March, 15 2022, 01:59pm EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Jennifer K. Falcon, Indigenous Environmental Network, jennifer@ienearth.org
Ahead of Vital UN Moment for Biodiversity, "Nature-Based Solutions" Are Once Again Being Erroneously Heralded as the Solution
WASHINGTON
From March 14-29th the UN Convention on Biodiversity (CBD) will resume talks in Geneva on a Global Biodiversity Framework to halt biodiversity loss. The concept of "nature-based solutions" is expected to be a controversial issue at the talks, with some governments pushing for it while many governments from the global South are concerned about more loopholes for carbon offsets. An IPCC report due to be released later this month is likely to lend more unwarranted credence to the "nature-based solutions" concept, as the UN climate COP26 talks in Glasgow did.
In a statement released today 364 organisations, networks and movements and 128 individuals from 69 countries expose these "nature-based dispossessions", warning of harmful practices such as the expansion of monoculture tree plantations and industrial agriculture lurking behind the "nature-based solutions" marketing/greenwashing ploy. They call for a rejection of "nature-based solutions", because these carbon offset schemes in disguise are not designed to slow climate breakdown. Rather, "nature-based solutions" are a means for corporations to continue, and even increase, their greenhouse gas emissions.
"Nature-based solutions" promotes the illusion that plants and soils can undo the climate damage caused by carbon emissions from fossil fuel burning. This is a dangerous deception and provides window dressing for "net-zero" pledges from governments and corporations. Instead of agreeing on the drastic emissions reductions needed to prevent climate chaos, they make false, inaccurate claims that "nature" will remove enough excess carbon from the atmosphere to avert catastrophe.
- The Italian energy company Eni says it will still be using fossil fuels to generate 90% of its energy by 2050. To offset these emissions, it will need the entire potential of all of Italy's forests to absorb the carbon. That is 8 million hectares for Eni's net-zero claim.
- The net zero targets of just four of the big oil and gas corporations alone (Shell, BP, Total and Eni) could require an area of land twice the size of the UK.
- The "net-zero" plan of world's largest food company, Nestle, could require 4.4 million hectares of land per year for offsets.
These are just three of the many corporate net-zero pledges that will cause unspeakable harm to peoples and territories in the global South. The reality is that corporate demand for "nature-based solutions" will enclose living spaces of Indigenous Peoples, peasants and forest-dependent communities on a massive scale.
To avert catastrophic climate chaos and biodiversity loss, the destruction of underground fossil carbon stores must be stopped and frontline communities must be supported and protected. "Nature-based solutions" must be halted in its tracks. They are dangerous distractions from ending fossil fuel burning, and will result in massive land grabs aimed at dispossessing Indigenous Peoples and rural communities in the global South.
No to the dangerous deception of "nature-based solutions"!
Quotes:
Tom BK Goldtooth, Indigenous Environmental Network: "Nature-based solutions is dangerous for Indigenous Peoples." "Under the umbrella of net-zero emissions targets the private sector corporations, the UN and governments are using it to push for more land-based offsets for a global carbon pricing system. "Nature-based solutions" has Big Ag, Big Oil and Big Pharma behind it. We are seeing a huge push for policies that falsely claim to save Mother Earth - the planet. The reality will be more land grabbing from Indigenous Peoples' lands and territories."
Silvia Ribeiro, Latin America Director for ETC group: "The umbrella term of NBS is functioning effectively to greenwash and expand profit-making opportunities - so the number of corporate 'NBS pledges' has exploded. But there simply isn't enough nature to go round, so companies are pushing also for technological means of "enhancing" nature, such as huge bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) projects and other geoengineering technologies."
Shalmali Guttal, Focus on the Global South: "Nature-based solutions" are solutions only for corporations, that are constantly looking for more ways to make profits regardless of their impacts on people and the planet. These are dangerous deceptions that will lead to large scale dispossessions of rural peoples, and increase conflicts over land and territories between rural communities and states. 'Net zero' is a cynical corporate calculus to produce bogus data and fool the world that destructive corporate operations can be offset somehow. We have to join forces across the world to dismantle corporate power, and halt their continuing attempts to extract value from nature and people."
