:26 of rights.
1:02:28 But if there is no policy coherence
1:02:30 that puts it at the center,
1:02:32 it's still a big problem because national laws.
1:02:36 On environment and conservation
1:02:39 is under the fortress approach,
1:02:42 fortress conservation approach,
1:02:44 where
1:02:45 we are in fact criminalized
1:02:47 when we use
1:02:48 our resources,
1:02:49 when we do hunting,
1:02:50 when we do fishing,
1:02:52 when we gather non-timber forest products,
1:02:54 we gather
1:02:55 herbal medicines,
1:02:57 we're we're criminalized.
1:02:58 Thousands of indigenous peoples are in jail
1:03:02 for violating national park laws.
1:03:06 Uh,
1:03:06 conservation laws,
1:03:08 so
1:03:09 we need to reform
1:03:11 laws that should be aligned
1:03:13 to respecting human rights,
1:03:16 including indigenous people's rights,
1:03:18 upholding social equity.
1:03:20 And sustainability
1:03:22 and at the same time
1:03:23 this should be accompanied by strong
1:03:26 accountability mechanisms that those violating rights,
1:03:30 those that are destroying the environment,
1:03:32 will be held to account.
1:03:35 Because unless we do that,
1:03:37 then the kind of violation or impunity that's happening will continue.
1:03:41 The destruction of the environment will,
1:03:43 will continue
1:03:45 because even now
1:03:47 another example in Argentina
1:03:49 where the the case of lithium mining and there were a lot of protests.
1:03:54 The government said
1:03:56 that
1:03:56 mining is a national priority,
1:03:59 so it will suspend
1:04:01 some
1:04:01 uh civil and political rights,
1:04:03 the right to demonstrate because
1:04:06 you cannot already
1:04:07 uh protest
1:04:09 national,
1:04:10 uh national priority.
1:04:12 Uh,
1:04:13 plants.
1:04:14 Right,
1:04:15 so,
1:04:16 so this is the scenario that we're looking at at the national level.
1:04:19 So unless there is clear
1:04:21 policy coherence
1:04:23 that put the government's obligation
1:04:26 to respect,
1:04:27 recognize,
1:04:27 and protect human rights,
1:04:29 to protect the environment,
1:04:31 to ensure sustainability in the use of of the resources,
1:04:36 then we will not be able to really address
1:04:39 this problem of the climate crisis.
1:04:46 Yeah,
1:04:46 thanks a lot,
1:04:48 Joanne.
1:04:50 Uh,
1:04:51 let me now see whether we do have questions from,
1:04:55 uh,
1:04:56 this large audience here where you can,
1:04:57 uh,
1:04:58 raise your hand and then,
1:05:00 yeah,
1:05:00 uh,
1:05:01 the lady over there and it would be great if you could come over to the mic,
1:05:06 um,
1:05:06 briefly introduce herself,
1:05:08 uh,
1:05:09 and come up with a crisp and concise question.
1:05:11 Good morning.
1:05:12 Thank you everyone.
1:05:13 Uh,
1:05:14 my name is Barbara Codispote.
1:05:15 I work for Oxfam.
1:05:16 Uh,
1:05:17 thank you to the panelists.
1:05:18 It was brilliant.
1:05:19 Thanks for presenting this,
1:05:20 OK,
1:05:21 depressing situation,
1:05:22 but that's it.
1:05:23 We're talking about policy responses and of course this is a very,
1:05:27 uh,
1:05:27 there's a focus on the carbon market,
1:05:30 etc.
1:05:31 If we zoom out,
1:05:32 uh,
1:05:33 the carbon market is sometimes an alibi.
1:05:36 Uh,
1:05:36 to avoiding
1:05:38 reduction of emissions,
1:05:40 so
1:05:41 should we be bolder in that saying that the
1:05:44 policy response is also about the reduction of emissions
1:05:48 or like the fact that these models,
1:05:50 uh,
1:05:51 is not sustainable
1:05:52 and the fact that corporate actors should have the obligation to
1:05:56 talk about their land footprint not just in the product.
1:05:59 But also in the carbon market
1:06:02 and other forms of offsetting
1:06:04 yesterday in the final uh keynote,
1:06:06 uh,
1:06:07 message,
1:06:08 uh,
1:06:08 a colleague said uh
1:06:10 there's no time anymore for carbon offsetting.
1:06:13 We should look at the reduction of emissions first so I think
1:06:16 we might be bolder.
1:06:17 I'm really curious to hear from you because I very much liked your presentation.
1:06:20 So
1:06:21 thanks a lot.
1:06:23 Yeah,
1:06:23 thank you.
