Carbon Markets and Our Rights: A Guide for Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities
The voluntary carbon market is quickly evolving and being introduced in new territories, making it challenging to sort out who’s who and what the implications are for impacted communities. To support Indigenous communities and local communities to better understand carbon markets, Rainforest Foundation US has launched a six-part animated series to demystify the market and provide communities with the essential information to protect their rights.
Recursos para Titulares de Direitos sobre Padrões do Mercado Jurisdicional de Carbono
ENGLISH PORTUGUÊS ESPAÑOL Análises técnicas para apoiar o envolvimento dos povos indígenas e comunidades locais nos padrões do mercado voluntário de carbono O mercado voluntário de carbono está evoluindo rapidamente em florestas tropicais ao redor do mundo. Está criando um cenário complexo de novos atores, padrões e requisitos para que os povos indígenas e comunidades […]
Mesoamerican Community Leaders Point the Way Toward a High-Integrity Carbon Market
The Mesoamerican Alliance of Peoples and Forests (AMPB), in collaboration with Rainforest Foundation US and Fundación PRISMA, convened in El Salvador to shape a united vision for strengthening the integrity of carbon markets in the region.
Recursos para Titulares de Derechos sobre los Mercados de Carbono
El mercado de carbono voluntario está evolucionando rápidamente en los bosques tropicales alrededor del mundo, creando un complejo panorama de nuevos actores, normas y requisitos que los pueblos indígenas y las comunidades locales deben navegar para proteger sus derechos. Con el objetivo de apoyar a estas comunidades, sus organizaciones y líderes, Rainforest Foundation US ha comisionado a Climate, Law and Policy para desarrollar una serie de análisis que detallan los requisitos asociados a las salvaguardas.
Challenges and Pathways for Equitable Carbon Markets: Insights from Guyana’s Experience
The certification of carbon credits in Guyana under a program designed without the participation and free, prior, and informed consent of Indigenous peoples is a troubling precedent that threatens the rights of Indigenous peoples and the social integrity of carbon markets everywhere. Learn more about the issues in a new case study.
Resources for Rights-holders on Jurisdictional Carbon Market Standards
The voluntary carbon market is quickly evolving in tropical forests around the world, creating a complex landscape of new actors, standards, and requirements for Indigenous peoples and local communities to navigate in order to protect their rights. To support communities, their organizations, and their leaders Rainforest Foundation US commissioned Climate, Law and Policy to develop a set of analyses that break down the safeguard-related requirements
Pushback from rights experts after aid-funded carbon certifier rejects first appeal from Indigenous group
Josh Lichtenstein, Program Manager at Rainforest Foundation US, expresses disappointment at the rejection of the appeal from the Amerindian Peoples Association of Guyana (APA) by carbon certifier ART. “The issues raised by APA’s complaint and appeal are serious and ongoing, and have, if nothing else, clearly demonstrated that the ART validation and verification process is deeply flawed, and the grievance mechanism does not work,” he says.
Indigenous Impacts of Carbon Offsetting Implementation in Guyana
In her latest article, Akola Thompson, advocacy coordinator at Guyana’s South Rupununi District Council, delves into the impacts of carbon offsetting on the Indigenous peoples of Guyana. She highlights the government’s persistent refusal to acknowledge Indigenous communities’ claims to their customary lands.
Questions Over Accounting and Inclusion Mar Guyana’s Unprecedented Carbon Scheme
Guyana has added almost all its forests to the carbon market, signing a $750 million carbon credit deal with petroleum company Hess Corporation, of which 15% will go to Indigenous communities. However, climate experts and Indigenous leaders are questioning the scheme’s accuracy in measuring carbon emissions and whether communities were properly consulted.