Kirtana Chandrasekaran, Friends of the Earth International: "In crucial Convention on Biological Diversity meetings this week, "nature-based solutions" is being presented as necessary for biodiversity, but really, all NBS does is use nature to offset ever-growing carbon emissions, at the expense of the rights of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities, who are biodiversity's true custodians. Commercializing biodiversity and offsetting are not the answer to the climate or biodiversity crises. Corporations and governments must cut carbon emission at source, rather than use NBS for greenwashing."
Henk Hobbelink, GRAIN: "If we let big oil, agribusiness and other giant corporations offset their emissions with what they call "nature based solutions", we will not only allow them to continue polluting the atmosphere but also to create a giant new farmland grab at the cost of small-scale farmers and global food production. We need to promote food sovereignty instead, which is the best way to keep farmers on their land while fighting the climate crisis."
Soumya Dutta, India Climate Justice / South Asian People's Action on Climate Crisis / Friends of the Earth India: "Agricultural soil carbon sequestration projects such as the 'Boomitra' controlled project in India are false solutions to the climate change crisis. They let polluting corporations and countries continue with high emissions in return for carbon market money. They put the data of millions of small farmers in the hands of big corporations, through their micro surveillance, exposing small farmers to more control from big agri-corporations. This will have serious adverse consequences for food sovereignty."
Jutta Kill, World Rainforest Movement: "The beautiful sound of "nature-based solutions" is deceitful. "Nature-based solutions" is REDD re-branded and expanded. For 15 years now, REDD has distracted from ending large-scale deforestation and provided cover for fossil fuel companies to keep on destroying underground carbon deposits. "Nature-based solutions" will result in the same conflicts, land grabs as REDD has done the past 15 years and fuel, not slow climate breakdown and deforestation."
Established in 1990 within the United States, IEN was formed by grassroots Indigenous peoples and individuals to address environmental and economic justice issues (EJ). IEN's activities include building the capacity of Indigenous communities and tribal governments to develop mechanisms to protect our sacred sites, land, water, air, natural resources, health of both our people and all living things, and to build economically sustainable communities.
LATEST NEWS
National Team Member Becomes at Least 265th Palestinian Footballer Killed by Israel in Gaza
Muhannad al-Lili's killing by Israeli airstrike came as the world mourned the death of Portugal and Liverpool star Diogo Jota and his brother André Silva in a car crash in Spain.
Jul 04, 2025
Muhannad Fadl al-Lili, captain of the Al-Maghazi Services Club and a member of Palestine's national football team, died Thursday from injuries suffered during an Israeli airstrike on his family home in the central Gaza Strip earlier this week, making him the latest of hundreds of Palestinian athletes killed since the start of Israel's genocidal onslaught.
Al-Maghazi Services Club announced al-Lili's death in a Facebook tribute offering condolences to "his family, relatives, friends, and colleagues" and asking "Allah to shower him with his mercy."
The Palestine Football Association (PFA) said that "on Monday, a drone fired a missile at Muhannad's room on the third floor of his house, which led to severe bleeding in the skull."
"During the war of extermination against our people, Muhannad tried to travel outside Gaza to catch up with his wife, who left the strip for Norway on a work mission before the outbreak of the war," the association added. "But he failed to do so, and was deprived of seeing his eldest son, who was born outside the Gaza Strip."
According to the PFA, al-Lili is at least the 265th Palestinian footballer and 585th athlete to be killed by Israeli forces since they launched their assault and siege on Gaza following the October 7, 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel. Sports journalist Leyla Hamed says 439 Palestinian footballers have been killed by Israel.
Overall, Israel's war—which is the subject of an International Court of Justice (ICJ) genocide case—has left more than 206,000 Palestinians dead, maimed, or missing, and around 2 million more forcibly displaced, starved, or sickened, according to Gaza officials.