1:06:25 If I have,
1:06:26 uh,
1:06:27 you can already move to the mic if you feel like,
1:06:29 uh,
1:06:30 asking another question,
1:06:32 um,
1:06:32 but meanwhile I would then hand over and I was sure that you were going to
1:06:36 take that question to and of course the others are invited to respond as well.
1:06:43 Yes.
1:06:45 Yes,
1:06:46 I,
1:06:46 I,
1:06:46 I fully agree that that that that's also why I
1:06:49 emphasize the need that we need to do a phase out
1:06:53 of of of fossil fuel production
1:06:55 and even if we look at the carbon offset,
1:06:59 the ones that that are involved in the carbon offset that are violating.
1:07:04 Human rights.
1:07:05 Many of them are from the fossil fuel industry.
1:07:07 They're using it as an excuse to continue
1:07:11 the,
1:07:11 the,
1:07:11 the production of fossil fuel,
1:07:14 so the carbon offset and the carbon market is not actually providing real solution
1:07:19 to reducing carbon emissions,
1:07:22 and 40% of the projects that were studied did not even result to carbon reduction.
1:07:29 With the offsets,
1:07:31 it actually provided excuses
1:07:34 for the fossil industry to continue to emit
1:07:39 carbon emissions.
1:07:39 So
1:07:40 the policy there is really the issue of immediate fast track
1:07:45 the phase out and divest,
1:07:47 divest from the fossil fuel industry
1:07:50 and instead
1:07:52 divest and stop the subsidies for fossil fuel industry
1:07:56 and channel that.
1:07:58 To building renewable energy needs of communities and
1:08:03 supporting their efforts to build their resilience.
1:08:05 Thank you.
1:08:07 Yeah,
1:08:07 thanks,
1:08:07 man.
1:08:08 I just wanted to come quickly in on a quick thought on the private sector,
1:08:12 uh,
1:08:12 because they are risk averse.
1:08:15 Private sector would prefer not to procure,
1:08:17 uh,
1:08:18 from places with tenure and security.
1:08:21 Um,
1:08:21 they would prefer not to,
1:08:23 uh,
1:08:24 procure
1:08:25 on the borders of protected areas.
1:08:27 But if the good actors in the private sector,
1:08:29 those who are trying with the SBTIs,
1:08:32 are.
1:08:33 Made too risky.
1:08:34 It's too risky to try something.
1:08:36 It's too risky to try.
1:08:38 They're gonna pull back.
1:08:39 And
1:08:40 another element of the private sector is going to jump in.
1:08:42 I've seen this on the edges of protected
1:08:45 areas or where farmers are in protected areas.
1:08:48 And the private sector is asking our community to say,
1:08:50 what can we do
1:08:52 so that we don't abandon our farmers when we find an issue in our supply chain.
1:08:57 Uh,
1:08:58 what can we do
1:08:59 other than run away,
1:09:00 which they are willing to do,
1:09:02 but I,
1:09:03 I want to encourage the good actors in the private sector to be bold,
1:09:07 uh,
1:09:07 and
1:09:08 try to work on tenure regularization in these areas,
1:09:12 negotiated agreements.
1:09:13 You see this in Cote d'Ivoire with the chocolate sector at the moment.
1:09:16 Once we realize and we start understanding the spatial,
1:09:20 uh,
1:09:21 elements of our supply chains,
1:09:23 particularly smallholder supply chains.
1:09:25 With EU deforestation regulations,
1:09:27 etc.
1:09:29 There's a risk that they will run away from working with smallholders,
1:09:33 uh,
1:09:33 leave and go straight back into their own privately owned,
1:09:37 uh,
1:09:37 or large
1:09:38 mills.
1:09:39 So I would just encourage us to think about who's going to fill the void if the,
1:09:44 I don't want to say good private sector actors,
1:09:45 but those that are willing,
1:09:47 when the light is shined,
1:09:48 uh,
1:09:49 to not run away,
1:09:50 because I,
1:09:50 I do think we need them to be part of the solution.
1:09:53 Um,
1:09:54 particularly when there's other markets that will take,
1:09:56 uh,
1:09:57 the same commodities,
1:09:59 so
1:09:59 yeah,
1:09:59 I think you,
1:10:00 you make a point there,
1:10:02 but again,
1:10:03 how do you identify a good private actor
1:10:05 and a bad private actor.
1:10:08 It's an issue because private actors from an economic theory
1:10:12 they operate in their
1:10:14 individual rationality to benefit
1:10:17 and once that rationality
1:10:19 is away they are going for profit maximization.
1:10:22 These other things add up to their pressure.
1:10:26 So
1:10:27 let me give you an example.
1:10:28 Total energy.
1:10:30 Is running a huge,
1:10:31 this is greenwashing,
1:10:33 running a huge um
1:10:35 carbon offset program in the Republic of Congo.
1:10:38 What has Total Energy done?
