New Zealand Celsias

With the Copenhagen conference underway, the world’s attention has turned to the issues of global warming and the measures nations need to take to prevent catastrophic warming on Earth. It is widely acknowledged that CO2 emissions need to be reduced in order to cool the planet, and some helpful measures could include emissions trading schemes and growth in the cleantech sector.

However, some of the environmentally friendly technologies and initiatives in place are having negative impacts on the world’s tribal groups. Survival International   has released a paper outlining the troublesome and complex relationship between global warming and tribal people worldwide. 

This new paper specifically addresses the effects of climate change and impending policy on native groups. In particular, the paper asserts that attempts by developed nations to improve current climate issues (biofuels, carbon credits and so on) could further damage the welfare of tribal groups.

It is well known that warming temperatures are affecting people globally. In the Arctic Circle- Canada and Alaska and the top of Europe- people are already trying to cope with the changes brought about by warming temperatures.

Examples include the Saami reindeer herders from Finland, Norway and Russia who report that their herd numbers are in steady decline. Reindeer numbers are down due to low quantities of food and increased injury rates as animals fall through thin ice.

Similarly, Inuit people are finding it more difficult to fish and hunt, and whole villages now face the possibility of evacuation because of flooding.

At the other end of the world, mass village evacuation is already a reality. People from the low-lying Carteret Islands  , Soloman Islands and Tuvalu   have had to rebuild villages on higher ground and whole groups are now known as ‘climate change refugees’  .

One of the questions addressed by the paper is that of the relationship between mitigation measures and indigenous people.  The paper looks at case studies involving indigenous people and the effect of biofuel plantations, hydroelectric dams and forestry initiatives.

In the case of biofuels, the report talks about the Guarani Tribe in Brazil. The Guarani people are the largest tribe in Brazil and one of the first to have made contact with Europeans. They live in the Amazon forest and rely on it for shelter and food. However, large sections of their forest have been decimated in order to make way for sugar cane plantations, the product of which is converted into ethanol.  Earlier this year, Brazilian President Lula announced at the Fifth Summit of the Americas, that Brazil would step up its biofuel production. 

He was reported as saying; “Biofuels are an effective weapon in the fight against global warming. Our society demands renewable, clean, inexpensive fuels. The production of sugar cane ethanol increases energy security”.

While this statement may be true, the effects of increasing plantations are catastrophic for the Guarani. Over the last six years. At least eighty children have died of starvation, and the loss of their land has forced people to squat on roadsides or in tiny plots bordered by sugar cane. The sugar cane plantations pollute the rivers and kill the fish.

According to the report there are also terrible social repercussions. The Guarani people have seen an increase in suicides, alcoholism and murder.

In Borneo, it is the enormous Bakan hydro dam that is threatening the way of life for indigenous tribes.  Malaysian government has been promoting this dam (due for completion in 2010) as a ‘green energy’ source, but the construction is predictably driving many people from their land and homes. Like the Guarani, the effects of the dam construction have resulted in starvation, flooding and illness for the Penan tribe of Borneo.

The report also focuses on carbon trading and the resulting exploitation of indigenous forest dwelling tribes.  Attempts to curb deforestation have seen the introduction of measures like REDD   – a scheme that may be finalized in Copenhagen this month. The basic premise of REDD is that developing countries will be inclined to protect their forests through payments by developed nations. A simple way of actioning this would be for the carbon stored in the forests to generate credits that developed countries can then buy as a means of offsetting their own pollution.

However, there are some concerns with such a system.  Survival International say that indigenous people have concerns over REDD because it could place a huge value on their forests and subsequently trigger a land grab. It could also make it more difficult for people to have their land rights recognized, or make it easier for other parties to undermine tribal interests. It could lead to evictions or restrictions on land ands natural resources.

As quoted in the report: “REDD will increase the violation of our human rights, our rights to our lands, territories and resources, steal our land, cause forced evictions, prevent access and threaten indigenous agriculture practices, destroy biodiversity and culture diversity and cause social conflicts.” International Forum of Indigenous Peoples on Climate Change (IFIPCC)

The report surmises that where climate change mitigation efforts affect indigenous tribes, they must involve these people fully in negotiations. It is vital that groups draw on their knowledge of the land and their environment.

The report also recommends the recognition and respect of indigenous rights as set out in the ILO Convention and the UN declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People.

The current Copenhagen conference will provide a platform for tribal interest groups to address world leaders about their current states of crisis.  The Indigenous Environmental Network is holding a talk in Copenhagen where Native Americans, Alaska Natives and First Nation Peoples will speak out about the US energy industry’s ‘war on indigenous lands and livelihood’. There will also be a prayer ceremony to call for a binding agreement put on by the same group.

Tribal groups the world over have generally lived harmoniously with their environment for centuries, whilst other nations have lived beyond their means and exploited the Earth’s resources to a critical point.  Developed Nations must recognize the needs and welfare of tribal groups, when they work towards an agreement over the next week.

Perhaps it is time to follow Gandhi’s lead and live simply so that others may simply live. The only problem is - how viable is this notion?

For more information on this report, visit the Survival International website.

Read other articles on Celsias:

Seeing REDD: Could There be a More Complicated Way to Save the Forests?

When the Changes Come, Where Will All the People Go?

Follow us on Twitter!