The Palestine Chronicle contrasted the worldwide press coverage of the car crash deaths of Portuguese footballer Diogo Jota and his brother André Silva with the media's relative silence following al-Lili's killing.
"Jota's death was a tragedy that touched millions," the outlet wrote. "Yet the death of Muhannad al-Lili... was met with near-total silence from global sports media."
Last week, a group of legal experts including two United Nations special rapporteurs appealed to the Fédération Internationale de Football Association, the world football governing body, demanding that its Governance Audit and Compliance Committee take action against the Israel Football Association for violating FIFA rules by playing matches on occupied Palestinian territory.
In July 2024, the ICJ found that Israel's then-57-year occupation of Palestine—including Gaza—is an illegal form of apartheid that should be ended as soon as possible.
During their invasion and occupation of Gaza, Israeli forces have also used sporting facilities including Yarmouk Stadium for the detention of Palestinian men, women, and children—many of whom have reported torture and other abuse at the hands of their captors.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Highly Inspiring' Court Ruling Affirms Nations' Legal Duty to Combat Climate Emergency
"While the United States and some other major polluters have chosen to ignore climate science, the rest of the international community is advancing protections," said one observer.
Jul 04, 2025
In a landmark advisory opinion published Thursday, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights—of which the United States, the world's second-biggest carbon polluter, is not a member—affirmed the right to a stable climate and underscored nations' duty to act to protect it and address the worsening planetary emergency.
"States must refrain from any conduct that reverses, slows down, or truncates the outcome of measures necessary to protect human rights in the face of the impacts of climate change," a summary of the 234-page ruling states. "Any rollback of climate or environmental policies that affect human rights must be exceptional, duly justified based on objective criteria, and comply with standards of necessity and proportionality."
"The court also held that... states must take all necessary measures to reduce the risks arising, on the one hand, from the degradation of the global climate system and, on the other, from exposure and vulnerability to the effects of such degradation," the summary adds.
"States must refrain from any conduct that reverses, slows down, or truncates the outcome of measures necessary to protect human rights in the face of the impacts of climate change."
The case was brought before the Costa-Rica based IACtHR by Chile and Colombia, both of which "face the daily challenge of dealing with the consequences of the climate emergency, including the proliferation of droughts, floods, landslides, and fires, among others."
"These phenomena highlight the need to respond urgently and based on the principles of equity, justice, cooperation, and sustainability, with a human rights-based approach," the court asserted.
IACtHR President Judge Nancy Hernández López said following the ruling that "states must not only refrain from causing significant environmental damage but have the positive obligation to take measures to guarantee the protection, restoration, and regeneration of ecosystems."
"Causing massive and irreversible environmental harm...alters the conditions for a healthy life on Earth to such an extent that it creates consequences of existential proportions," she added. "Therefore, it demands universal and effective legal responses."
The advisory opinion builds on two landmark decisions last year. In April 2024, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the Swiss government violated senior citizens' human rights by refusing to abide by scientists' warnings to rapidly phase out fossil fuel production.
The following month, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea found in an advisory opinion that greenhouse gas emissions are marine pollution under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and that signatories to the accord "have the specific obligation to adopt laws and regulations to prevent, reduce, and control" them.
The IACtHR advisory opinion is expected to boost climate and human rights lawsuits throughout the Americas, and to impact talks ahead of November's United Nations Climate Change Conference, or COP30, in Belém, Brazil.
Climate defenders around the world hailed Thursday's advisory opinion, with United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk calling it "a landmark step forward for the region—and beyond."
"As the impact of climate change becomes ever more visible across the world, the court is clear: People have a right to a stable climate and a healthy environment," Türk added. "States have a bedrock obligation under international law not to take steps that cause irreversible climate and environmental damage, and they have a duty to act urgently to take the necessary measures to protect the lives and rights of everyone—both those alive now and the interests of future generations."
Amnesty International head of strategic litigation Mandi Mudarikwa said, "Today, the Inter-American Court affirmed and clarified the obligations of states to respect, ensure, prevent, and cooperate in order to realize human rights in the context of the climate crisis."
