SPECIAL REPORTS AND PROJECTS
The Rush for Carbon Concessions: More Land Theft and Deforestation
Published
4 years agoon

This bulletin focuses on a central cause of large-scale deforestation and dispossession of forest peoples: The imposition of land concessions as an instrument to separate, divide and map land according to economic and political interests. In consequence, the editorial alerts on the grabbing of vast amounts of hectares for Carbon Concessions.
This bulletin pays attention to what the WRM Secretariat considers as a central cause of large-scale deforestation and dispossession of forest peoples: The imposition of land concessions as an instrument to separate, divide and map land (and forests) according to economic and political interests.
This is not an easy subject; it forces us to deeply reflect about mainstream perceptions of ‘land’, how these attempt to violently separate it from the rest of ‘nature’ – including its inhabitants, and how the colonizers and capitalist Elites have been organizing and using it according to their interests.
Some articles in this bulletin explore the colonial histories of how concessions were imposed and resisted across the Amazon, South East Asia and the Congo Basin. In some cases, like the articles focused on the DR Congo and Thailand, one can clearly comprehend the direct and deep implications that these histories have on today’s continuous violence, discrimination and struggles around land. The article focused on the women’s resistance in Brazil, alerts on how the privatization of conservation concessions is a serious threat to the livelihoods and cultures of local populations. Another article alerts on the international push to create more Protected Areas ‘without people’ and exposes the current trend of privatizing these Parks’ management in the African continent in particular.
In close relation to this push for more Protected Areas, there is a serious risk of a vast expansion of another type of concessions in order to exert control over tropical forest land: Carbon Concessions. These concessions aim to control in particular the carbon commodity in it and other so-called ‘ecosystem services’. Actors, such as international conservation NGOs, multinational corporations, brokers, banks, traders, certification agencies, governments and others, are competing in (and facilitating) the trade of carbon credits and offsets while expanding the means for land control.
Hundreds of multinational companies and more than 130 governments have committed to countless ‘net zero’ emissions targets, which in tandem with the push for so-called Nature-Based Solutions, explain the rush on Carbon Concessions. This big wave of climate targets also explains why such concessions tend to be much bigger than most forest carbon projects promoted so far.
In this context, for example, in late 2021, company Mayur Renewables PNG (MR), subsidiary of Mayur Resources (MRL), got three Carbon Concessions from the Papua New Guinea (PNG) government, covering approximately 800,000 hectares of forests. These concessions have a crediting period of over 30 years, and according to the company, these are “Nature-Based REDD-Carbon Offsets projects.” (1). The company’s aim is to expand to 1.4 million hectares.
PNG-based MRL aims to become the main supplier of “carbon neutral lime and cement products” in the region, and these Carbon Concessions are supposed to make its Central Cement & Limestone Project near Port Moresby into a ‘carbon neutral’ business. (2)
On December 2021, VT Carbon Partners gave MR a US 3 million dollars loan facility. VT Carbon Partners is a joint fund management from Viridios Capital and Tribeca Investment Partners. This fund was launched in 2021 with an initial 500 million Australian dollars (over US360 million dollars) portfolio to be deployed to ‘nature-based projects’ certified by Verra. With these large Carbon Concessions and expansion plans, PNG is set to become one of the largest carbon credit producers in the world.
During a webinar from 2021, the CEO of Viridios Capital stated that, “A whole new industry can be created here and potentially a new export market for PNG as well. Just thinking about the requirement for developed countries to mitigate their emissions (…), especially for neighbouring developed countries, like Australia and New Zeeland, which need those offsets. And that would create a whole new industry in PNG, including local communities, who would need to be re-trained on proper forest management, science and academia training up on new technologies as well.” (3) (emphasis added)
This CEO must be thinking that a proper forest management is one in which the use of the forest is only for the profit-seeking interests of the concessions’ investors, and for which local communities need to be re-trained on how they should behave, and live differently from coexisting with and using the forest on their own terms
Similarly, although receiving much more media controversy, in November 2021, an agreement between the government of Malaysia and Singapore-based Hoch Standard Ptd. Ltd. granted the company more than two million hectares of tropical forests as a Carbon Concession in the Malaysian state of Sabah on the island of Borneo. The plan was to expand the project to four million hectares. According to the agreement, foreign entities would hold the rights over these forests for the next 100 to 200 years. Global consultancies Tierra Australia and Global Nature Capital were also involved in the negotiations of the agreement.
