In Liberia’s lush forests, where generations of Indigenous communities have found sustenance and livelihoods, a looming threat now casts a shadow over their way of life. The Liberian government’s decision to sell off a sizable portion of the country’s land to Dubai-based company Blue Carbon has sparked outrage and resistance among local populations.
The deal, encompassing about 10% of Liberia’s territory, aims to preserve forests by selling carbon credits to offset polluters’ emissions. However, this model, dubbed “carbon colonialism” by activists, has raised concerns about its actual climate benefits and its disregard for Indigenous land rights.
Community leaders voiced their concerns over the lack of legal protections and consultation in the agreement. Activists argue that the Liberian government’s decision violates local land ownership laws and fails to consider the interests of Indigenous populations who depend on the forests for their survival.
Similar controversies have arisen in other African countries where Blue Carbon operates. Reports from Kenya reveal Indigenous populations being evicted to make room for carbon credit projects, drawing criticism from human rights groups for their opaque and culturally destructive nature.
Simon Counsell, an expert on conservation projects, highlights the alarming lack of transparency and consent in these agreements. He emphasizes the ethical and legal implications of such deals, which often result in human rights abuses and undermine local communities’ livelihoods.
While Africa’s natural resources are significant in combating climate change, the exploitation of these resources without respecting Indigenous rights poses a moral dilemma. Cash-strapped governments are enticed by the financial gains of conservation initiatives, despite mounting concerns about their impact on local populations.
Related: A deep dive into the world of carbon credits and business impact
In Liberia, opposition from communities and activists led to the halt of the Blue Carbon deal under the previous government. However, the future of the agreement remains uncertain under the new administration, leaving affected communities in limbo.
Emmanuel Yarkpawolo, Liberia’s Environmental Protection Agency director, acknowledges the flaws in the rushed agreement and pledges to develop regulations that prioritize environmental sustainability and Indigenous rights.
The opacity surrounding Blue Carbon’s operations raises further questions about the accountability of such ventures. Critics also question the effectiveness of carbon offsetting, pointing out flaws in the concept of “additionality” and the temporary nature of carbon storage in forests. Furthermore, the displacement caused by conservation projects may inadvertently contribute to deforestation elsewhere, offsetting any potential climate benefits.
As Indigenous communities in Liberia and across Africa continue to resist the encroachment on their lands, the debate over the ethics and efficacy of carbon credit deals underscores the complex interplay between environmental conservation, economic interests, and human rights.
It is essential to note that the concept of carbon credits itself is not inherently negative. When implemented transparently and with genuine stakeholder engagement, carbon offset projects can contribute to both environmental conservation and community development. Involving local communities in decision-making processes and ensuring their rights are respected are crucial steps toward achieving sustainable and equitable outcomes. Meaningful consultation with Indigenous groups, whose traditional knowledge often holds valuable insights into forest management, can lead to more effective and culturally sensitive conservation efforts. Carbon credit projects can foster genuine environmental stewardship while uplifting the livelihoods of those directly impacted by such initiatives by empowering local communities as partners in conservation initiatives.
