Dear Editor,
As we celebrate International Women’s Day 2023, I write as an Indigenous Wapichan woman to add my voice regarding the sale of Carbon Credits and Food Insecurity. Attending the United Nation’s Climate Change Convention Conferences COP 26 and COP 27 has allowed me to gain more knowledge of how the United Nation’s Framework Convention for Climate Change works and the reason for its existence. I have also heard other Indigenous peoples from across the globe share similar experiences and challenges of what is happening in their communities and countries.
The lessons I have learned from those experiences have helped me see Guyana’s rushed sale of carbon credits for what it is. It is not the gracious boon to Indigenous peoples that the government would like us to believe it is. In fact, it is far from it. The sale of these credits – which are only available because Indigenous peoples in Guyana have protected our lands since time immemorial – is an abdication of the government’s duties to respect the rights of Indigenous peoples.
A top-down decision-making approach by the Government
The reality is this: despite the growing mountain of research showing that across the world Indigenous people are the best stewards of forests, on the ground our rights are continuously disrespected. These are the rights that empower us to be effective stewards of our forests. I shared this point at COP 27 with two of my colleagues when we presented our proposal to partner with the government to manage our traditional lands. But instead of collaborating with us, the Government of Guyana decided to use the healthy forests on our land to make money. Rightfully, the money belongs to us.
The government’s commitments to abide by international law, enshrined in our Constitution, create obligations for the government to respect our rights. Our rights have been violated by the recent sale of carbon credits. Article 3 of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which Guyana has signed, speaks of our right as Indigenous Peoples to self-determination, and to determine a relevant development according to our worldview. The reality however, in Guyana is that the process has been top-downwards, driven by the government and not by our communities.
Monies are given for our villages, but previous experience has taught us that this does not help. I recall the example of the COVID Relief Grant which was given to communities but was not effective. If the women are asked if they have benefited from those grants given to communities, one would be appalled by the answers. We have seen that the government has a hand in determining where these monies go. Why do they not send the monies directly to our own villages and organisations? We already have established institutions on the ground where these funds can be facilitated. Continuously we have seen policies created and decisions made for Indigenous peoples at the national level. This top-down approach is very concerning since we are the ones who live on these lands and whatever decisions are made will affect us in the future.
A Lack of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent
A key aspect of self-determination is the requirement to seek and obtain the free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) of Indigenous peoples before undertaking any project or activity that affects us. These forests are on our lands, whether titled and untitled. Again, the proposal that the Wapichan people have made to the government would make sure that FPIC is followed. This was however, not the case with the Hess deal.
The “informed” part of FPIC is seriously lacking in this case. Most of my people have not been as fortunate as I was to attend international conferences with other Indigenous communities. Furthermore, working with women in the communities of the Wapichan Territory, listening and being aware of the struggles and challenges faced by women, I am very concerned about the implications of these decisions on our lives. Most of us do not fully understand and grasp the concepts of carbon and carbon trading, even though we try our best to grasp these developments. The different mechanisms that govern carbon markets and the benefits and implications of carbon trading are extremely complex, and the “informed” requirement of FPIC can’t be fulfilled via a short information-sharing session on the Low Carbon Development Strategy (LCDS).
In addition, evidence and stories have shown that the different carbon trading mechanisms in fact have more failures than successes. For example, even the REDD+ scheme has not shown demonstrable success over the 15 years of its existence. Often, these projects’ success exists more on paper than in practice. In reality, carbon trading mechanisms can have serious consequences for inhabitants of the land, like Indigenous peoples. Hence, we must be fully informed about these consequences, not just the potential benefits of selling carbon credits.
The government, Architecture for REDD+ Transactions (ART), and some commentators, have claimed that the National Toshaos Council’s (NTC) resolution endorsing the government’s plan was sufficient to constitute the consent of all of Guyana’s Indigenous peoples. That cannot be allowed. Nothing in international or Guyanese law imbues the NTC with the authority to exercise rights guaranteed to Indigenous peoples.
A need for balanced development
Our way of life, the way our society functions, our knowledge, is inherently rooted in respect for the environment and for everything that it provides for us. As custodians of the environment, we continue to live in harmony with nature and everything around us. Therefore, we feel weary and defeated when others reap the direct benefits from our actions, while we are only offered a few crumbs. Look at what is happening with the extraction of oil in Guyana, foreigners are undermining our sovereignty. Now we’re facing the same situation, this time with our forests and natural resources. Are we going to stand and allow this to happen? I don’t think so! We women from the South Rupununi are determined to continue asserting our rights. The government often speaks highly of the development that is taking place across Guyana. Yes, infrastructural development is happening but the gap between the coast and hinterland still exists.
In Region Nine currently, there is an acute shortage of food. Our staple, cassava, is not widely available and as a result we cannot make farine which is an essential part of our diet. As women, one of our roles is to ensure that we can provide food for our families. If we are to receive money for the work we’ve done to protect our forest, I feel that the money that is now available should be used to counter the rising food insecurity in our region. It therefore adds injury to insult for our leaders who are tasked with creating “development projects” to receive the small sums of money that our traditional practices have earned this country.
One of the primary drivers of climate change has been the reckless exploitation of resources without regard for future generations. And now we are told that the solution is the exploitation of one more resource: the carbon credits generated by our forests. We have not caused climate change, but the world depends on us and our forests to stop it. The government must let us set the terms of that process, instead of taking shortcuts to manufacture an artifice of consent. If they don’t, then what is to stop this practice from ballooning out of control into a system of de facto carbon colonization, in the name of fighting climate change? Is the UN supporting this form of colonization? Do Guyanese support it?
Sincerely,
Immaculata Casimero,
Wapichan Woman,
Aishalton South Rupununi