In response to a flurry of attention from media and civil society organizations and groups in Sabah, in February 2022, the State Attorney General for Sabah put out a press statement in which she described the proposed ‘Nature Conservation Agreement’ as “legally impotent”. Ten days later however, and despite the many technical impossibilities that have been found to sign this deal, Sabah’s Deputy Chief Minister Jeffrey Kitingan said that “everything is good” with the Agreement. (4)
An indigenous leader from Sabah reflected on this Agreement and on the absolute lack of consideration for the indigenous groups living in those forests, “Is history repeating itself? Are we not yet free or healed from our colonial and wartime histories?” (5) A very valid question indeed.
(1) Mayur Resources, Mayur’s forest carbon concessions granted paving pathway to “net zero” projects and opportunity to provide high quality carbon credits for global carbon markets, 2022.
(2) Pacific News Services, Mayur gets carbon concessions, 2022.
(3) Mayur Resources Forest Carbon Concessions Investor Webinar, January 2022.
(4) REDD-Monitor, A question for Jeffrey Kitingan, Sabah’s Deputy Chief Minister: Who owns Lionsgate, the company registered in the British Virgin Islands that owns all the shares in Hoch Standard?, February 2022.
(5) Mongabay, Is colonial history repeating itself with Sabah forest carbon deal?, 2021.
Original Source: World Rainforest Movement
Related posts:

Tropical forests in Africa’s mountains store more carbon than previously thought—but are disappearing fast
Conservation Concessions as Neo-Colonization: The African Parks Network
Uganda: Local communities claim they are not benefiting from Green Resources’ subsidiary’s carbon credit initiative; incl. company’s comments
Forest Concessions, Colonial Concept
You may like
SPECIAL REPORTS AND PROJECTS
Top 10 agribusiness giants: corporate concentration in food & farming in 2025
Published
2 months agoon
August 28, 2025

|
Ranking
|
Company (Headquarters)
|
Sales in 2023
(US$ millions)
|
% Global market share 19
|
|
1
|
Bayer (Germany)20
|
11,613
|
23
|
|
2
|
Corteva (US)21
|
9,472
|
19
|
|
3
|
Syngenta (China/Switzerland)22
|
4,751
|
10
|
|
4
|
BASF (Germany)23
|
2,122
|
4
|
|
Total top 4
|
27,958
|
56
|
|
|
5
|
Vilmorin & Cie (Groupe Limagrain) (France)24
|
1,984
|
4
|
|
6
|
KWS (Germany)25
|
1,815
|
4
|
|
7
|
DLF Seeds (Denmark)26
|
838
|
2
|
|
8
|
Sakata Seeds (Japan)27
|
649
|
1
|
|
9
|
Kaneko Seeds (Japan)28
|
451
|
0.9
|
|
Total top 9
|
33,695
|
67
|
|
|
Total world market29
|
50,000
|
100%
|
|
Ranking
|
Company (Headquarters)
|
Sales in 2023
(US$ millions)
|
% Global market share
|
|
1
|
Syngenta (China/Switzerland)43
|
20,066
|
25
|
|
2
|
Bayer (Germany)44
|
11,860
|
15
|
|
3
|
BASF (Germany)45
|
8,793
|
11
|
|
4
|
Corteva (US)46
|
7,754
|
10
|
|
Total top 4
|
48,472
|
61
|
|
|
5
|
UPL (India)47
|
5,925
|
8
|
|
6
|
FMC (Germany)48
|
4,487
|
6
|
|
7
|
Sumitomo (Japan)49
|
3,824
|
5
|
|
8
|
Nufarm (Australia)50
|
2,056
|
3
|
|
9
|
Rainbow Agro (China)51
|
1,623
|
2
|
|
10
|
Jiangsu Yangnong Chemical Co., Ltd. (China)52
|
1,595
|
2
|
|
Total top 10
|
67,982
|
86
|
|
|
Total world market53
|
79,000
|
100
|
|
Ranking
|
Company (Headquarters)
|
Sales in 2023
(US$ millions)
|
% Global market share
|
|
1
|
Nutrien (Canada)72
|
15,673
|
8
|
|
2
|
The Mosaic Company (US)73
|
12,782
|
7
|
|
3
|
Yara (Norway)74
|
11,688
|
6
|
|
4
|
CF Industries Holdings, Inc, (US)75
|
6,631
|
3
|
|
Total top 4
|
46,774
|
24
|
|
|
5
|
ICL Group Ltd. (Israel)76