1:10:40 You've secured 50,000 hectares of
1:10:43 forests
1:10:44 of land.
1:10:46 And they have displaced indigenous community in Plateau Department.
1:10:50 This community have not been compensated up to now,
1:10:53 and they are already planting acacia.
1:10:56 To offset
1:10:57 their carbon footprint.
1:10:59 So,
1:11:01 and Total Energy like
1:11:02 uh Karen said now these are fossil fuel
1:11:06 uh big promoter uh actors.
1:11:09 So the problem is how do you identify
1:11:13 uh good private um
1:11:15 private uh sector actors.
1:11:18 It's a big problem.
1:11:20 I can help with that.
1:11:22 Yeah,
1:11:23 I,
1:11:23 I,
1:11:23 I,
1:11:23 I,
1:11:24 I,
1:11:24 I don't know if you know but there is a group of investors,
1:11:27 uh,
1:11:27 they called,
1:11:28 uh,
1:11:28 uh,
1:11:30 investors for human rights,
1:11:32 and they condition their investment
1:11:35 to clear commitment of human rights,
1:11:37 and many of them including the evidence that uh when
1:11:41 indigenous peoples are affected that there is a free.
1:11:44 Prior and informed consent
1:11:46 before they they give their investment
1:11:49 so I,
1:11:49 I think that's a good,
1:11:50 uh,
1:11:51 that I,
1:11:51 I call them,
1:11:52 uh,
1:11:52 good investors because they,
1:11:55 they
1:11:55 they have
1:11:56 clear ethical principles and policy commitments
1:12:00 and make also themselves accountable.
1:12:02 So
1:12:03 and I,
1:12:03 I,
1:12:04 and I believe that sector is now growing.
1:12:06 Wing because many are now beginning to realize,
1:12:08 like it's mentioned that they should also be part
1:12:11 if they were part of the problem,
1:12:13 they,
1:12:13 they,
1:12:13 they should also be part of the solution
1:12:16 and they're stepping up,
1:12:17 uh,
1:12:18 their,
1:12:18 their,
1:12:19 their efforts also to to support good investments that puts people at the center
1:12:24 and also ensure the protection of the environment.
1:12:29 Yeah,
1:12:29 thanks a lot.
1:12:30 Uh,
1:12:30 that's an interesting discussion and you don't even need me to moderate that.
1:12:35 Yeah,
1:12:35 I have another question here,
1:12:37 um,
1:12:37 please.
1:12:38 Yeah,
1:12:38 hi,
1:12:39 I'm Neil Sorenson with the Land Portal Foundation.
1:12:42 You know,
1:12:42 I remember back in,
1:12:43 uh,
1:12:44 during the world food crisis,
1:12:46 you know,
1:12:46 there was discussion that there has to be the cap and trade system,
1:12:49 it has to be $100 a ton
1:12:52 for the,
1:12:53 the system to be effective,
1:12:55 and now,
1:12:56 uh,
1:12:57 I mean I think there's still no global
1:13:00 standard yet,
1:13:01 but there is a European standard,
1:13:03 and,
1:13:04 uh,
1:13:05 I think the,
1:13:05 the price is now like $98 a ton.
1:13:08 In and in the for the European standard
1:13:11 trading standard
1:13:12 and even in Sweden it's like $125 a ton.
1:13:16 How do you differentiate
1:13:18 between you,
1:13:19 you all these bad actors you're talking about Raymond
1:13:21 saying they're,
1:13:22 they're greenwashing
1:13:24 what system are they using?
1:13:26 What system are they going by?
1:13:27 Are they,
1:13:28 uh,
1:13:29 you know,
1:13:30 are,
1:13:30 is the greenwashing going through the European trading system or is it some other?
1:13:35 You know,
1:13:36 other system,
1:13:37 or is the system in Sweden,
1:13:39 is it functioning better
1:13:41 and that's why the.
1:13:42 The pricing is $125 a ton.
1:13:46 Is that benefiting the tenure
1:13:48 facility
1:13:49 or indigenous peoples in any way?
1:13:53 Brief thought,
1:13:54 land-based investments are more risky.
1:13:57 They
1:13:58 oftentimes they generate a premium because they look better to some people
1:14:03 than,
1:14:03 um,
1:14:04 say,
1:14:05 uh,
1:14:05 replacing light bulbs across,
1:14:07 uh,
1:14:08 a large industrial area.
1:14:09 Um,
1:14:10 but they also
1:14:11 lose some of that premium because
1:14:13 their ability to,
1:14:14 to ensure permanence
1:14:16 is risky.
1:14:17 So there's a balance.
1:14:18 What I should say is that the,
1:14:21 the climate area has a rating system now,
1:14:23 so a credit is not equal to a credit,
1:14:25 right?
