Local communities will soon have the formal ability to challenge UN-registered carbon credit projects, both during the planning phase and after the projects have been implemented. This development marks a significant shift in ensuring that the voices and rights of indigenous populations and other local groups are respected in the global push for carbon markets. Carbon credit projects, which are designed to offset greenhouse gas emissions through activities like forest conservation or reforestation, often occur in regions where communities rely on the land for their livelihoods and cultural practices. Historically, these communities have had limited input or recourse when such projects negatively impacted their land rights, access to resources, or way of life.
With this new mechanism, local communities will be empowered to raise concerns about projects that may threaten their environment, resources, or socio-economic conditions. Before a project is launched, they can formally contest its design or the consultations that have taken place, ensuring that all relevant voices are heard before the project is approved. This process emphasizes transparency and accountability, requiring project developers to address grievances or redesign aspects of the project that may harm local interests.
Moreover, even after a project has been launched, communities will retain the right to challenge it. If unforeseen negative impacts arise or if the project fails to deliver promised benefits, such as fair compensation or community development programs, locals can take formal action. This could result in the suspension or restructuring of the project, providing a critical safety net for communities that are often marginalized in large-scale environmental initiatives.
By granting local communities a voice before and after the implementation of carbon credit projects, this new policy aims to strike a balance between global climate goals and the rights and well-being of those most affected by such initiatives. It also encourages more sustainable, inclusive approaches to carbon offsetting, where community involvement becomes a key element in the success and legitimacy of the project.
The new global carbon market being set up under the Paris Agreement will have a system to prevent carbon credit developers from grabbing land or water from local people, polluting their air and other abuses.
At a meeting in the German city of Bonn last week, government negotiators and experts from around the world approved an appeals and grievance procedure for the UN’s proposed Article 6.4 carbon crediting mechanism.
Maria AlJishi, chair of the body in charge of establishing the market, said in a statement that by introducing the procedure, “we’re establishing new avenues to empower vulnerable communities and individuals, ensuring their voices are heard and their rights are upheld.”
Isa Mulder, a researcher with campaign group Carbon Market Watch, told Climate Home the agreement on policies to challenge carbon credit projects before and after they are implemented was “quite a historic moment”. “This is pretty big,” she added.
The previous UN carbon market – called the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) – did not have any such procedures. It, and other carbon markets, have been plagued by allegations they have harmed local people and their livelihoods, as well as often not delivering the emissions reductions claimed.
Negative local impacts
In one CDM project in Uganda, Carbon Market Watch said villagers were being denied access to a tree plantation’s land which they used to grow food, graze livestock and gather firewood. In another CDM project in India, the National Green Tribunal found a waste incineration plant was releasing cancer-causing toxic chemicals into Delhi.
A hydro-electric plant in Guatemala, financed using the CDM, stopped local people reaching water to fish, wash coffee and bathe, while another plant in Chile diverted rivers, endangering the water supply to the country’s capital Santiago.
To prevent such abuses, governments have agreed that the CDM’s replacement – under Article 6.4 of the Paris pact – will have processes to make appeals and raise grievances. The appeals procedure is to challenge projects before they begin, and the grievance procedure will apply once they are in place.
Retribution risk
Only people directly affected by a carbon credit project can file a grievance – and only if they have suffered “adverse effects of a social, economic or environmental nature” caused by it.
After a grievance form has been filled in and published on the UN climate change website, an independent panel will have two weeks to put together recommendations to the Article 6.4 supervisory body, which makes the final decision on actions to be taken “as it deems appropriate”.
There will be no cost to filing a grievance, despite the supervisory body previously discussing fees of up to $5,000.
Complaints must, however, be submitted in one of the UN’s six official languages – Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish – a requirement which Mulder called “a big problem” that “will specifically hit people who are most in need of protection”.
She added that the new procedures will not do enough to protect complainants from retribution from carbon credit sellers. “Sometimes it can be very sensitive if you file a grievance, but then there’s local tensions – and there’s also the project proponent who is right there and of course doesn’t want you to file a grievance,” she said.
Although negotiators have now agreed the appeals and grievance procedure, they were unable to approve a full set of rules for the Article 6.4 carbon market at the COP27 or COP28 summits in the past two years. They will try again at COP29 in November, and hope to have the market up and running by early 2025.
(Reporting by Joe Lo; editing by Megan Rowling)