|
6,294
|
3
|
|
6
|
OCP (Morocco)77
|
5,967
|
3
|
|
7
|
PhosAgro (Russia)78
|
4,989
|
3
|
|
8
|
MCC EuroChem Joint Stock Company (EuroChem) (Switzerland/Russia)79
|
4,298
|
2
|
|
9
|
OCI (Netherlands)80
|
4,188
|
2
|
|
10
|
Uralkali (Russia)81
|
3,497
|
2
|
|
Total top 10
|
76,007
|
39
|
|
|
Total world market82
|
196,000
|
100
|
|
Ranking
|
Company (Headquarters)
|
Sales in 2023
(US$ millions)
|
% Global market share
|
|
1
|
Deere and Co. (US)89
|
26,790
|
15
|
|
2
|
CNH Industrial (UK/Netherlands)90
|
18,148
|
10
|
|
4
|
AGCO (US)91
|
14,412
|
8
|
|
3
|
Kubota (Japan)92
|
14,233
|
8
|
|
Total top 4
|
73,583
|
43
|
|
|
5
|
CLAAS (Germany)93
|
6,561
|
4
|
|
6
|
Mahindra and Mahindra (India)94
|
3,156
|
2
|
|
7
|
SDF Group (Italy)95
|
2,197
|
1
|
|
8
|
Kuhn Group (Switzerland)96
|
1,583
|
0.9
|
|
9
|
YTO Group (China)97
|
1,493
|
0.9
|
|
10
|
Iseki Group (Japan)98
|
1,057
|
0.6
|
|
Total top 10
|
89,629
|
52
|
|
|
Total world market99
|
173,000
|
100
|
|
Ranking
|
Company (Headquarters)
|
Sales in 2023
(US$ millions)
|
% Global market share
|
|
1
|
Zoetis (US)115
|
8,544
|
18
|
|
2
|
Merck & Co (MSD) (US)116
|
5,625
|
12
|
|
3
|
Boehringer Ingelheim Animal Health (Germany)117
|
5,100
|
11
|
|
4
|
Elanco (US)118
|
4,417
|
9
|
|
Total top 4
|
23,686
|
49
|
|
|
5
|
Idexx Laboratories (US)119
|
3,474
|
7
|
|
6
|
Ceva Santé Animale (France)120
|
1,752
|
4
|
|
7
|
Virbac (France)121
|
1,348
|
3
|
|
8
|
Phibro Animal Health Corporation (US)122
|
978
|
2
|
|
9
|
Dechra (UK)123
|
917
|
2
|
|
10
|
Vetoquinol (France)124
|
572
|
1
|
|
Total top 10
|
32,727
|
68
|
|
|
Total world market125
|
48,000
|
100
|
The genetic material used in the industrial production of meat, dairy and aquaculture is supplied by a small number of relatively unknown companies that are mostly privately owned. As detailed financial data is not publicly available for most of these companies, it is difficult to determine companies’ market shares and even the value of the global market. However, it was possible to arrive at some estimates for chicken, which tops global meat production (narrowly exceeding pigs).126Related posts:

CORPORATE AGRIBUSINESS GIANTS SWIM IN WEALTH AS MORE POOR PEOPLE GO HUNGRY AMID THE BITING COVID PANDEMIC.
A corporate cartel fertilises food inflation
The United Nations Food Systems Summit is a corporate food summit —not a “people’s” food summit
Food inflation: The math doesn’t add up without factoring in corporate power
SPECIAL REPORTS AND PROJECTS
Maasai demand Volkswagen pull out of carbon offset scheme on their lands
Published
3 months agoon
July 24, 2025
Maasai Indigenous people in Tanzania have called on Volkswagen (VW) to withdraw from a controversial carbon credits scheme which violates their rights and threatens to wreck their livelihoods.
In a statement, the Maasai International Solidarity Alliance (MISA) denounced the “loss of control or use” of vital Maasai grazing grounds, and accused VW of making “false and misleading claims” about Maasai participation in decision making about the project.
Many Maasai pastoralists have already been evicted from large parts of their grazing lands for national parks and game reserves, with highly lucrative tourist businesses operating in them. Now a major new carbon-credit generating project by Volkswagen ClimatePartner (VWCP) and US-based carbon offset company Soils for the Future Tanzania is taking control of large parts of their remaining lands, and threatening livelihoods by upending long-standing Maasai grazing practices.