1:14:25 When a company buys,
1:14:26 if they're buying from
1:14:28 Mayandombe versus ERA,
1:14:30 they know what they're buying now,
1:14:32 you know,
1:14:33 so,
1:14:33 so carbon credits are now very much rated separately.
1:14:37 Um,
1:14:37 and it's not just having the
1:14:39 checkmark that you're Vera certified and that you've got the climate,
1:14:42 community,
1:14:43 biodiversity.
1:14:44 Anybody can do that,
1:14:44 not anybody,
1:14:45 but you can do that.
1:14:46 So there are ratings agencies like Cli,
1:14:49 uh,
1:14:49 out there that have just emerged in the last 2 or 3 years,
1:14:52 and they are helping,
1:14:53 uh,
1:14:54 the market to differentiate
1:14:56 for what they want.
1:14:57 Some people just want that credit to meet their EU ETS requirements.
1:15:01 Others
1:15:02 want to be able to be proud of what they're,
1:15:04 they're purchasing,
1:15:05 and they know people will come looking.
1:15:06 And so
1:15:07 it is starting to differentiate
1:15:09 a little bit.
1:15:10 But the problem again
1:15:12 is that if we focus just on that,
1:15:14 then all of those investments will go to Kenya,
1:15:17 and zero investments will go to Burkina Faso,
1:15:19 or,
1:15:20 or,
1:15:21 you know,
1:15:21 other places.
1:15:22 And I think as our community,
1:15:23 we need to help secure land rights
1:15:26 in other countries so that just a few
1:15:28 countries aren't the participants in the carbon,
1:15:31 uh,
1:15:31 whatever benefits can be there.
1:15:33 So,
1:15:34 that for me is sort of the next phase challenge.
1:15:37 Yeah,
1:15:37 I think one issue is the what standard are this company using
1:15:42 to buy this credit.
1:15:44 The ATI standard was,
1:15:46 if you look from their policy document,
1:15:48 it is very beautiful.
1:15:50 And how
1:15:51 they
1:15:52 really pay the language
1:15:55 of
1:15:56 protecting indigenous people,
1:15:57 right,
1:15:58 but what we have seen in Guyana,
1:16:01 which is the first country.
1:16:03 That this buying credit using this standard
1:16:07 shows that the grievance mechanism
1:16:09 in that standard is not
1:16:12 adequate to protect right.
1:16:14 Because the Ameridian people
1:16:16 have tried to use it
1:16:18 to complain and it didn't work,
1:16:21 so there's still a lot of work to be done.
1:16:23 And then if you see recently when the Integrity
1:16:28 Council for Voluntary Carbon Market is approving
1:16:31 Ary
1:16:34 as their standard.
1:16:36 Then
1:16:37 one needs to rethink.
1:16:39 That
1:16:40 Approving this that we have seen from the field that it's not working.
1:16:44 Are we going back to business as usual or
1:16:47 what are we,
1:16:48 what are we going to do?
1:16:52 Yeah,
1:16:54 what I,
1:16:54 I want to add here in the discussion of carbon is
1:16:59 that I'm just concerned.
1:17:01 From the indigenous people's perspective that we um
1:17:05 suddenly uh the importance of of of forest became
1:17:09 known because of its carbon
1:17:12 but from the perspective of indigenous peoples forest is not carbon
1:17:16 it's it's about it's multiple uh
1:17:18 values to to our culture to our livelihood,
1:17:22 to our identity.
1:17:24 And to the future generation,
1:17:26 uh,
1:17:26 with the way we want to manage the,
1:17:28 the forest and,
1:17:29 and,
1:17:30 and,
1:17:31 and,
1:17:31 and that's why,
1:17:32 as,
1:17:32 as Raymond has earlier said people don't understand what this carbon
1:17:36 market is all about because they cannot relate it with the way
1:17:40 we value our,
1:17:41 our forest
1:17:42 and in that sense we are now isolating forest as an ecosystem with other
1:17:48 ecosystems because of its carbon
1:17:51 but from.
1:17:51 Our perspective,
1:17:52 this the forest ecosystem is also related to other ecosystems.
1:17:57 So what,
1:17:57 what we need to protect not only
1:17:59 the forest but also the other ecosystems because of its multiple values to us.
1:18:05 But now with the commercialization of carbon as as the value of forest,
1:18:10 we're eliminating
1:18:12 or or those other values and importance of forests
1:18:16 are
1:18:17 are are becomes invisible.
1:18:19 And the appreciation of the the the interlink
1:18:23 of of forest ecosystem with other ecosystems is
1:18:27 suddenly not given importance and that is dangerous
1:18:31 and that is dangerous uh in in in that regard
1:18:35 because indigenous peoples are then
1:18:37 prohibited uh as mentioned earlier
1:18:40 to to do the the resource management systems
1:18:43 that.
