[ Spanish ] [ Portuguese ]

Please forward to your networks:

Affiliates from the Durban Group for Climate Justice request urgent solidarity in a new statement rejecting schemes for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD). The REDD Statement recognizes the need to support the growing voices opposing REDD and REDD-like projects and draws attention to the dangers of REDD including land grabs and the inclusion of REDD in the carbon market.

Please join us by signing onto this REDD Statement ahead of the World Peoples Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth in Bolivia, 19-22 April 2010, so that the voices of those opposing REDD can speak with global support.

The Durban Group for Climate Justice is an international network of independent organisations, individuals and people’s movements who reject the approach to climate change promoted by polluting corporations, financiers, northern governments and economists. Since 2004 we have provided a platform for discussion and analysis of climate justice, and our members engage in regular advocacy in favour of real not false solutions to the crisis. We view durable change as emanating primarily from grassroots and shopfloor movements for climate justice. We aim to help mobilise communities around the world and pledge solidarity with people resisting carbon trading across the world.

No REDD! No REDD Plus!

Global Sign-On Campaign against Schemes for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation

As part of a mounting global civil society criticism of the ineffective and unjust solutions to climate change – including carbon trading and geoengineering – representatives of peoples’ movements and independent organizations oppose the schemes for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) currently being formulated under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change – and already piloted in schemes such as the World Bank’s Forest Carbon Partnership Facility and the United Nations REDD Programme.

The proposed UN climate negotiator’s ‘forest deal’ jeopardizes the human future by serving to further entrench fossil fuel use – the major cause of the climate crisis – while at the same time failing to safeguard the future of forests and the rights of Indigenous Peoples and forest-dependent communities over their territories and knowledge. Further, there is a clear disregard from Northern countries to address the high levels of consumption in those countries as a driver of deforestation.

The projected growth of carbon markets in the US, Australia and elsewhere is set to trigger a huge new demand for imported pollution rights to allow industrialized countries and industries to continue business as usual and avoid emissions cuts at home. Norway has already calculated, for example, that Amazon forest conservation could “offset” or compensate for ten times its yearly emissions. However, a drought in 2005 turned the Amazon forest into a carbon source, not a carbon sink, and such events could occur in the future.

The REDD or “REDD-readiness” programmes in Southern countries that currently receive public funding do not constitute evidence that REDD will be pursued independently of carbon markets. On the contrary, such programmes are taxpayer-funded means for setting up the technical, legal and political infrastructure for the expanded market in forest carbon that will ultimately be demanded by big polluters in the US and elsewhere.

The new pollution licenses to be generated by REDD are designed in a way that obstructs the only workable solution to climate change: keeping oil, coal and gas in the ground. Like the carbon credits produced under the Kyoto Protocol’s Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), they are not intended to result in any net climate gain, but merely to “compensate” for excessive fossil fuel use elsewhere. In reality, they fail to achieve even this null result. Like CDM credits, they exacerbate climate change by giving industrialized countries and companies incentives to delay undertaking the sweeping structural change away from fossil fuel-dependent systems of production, consumption, and transportation that the climate problem demands. They waste years of time that the world doesn’t have to solve this problem.

Worse, biotic carbon—the carbon stored in forests– can never be climatically equivalent to fossilized carbon kept underground. This is because carbon dioxide emitted from the burning of fossil fuels adds to the overall burden of carbon perpetually circulating between the atmosphere, vegetation, soils and oceans. However, carbon dioxide stored in forests is not a permanent sink for carbon in the same way as fossilized carbon. This inequivalence, among many other complexities, makes REDD carbon accounting impossible, allowing carbon traders to inflate the value of REDD carbon credits with impunity and further justify the increased use of fossil fuels. In 2009, even Interpol has warned against the vulnerability of REDD to international fraud and corruption.

REDD’s focus on the mass production of pollution licenses for industries in rich countries would inevitably neglect the needs and violate the rights of ordinary people throughout the world. In the South, REDD would transform the carbon in living trees into private property so that it can be awarded or transferred to private corporations in the North. Despite efforts to create safeguards to prevent the violation of the human rights of Indigenous Peoples and forest-dwelling communities, there is no guarantee to their effectiveness. In the worst case, REDD could inaugurate a massive land grab that would leave Indigenous Peoples and forest-dependent communities with nothing. In the North, meanwhile, REDD credits would enable fossil fuel-related corporations to maintain business as usual, to the detriment of communities affected by fossil fuel extraction and pollution.

In this context, the idea that REDD could help secure the territories or consolidate the rights and livelihoods of forest-dependent peoples is ludicrous. In the voluntary carbon markets, carbon forestry and REDD-type projects have already resulted in land seizures, violent evictions, forced displacement, violations of Indigenous Peoples’ rights, militarization, loss of access to land and livelihood, loss of biological diversity, fraud, coercion and the corruption of the sacred. Inclusion of forests and tree plantations in the giant compliance carbon market could only multiply such abuses.