The Maasai have not given their free, prior and informed consent for the project. They fear it will restrict their access to crucial refuge areas in times of drought, and threaten their food security.
Ngisha Sinyok, a Maasai community member from Eluai village, which is struggling to withdraw from the project, told Survival: “Our livestock is going to be depleted. We will end up not having a single cow.” Asked about VW’s involvement in the project, he replied, “It is not a solution to climate change. It is just a business for people to make money using our environment. It has nothing to do with climate change.”
Another Maasai man, who wished to remain anonymous for fear of reprisals, said: “They use their money to control us.” A third said: “Maasailand never had a price tag. In Maasailand, there is no privatization. Our land is communal.”
Survival International’s Director of Research and Advocacy, Fiona Watson, said today: “The carbon project that Volkswagen supports violates the Maasai’s rights and will be disastrous for their lives, all so the company can carry on polluting and greenwash its image. It takes away the Maasai’s control over their own lands and relies on the false and colonial assumption that they are destroying their lands — which is not supported by evidence.
“The Maasai have been grazing cattle on the plains of East Africa since time immemorial. They know the land and how to manage it better than carbon project developers seeking to make millions from their lands.”
VW’s investment in the project, whose official name is the “Longido and Monduli Rangelands Carbon Project”, is believed to run to several million dollars, and has contributed to corruption and tensions in northern Tanzania, according to MISA’s report on the project.
An adjacent project in southern Kenya, also run by Soils for the Future, is beset with similar problems, and has already sparked resistance from local communities.
Survival International’s Blood Carbon report revealed that the whole basis for these “soil carbon” projects is flawed, and unsupported by evidence. Survival documented similar problems with the highly controversial Northern Kenya Grasslands Carbon Project. That project suffered a blow in a Kenyan court and was suspended and put under review by Verra, the carbon credit verification agency, for an unprecedented second time.
Source: Survival International
Related posts:

Kenya: Court halts flagship carbon offset project used by Meta, Netflix and British Airways over unlawfully acquiring community land without consent
East Africa poised to monitor carbon emission
Carbon offset projects exacerbate land grabbing and undermine small farmers’ independence – GRAIN report
SPECIAL REPORTS AND PROJECTS
Seizing the Jubilee moment: Cancel the debt to unlock Africa’s clean energy future
Published
4 months agoon
July 12, 2025
Africa has the resources and the vision for a just energy transition, but it is trapped in a financial system structured to take more than it gives. In this blog, we outline how debt burdens and climate impacts are holding the continent back, and looks at the role of institutions that shape the global financial order, like the World Bank, African Development Bank and IMF. As these institutions and governments meet in Seville for FfD4, we urge them to heed people’s calls for reform: cancel the debt, redistribute the wealth, and fund the just transition. — By Rajneesh Bhuee and Lola Allen
With 60% of the world’s best solar energy resources and 70% of the cobalt essential for electric vehicle batteries, the African continent has everything it needs to power its development and become a global reference point for sustainable energy production. That potential, however, remains largely untapped; Africa receives just 2% of global renewable energy investment. As the UNCTAD Secretary-General Rebeca Grynspan warns, too many countries are forced to “default on their development to avoid defaulting on their debt.”
The cost of servicing unsustainable debts, layered with new loan-based climate and development finance, leaves governments with little fiscal space to invest in clean energy, health or education. In 2022 alone, African countries spent more than $100 billion on debt servicing, over twice what they spent on health or education. Add to this the $90 billion lost annually to illicit financial flows, and the reality is stark: more money leaves the continent through financial leakages (also including unfair trade and extractive investment) than comes in through productive, equitable and development-oriented finance.
These are not isolated problems. They reflect a financial system that has been built to serve global markets rather than people. Between 2020 and 2025, four African countries defaulted on their external debts, that is, they failed to make scheduled repayments to creditors like the International Monetary Fund or bondholders, triggering fiscal crises and, in several cases, IMF interventions tied to austerity measures. Pope Francis’ Jubilee Report (2025) and hundreds of civil society groups argue that these defaults reflect the deeper crisis of unsustainable debt. Meanwhile, 24 more African countries are now in or near debt distress. None have successfully restructured their debts under the G20 Common Framework, a mechanism launched in 2020 to facilitate debt relief among public and private creditors. The Framework has been widely criticised for being slow, opaque and ineffective. According to Eurodad, without urgent systemic reforms, up to 47 Global South countries, home to over 1.1 billion people, face insolvency risks within five years if they attempt to meet climate and development goals.