1:18:43 We do in a sustainable way
1:18:45 that at the same time also providing
1:18:48 for our,
1:18:49 our,
1:18:49 our needs,
1:18:50 right?
1:18:51 So I I I just want to add that in in the discussion
1:18:55 of,
1:18:55 of,
1:18:56 uh,
1:18:56 you know,
1:18:56 how,
1:18:56 how do we actually
1:18:58 uh put value to needed ecosystems for our continued survival and not just reduce it
1:19:06 to the issue of carbon.
1:19:08 Yeah,
1:19:09 thanks a lot,
1:19:09 and I think it's not only dangerous,
1:19:11 but it's also very difficult to solve and needs needs to be solved and so that
1:19:16 the evaluation on this
1:19:18 that can be very different from the
1:19:22 local community's perspectives somehow corresponds to.
1:19:26 Whatever price of carbon we can possibly agree on,
1:19:30 and you're right,
1:19:32 Neil,
1:19:32 that there's no agreement and no procedure how we would arrive at the uniform
1:19:37 price there.
1:19:38 There's a rather a proliferation
1:19:40 of procedures.
1:19:41 I had,
1:19:42 did I have
1:19:44 another question from the audience here,
1:19:46 please,
1:19:46 you can take the mic.
1:19:48 Thank you.
1:19:49 Uh,
1:19:49 hello,
1:19:49 my name is Hege Rangersweit.
1:19:51 I'm from the government of Norway,
1:19:52 the International Climate and Forest Initiative.
1:19:55 Uh,
1:19:56 thank you for a very,
1:19:57 uh,
1:19:57 interesting panel.
1:19:59 Uh,
1:19:59 I think my question is as much as a comment because for,
1:20:02 for us who,
1:20:03 who work,
1:20:04 we work on international climate and forest finance
1:20:07 and,
1:20:07 as I think,
1:20:08 as all of you know,
1:20:09 um,
1:20:10 finance,
1:20:10 uh,
1:20:11 forest.
1:20:11 Are
1:20:12 underfinanced globally as a very important part of the climate solution.
1:20:16 forest and land use can be as much as 1/3
1:20:19 of the solution to reach the Paris Agreement goals,
1:20:22 and it can be as much as 2/3 at least
1:20:25 of,
1:20:25 of the global biodiversity framework.
1:20:28 So,
1:20:28 uh,
1:20:29 and,
1:20:29 and there's a big financing
1:20:31 gap
1:20:32 if we are to reach the global goals,
1:20:34 uh,
1:20:35 also including sustainable,
1:20:36 uh,
1:20:37 development goals.
1:20:38 So we've been working on for high integrity
1:20:41 forest carbon markets for the last 15-16 years
1:20:45 trying to see where can we attract
1:20:47 that type of finance.
1:20:50 So one of our principles is that we work with jurisdictional
1:20:54 REDD plus,
1:20:54 so we work with countries and or uh large scale states,
1:20:59 uh,
1:20:59 and I mean.
1:21:00 Countries like Guyana are not here to present their side of the story.
1:21:03 I think we need to be mindful of that,
1:21:06 uh,
1:21:06 but like Zambia,
1:21:08 Guyana,
1:21:09 DRC,
1:21:09 Indonesia,
1:21:10 Brazil,
1:21:10 there's many countries that have are
1:21:13 on,
1:21:13 on this path,
1:21:14 uh,
1:21:15 trying to find,
1:21:16 you know,
1:21:16 how they can develop,
1:21:17 uh,
1:21:18 high integrity,
1:21:19 uh,
1:21:19 regulations,
1:21:20 and it's a,
1:21:20 it's a challenging road,
1:21:21 right.
1:21:22 Um,
1:21:23 so not sort of diving into all the details.
1:21:26 I,
1:21:26 uh,
1:21:27 on,
1:21:27 on,
1:21:28 on the different standards because
1:21:30 of all arteries launched yesterday that they will,
1:21:33 uh,
1:21:33 revive that or,
1:21:35 uh,
1:21:35 go through the standard again so you all have,
1:21:37 uh,
1:21:37 uh,
1:21:37 the,
1:21:38 uh,
1:21:38 opportunity to give input to that standard,
1:21:41 but I,
1:21:41 I,
1:21:42 I think it's important to be solutions oriented because we've set some very,
1:21:46 very high targets globally,
1:21:48 about where we're going to be by 2030 and 2050.
1:21:52 And while we have to maintain high social integrity and secure rights,
1:21:57 I think we also need to generate a high integrity finance
1:22:02 so sort of where is that going to come from and how
1:22:04 can we work together in in developing that further would be my
1:22:08 question.
1:22:08 Thank you.
