First Nations' Land at Risk: Are Carbon Markets Sabotaging Indigenous Stewardship?

Professor Peter Macreadie measuring carbon sequestration in mangrove forests around Cairns. Credit: Through The Looking Glass Studio.

In a provocative new article published in Nature Climate Change, a coalition of experts warns that current carbon markets may unintentionally penalize Indigenous stewardship of land while rewarding past environmental degradation. This striking assertion comes from researchers at RMIT University in Australia, including environmental science and legal experts, alongside Brian Singleton, a Yirrganydji Aboriginal man deeply connected to his ancestral lands in northern Australia.

The crux of the concern lies in the concept of "additionality," a fundamental principle of carbon markets designed to ensure that carbon credits are awarded only for emission reductions that would not have occurred without specific interventions. Unfortunately, this definition creates a disparity where landholders who have degraded ecosystems can generate carbon credits through restoration efforts, while long-standing Indigenous custodians, whose lands remain intact, are often left out of the equation.

Lead author Professor Peter Macreadie, who directs RMIT’s Centre for Nature Positive Solutions, emphasizes that this system fosters inequity. “Carbon markets were designed to reward climate action,” he states, “but our research shows they may be producing a perverse outcome: rewarding those who damaged land in the past while excluding Indigenous custodians who for generations have cared for country.”

Brian Singleton echoes these sentiments, articulating the frustrations of his community. He notes that Indigenous peoples have overseen the stewardship of the Cairns area for thousands of years, predating modern conservation efforts. "We need to be included so we can see the other value and opportunities in protecting what mangrove systems we still have," Singleton asserts. He highlights that even remote areas are facing severe climate challenges, including dieback, erosion, and pollution.

Moreover, Singleton emphasizes the importance of properly consulting with traditional landowners in setting up carbon markets. He advocates for recognition of the hard work Indigenous communities undertake to maintain these ecosystems, suggesting that financial incentives could facilitate ongoing efforts to protect and nurture the land. “Otherwise, if it’s not done, it will be bad news not just for people but for the environment,” he warns.

Reimagining Carbon Market Frameworks

Dr. Vanessa Johnston, a legal scholar at RMIT, argues that aligning carbon markets with Indigenous custodianship would not only broaden participation but also improve overall climate outcomes. “Achieving this requires integrity frameworks that recognize stewardship, not just restoration, as a legitimate form of climate action,” she explains. The team outlines several recommendations aimed at creating fairer and more effective environmental outcomes. These include recognizing that maintaining intact ecosystems often necessitates active governance, particularly in the face of altered fire regimes, invasive species, and changing water flows.

Johnston clarifies that acknowledging stewardship within additionality is not a call for weaker standards, but rather a necessary corrective to a framework initially crafted without Indigenous governance in mind. “It also aligns with a growing body of research that recognizes land ownership as involving obligations of conservation and protection, not just entitlements,” she notes.

Professor Macreadie further explains that integrating legal perspectives with Indigenous experience and environmental science highlights significant tensions regarding the application of carbon market integrity rules. “What we are seeing is climate finance systems built on good intentions backfiring because they fail to recognize stewardship, care, and long-term ecosystem protection as legitimate climate action. Clearly, something needs to change,” he concludes.

The research encapsulated in the article titled "Additionality requirements of carbon markets could penalize Indigenous stewardship" underscores the urgent need for a re-evaluation of existing carbon market frameworks. As climate change continues to pose existential threats globally, the integration of Indigenous knowledge and practices into environmental policies may prove crucial not only for equity but also for effective climate action. The call for change is clear: a more inclusive and equitable approach can pave the way for more effective climate solutions that respect the rights and contributions of those who have cared for the land for generations.