Importance of inclusiveness

When it comes to forest protection, integrity and inclusion go hand in hand. Of particular importance is the critical role that Indigenous peoples play in forest protection – especially when you consider the fact that more than 20% of the world’s land area is managed by Indigenous peoples and local communities.

Recent research suggests that one of the strengths of REDD+ programmes is the tangible benefits they can bring to Indigenous peoples and local communities. That’s as it should be. A solid and growing body of evidence proves that the best guardians of tropical forests are the people who have always called them home.

We take a look at some of the evidence, the way Indigenous peoples are typically involved in REDD+ programmes, and how their involvement is intrinsic to the latest generation of jurisdictional initiatives.

To anyone who is not familiar with the subject, it could come as something of a surprise to learn that there has often been conflict between conservation initiatives and Indigenous peoples. Indeed, in a recent interview, the activist and one-time UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of Indigenous peoples, Victoria Tauli-Corpuz, went so far as to suggest that conservation projects are one of the three biggest threats facing Indigenous peoples – ranking right up there with the extractive industries and the impact of climate change^[1].

The accusation is that, often, conservation projects take a “fortress” approach, seeking to demarcate protected areas and flush everyone from them in the belief that this will enable nature to return to an untouched or pristine state. This approach, so the argument goes, excludes Indigenous peoples, can banish them from their ancestral homelands, and misunderstands the special nature of tropical forest ecosystems and the symbiotic role that local communities often play.

Also, the criticisms can go well beyond the so-called fortress approach. Take a look through the media, and you will quickly discover that all manner of conservation and forest management initiatives are routinely condemned for their alleged treatment of Indigenous peoples – including significant concerns over land rights, a lack of engagement, and the extent of the benefits that flow to local communities.

Against this background, it is interesting to note that REDD+ is relatively well regarded for its engagement with Indigenous peoples and local communities. In a recent research project [link to reputation white paper], for example, which analysed a decades’ worth of online discussion in social media, blogs and forums, and the mainstream media, REDD+ was widely thought to bring tangible and significant improvements to the lives of local communities^[2].

This is reassuring, not just because the rights and interests of Indigenous and local peoples are being respected. A growing body of evidence also suggests that the best guardians of tropical forests tend to be the people who have always called them home.

Deforestation, biodiversity loss and carbon emissions are lower on land governed by Indigenous communities. This is the central conclusion of a major 2021 report from the UN, Forest Governance by Indigenous and Tribal Peoples^[3]. It is based on the analysis of more than 300 reputable scientific studies. And, although the report itself focuses on Latin America and the Caribbean, it is thought that the same principles hold good around the world.

For example, deforestation rates in the territories managed by Indigenous people tend to be 50% lower than in territories elsewhere, almost half of the intact forests in the Amazon are in Indigenous territories, and even though Indigenous territories cover 28% of the Amazon Basin, they only generated 2.6% of the region’s carbon emissions^[4]. Other studies go much further, suggesting that deforestation rates are three-to-four times lower than equivalent lands that are not held by Indigenous people^[5].

What is more, many Indigenous territories have been found to prevent deforestation at least as effectively as the so-called fortress approach of protected areas, and some even more effectively. For example, between 2006 and 2011, the Indigenous territories in the Peruvian Amazon reduced deforestation twice as much as protected areas with similar ecological conditions and accessibility^[6]. Meanwhile, a 2019 study found that Indigenous lands as far-flung as Australia, Brazil and Canada had comparable biodiversity to government-protected areas^[7].

It is also important to note that we are not talking of isolated examples or small-scale territories. Instead, the lands managed by Indigenous people are vast. One study, by Rights and Resources International, calculates that, around the world, Indigenous people manage nearly 300 billion metric tons of carbon stored above and below ground, equal to more than 30 years’ worth of global emissions^[8]. Another study calculates that more than 20% of the world’s land area is managed by Indigenous peoples and local communities^[9].

So, what is it that makes Indigenous people such good forest guardians?

The fact is, Indigenous peoples know their lands better than anyone. And it seems certain that cultural factors and traditional knowledge have a significant role to play. As the UN report puts it: “Many Indigenous and tribal peoples have productive systems that are less harmful to forest ecosystems. This is an empirical finding, based on data, not a naïve ideological or romantic notion”^[10].

Over centuries, Indigenous communities have developed interdependent systems of agriculture and forestry that are uniquely suited to the ecological circumstances of the land they inhabit. For them, there is often no clear line between agriculture and forestry. And, in many cases, the reason why forests remain in these areas is that they are important to local communities and carefully managed by them^[11]. For example, it has been concluded that large tracts of what had once been thought to be pristine Amazon rainforest had actually been profoundly shaped by people for many generations^[12].

