Biodiversity conservation and climate change mitigation have become priorities on the global agenda, driving the creation of new protected areas and heavy investment in environmental projects. However, the current conservation model is marked by a profound paradox: alongside these priorities and investments, insufficient consideration is given to the deterioration and progressive loss of Indigenous territories, as well as to violence, inequality, and the lack of recognition of the rights of those who have coexisted with nature for centuries.
Respecting Indigenous peoples’ rights over their territories represents effective and just “nature-based” solutions that promote both climate change mitigation and biodiversity conservation, as well as Indigenous peoples’ well-being. Their carbon storage capacities are maintained because of the integrity that generally characterizes the ecosystems within these territories.
These contributions of Indigenous territories to planetary health are linked to the worldviews, values, and ways of life of their peoples. This is the case of the good living of the Quechua people (Sumak Kawsay) in various Andean countries, or the good living of the Guaraní people (Teko Porâ) in Paraguay, southern Brazil and northern Argentina, as well as the Mapuche worldview in southern Chile and Argentina, and that of numerous Amazonian native peoples.
In fact, it is no coincidence that the social and cultural disintegration of Indigenous peoples and of the ecological integrity of their territories occur at the same time, both in the name of development and in the name of economic interests (legal and illegal), or due to pressures from impoverished populations (Indigenous or non-Indigenous). Beyond the exterminations or forced displacements in colonial times, the dispossession of Indigenous peoples from their lands continues to advance in different Latin American countries. The Maya in Mexico, the Awajún and Wampís of the Peruvian Amazon, the Miskitu in Nicaragua, the Mbä-Guaraní in Paraguay and Brazil, the Mapuche in Chile and Argentina, among many others, are struggling to defend their ancestral territories. Despite legal advances such as the acquisition of collective property titles, the livelihoods of these peoples continue to be threatened and give way to the expansion of extractive industries.
Dispossession and degradation
Dispossession of Indigenous peoples from their lands can also occur in the name of conservation, a phenomenon known as green grabbing, fortress conservation, or colonial conservation. In Latin America, these tensions can be found in cases such as Yasuní National Park in Ecuador, Manu National Park in Peru, the Maya Biosphere Reserve in Mexico or Lanín National Park in Argentina.
The displacement of Indigenous peoples by dispossession and the consequent transformation of natural or semi-natural ecosystems for grazing fields, crops, and forestry are just the tip of the iceberg. The degradation of the geographic, ecological, cultural and social integrity of their territories is as frequent as it is barely visible. This not only impacts the dignity of Indigenous peoples, but also generates a vicious circle of poverty, environmental deterioration and blocked access to funding.
Not all is lost
Indigenous territories still contain a substantial portion of the least modified landscapes and ecosystems on the planet, and we know that many Indigenous peoples profess a respect for nature that goes far beyond our best conservationist discourses. According to research such as that led by Stephen Garnett, published in the journal Nature Sustainability, and others that have followed in the same vein, Indigenous peoples manage or have rights to more than a quarter of the planet’s land area, significantly more than other protected lands, and a third of the world’s Intact Forests are found within Indigenous lands. This makes them crucial areas for climate change mitigation as rates of forest loss remain significantly lower on Indigenous lands in comparison with others, albeit with wide variations between countries.
Why is investment in conservation on Indigenous lands not commensurate with the key role they play in biodiversity conservation? The lack of investment is due to several constraints that vary from case to case: weak legal status of land tenure; diversion of funds to other destinations; conflicts with development policies; inefficient administration of funds; restrictions on access to aid and compensation programs; lack of control mechanisms to prevent illegal exploitation of resources and encroachment on Indigenous lands; and above all mistrust, in both directions.
Towards solutions based on Indigenous territorial justice
It is essential to establish new forms of collaboration between Indigenous communities, and other local and global actors, so that Indigenous territorial claims and global concerns about biodiversity loss and climate change converge.
To be viable and sustainable, such solutions based on “Indigenous territorial justice” need to differ from the old asymmetric formulas, where Indigenous peoples and territories appear in agreements as politically correct paragraphs, but in practice are often relegated to the discursive realm, without materializing in concrete actions. Most of the efforts to identify and develop business opportunities capable of driving nature-based solutions are based on logics, languages and technical bodies that do not necessarily address these realities.
Around the world, valuable experiences have been developed that could be recovered, systematized, improved and adapted to different contexts. One example is the Kayapó Project in Brazil, which, in partnership with international NGOs and the Brazilian government, has enabled the Kayapó people to implement forest monitoring and sustainable natural resource management programs. Other examples are the payment for environmental services promoted by the Mexican government through the National Forestry Commission for the benefit of Indigenous peoples and the Life Plans promoted by the Colombian government for the U’wa and other Indigenous communities. Furthermore, valuable lessons have even been learned from FAO’s REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) projects.
However, to incorporate these solutions in an effective and sustainable manner, it is necessary to strengthen mechanisms to protect Indigenous rights, guarantee their participation in decision-making and ensure an equitable distribution of resources for conservation.
There is still a significant gap between recognized rights and the reality they live in their territories. Although the titling of Indigenous lands is a first step, it does not always guarantee the effective protection of their rights. In many cases, the participation of these peoples is limited to consultation, information, or the signing of agreements, when they are fundamental for the feedback of behaviors and commitments.
To change this reality, it is necessary to reduce the inequalities of these communities in access to education, health care, justice, basic technologies and authorities. And just as gender inequalities are gaining space within international support programs, it is important to allocate a proportion of funds to finance solutions based on Indigenous territorial justice.
Final considerations
Recognition and respect for these territories mean much more than a formula for reducing major transformations and the replacement of biodiverse ecosystems. If we really want to integrate Indigenous peoples into conservation agendas, it is crucial to avoid falling into reductionist stereotypes that limit them to the role of “guardians of nature”. These views, while well-intentioned, can obscure the complexities of Indigenous cultures and ultimately fail to separate “nature-based solutions” from “nature-based solutions and Indigenous territorial justice”.
True inclusion implies respecting the diversity of visions and allowing Indigenous peoples to be the protagonists of their own development, without imposing conservation models on them. The conciliation between Indigenous territorial justice and nature-based solutions depends on the construction of free and virtuous links that guarantee respect for their rights and their fundamental role in the management of their territories.
*Text produced jointly with the Inter-American Research Institute on Global Changes (IAI). The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of their organizations.
Machine translation proofread by Janaína da Silva.
Autor
PhD in Biological Sciences from the University of Buenos Aires. Principal Investigator at CONICET. Currently working at the Bariloche Foundation (Argentina) as director of the Socioecological Systems Program and is especially interested in the governance of ecosystem services.