How debt undermines the just energy transition
Debt has become both a driver and a symptom of climate injustice. Countries that did the least to cause the climate crisis now pay the highest price, twice over. First, they suffer the impacts. Second, they must borrow to rebuild.
This is happening just as concessional finance disappears. The US has withdrawn from the African Development Fund’s concessional window (worth $550m), yet maintains influence over private-sector lending. It has also opted out of the UN Financing for Development Conference (FfD4), a historic opportunity to confront the injustice of our financial system. Meanwhile, European governments, though now celebrating themselves as defenders of multilateralism, played a key role in weakening the outcome of FfD4, slashing aid budgets, redirecting funds toward militarisation, and systematically blocking proposals for a UN-led sovereign debt workout mechanism. With rising insecurity and geopolitical tensions, these actions send a troubling signal: at a moment when global cooperation is urgently needed, many Global North countries are stepping back from efforts to fix the very system that is preventing climate justice and clean energy for much of the Global South.
A role for the AfDB?
The African Development Bank (AfDB), under incoming president Sidi Ould Tah , has made progressive commitments of $10 billion to climate-resilient infrastructure and $4 billion to clean cooking. Between 2022 and 2024, one in five (20%) of its energy dollars were grants, far exceeding The World Bank ‘s 10% and the Asian Development Bank (ADB) ‘s 3.8%. The AfDB has also backed systemic reform: for example, calling for Special Drawing Rights (SDR) redistribution, launching an African Financial Stability Mechanism that could save up to $20 billion in debt servicing, and consistently advocating for fairer lending terms.

Yet, even progressive leadership struggles within a broken system. Recourse’s recent research shows that AfDB energy finance dropped 67% in 2024, from $992.7 million to just $329.6 million. Of this, a staggering 73% went to large-scale infrastructure like mega hydro dams and export-focused transmission lines, ‘false solutions’ that bypass the energy-poor and displace communities. Meanwhile, support for locally-appropriate, decentralised renewable energy systems such as mini-grids, solar appliances, and clean cookstoves plummeted by over 90%, from $694.5 million to just $61 million, with only five of 13 projects directly addressing energy access in 2024.
Africa received just 2.8% of global climate finance in 2021–22, and what is labelled as “climate finance” is often little more than a Trojan horse: resource-backed loans, debt-for-nature swaps, and blended finance instruments that shift risk to the public while offering little real benefit to local communities. These mechanisms, promoted as “innovative” or “green”, often entrench financial dependency and fail to deliver meaningful change for energy-poor or climate-vulnerable groups.
Meanwhile, initiatives that could build green industry and renewable capacity across Africa are falling short in both scale and speed. Flagship projects, such as the EU’s Global Gateway, have failed to drive green industrialisation in Africa, and carbon markets continue to delay real emissions reductions, subsidise fossil fuel interests, and entrench elite control over land and resources.
Mission 300: Ambition or another missed opportunity?
In this constrained context, the AfDB and World Bank launched Mission 300, an ambitious plan to connect 300 million Africans to electricity by 2030. Pragmatic goals like electrification are crucial, but the story beneath the surface of Mission 300 raises concern. Far from serving households, many projects under the initiative appear more aligned with export markets and large-scale energy users, echoing decades of infrastructure that bypasses those most in need.
Mission 300 can still be transformative, but only if it centres people, not profits. Energy access must begin with those who need it most: women and youth, especially in rural communities. Across Africa, many women cook over open fires, walk hours to gather fuel, and care for families in homes without light or clean air. This is not just an inconvenience, it is structural violence and policy failure.
Yet most energy finance still flows to centralised grids, mega-projects, and sometimes fossil gas (misleadingly called a “transition fuel”). These do little to address energy poverty. Locally appropriate decentralised renewable energy solutions, solar-powered appliances, clean cookstoves, and mini-grids can deliver faster, cheaper, and more equitable impact. Mission 300 must invest in such solutions, without adding to existing debt problems. It should support national policy design, for example, by ensuring that energy policy is responsive to women’s needs, making use of gender-disaggregated data and community consultation.
