Foreword

The increased occurrence of deadly heat waves and flooding led United Nations Secretary General António Guterres to observe that we are witnessing “a climate breakdown in real-time”. Climate extremes disproportionately impact those without access to resources to adapt. Addressing this injustice must be a central focus of climate policy.

Global efforts to reduce emissions must accelerate urgently to prevent further human suffering caused by climate change. However, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) projects that limiting global warming to 1.5°C will not only require emission reduction but also measures to remove carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide removal refers to the process of withdrawing carbon dioxide that has already been or will be emitted into the atmosphere.

Several strategies for carbon dioxide removal exist. To date, afforestation and reforestation are among the most commonly used approaches–sometimes at the expense of other vital ecosystems, such as grasslands.

Meanwhile, reports of escalating deforestation in the world’s remaining tropical forests and the widespread occurrence of catastrophic forest fires are well documented. This raises an important question: what could possibly be wrong with planting more trees?

Trees must often be planted in areas that are currently not forested. However, this land is usually inhabited by Indigenous Peoples and local communities. Establishing new forests necessitates changes in how the land is used, which can have significant consequences for people who depend on it for agriculture. Such land use change often results in livelihood loss for these communities.

Climate justice demands that measures to achieve global climate goals do not harm people who are already living in vulnerable situations. Therefore, carbon dioxide removal projects that hurt smallholder farmers or pastoralists are everything but climate just.

Carbon markets add an important layer of complexity to carbon dioxide removal. At the 29th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC COP29) in Baku, Parties finalised Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, establishing rules for carbon markets. Carbon markets aim to deliver cost-efficient climate mitigation by trading carbon credits, each representing one tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO₂e), between emitters and those reducing or avoiding emissions through reforestation, afforestation, or renewable energy projects.

Net Zero CO₂ and Land Rights takes a deep dive into one specific aspect of carbon markets: investments in land-based carbon projects. These projects have long been a component of rapidly growing voluntary carbon markets even prior to the agreement at COP29. They serve as a testing ground for the further design and implementation of carbon market mechanisms.

Such land-based carbon projects are subject to severe criticism: studies reveal that carbon credits often fail to deliver the promised climate change mitigation outcomes. Further, carbon markets allow high emitters to buy their way towards carbon neutrality without transforming their economies or business models. Land-based carbon projects have also led to severe social implications. Indigenous Peoples are evicted from their traditional territories in the name of conservation. Additionally, carbon markets can exacerbate existing gender disparities in land access. Carbon market intermediaries tend to address the male head of household as the landowner, who may then make land use decisions that affect female household members without their involvement. In effect, women lose their land use rights, which harms household food security. Land-based carbon projects also further increase land’s value, contributing to the rush for land. In effect, Indigenous Peoples, women and youth run the risk of being pushed off of their land.

We believe such criticism merits further analysis. Governments around the globe are eager to implement land-based carbon projects, despite an absence of effective regulation. Carbon credits are seen as a way to earn much-needed foreign currency for developing countries. As a result, carbon markets are both here to stay and projected to grow. This necessitates an urgent need to find ways to regulate land-based carbon projects so that they benefit local communities and Indigenous Peoples instead of harming them.

Large-scale land-based carbon projects are implemented in rural areas that are often defined by weak land rights, poor law enforcement and the absence of democratic land use planning processes. At the same time, parties to the UNFCCC have already adopted binding human rights agreements that acknowledge land as a key element of substantive human rights, such as the Right to Food and the Right to Housing. Carbon markets do not operate in a void; the framework for their operation must be defined by human rights. Given the pace with which land-based carbon projects are implemented, it is key to urgently operationalise human rights agreements to regulate carbon markets.

This publication presents a breadth of evidence that demonstrates why a human rights-based framework is integral to regulating carbon markets at the national level. Such a framework would include measures to recognise and protect legitimate land tenure rights to ensure participatory planning and decision-making processes, and to empower local communities and Indigenous Peoples so that they can benefit from carbon markets. Effective grievance mechanisms are another key element of a human rights-based framework for carbon markets.

This publication moreover aspires to contribute to a broader debate on land-based carbon projects. Many national climate commitments are based on land use in other countries. In the absence of a human rights-based framework for carbon markets, these national climate commitments can increase the vulnerability of people who are already most affected by the impact of climate change. Tropical forests and ecosystems are crucial carbon sinks and heralded as possessing great potential for land-based carbon sequestration. That is why this publication focuses on the Global South and the African continent in particular. It is complemented by an online resource that provides further insights into the topic.

We would like to wholeheartedly thank the authors of the articles that contributed to Net Zero CO₂ and Land Rights. We hope that this publication contributes to a much-needed discussion on a topic vital to a just transition for all.

Dr. Jes Weigelt,
Managing Director TMG Research

Ottilie Bälz,
Senior Vice President, Robert Bosch Stiftung