1:22:10 Yeah,
1:22:10 thanks a lot for uh the comment uh and question
1:22:15 um
1:22:16 that I would like to use uh to open my final round uh since eventually your your
1:22:21 question is touching upon a fundamental trade-off that
1:22:25 we need to address in a solutions oriented manner
1:22:29 and,
1:22:30 and maybe we can
1:22:32 just
1:22:32 start from Johanna with a with a final brief comment and.
1:22:38 Uh,
1:22:39 then we conclude otherwise,
1:22:40 unless I see,
1:22:41 uh,
1:22:42 an immediate
1:22:43 hand
1:22:44 going up,
1:22:45 no,
1:22:45 it's not the case,
1:22:46 and then I'll be concluding.
1:22:48 Sure,
1:22:48 thank you.
1:22:49 I might respond to the previous question,
1:22:52 first question a little more because I think it's,
1:22:54 it's also related to solution and I think the issue that
1:22:57 that you raised about
1:22:58 um
1:23:00 sustainable consumption is really critical and there is an SDG obviously
1:23:04 on sustainable production and consumption and I feel over the last.
1:23:08 In the beginning it was there was a
1:23:09 lot of attention but it's gotten significantly less attention
1:23:13 um
1:23:14 over the last few years and
1:23:16 um I think it's really important because
1:23:19 we're talking about even the the discussion
1:23:21 on energy transition as the term transition
1:23:24 currently communicates we're really transitioning away from fossil fuels
1:23:28 and that's just not the case there is a
1:23:30 reduction in coal production that's going down but gas and
1:23:33 and and um
1:23:36 fossil fuels are still going up and.
1:23:38 What the what the green energy or clean energy
1:23:42 is supplying is really the increasing energy
1:23:45 demand that we're seeing so it's really more of the energy addition than
1:23:49 transition for at least the medium term and
1:23:52 I think it's really important to recognize that
1:23:54 some people say the biggest lithium source is in a rubbish dump somewhere in Ghana
1:23:58 so
1:23:59 I think thinking about circular models thinking about more.
1:24:02 Efficient extraction methods thinking about
1:24:05 uh
1:24:06 more efficient energy
1:24:08 use and and
1:24:10 building cities etc.
1:24:12 is really critical dimension of this discussion
1:24:15 and we we sort of
1:24:16 forget about it a little bit in some of some of this so I'm
1:24:19 I'm glad you raised this.
1:24:20 I think we need to sort of bundle this discussion together with
1:24:24 the type of issues that we're discussing here thank you.
1:24:30 Cool,
1:24:30 thanks,
1:24:31 um,
1:24:31 focusing on solutions,
1:24:33 um,
1:24:33 and thinking about the role,
1:24:35 particularly of bilateral donors,
1:24:37 the private sector,
1:24:38 the regular carbon market will have a hard time working with,
1:24:41 uh,
1:24:42 maybe countries on policies,
1:24:45 individual project developers.
1:24:46 So I do think the focus for bilateral donors
1:24:48 and multilateral is to focus on the policy and political will to address,
1:24:53 uh,
1:24:53 community tenure and rights,
1:24:55 um,
1:24:56 because as I mentioned before,
1:24:57 introducing.
1:24:57 more money into the into the process will just encourage people to go to site,
1:25:01 site,
1:25:02 site,
1:25:02 site,
1:25:02 and try to develop more,
1:25:03 more,
1:25:03 more projects
1:25:05 when we have ignored for the past 60,
1:25:07 100 years,
1:25:08 whatever,
1:25:08 solving the underlying community rights and conflicts there.
1:25:11 So,
1:25:12 I think in encouraging
1:25:14 these focuses to not just focus on the,
1:25:17 uh,
1:25:18 easy countries,
1:25:18 let's say,
1:25:19 because I think this is much of the carbon
1:25:21 development world and really every world is about trust
1:25:24 between communities.
1:25:25 Government and
1:25:27 private sector development developers
1:25:29 and this process needs to be building trust.
1:25:32 Until you address rights,
1:25:33 you will not have a trust,
1:25:35 uh,
1:25:35 trusting relationship,
1:25:36 um,
1:25:37 until you build some transparency.
1:25:38 So that's the other role for government
1:25:40 on the rights framework.
1:25:41 And finally,
1:25:42 from our community,
1:25:43 we have tools.
1:25:44 We have tools for conflict resolution at the community level.
1:25:47 We have,
1:25:48 uh,
1:25:48 governance tools for how,
1:25:50 how,
1:25:50 uh,
1:25:51 community governance can,
1:25:52 can support.
1:25:53 So let's be focusing on delivering the tools rather than developing new tools.
1:25:58 Forest governance assessment framework,
1:26:00 uh,
1:26:01 a number of things in the past 10 years.
1:26:03 Let's,
1:26:04 let's apply the tools.