In addition, climate policy negotiations at the international and national levels are considering the inclusion of soils and agricultural practices into REDD and other carbon marketing schemes. Just as Indigenous Peoples and forest dependent communities are threatened by forest-based REDD, agriculturalists, pastoralists and peoples’ food sovereignty will be seriously threatened should this come to pass. In effect, this will extend the commodification of lands as offsets for wealthy polluters over much of the earth’s surface. As well, we reject any incentive to use the oceans for REDD projects as well.

Further, because every REDD project would affect not only forest communities, but also people suffering from the operations of companies buying REDD offset credits and indeed those impacted by the climatic damage incurred by the project, the consent of vast numbers of people would need to be obtained for each project – something REDD practitioners have no intention of attempting.

REDD would also endanger forest conservation itself, by giving short shrift to many of the characteristics of forests essential to survival – the complex and diverse ways in which Indigenous Peoples and forest-dependent communities constitute homes, livelihood sources, storehouses of biodiversity and medicines, regulators of watersheds, and centres of culture and spirituality – while failing to address the underlying causes of deforestation. REDD initiatives are set to include industrial plantations and even the planting of genetically modified trees. REDD could indeed become, in the words of The New York Times, a “cash cow for forest destroyers.”

Forests have been and can only be protected through locally-led forestry governance, strong rights and institutions for forest-dependent people, especially Indigenous Peoples, locally-initiated investments, strictly enforced bans on trade in timber products, addressing excessive consumption in the North and so forth. Fixing a climate crisis caused in the main by the large historical fossil fuel users in the North must not be a burden borne by disenfranchised Indigenous and forest-dependent peoples in the South. There is indeed a climate debt the North owes the South and to imagine that it could be paid off by investments in REDD projects that generate carbon credits for industrialized countries would be the height of irony.

Durban Group for Climate Justice Signatories:

Acción Ecológica, Ecuador
Carbon Trade Watch, International
CENSAT AGUA VIVA, Colombia
Centre for Civil Society Environmental Justice Project, University of KwaZulu-Natal,
Durban, SA
COECOCEIBA-Amigos de la Tierra Costa Rica, Costa Rica
CORE (Centre for Organisation Research & Education), India
The Corner House, UK
FASE – ES, Brasil
FERN, UK
Global Justice Ecology Project, USA
Indigenous Environment Network, International
Institute for Social Ecology, USA
Moving Mountains, China
National Forum of Forest People and Forest Workers, India
Peoples Movement on Climate Change (PMCC), International
School of Democratic Economics, Indonesia
SOLJUSPAX, Philippines
Sustainable Energy & Economy Network, Institute for Policy Studies, USA
Timberwatch, South Africa
World Rainforest Movement, Uruguay

Other Signatories:

1. Te Ata Tino Toa, Aotearoa/New Zealand
2. Susana Deranger, Canada
3. Tibet Third Pole, USA
4. Tibet Justice Center, USA
5. Rhiannon Colvin, England
6. Gaia Guerrero, Ecuador
7. Movement Generation Justice and Ecology Project, USA
8. Monroe Edwin Jeffrey, USA
9. Elana Bulman, Scotland
10. CEPEDES – Centro de Estudos e Pesquisas para o Desenvolvimento do Extremo Sul/Bahia, Brasil
11. RECOMA (Latin American Network against Monoculture Tree Plantations), Latin America
12. Fórum Socioambiental do Extremo Sul da Bahia, Brasil
13. International Indian Treaty Council, International
14. Ararat, Denmark
15. Greenpeace, USA
16. Andres Dimitriu UNC, Argentina
17. Bharat Jan Vigyan Jatha/South Asian Dialogues on Ecological Democracy (SADED), India
18. International Tribal Association, USA
19. Jyri Jaakkola, Finland
20. Fundación UÑOPATUN, Patagonia – Argentina
21. Florentine Schmidl, Austria
22. David Brunmayr, Austria
23. Karolyn Beebe, USA
24. Sandra Hernandez-Gamez, México
25. Gender Action For Climate Change For Equality and Sustainability (Angelina Mensah), Ghana
26. Dietrich Muylaert – CJA, Belgium
27. Ali Barrett, Australia
28. Arief Wicaksono, Indonesia
29. Asociación Indígena Ja’in Wain’jin, Venezuela
30. Comision Mapuche La Azotea, Argentina
31. Climate Himalaya Initiative, India
32. EQUATIONS, India
33. Forum for Indigenous Perspectives and Action, North East India
34. Maria Pia Macchi, Italy
35. Julia Krohmer, Germany
36. Focus on the Global South, India, Philippines, Thailand
37. Asociación Asturiana Gaspar García Laviana, Asturias (Spain)
38. Platform, UK
39. Nadi Ghati Morcha, Chhattisgarh, India
40. Claudia Camacho, México
41. Muskitia Indianka Pankirhka nani Nikbanka (MUIHKA), Honduras
42. Alianza Sustentabilidad Ecologia y Justicia Social (AlianzaVerde), Honduras
43. Coordinadora Indigena de Mesoamerica y el Caribe (CIMCA), Honduras
44. Kamil Glowinkowski, Poland
45. Cumbres Cambio Climático.org, Bolivia
46. Zara Zsido, USA
47. CESTA Friends of the Earth El Salvador, El Salvador
48. Francesca Alvino, Italy
49. Jose Tomas Ibarra, Chile
50. Asociacion Qechua-Ayamara para Comunidades Sustentables, “ANDES”, Peru
51. ARPI-S.C., Peru
52. Pio Tudela Talavera, Spain
53. Lisset Saenz Z, Peru
54. Diego Cardona Calle, Colombia
55. Communities for a Better Environment, USA
56. Holly Walter, USA
57. Edgar Gonzalez Gaudiano, México
58. Nina Somera, Philippines
59. Bernice A. See, Philippines
60. Mariela Jibaja, Peru
61. Luis Maldonado Raggio, Peru
62. Tareq Daoud, Switzerland
63. Asociacion Indigena Ambiental de Panama, Panama
64. Gloria Caudillo, México
65. Society for Threatened Peoples International, International
66. EARTH PEOPLES, International
67. Asociación de Cooperación Técnica, Económica, Social y Ambiental en la Cuenca del Lago Atitlán ¨ASOATITLÁN¨, Guatemala
68. Monique Fordham, Esq., USA
69. Judith Francis Zeitlin, USA
70. Barbara Worley, USA
71. Wolfram André, Germany
72. Sobrevivencia/Friends of the Earth-Paraguay, Paraguay
73. Global Forest Coalition, International
74. Labor/Community Strategy Center, USA
75. Jean Hudon, Canada
76. Henry Söderholm, Finland
77. David Hallowes, South Africa
78. Helena Paul, EcoNexus, UK
79. T.M. van Hettema, Netherlands
80. Unidad Ecologica Salvadorena UNES, El Salvador
81. New York Climate Action Group, USA
82. Craig Bryce, Scotland
83. Climate SOS, USA
84. GenderCC – Women for Climate Justice, Germany
85. Monroe Edwin Jeffrey, USA
86. Labour,Health and Human Rights Development Centre, Nigeria
87. Ahmad Saiful Muhajir, Indonesia
88. Ecological Society of the Philippines, Philippines
89. Rick Harlow “The Elders Project”, USA
90. Bram Büscher, Netherlands
91. ETC Group, International
92. Jessica Cox, USA
93. Liisa L. North, Canada
94. Islands and Highlands Environmental Consultancy, USA
95. Amigos de la Tierra América Latina y el Caribe, Latin America
96. María Inés Aiuto – Periodista, Argentina
97. Teguh Surya (WALHI), Indonesia
98. Hemantha Withanage, Centre for Environmental Justice, Sri Lanka
99. River Basin Friends(NE), India
100. Bodil Arnesen, UK
101. Taiwo Adewole, Nigeria
102. Obligatory Games, Denmark
103. Antonis Diamantidis, Greece
104. Mountain club “Jabagly-Manas”, Kazakhstan
105. LOKOJ INSTITUTE, Bangladesh
106. Byron Esteban Riedel De Juan, Chile
107. Peoples Movement on Climate Change (PMCC), International
108. Asia Pacific Research Network, International
109. Jessica Flood, Australia
110. Jenny Maurer, USA
111. Elisabeth Daystar, USA
112. Ninang Simon, Philippines
113. Prakriti, a mountain environment group, India
114. Abby Don, Philippines
115. Solidarity Workshop, Bangladesh
116. BLUE 21, Germany
117. Kiribati Climate Action Network, Kiribati
118. Chris Stabb, Australia
119. Rosalyn Negron Goldbarg, USA
120. Asian Pacific Environmental Network, USA
121. Agriconnect Communication Media, South Africa
122. Kalliopi Stara, Greece
123. Anthra, India
124. Adivasi Aikya Vedika, India
125. Yakshi, India
126. Mark Cookson, UK
127. Les Amis de la Terre – Friends of the Earth, France
128. Wak Kalola, Canada
129. World Council of Churches, Switzerland
130. Toxisphera, Brazil
131. APROMAC Environment Protection Association, Brazil
132. Kelli Lawrence, Canada
133. Urban Karine, France
134. Asselineau Eléa, France
135. Jorge Intriago, Ecuador
136. Raymond J. Tarpley, USA
137. Kit Robertson, USA
138. Guy Anthony Ragosta, USA
139. Johonaaei, USA
140. Helena Leonhard, Germany
141. Eco Aqua Technologies, South Africa
142. MaryFrances Koehn, USA
143. Yulia Sugandi, Indonesia
144. Ecograin, Spain
145. Baphiwe Nxumalo, South Africa
146. José Antonio Avalos Lozano, México
147. Nicolas San Martin Diaz, Chile
148. Anthony Anaya Jr., Maricopa
149. Samantha Joe, Canada
150. Communities for a Better Environment (CBE), USA
151. Miguel Mardesich, Bolivia
152. EcoC2S/Irucka Embry, USA
153. Diana Pei Wu, USA

Download Statement [pdf 60k]