MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK
UN approves carbon market safeguards to protect environment and human rights
Published
1 year agoon

The UN’s new carbon market will have a compulsory mechanism that aims to prevent developers of carbon credit projects from breaching human rights or causing environmental damage with their activities – a first for the UN climate process.
Developers of projects under the UN’s new Article 6.4 carbon crediting system will be required to identify and address potential negative environmental and social impacts as part of a detailed risk assessment under new rules adopted by technical experts in Baku, Azerbaijan, last Thursday.
Developers will also be asked to set out how their activities contribute to sustainable development goals like ending poverty or improving health, alongside their primary objective of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Maria AlJishi, chair of the Supervisory Body in charge of setting the rules, said in a statement that “these new mandatory safeguards are a significant step towards ensuring that the UN carbon market we are building contributes to sustainable development without harming people or the environment”.
The risk reduction measures introduced by the so-called “Sustainable Development Tool” represent an attempt to grapple with widespread concerns over the harm caused by some carbon credit projects around the world.
The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) – the previous UN carbon market set up to help richer countries meet their emissions-cutting pledges – was dogged by accusations of social and environmental abuses linked to its registered projects. They included, for example, toxic pollution from a waste-to-energy facility in India, forced relocations due to infrastructure like a hydropower dam in Panama, and villagers in Uganda being denied access to land they used to grow food as a result of a tree-planting project.
The CDM had only a less-rigorous voluntary safeguarding mechanism that was heavily criticised by civil society.
The approval of the new Sustainable Development Tool this week marks the end of a two-year process to agree on the rules, which will work alongside an appeals and grievance procedure rubber-stamped earlier this year.
Kristin Qui, a Supervisory Body member closely involved in developing the tool, told Climate Home it had been “very challenging” to get it right. “Everyone wanted to find the right balance between making sure the tool can be used while at the same time being as stringent as possible,” she added.
Under the new rules, project developers will have to fill out an extensive questionnaire designed to assess the risk their activities could pose in 11 areas, including land and water, human rights, health, gender equality and Indigenous Peoples.
They will have to describe how they are planning to avoid any negative impacts or, if that is not possible, the measures they are taking to reduce them, as well as procedures to monitor their implementation.
External auditors will review the risk assessment, check that local communities have been properly consulted and evaluate the appropriateness of the actions proposed by the developers. The rules will apply to both new projects developed under Article 6.4 and to over a thousand more that are seeking to transfer into the new market from the CDM.
Isa Mulder, a policy expert at Carbon Market Watch (CMW) and a close observer of Article 6 negotiations, said the tool “should go a long way in upholding rights and protecting people and the environment”.
She added there is still room for improvement on certain provisions and said the mechanism will need to be used as intended for it to be effective, but called it “a really good start”.
The Supervisory Body will review and update the safeguarding tool every 18 months, striving to improve it based on feedback from those involved.
In addition to the risk assessment, the mechanism will require project developers to assess the potential impacts of their activities on country efforts to meet the 17 Sustainable Development Goals, adopted by the UN in 2015 and due to be met this decade.
Qui said the tool will make project developers reflect more closely on how they can share benefits with local communities.
“It poses the question of how the project is actually going to contribute to sustainable development in addition to simply avoiding harm and encourages a high level of engagement with Indigenous populations from the get-go,” she added.
The approval of the Sustainable Development Tool is seen as an important stepping stone towards achieving the full operationalisation of the Article 6 carbon market at COP29 in November – one of the main priorities for the incoming Azerbaijani presidency of the talks.
CMW’s Mulder said the tool’s adoption was “very significant”, as having a human rights protection package in place was “probably a prerequisite” for many countries to even consider approving other carbon market measures at COP.
After extended and heated discussions stretching into the early morning on Thursday, the Supervisory Body also agreed on guidance for the development of carbon-credit methodologies and carbon removal activities aimed at ensuring that emission reductions claimed by projects are credible.
These key building blocks for the establishment of the Article 6.4 carbon crediting mechanism proved an insurmountable hurdle at the last two annual climate summits where government negotiators rejected previous iterations of the documents.
That prompted the Supervisory Body to take a different route in Baku this week by directly approving those documents as “standards” instead of simply presenting its recommendations for diplomats to fight over at COP.
Jonathan Crook, a policy expert at CMW, interpreted the move as “a risky take-it-or-leave it strategy” to avoid intensive negotiations. “I think this approach aims to ensure the texts won’t be reopened at COP29 for line-by-line edits,” he said.
Climate Home understands that governments will still have the option of rejecting the body’s “standards” wholesale or directing it to make further changes.