1:26:05 To build trust.
1:26:08 Yeah,
1:26:08 I think uh
1:26:09 the,
1:26:10 the.
1:26:11 There's actually the gap of funding that He raised,
1:26:14 which is really important.
1:26:17 Um,
1:26:17 the Leaf coalition is actually one of those mechanisms
1:26:21 which is solution-oriented
1:26:23 to provide that funding
1:26:25 to support,
1:26:26 uh,
1:26:27 but the problem is the,
1:26:28 the great issue here is the sequencing,
1:26:31 which is very crucial,
1:26:33 like you said,
1:26:33 right,
1:26:34 underlining,
1:26:35 uh,
1:26:36 problem needs to be solved before,
1:26:38 um,
1:26:39 moving on with this initiative.
1:26:42 That is why the case of um
1:26:44 Guyana is really uh particular here in that
1:26:48 why the indigenous people manage 40% of the forest,
1:26:52 they have title to 15%.
1:26:54 Now
1:26:55 they are getting money from the
1:26:58 the red from archery.
1:27:00 The government is giving them those that 15% and
1:27:03 it is,
1:27:04 it gives the government that strong incentive not to
1:27:08 tie to the remaining 25%
1:27:11 so sequencing is really important
1:27:13 and then
1:27:14 the other problem here is um.
1:27:18 The
1:27:19 fundamental problem here is
1:27:21 how do you put right like um
1:27:24 Joan uh said
1:27:25 at the center.
1:27:27 The right for indigenous people is not only about
1:27:29 this,
1:27:30 but it encompass this bundle where we have been talking.
1:27:34 So it is really important
1:27:36 and it is part of the solution.
1:27:38 Because
1:27:38 once you resolve that,
1:27:40 there is,
1:27:41 is a frequency to get
1:27:43 these goals
1:27:44 and even
1:27:45 more faster.
1:27:46 Mm.
1:27:48 Yeah,
1:27:48 uh,
1:27:49 thank you.
1:27:49 On the question on where do we get finance to protect forests,
1:27:53 there are 3 that I can mention.
1:27:56 One is
1:27:57 divert the subsidies
1:28:00 from fossil fuel
1:28:01 to protect forest.
1:28:02 I mean,
1:28:03 that's trillions already.
1:28:05 So that's a political will issue from governments providing subsidies to
1:28:10 to
1:28:11 to instead
1:28:13 support the protection of forests.
1:28:14 The other is the official development aid.
1:28:17 How many countries are actually providing
1:28:19 the amount
1:28:22 of of of their official development aid?
1:28:24 It's not coming.
1:28:25 So if they only the rich countries will only put up
1:28:29 their
1:28:30 their ODA commitments,
1:28:32 then that's,
1:28:33 that's that,
1:28:33 that would really
1:28:35 not only protect forests but also support
1:28:38 the initiatives of communities
1:28:42 protecting the forest and other
1:28:45 ecosystems.
1:28:46 And the third is the private funds coming from philanthropists.
1:28:50 They're the ones,
1:28:51 I mean,
1:28:51 they are now the billionaires of the world.
1:28:54 If we can convince them
1:28:56 to protect forests,
1:28:58 and of course protecting forests means protecting
1:29:01 the rights of the stewards of forests.
1:29:03 It comes as a bundle,
1:29:05 right?
1:29:06 Uh,
1:29:08 will solve our problem on finance.
1:29:10 It's really just the
1:29:11 the lack of political will and strong commitment of these
1:29:15 actors to provide the necessary finance.
1:29:18 Not only for forests but also for other protection of other ecosystems.
1:29:23 Now on the solutions,
1:29:25 it's it's for,
1:29:26 for me,
1:29:27 in addition to ensuring the respect for
1:29:30 for for rights,
1:29:32 it's also
1:29:33 changing the approach of planning and designing all the solutions.
1:29:38 We need to
1:29:39 have a bottoms up approach.
1:29:42 We need to involve rights holders,
1:29:45 uh,
1:29:46 provide mechanisms and spaces for their
1:29:48 effective participation in decision making,
1:29:51 in designing actions,
1:29:53 because they know the situation also better.
1:29:55 They have,
1:29:56 they have also capacities
1:29:59 to,
1:29:59 to.
1:30:00 They acknowledge to contribute.
1:30:03 So,
1:30:03 so this is one of the missing.
1:30:06 It's always top down.
1:30:08 It's only a few people making decisions on behalf
1:30:12 of the billions of people in the world.
1:30:14 We need to change that.
1:30:16 Thank you.
