On January 31 2025, the Isiolo Environmental and land court ruled that the Northern Rangelands Carbon Project (NRCP), a Kenyan carbon project partially illegal. The judgment affirmed that two of its biggest conservancies- land managed by a group of people for the protection or benefit of wildlife and its inhabitants, set up by the Northern Ridgeland Trust (NRT) were established unconstitutionally without any basis in law. The heavily armed NRT rangers were also ordered to leave. The lawsuit brought by 165 members of northern Kenyan Isiolo County in 2021 claimed that NRT had established conservancies without their consent and was using heavily armed rangers to forcefully silence them. The silencing was in the form of various human rights abuses.
Established in 2013 with thirteen conservancies, NRT is one of the many nature based carbon offset schemes; like the Kasigau corridor project elsewhere in Kenya, Soils for the Future Tanzania, rainforest protection programmes, and the Kariba project in Zimbabwe. The NRCP is an enterprise of the NRT that marketed itself as the “world’s largest soil carbon removal project to date and the first project generating carbon credits reliant on modified livestock grazing practices and replacing them with a centrally controlled system.”
Carbon offset schemes were developed in 1988 as a way to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions and cushion the impact of global warming. Emissions reduction or removal projects like reforestation, renewable energy projects and rainforest protection programmes are among ways to generate carbon credits. This NRT scheme will be achieved by disrupting long-standing, traditional grazing practices of the natives; this prevents migration during droughts subsequently endangering their livelihood.
Carbon credits purportedly generated from this project are then sold on the voluntary carbon markets- unregulated markets where buyers voluntary purchase and trade carbon offsets. A credit represents one tonne; this project began generating credits in 2021. The credits are then sold to companies like Meta, Netflix and British Airways looking to offset their greenhouse gas emissions, thereby claiming to have gone carbon neutral. Generated revenue is supposed to facilitate the creation of similar institutions to further the preservation and restoration of land for wildlife.
Verra- the leading verifier of voluntary carbon credits suspended the issuance of carbon credits for the NRCP for the second time after the ruling in January. The first time was in 2023 in response to a scathing report published Simon Counsell of Survival International, an indigenous rights advocacy group questioning their methodology and worthiness of issued credits. He visited the NRT in Kenya and reported “the whole basis of additionality with this project, which is the fundamental requirement for an offset, is really up for question. What are they bringing that’s new to this area that the indigenous peoples weren’t already doing?”
“NRT’s carbon project fails to comply with some of the basic requirements for carbon offsetting projects, such as showing clear additionality, having proper baseline, and being able to measure carbon ‘leakage’ to other areas. The mechanism for monitoring the implementation and impacts of the project are fundamentally flawed. It’s extremely implausible that the carbon credits being sold by the project represent any real additional storage of carbon in the area’s soils.” Additionality means whether a carbon offset project actually adds to emission reduction or whether the benefits would have occurred regardless of the project.
The suspension was lifted after an eight month investigation. Survival International is not the only organization that found Verra’s methodology and issuance of credits severely flawed, a nine-months long investigation in 2023 by the guardian into a considerable percent of the schemes, revealed that more than 90% of their rainforest offset credits- which contributes up to 40% of the credits it approves- are likely to be “phantom credits” and do not represent genuine emissions reduction.
Similar investigation by the guardian into another offset project- clean cookstove projects- a clean energy initiative which contributes about 15% of total credits in the market found that claims of generated carbon offsets are massively overstated by 1000% on average. In fact, a former carbon offset executives, who was also a board member of Verra and World Bank was indicted for fraud for allegedly manipulating information about cookstove projects in Africa and Asia to make them seemingly more attractive to investors. He faces up to 20 years if convicted. Verra disputed the findings, said the “findings did not directly relate to its current methods” but subsequently suspended the 27 implicated projects pending outcome of a review. The scientist involved in the research made recommendations to issuers to ensure the integrity of carbon credits.
https://www.aecweek-registration.com/2026/
Meanwhile in the Gazi and Makongeni villages on the south coast of Kenya, the story is different. The Mikoko Pamoja is a mangrove conservation and village development project with the purpose of “conservation and sustainable use of mangrove resources to achieve the ‘triple win benefits’: mitigate climate change, conserve biodiversity, and enhance community livelihood”. Mangroves stores and retain more carbon in their biomass than forests. This project has been authorized by Plan Vivo to sell at least 3000 metric tonnes of CO2 over 2013-2033 equivalent per year. The revenue generated has provided clean water employment opportunities and essential school materials for children.
Carbon credits schemes appear to be an ineffective and fraudulent solution to an ever increasing problem. It imposes the burden of combating global temperature increases on developing countries who contribute the least to greenhouse gas emissions; giving cover to corporations and wealthy nations to continue polluting. Carbon crediting doesn’t reduce emission; enabling the continued usage fossil fuel.