The Jubilee: A year for action
In a year already marked as a Jubilee moment, African leaders have demanded reform: including a sovereign debt workout mechanism and a UN Tax Convention to end illicit financial flows. Yet as AFRODAD has documented, these demands were blocked at the FfD4 negotiations by wealthy nations—notably the EU and UK—even as climate impacts grow and fiscal space shrinks.
This is not just about finance. It is about reclaiming sovereignty. The incoming AfDB president and all the multilateral development banks face a choice: continue financing extractive, large-scale projects that serve foreign interests, or invest in decentralised, gender-responsive, pro-people solutions that shift power and ownership.
Africa has the resources. What it needs is fiscal space, public-led finance, and global rules that prioritise people and planet over profit. The Jubilee call is clear: cancel the debt, redistribute the wealth, and fund the just transition.
Source: Recourse through LinkedIn Account Recourse.
Related posts:

Statement: The Energy Sector Strategy 2024–2028 Must Mark the End of the EBRD’s Support to Fossil Fuels
African Development Bank decides not to fund Kenya coal project
Africa must unlock the power of its women to save climate change
PFZW scraps funding from Total and others for failure to transition into a cleaner energy mix.
StopEACOP Coalition warns TotalEnergies and CNOOC investors of escalating ‘financial and reputational’ Risks
12 anti-Eacop activists decry delayed justice after spending 100 days on remand
‘They Stole Our Ancestors’: Ministry of Water, RDCs Accused of Land Grabbing and Grave Exhumation in Kanungu
Failed US-Brokered “Peace” Deal Was Never About Peace in DRC
Uganda is on a mission to plant over 40 million trees by October 3, 2025, a crucial step in combating the alarming decline in its forest cover.
The 4th African Forum on Business and Human Rights: The rapidly escalating investment in Africa is urgently eroding environmental conservation and disregarding the dignity, the land, and human rights of the African people.
Oil palm tree growing in Uganda: The National Oil Palm Project is threatening to evict hundreds of smallholder farmers to expand its operations.
The 4th African Forum on Business and Human Rights: The African continent is lagging, with only a few member states having adopted the National Action Plan (NAP) on Business and Human Rights.
Innovative Finance from Canada projects positive impact on local communities.
Over 5000 Indigenous Communities evicted in Kiryandongo District
Petition To Land Inquiry Commission Over Human Rights In Kiryandongo District
Invisible victims of Uganda Land Grabs
Resource Center
- REPARATORY AND CLIMATE JUSTICE MUST BE AT THE CORE OF COP30, SAY GLOBAL LEADERS AND MOVEMENTS
- LAND GRABS AT GUNPOINT REPORT IN KIRYANDONGO DISTRICT
- THOSE OIL LIARS! THEY DESTROYED MY BUSINESS!
- RESEARCH BRIEF -TOURISM POTENTIAL OF GREATER MASAKA -MARCH 2025
- The Mouila Declaration of the Informal Alliance against the Expansion of Industrial Monocultures
- FORCED LAND EVICTIONS IN UGANDA TRENDS RIGHTS OF DEFENDERS IMPACT AND CALL FOR ACTION
- 12 KEY DEMANDS FROM CSOS TO WORLD LEADERS AT THE OPENING OF COP16 IN SAUDI ARABIA
- PRESENDIANTIAL DIRECTIVE BANNING ALL LAND EVICTIONS IN UGANDA
Legal Framework
READ BY CATEGORY
Newsletter
Trending
-
MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK2 weeks agoOil palm tree growing in Uganda: The National Oil Palm Project is threatening to evict hundreds of smallholder farmers to expand its operations.
-
MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK1 week agoNew! The Eyes on a Just Energy Transition in Africa Program is now live on Witness Radio.
-
MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK1 day agoStopEACOP Coalition warns TotalEnergies and CNOOC investors of escalating ‘financial and reputational’ Risks
-
MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK5 days agoKnow Your Land rights and environmental protection laws: a case of a refreshed radio program transferring legal knowledge to local and indigenous communities to protect their land and the environment at Witness Radio.
-
NGO WORK4 days agoFailed US-Brokered “Peace” Deal Was Never About Peace in DRC
-
MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK1 week agoRDCs, Local Leaders Accused of Grabbing 70-Acre Ancestral Land
-
MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK5 days agoGov’t Seeks Land to Establish Palm Oil Mill and Nursery in Busoga
-
MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK2 days ago12 anti-Eacop activists decry delayed justice after spending 100 days on remand