Supervisory Body chair AlJishi said in written comments that “the adoption of these standards marks a major step forward in enabling a robust, agile carbon market that can continue to evolve”.
But a fellow member of the body, Olga Gassan-zade, voiced concerns over the process. “Personally I have huge reservations against creating a UN mechanism that can effectively evade the UN governance,” she wrote in a LinkedIn post, “but it didn’t feel like the SBM [Supervisory Body Mechanism] as a whole was willing to risk not adopting the CMA recommendations for a third year in a row.”…PACNEWS/CIMATE HOME.
Source: Post-Courier
Related posts:

Finnish carbon offsetting firm Compensate finds 91% of carbon offset projects fail its evaluation process. Of course the remaining 9% will also not help address the climate crisis
A new destructive business: Carbon credits from tree plantations
The carbon shop: planting new problems
Human rights defenders & business in 2022: People challenging corporate power to protect our planet.
You may like
MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK
“Vacant Land” Narrative Fuels Dispossession and Ecological Crisis in Africa – New report.
Published
12 hours agoon
November 13, 2025
By Witness Radio team.
Over the years, the African continent has been damaged by the notion that it has vast and vacant land that is unused or underutilised, waiting to be transformed into industrial farms or profitable carbon markets. This myth, typical of the colonial era ideologies, has justified land grabs, mass displacements, and environmental destruction in the name of development and modernisation.
A new report by the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA) titled “Land Availability and Land-Use Changes in Africa (2025)” dismisses this narrative as misleading. Drawing on satellite data, field research, and interviews with farmers across Africa, including Zambia, Mozambique, South Africa, and Zimbabwe, the study reveals that far from being empty, Africa’s landscapes are multifunctional systems that sustain millions of lives.
“Much of the land labelled as “underutilised” is, in fact, used for grazing, shifting cultivation, gathering wild foods, spiritual practices, or is part of ecologically significant systems such as forests, wetlands, or savannahs. These uses are often invisible in formal land registries or economic metrics but are essential for local livelihoods and biodiversity. Moreover, the land often carries layered customary claims and is far from being available for simple expropriation,” says the report.
“Africa has seen three waves of dispossession, and we are in the midst of the third. The first was the alienation of land through conquest and annexation in the colonial period. In some parts of the continent, there have been reversals as part of national liberation struggles and the early independence era. But state developmentalism through the post-colonial period also brought about a second wave of state-driven land dispossession.” This historical context is crucial to understanding the current state of land rights and development in Africa. Said Ruth Hall, a professor at the Institute for Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies (PLAS), at the University of the Western Cape in Cape Town, South Africa, during the official launch of the report.
The report further underestimates the assumption that smallholder farmers are unproductive and should be replaced with mechanised large-scale farming, leading to a loss of food sovereignty.
“The claim that small-scale farmers are incapable of feeding Africa is not supported by evidence. Africa has an estimated 33 million smallholder farmers, who manage 80% of the continent’s farmland and produce up to 80% of its food. Rather than being inefficient, small-scale agro-ecological farming offers numerous advantages: it is more labour-intensive, resilient to shocks, adaptable to local environments, and embedded in cultural and social life. Dismissing this sector in favour of large-scale, mechanised monocultures undermines food sovereignty, biodiversity, and rural employment.” Reads the Report.
The idea that industrial agriculture will lift millions out of poverty has not materialised. Instead, large-scale agribusiness projects have often concentrated land and wealth in the hands of elites and foreign investors. Job creation has been minimal, as modern farms rely heavily on machinery rather than human labour. Moreover, export-oriented agriculture prioritises global markets over local food security, leaving communities vulnerable to price fluctuations and shortages.
“The promise that agro-industrial expansion will create millions of decent jobs is historically and economically questionable. Agro-industrial models tend to displace labour through mechanisation and concentrate benefits in the hands of large companies. Most industrial agriculture jobs are seasonal, poorly paid, and insecure. In contrast, smallholder farming remains the primary source of employment across Africa, particularly for young people and women. The idea that technology-intensive farming will be a panacea for unemployment ignores the structural realities of African economies and the failures of previous industrialisation efforts.”
Additionally, the assumption that increasing yields and expanding markets will automatically improve food access overlooks the structural causes of food insecurity. People’s ability, particularly that of the poor and marginalised, to access nutritious food depends on land rights, income distribution, gender equity, and the functioning of political systems. In many countries, high agricultural productivity coexists with hunger and malnutrition because food systems are oriented towards export and profit rather than equitable distribution and local nourishment. It highlights the urgent need for equitable food distribution, making the audience more empathetic and aware of the issue.