"Crucially, the court recognized the autonomous right to a healthy climate for both individuals and communities, linked to the right to a healthy environment," Mudarikwa added. "The court also underscored the obligation of states to protect cross-border climate-displaced persons, including through the issuance of humanitarian visas and protection from deportation."
Delta Merner, lead scientist at the Science Hub for Climate Litigation at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said in a statement that "this opinion sets an important precedent affirming that governments have a legal duty to regulate corporate conduct that drives climate harm."
"Though the United States is not a party to the treaty governing the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, this opinion should be a clarion call for transnational fossil fuel companies that have deceived the public for decades about the risks of their products," Merner added. "The era of accountability is here."
Markus Gehring, a fellow and director of studies in law at Hughes Hall at the University of Cambridge in England, called the advisory opinion "highly inspiring" and "seminal."
Drew Caputo, vice president of litigation for lands, wildlife, and oceans at Earthjustice, said that "the Inter-American Court's ruling makes clear that climate change is an overriding threat to human rights in the world."
"Governments must act to cut carbon emissions drastically," Caputo stressed. "While the United States and some other major polluters have chosen to ignore climate science, the rest of the international community is advancing protections for all from the realities of climate harm."
Climate litigation is increasing globally in the wake of the 2015 Paris climate agreement. In the Americas, Indigenous peoples, children, and green groups are among those who have been seeking climate justice via litigation.
However, in the United States, instead of acknowledging the climate emergency, President Donald Trump has declared an "energy emergency" while pursuing a "drill, baby, drill" policy of fossil fuel extraction and expansion.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Admin Quietly Approves Massive Crude Oil Expansion Project
"This thinly analyzed decision threatens the lifeblood of the American Southwest," said one environmental attorney.
Jul 04, 2025
The Trump administration has quietly fast-tracked a massive oil expansion project that environmentalists and Democratic lawmakers warned could have a destructive impact on local communities and the climate.
As reported recently by the Oil and Gas Journal, the plan "involves expanding the Wildcat Loadout Facility, a key transfer point for moving Uinta basin crude oil to rail lines that transport it to refineries along the Gulf Coast."
The goal of the plan is to transfer an additional 70,000 barrels of oil per day from the Wildcat Loadout Facility, which is located in Utah, down to the Gulf Coast refineries via a route that runs along the Colorado River. Controversially, the Trump administration is also plowing ahead with the project by invoking emergency powers to address energy shortages despite the fact that the United States for the last couple of years has been producing record levels of domestic oil.
Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) and Rep. Joe Neguse (D-Colo.) issued a joint statement condemning the Trump administration's push to approve the project while rushing through environmental impact reviews.
"The Bureau of Land Management's decision to fast-track the Wildcat Loadout expansion—a project that would transport an additional 70,000 barrels of crude oil on train tracks along the Colorado River—using emergency procedures is profoundly flawed," the Colorado Democrats said. "These procedures give the agency just 14 days to complete an environmental review—with no opportunity for public input or administrative appeal—despite the project's clear risks to Colorado. There is no credible energy emergency to justify bypassing public involvement and environmental safeguards. The United States is currently producing more oil and gas than any country in the world."
On Thursday, the Bureau of Land Management announced the completion of its accelerated environmental review of the project, drawing condemnation from climate advocates.
Wendy Park, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, described the administration's rush to approve the project as "pure hubris," especially given its "refusal to hear community concerns about oil spill risks." She added that "this fast-tracked review breezed past vital protections for clean air, public safety and endangered species."
Landon Newell, staff attorney for the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, accused the Trump administration of manufacturing an energy emergency to justify plans that could have a dire impact on local habitats.
"This thinly analyzed decision threatens the lifeblood of the American Southwest by authorizing the transport of more than 1 billion gallons annually of additional oil on railcars traveling alongside the Colorado River," he said. "Any derailment and oil spill would have a devastating impact on the Colorado River and the communities and ecosystems that rely upon it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular