The Institutionality of Environmental Justice in a REDD+ Offset Project

Sessin-Dilascio, Karla; Rossi, Charles Borges; Sinisgalli, Paulo Antônio de Almeida

doi:10.1590/1809-4422asoc0188r3vu27L2OA

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Original Article • Ambient. soc. 27 • 2024 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1809-4422asoc0188r3vu27L2OA copy

The Institutionality of Environmental Justice in a REDD+ Offset Project

La Institucionalidad de la Justicia Ambiental en un proyecto de Compensación REDD+

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Abstract

This article presents a comparative institutional analysis of the implementation of the Climate, Community and Biodiversity Standard, of Verra, for a REDD+ offset Project in the Brazilian Amazon and the results from Environmental Justice (EJ). Based on the Institutional Analysis and Development Framework, the article identifies interactions between political arenas and formal and informal rules in the results of EJ following the case study of a REDD+ offset Project. The article points to the importance of the operational local arena and the institutional work of local players in the results of REDD+ offset Projects regarding EJ aspects.

Keywords:
REDD+ offset; CCB standard; institutions; environmental justice; Amazon

CS		CC Standard - 2nd edition
1	Actions that are complementary or consistent with the objectives of national forest programs and other relevant international conventions and agreements	a) Compliance with national laws
3	Respect for the knowledge and rights of indigenous peoples and members of local communities, taking into account relevant international obligations, national laws, and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples	a) Legal and traditional rights of occupation/use/access/management over their lands
		b) Demonstrate documented community consultation and agreement procedures
		c) Demonstrate that the activities of the project do not lead to the involuntary removal or transfer of property rights holders from their lands or territories, nor force them to relocate activities that are important to their culture or livelihoods
4	Full and effective participation of stakeholders, in particular indigenous peoples and local communities	a) Describe the complete documentation of the project, which should be free to access communities and other stakeholders
		b) Explain how relevant and appropriate information on the potential costs, risks, and benefits to communities was provided for proper decision-making regarding the project
		c) Describe the communication measures and methods used to explain to the communities the validation and verification process
		d) Describe how the communities influence the design and implementation of the project through effective consultation
		e) Demonstrate that all consultations and participatory processes were conducted directly with the communities
		f) Describe the necessary measures taken to allow effective participation
5	Actions should contribute to the conservation and recovery of natural ecosystems and avoid negative impacts on biodiversity and environmental services, as well as contribute to other social and environmental benefits	a) Include high-value conservation attributes related to the biodiversity of project areas
		b) Estimate the expected and actual impacts, benefits, costs, and risks, direct and indirect, to each of the community groups
		c) Describe measures necessary to mitigate any negative impacts so that no high-value attribute for conservation is negatively affected
		d) Demonstrate that the net impacts of the project for all community groups are positive in comparison to a scenario of project absence
6	Identify actions to avoid the risks of REDD+ results reversals	a) Identify natural and man-induced risks for the benefits expected from CCB and the necessary measures taken to mitigate risks and maintain and improve benefits
7	Identify actions to reduce the displacement of carbon emissions to other areas	a) Identify expected leaks and describe measures and proposals for mitigation
		b) Identify impacts on biodiversity outside the project zone and describe measures and proposals for mitigation
		c) Identify positive and negative impacts on communities, describe proposed mitigation measures d) Demonstrate that the activities do not result in negative net impacts

FORMAL INSTITUTIONS (FI)		INSTITUTIONAL WORK (InWork)
CS/CCB	Valparaiso Project	Rules in Use (RU)
1	1) Declaration of the area in CAR	1 and 2) The area was declared in CAR, but it does not have its land regularization process completed in INCRA (it is not registered in SIGEF for CCIR issuance)
1	2) Completion of the area land regularization process	3) Use of the public machine to complete assistance activities provided for in the project (dental kit and UBS improvements)
3	1) The project promises to transfer lots of entitled land to the communities in the area	1) The land ownership agreements signed by community members are not available for free access
		2) Community reports indicate that they had no choice and were induced to sign agreements that restricted the area destined for community subsistence practices
		3) Community reports indicate that they had no opportunity to clarify their rights to property
		4) Community members claim that they live in constant fear of being evicted from their territory
4	1) Provision of documents on the website and in print	1) Low transparency of agreements and assessments: a) many documents that differ between the date of the report and its date of availability; b) repeated documents; c) lack of clarity regarding which documents were used for the assessment; d) translation into Portuguese with errors that hinder comprehension
	2) Radio program for dissemination of information about the project	2) There is no proof about radio programs
	3) Meetings with the community	3) Meeting “minutes” are not available for consultation
5	1) Actions to monitor deforestation and conversations with the community	1) The project’s benefit distribution is focused on the distribution of baskets of food staples, training sessions, and, only recently (25/06/2021), the hiring of 10 people from the community to work for the project
	2) 100 community members received medical attention from a local nurse	2) The project activities were punctual and non-procedural
	3) The local medical clinic (UBS) was renewed	3) Community members reported a situation of nutritional vulnerability, including periods of food shortages
	4) Construction of collective bathrooms	4) Many families have already left the land and are migrating to adjacent areas, especially the Lua Clara branch, occupying land not yet distributed by the Union
	5) Construction of a collective cafeteria	5) Instability of land ownership. Entrepreneurs do not have their land regularized according to Brazilian standards
	6) Distribution of dental kits (12 children)
	7) Purchase of three boats for the transport of communities and their products, which should facilitate their access to the market
	8) Training on sustainable agriculture (with 26 visits between 2016/17)
6	9) Creation of an association to process cassava flour and açai - Purchase of an açai processor
7	10) The project promises to share the financial benefits with the communities

ANPPAS - Revista Ambiente e Sociedade Anppas / Revista Ambiente e Sociedade - São Paulo - SP - Brazil
E-mail: revistaambienteesociedade@gmail.com

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] Karla Sessin Dilascio ✉ karla.dilascio@usp.br