Furthermore, technological fixes such as improved seeds, synthetic fertilizers, and irrigation are being promoted as solutions to Africa’s food insecurity, but evidence suggests otherwise. The Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) spent over a decade pushing such technologies with little success; hunger actually increased in its target countries.
These high-input models overlook local ecological realities and structural inequalities, while increasing dependence on costly external inputs. As a result, smallholders often fall into debt and lose control over their own seeds and farming systems. It underscores the importance of understanding and respecting local ecological realities, making the audience feel more connected and responsible.
Africa is already experiencing an increased and accelerating squeeze on land due to competing demands including rapid population growth and urbanisation, Expansion of mining operations, especially for critical minerals like cobalt, lithium, and rare-earth elements, which are central to the global green transition, The proliferation of carbon-offset projects, often requiring vast tracts of land for afforestation or reforestation schemes that displace existing land users, Rising global demand for timber, which is increasing deforestation and land competition as well as Agricultural expansion for commodity crops, including large-scale plantations of palm oil, sugarcane, tobacco, and rubber.
“In East Africa, we see mass evictions, like the Maasai of Burunguru, forced from their ancestral territories in the name of conservation and tourism. In Central Africa, forests are cleared for mining of transitional minerals, destroying ecosystems and livelihoods. Women, a backbone of Africa’s food production, remain the most affected, and least consulted in decisions over land and resources and things that affect them.” Said Mariam Bassi Olsen from Friends of the Earth Nigeria, and a representative of the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa.
The report urges a shift away from Africa’s high-tech, market-driven, land-intensive development model toward a just, sustainable, and locally grounded vision by promoting agroecology for food sovereignty, ecological renewal, and rural livelihoods, while reducing the need for land expansion through improved productivity, equitable food distribution, and reduced waste.
Additionally, a call is made for responsible urban planning, sustainable timber management, and reduced mineral demand through circular economies, as well as the legal recognition of customary land rights, especially for women and Indigenous peoples, and adherence to the principle of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) for all land investments.
Related posts:

AGRA’s Silent Takeover: The Hidden Impact on Africa’s Agricultural Policies.
63 million people food insecure in Horn of Africa: report
African Food Systems Summit 2024: Do not use it to promote failed agricultural models – African Faith Leaders.
Carbon offset projects exacerbate land grabbing and undermine small farmers’ independence – GRAIN report
MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK
Uganda’s Army is on the spot for forcibly grabbing land for families in Pangero Chiefdom in Nebbi district.
Published
16 hours agoon
November 13, 2025
By the Witness Radio team.
Despite the challenges, the community in Koch Parish, Nebbi Sub-County, in Nebbi District, near the Congolese border, has shown remarkable resilience. The Army seized approximately 100 acres of land, including private buildings, that members of the local Koch community had used for over 150 years to establish an Army barracks. Their resilience in the face of such a significant loss is genuinely inspiring.
The UPDF, as described on its website, is a nonpartisan force, national in character, patriotic, professional, disciplined, productive, and subordinate to the civilian authority as established under the constitution. Furthermore, it states that its primary interest is to protect Uganda and Africa at large, providing a safe and secure environment in which all Ugandan citizens can live and prosper.
However, according to a whistleblower, when the UPDF seized their land, no military chiefs offered prior communication, consultation, compensation, or resettlement. Instead, Uganda’s national Army only occupied people’s land forcefully, and not even the section commanders offered an official explanation.
“Citizens just woke up to a massive Army deployment in their fields,” wrote a whistleblower in an exchange with Witness Radio.
The occupied area in Koch Parish is not just a piece of land, but a home to the members of the Pangero chiefdom. This community belongs to the Alur kingdom, which spans north-western Congo and western Uganda, north of Lake Albert.
The reality and daily life of the Pangero community, which typically lives in a closely connected and communal manner, have been significantly impacted by the loss of both private and communal land. Not only is the cultural identity associated with land and community life at risk, but access to cultural sites, such as the graves of ancestors, is now denied.
Members of the local community who resisted the unlawful seizure of their land were reported to have been harassed and defamed. Despite these challenges, they continue to fight for their rights, making negotiations with the UPDF significantly more challenging.
Beyond the human suffering, the takeover also raises serious legal questions under Ugandan land law. Under Ugandan law, this action by the UPDF constitutes an illegal act. In principle, the government and, by extension, the Army are entitled to take over land if it is in the public interest, and are subject to fairly compensating the landowners.
However, this is subject to the condition that their intention is clearly communicated in advance and that negotiations take place with the previous residents, resulting in a mutual agreement on the necessary and appropriate compensation.
When faced with community resistance, the Army was compelled to conduct a survey and valuation of the land occupied by the UPDF in 2023 and 2024. However, land defenders in the area claim that the process was marred by irregularities in some cases, against the will and in the absence of many landowners.
“The community was also pressured by the Koch Land Committee responsible for the review. Despite that it was supposed to represent the local population, it was not democratically elected by consensus, as is tradition in Alur communities, and was comprised of an imposed elite.” A local defender told Witness Radio
At an announcement meeting facilitated by officials from the UPDF Land Board, their national surveyor, and the Commander of Koch Army Barracks on September 19, 2025, community members were compelled to sign documents for meager compensation for land that had been seized five years prior.
“Residents whose land was surveyed before were given two choices: To sell their land to the Army by accepting the offered compensation, or to refuse the UPDF’s offer. In the latter case, however, it would be necessary to contact the Army headquarters in Mbuya, which is far away, to assert one’s claims or submit a petition.” Says another defender. Despite signing for this money, as of the writing of this article, the community claims it had never received it, almost two months later.
Mr Opio Okech, who attended the meeting himself, disapproves that this equates to a forced decision to sell, as the further necessary measures seem almost impossible for those affected without legal knowledge or external support.
“The problem here from the government was to enter upon the land, stay for long without adequate awareness creation, then decide we are going nowhere. Come for compensation. This looks, smells, and walks like a forceful eviction, “he mentions.
The effects of forced land acquisition by the UPDF in Koch Parish pose a high risk of home and landlessness, rises in youth criminality, and recurring poverty, primarily affecting women and children. Furthermore, the dispersal of the traditional community of the Pangero chiefdom is most likely to result in a severe loss of cultural heritage.
The Ugandan government has a duty here to look after the needs of this traditional community beyond compensation. This could include providing alternative land on which the traditional communal way of life could continue.
Witness Radio had not received a response from Army spokesperson Mr. Felix Kulayigye regarding the land grab, despite several attempts. However, since the initial takeover in 2020, another land grab by the same agency is looming in the same Kochi community for the expansion of the Army barracks.
According to sources, the UPDF intends to acquire more than 1,000 acres in total, nearly half of Koch Parish, leaving residents in fear and uncertainty.
“People are now panicking because they have heard speculations that more land is being
targeted for expansion. They are concerned about the impunity of the national Army, since the land that was grabbed five years ago has not been paid for, and now there are reports that more than 1,000 acres of community land are being targeted.” Mr. Okello further revealed.
The fate of the Pangero chiefdom is not an isolated case. Across Uganda, communal lands belonging to traditional clans and kingdoms continue to face similar threats from investors and state actors. Although Ugandan law recognizes customary ownership, enforcement often remains weak, and those affected rarely have access to the information or resources needed to defend their rights.
Related posts:

Church of Uganda’s call to end land grabbing is timely and re-enforces earlier calls to investigate quack investors and their agents fueling the problem.
Ugandan army to punish soldiers for torturing Journalist in Kampala
Mubende district police are aiding land grabbing and committing crimes against locals they are obliged to protect.
Uganda: World Bank financing is violently forcing thousands of local families off their land for large-scale cereal growing.
MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK
Seed Sovereignty: Most existing and emerging laws and policies on seeds are endangering seed saving and conservation on the African continent.
Published
2 days agoon
November 11, 2025
By the Witness Radio team
In Africa, farmers and civil society organizations are urgently warning about the adverse effects of existing policies on agrobiodiversity. These policies aim to erode centuries-old traditions of seed saving and exchange, effectively undermining seed sovereignty and intensifying dependency on commercial seed companies.
The struggle over seed sovereignty, particularly the rights of smallholder farmers, has become one of the most pressing issues for the continent’s agricultural future. As governments introduce new seed laws, such as the proposed East African Seed and Plant Varieties Act Bill of 2024, the preservation of cultural seeds and the rights of smallholder farmers are at stake.
The Communications and Advocacy Officer at Kenya’s Seed Savers Network, Tabitha Munyeri, notes that this has heightened monoculture, thereby significantly reducing the focus on indigenous plant varieties.
“There’s a lot of loss of agrobiodiversity with people focussing on a few foods, a few crops, leaving out so many other essential crops that have sustained humankind for generations and it is also important because it is coming at a time where we are having a lot of also conversations around different seed laws that are coming up for example within the EAC we see that there is the seed and plant varieties bill of 2024 and we are looking at it as a huge setback and there is need for us to create awareness around even the policies that exist.”
