The Green Economy

A recent report by Friends of the Earth International highlights how classic, stringent regulations are being swapped for much more lenient compensation and offsetting schemes. Specific sectors, such as the global food, agriculture and aviation industries, use these schemes to maintain their social license to continue their destructive activities and ward off the threat of regulation. The report explores and unpacks the myths behind biodiversity offsetting: what it means, and how it enables the destruction of nature and undermines environmental protection.

Chile was to be the host of the UN Climate Summit. But in the face of a massive popular uprising against the neoliberal economic model, Chile cancelled the Summit and it was moved to Spain, yet Chile retained the Presidency of the COP.

This bulletin highlights threats involved in the so-called “energy transition,” and exposes its dirty secret of exponential expansion of mining in the global South as a consequence of the massive demand for “green” energy.

An oxymoron describes "a statement that seems to say two opposite things." The World Bank has a lot of experience with oxymoronic initiatives.

Australian company Base Resources was allowed to destroy the Mikea Forest as long as it established an offset project, which, in turn, would impose far-reaching restrictions on communities to access their land and forests.

Governments and transnational corporations backed up by multilateral financial institutions, together with Pacific Island nations, are racing to divide up the ocean under the narratives of so-called sustainable Blue Economy and Blue Growth, to justify its exploitation.

This is good news for forests, forest peoples and the climate because the IFC proposal aimed at subsidizing a carbon market for private sector REDD+ project credits for which there is neither demand nor justification.

More than one hundred organisations signed this open letter to members of the Green Climate Fund Board. The Board will be meeting from 12 to 14 November 2019, and will decide on a number of funding requests related to REDD+.

The Board of the Green Climate Fund (GCF) decides on a number of funding requests related to REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation), the controversial approach that has dominated international forest climate policy for more than a decade. Members of the Board must reject these requests.

A logic that violates indigenous and traditional peoples’ rights while facilitating further deforestation. A compilation of articles from the World Rainforest Movement Bulletin (WRM). October 2019

The government claims that small-scale agriculture is responsible for deforestation. But this claim ignores government policies that drive land-use changes and destructive markets as well as the exclusion of indigenous peoples through the creation of reserves.

REDD+ has shown to be a big failure for the climate, the forests and forest peoples, but many international agencies and governments continue to support it. This article takes a look at its inability to halt deforestation and the fundamental flaws of its main initiatives.