An article published by the Yale School of the Environment provides a useful insight into what makes Indigenous agroforestry so special. In it, the distinguished ecologist Charles M Peters (Curator of Botany at the New York Botanical Garden and professor of tropical ecology at Yale) describes how the Kenyah Dayak people in Borneo successfully manage more than 150 species within a single plot, while western foresters can struggle to manage just four of five species, and prefer to deal with one or two. “To do what they are doing you have to pay attention to every one of those species and ask how it is doing and what its requirements are. Are there seedlings and saplings? Are you ensuring that once you harvest that tree there will be others of its kind that take its place? It’s a very complicated and wonderful thing. And all of this is being accomplished with traditional knowledge, as opposed to putting in plots and counting things as Western foresters do. How are they doing this? How did they learn this? They learned it by trial and error over a thousand years and more”^[13].

With the evidence mounting, things appear to be moving in the right direction. Indigenous people and local communities are starting to play a more central role in many of the world’s most successful conservation programmes. This is certainly a factor in many of the more recent Jurisdictional REDD+ programmes – which are designed to ensure that Indigenous people are more actively engaged in the planning stages, for example, that traditional knowledge and agroforestry models are rejuvenated, and that they are adequately paid for ecosystem services (a little like the environmental payments that farmers receive in many western countries).

A case in point is Guyana, a country that has successfully preserved its forests and will be rewarded for it through Jurisdictional REDD+. Guyana the first developing country to launch a Low-Carbon Development Strategy. Nine different tribes live throughout Guyana’s rainforests, mountains, savannahs, and coast. Making up 15% of the population, they have stewarded the country’s diverse landscape for centuries. The government is committed to the socio-economic development of Amerindian communities, preservation of their culture, and recognition and protection of their collective rights, which are enshrined in the Amerindian Act. Guyana’s Low-Carbon Development Strategy identified and implemented projects to create sustainable jobs while developing climate resilience and adaptation – supporting Indigenous peoples while advancing Jurisdictional REDD+ initiatives and forest governance.

Another good example is Costa Rica, a country with 60% forest cover, which is widely recognised for its abundance of biodiversity. However, this was not always the case. In the 1990s, Costa Rica had one of the world’s highest deforestation rates. In the subsequent three decades, pioneering conservation efforts led by both government and Indigenous peoples have doubled forest cover – making Costa Rica one of the first tropical nations to have successfully halted and reversed deforestation.

Maintaining their ancestral relationship with the forests, Costa Rica’s eight remaining Indigenous peoples communally manage the ecological richness of the 24 territories in which they live. The country has recognised their critical contributions to forest management by developing a national Indigenous consultation plan means they are intrinsically involved in establishing the national Jurisdictional REDD+ strategy.

This innovative Jurisdictional REDD+ plan includes the Cultural Mediators programme, which introduces local communities to REDD+ related topics in a way that is understandable and relevant to local circumstances. Also, the planned expansion of payments for ecosystem services the creation of an Indigenous peoples’ forest management plan – incorporating all territorial rights as defined by the Indigenous peoples themselves.

The biggest recent development in the world of REDD+ is the emergence of jurisdictional REDD+ programmes, and the level of financing that is being amassed through the LEAF Coalition to support them.

Yes, there are quite a few acronyms in that last sentence, so let’s quickly go through them one by one to try and get some clarity: REDD+ is the UN’s forest protection scheme, which puts a financial value on standing forests, and channels funds (via carbon credits) to forest protection projects that have a formal plan to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation; jurisdictional REDD+ programmes are large-scale forest protection projects, orchestrated by regional or national governments, which have formal plans and commitments for entire jurisdictions; the LEAF Coalition (LEAF stands for Lowering Emissions by Accelerating Forest finance) is a public-private partnership involving the governments of Norway, UK and USA, and many of the world’s best-known brands (the likes of Amazon, Unilever and Walmart) who have committed more than $US1billion of funds for jurisdictional REDD+ programmes – with much more money expected through the voluntary carbon markets.

To qualify for these funds, jurisdictional REDD+ programmes need to meet strict criteria. Two international standard-setting organisations, ART and Verra (yes, the acronyms can be maddening), have put together rigorous standards or frameworks for the measurement, monitoring, reporting and verification of these programmes. The aim is to ensure that high levels of integrity are maintained. And, to qualify for funding, it is necessary for Jurisdictional REDD+ programmes to involve and bring tangible benefits to local communities.

For example, the ART TREES standard has a range of related requirements. Indeed, ART argues that ensuring the recognition, respect, protection, and fulfilment of the rights of Indigenous peoples and local communities is one of its immutable principles. And it requires that these communities participate at every step including planning, implementation, gathering data, and assessing the success of the programs, providing additional opportunities for input and feedback.

Indeed, Indigenous peoples are so central to a jurisdictional REDD+ programme that they will typically implement it – by reintroducing ancestral agroforestry models, for example, or by receiving payments for ecosystem services.