REDD+ and the Indigenous Question: A Case Study from Ecuador

Abstract

Abstract:One of the main issues regarding the implementation of REDD+ in Latin America has been the growing concern that such projects may infringe upon the rights and negatively affect the livelihoods of forest-dependent communities. Various indigenous and civil society organizations are ardently opposed to the initiative. Such is the case in Ecuador, where indigenous opposition to REDD+ represents a considerable obstacle in the creation of a national strategy since more than 60% of the country's remaining forest cover is on indigenous land or under indigenous occupation. Thus one of the most critical challenges remaining for Ecuador will be the construction of a strong legal, financial, and institutional framework-one that the greater indigenous community might be willing to accept. Closer examination of this topic however, reveals just how difficult this may become. Lack of information, a recent political split between national authorities and the indigenous sector, and the dissimilar organizational capacity levels of indigenous communities make the feasibility of carrying out REDD+ projects on these lands extremely complex. However, the biggest obstacle may be ideological. Many indigenous groups view REDD+, with its possible emphasis on international markets and neoliberal mechanisms, as a continuation of the type of policies that have impeded their quest for sovereignty and self determination. As such, indigenous people are only willing to consider such projects if they clearly see preconditions in place that would safeguard their cultures, territories, and autonomy.

Ten Years of REDD+: A Critical Review of the Impact of REDD+ on Forest-Dependent Communities

“…First of all, there could be a risk that, because of unclear forest definitions, forests are changing into monocultures or tree plantations that increase the carbon stocks at the expense of biodiversity and socio-cultural values [7,53,63]. Another risk is that there could be increased land-use pressure on carbon poor ecosystems outside REDD+ areas.…”

“…Introducing mono tree plantations and high-carbon production forests; more pressure on land outside REDD+ forests; threat to ecosystems with high biodiversity but low carbon sequestration [7,21,53,63,85,86].…”

“…Unequal distribution of income; people losing access to the forests; people losing forest tenure rights; people having less farmland; intra-and inter-community conflicts; REDD+ does not cover the opportunity costs; marginalization; discrepancies among definitions [8,11,26,35,[45][46][47][48][49][51][52][53][54][55]59,60].…”

“…Various studies [7,23,41,[51][52][53][54][55] assert that securing tenure over forestland and carbon are necessary steps to be undertaken if REDD+ is to be successful in both forest conservation and livelihood improvement (Land tenure in this study is defined as [56]: "The right, whether defined in customary or statutory terms, that determines who can hold and use land (including forests and other landscapes) and resources, for how long, and under what conditions" (p. 303). Carbon rights can be defined as [57]: "Intangible assets created by legislative and contractual arrangements that allow the recognition of separate benefits arising from the sequestration of carbon in the biomass" (p.…”

Deforestation and Waodani Lands in Ecuador: Mapping and Demarcation Amidst Shaky Politics

“…While the Waodani at times express their ignorance of these boundaries including the Yasuní National Park, the Tagaeri-Taromenane Intangible Zone, and even the border with Peru (Randi Randi 2003), the borders in practice mean that other actors are managing significant portions of Waodani territory. In addition, the 2008 Ecuador Constitution ratifies the government's rights to sub-surface resources including oil and minerals, but also forest resources and environmental services (Bremner & Lu 2006;Reed 2011). Thus the Waodani are legal owners but not actual administrators of their territory (CARE 2002).…”