She further argues that there is a need to raise awareness and sensitise farmers to the existing policies so that they can understand their effects on agrobiodiversity.
“Even for Kenya we have been having punitive seed laws for the longest time but now we are happy that courts of law are reviewing the law, but we still think that there is need to create a lot of advocacy around the seed laws and what they really mean to farmers because some of them do not understand, some of them are not even interested but once they get to know what it means and the impacts that the laws have on them then they are also able to become more vocal and more involved in the process.” She says.
Farmers in Africa have been the custodians of agricultural biodiversity, developing and maintaining numerous varieties of crops that are suited to local soils and climates. However, over the last few decades, the focus on farming has drastically declined to a handful of “high-yield” crops and imported hybrid varieties, leaving out the diverse indigenous seeds that have sustained communities through droughts, pests, and diseases.
Munyeri warns that this decline in agrobiodiversity is accelerating, driven not merely by market pressures, but by restrictive laws that criminalise and discourage traditional seed-saving practices.
In Kenya, where smallholder farmers supply more than 80 percent of the country’s food, seed systems have long depended on the informal exchange of seeds within communities. Small-hold farmers have relied on these systems to share, adapt, and innovate with seeds suited to their local conditions. However, existing laws have tended to favour the formal sector, requiring seed certification, variety registration, and compliance with intellectual property protections that most small-scale farmers cannot afford.
The 2024 Seed and Plant Varieties Act Bill, currently under discussion in several East African countries, has sparked significant controversy. It seeks to modernize agriculture and align national systems with international standards. However, smallholder farmers and critics contend that it allows corporate control over genetic resources, limiting farmers’ autonomy and threatening biodiversity. Under such a framework, only registered seed varieties can be legally traded or exchanged, effectively outlawing the informal seed networks that have sustained rural communities for centuries.
If smallholder farmers lose their rights to exchange and cultivate indigenous varieties, they may also lose control over their food systems. Dependence on improved seeds necessitates purchasing new stock each planting season, eroding self-reliance and increasing vulnerability to market fluctuations.
This awareness gap is what the Seed Savers Network hopes to address. Through training programs and advocacy initiatives, including its recently concluded regional boot camp, the organization equips participants from across Africa with knowledge about seed laws, biodiversity, and policy engagement.
Related posts:

Seed Boot Camp: A struggle to conserve local and indigenous seeds from extinction.
The EAC Seed & Plant Varieties Bill, 2025, is a potential threat to smallholder farmers, as it aims to disengage them from the agriculture business, according to experts.
CSOs and Smallholder farmers are urgently convening to scrutinize the EAC Seed & Plant Varieties Bill, 2025.
African governments are giving in to corporate pressure and undermining local seed systems – report
“Vacant Land” Narrative Fuels Dispossession and Ecological Crisis in Africa – New report.
Uganda’s Army is on the spot for forcibly grabbing land for families in Pangero Chiefdom in Nebbi district.
Climate wash: The World Bank’s Fresh Offensive on Land Rights
Africa’s Land Is Not Empty: New Report Debunks the Myth of “Unused Land” and Calls for a Just Future for the Continent’s Farmland
StopEACOP Coalition warns TotalEnergies and CNOOC investors of escalating ‘financial and reputational’ Risks
New! The Eyes on a Just Energy Transition in Africa Program is now live on Witness Radio.
Failed US-Brokered “Peace” Deal Was Never About Peace in DRC
Know 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.
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 NETWORK1 week agoReport reveals ongoing Human Rights Abuses and environmental destruction by the Chinese oil company CNOOC
-
SPECIAL REPORTS AND PROJECTS1 week agoThe Environmental Crisis Is a Capitalist Crisis
-
MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK1 week agoLands ministry rejects call to save over 300 Masaka residents facing eviction
-
SPECIAL REPORTS AND PROJECTS1 week agoGlobal use of coal hit record high in 2024
-
MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK2 days agoSeed Sovereignty: Most existing and emerging laws and policies on seeds are endangering seed saving and conservation on the African continent.
-
MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK16 hours agoUganda’s Army is on the spot for forcibly grabbing land for families in Pangero Chiefdom in Nebbi district.
-
MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK12 hours ago“Vacant Land” Narrative Fuels Dispossession and Ecological Crisis in Africa – New report.
-
NGO WORK2 days agoDiscover How Foreign Interests and Resource Extraction Continue to Drive Congo’s Crisis