1:30:19 Yeah,
1:30:19 uh,
1:30:20 thanks a lot,
1:30:20 and I,
1:30:21 I think it's time,
1:30:22 um,
1:30:23 to conclude this panel,
1:30:25 um,
1:30:26 and
1:30:26 I think it's very difficult to summarize,
1:30:29 uh,
1:30:29 that panel uh of and that multifaceted,
1:30:32 uh,
1:30:33 challenge of a land intensive climate action in a few words,
1:30:38 but I hope that,
1:30:39 um,
1:30:40 we could,
1:30:42 in,
1:30:42 in,
1:30:42 I think what you
1:30:43 really made a perfect,
1:30:44 uh,
1:30:45 uh,
1:30:46 panel here.
1:30:48 What this panel has shown you,
1:30:49 I think,
1:30:50 is that evidence is accumulating that this is an issue that
1:30:55 we didn't just invent to have a nice conference here,
1:30:58 but that it's something that is very relevant
1:31:02 globally
1:31:04 but then on the ground and affecting a lot of very vulnerable groups.
1:31:08 And so it's a perfect storm that we are facing,
1:31:12 as you put it,
1:31:13 Johanna.
1:31:15 We have evidence that
1:31:18 this matters and
1:31:21 the maps that Matt has shown are impressive in that regard.
1:31:26 They,
1:31:26 we are talking about areas that cover.
1:31:30 Very huge parts of entire countries and we've also seen
1:31:35 that on the ground
1:31:36 there is too much business as usual.
1:31:39 It's the same thing that we
1:31:41 said 15 years ago when we were discussing
1:31:44 here the implications of that global land rush.
1:31:47 We also said there are many good intentions out there.
1:31:51 It's not changing on the ground,
1:31:53 and I think it's big time that this needs to change.
1:31:57 Only a few thoughts on what I took from discussions about policy priorities,
1:32:03 so.
1:32:05 I think
1:32:06 what is a key point that is repeatedly mentioned at
1:32:11 this conference is that local communities need to become partners.
1:32:16 We need to
1:32:18 become serious about inclusive and participatory approaches
1:32:22 that we are still talking about that is required
1:32:28 should not be the case.
1:32:29 It should just be
1:32:31 part of any project and program that we are seeing implemented
1:32:36 on the ground.
1:32:37 It's not having,
1:32:38 and this means,
1:32:39 and that's the third,
1:32:40 the second point is I think an important.
1:32:44 Part of this is what you,
1:32:46 Joanne call an enabling environment,
1:32:49 so local communities need to becapacitated
1:32:52 to,
1:32:53 to also do their part of the job,
1:32:56 understand what this is about,
1:32:58 and make sure that
1:33:00 they can benefit
1:33:02 from such
1:33:04 systems.
1:33:06 And finally,
1:33:09 many of these aspects are related to governance
1:33:12 questions at various levels from the international,
1:33:14 as Johanna explained to us so well.
1:33:18 Uh,
1:33:19 down to the
1:33:20 domestic government level as,
1:33:22 uh,
1:33:24 as you were,
1:33:25 um,
1:33:26 alluding to,
1:33:27 and,
1:33:28 and,
1:33:28 and then down to the community level where we also face,
1:33:31 uh,
1:33:31 governance challenges in terms of how,
1:33:34 uh,
1:33:34 benefits are shared and distributed.
1:33:37 OK,
1:33:37 with this,
1:33:38 uh,
1:33:38 with this attempt to,
1:33:40 to summarize,
1:33:40 uh,
1:33:41 this,
1:33:41 uh,
1:33:42 challenge,
1:33:43 uh,
1:33:43 out here,
1:33:44 uh,
1:33:44 thanks a lot,
1:33:45 uh,
1:33:46 to my panels here.
1:33:48 Uh,
1:33:48 I would also like to extend my thanks to Christoph Kubitzer,
1:33:52 who has been
1:33:53 instrumental in putting this together,
1:33:55 uh,
1:33:55 in organizing this panel,
1:33:57 to all our funders,
1:33:58 of course,
1:33:59 the Land Metrics initiatives,
1:34:00 and finally to the bank for hosting this event and to you
1:34:05 for listening and providing questions and comments.
1:34:08 Thanks a lot.
1:34:08 Have a good,
1:34:09 great day.
1:34:16 I
- add-style
- lp-body-content
A video recording of the Policies to Secure Land Tenure in Land Intensive Climate Action session of the 2024 World Bank Land Conference.
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: Jann Lay, Head of Globalisation and Development Research Programme, German Institute for Global and Area Studies (GIGA)
Speakers:
- Johanna Von Braun, Climate and Nature lead, International Land Coalition
- Raymond Achu Samndong,Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) Manager, Tenure Facility
- Christoph Kubitza, Research Fellow at the GIGA Institute for Asian Studies
- Matt Sommerville, Chief of Party, USAID Tenure and Global Climate Change Program
- Joan Carling, environment and indigenous rights defender