Kenya Insights

Tag: Verra verified carbon credits

  • Carbon Credits Crisis: Maasai Herders Win Landmark Case Against Corporate Giants

    Carbon Credits Crisis: Maasai Herders Win Landmark Case Against Corporate Giants

    In a significant blow to major tech corporations’ environmental initiatives, a Kenyan court has ruled in favor of local Maasai herders in a dispute over carbon credits that could potentially cost companies like Netflix and Meta billions in invalid offsets.

    The Northern Kenya Rangelands Carbon Project, touted as the world’s largest soil-carbon plan covering 4.7 million acres of grasslands, has been suspended by Verra, the international nonprofit that certifies carbon credits.

    This suspension follows the court ruling that found project developers had not properly secured consent from the indigenous communities whose lands were being used.

    “The project completely destroyed the traditional system and brought another one, which is like a displacement,” said Hassan Bidhu, one of the plaintiffs who challenged the project in court.

    The 33-year-old herder claimed that grazing restrictions imposed by the carbon project prevented him from accessing traditional dry-season pastures during Kenya’s devastating 2022 drought, resulting in cattle losses.

    The ruling potentially invalidates approximately 20% of the project’s credits, with rights groups suggesting that credits in around half of the project’s 14 wildlife conservancies could be vulnerable to similar legal challenges.

    This creates a precarious situation for corporations like Netflix and Meta, which have spent between $42 million and $90 million on over six million carbon credits to offset their substantial carbon footprints from energy-intensive operations.

    Both companies have used these credits to claim carbon neutrality – Meta in 2020 and Netflix in 2022. Representatives from both corporations defended their purchases, stating the credits had been “rigorously verified,” including by Verra.

    The dispute centers on allegations that the Northern Rangelands Trust, which runs the project, created conservancies through “pressure and intimidation rather than informed consent” from the pastoralist communities.

    While the trust has appealed the decision, the controversy highlights growing tensions in the rapidly expanding carbon offset market, which Morgan Stanley projects will grow from $1.4 billion today to between $7 billion and $35 billion by 2030.

    “This raises big questions about what the carbon industry will do about this,” said Simon Counsell, who co-authored a report on the issue with indigenous-rights group Survival International, noting companies might be forced to surrender invalid credits.

    The conflict reflects a broader clash between corporate environmental goals and indigenous rights.

    While some pastoralists support the project, citing benefits like new hospitals, scholarships, and wells, opponents argue that project restrictions disrupt centuries-old migration patterns based on seasonal rainfall and pasture availability.

    Similar disputes are emerging elsewhere, with violent protests recently erupting over a carbon project in southern Kenya.

    Maasai activists in neighboring Tanzania have called for a five-year suspension of carbon projects, with rights organizations warning that these initiatives could eventually lock nearly all ancestral Maasai lands into offset projects or protected areas.

    For 23-year-old Gedion Kanchori, who is leading opposition efforts in southern Kenya, the issue is existential: “This land is our inheritance. We will do anything to protect it.”

    As corporations face increasing pressure to meet climate commitments, this ruling serves as a stark reminder that environmental solutions must include meaningful consultation with and consent from indigenous communities to be truly sustainable.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

  • Celebrated Carbon Trading Firm Wildlife Works In Kenya Under Probe For Multiple Gross Human Rights Violations

    Celebrated Carbon Trading Firm Wildlife Works In Kenya Under Probe For Multiple Gross Human Rights Violations

    In Kenya, a court has ordered the government to set up a Commission to carry out an investigation into how a ranching company called Kambanga Ranching acquired over 4000 acres of land belonging to the Wata community.

    Judge Stephen Murigi Kibunja issued the orders following a suit filed by Kambanga Ranching (DA) Co Ltd against 147 occupants named as respondents.

    The company took the villagers to court in efforts to secure an enforcement for the 147 villagers to be kicked out of their land.

    The investigation aims to shed light on the circumstances surrounding the acquisition of the land and determine whether any irregularities or violations occurred during the process. By issuing these orders, the court seeks to ensure transparency, fairness, and adherence to legal procedures in matters related to land ownership and utilization.

    This development underscores the importance of upholding the rights of local communities and ensuring proper scrutiny of land transactions, especially in cases involving sensitive issues such as carbon trading and indigenous land rights. It reflects the judiciary’s commitment to safeguarding the interests of all stakeholders and promoting accountability in land governance processes.

    Kambanga Ranch is part of Kasigau Corridor REDD project which was started by American/ Canadian Mike Korchinsky, founder of Wildlife Works Carbon which has over a million hectares of land under its belt in Kenya and DRC.

    Kasigau Corridor.

    The organization uses ranches like Kambanga as a front to secure more land in Kenya which it them uses to generate and sell Verra verified carbon credits. The carbon credits client list for Wildlife Works REDD Projects in Kenya and DRC includes the likes of Shell, Audi, Microsoft, Netflix etc.

    Human rights violations by Wildlife Works

    In November 2023, the Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC) and the Centre for Research on Multinational Corporations (SOMO) exposed serious allegations of sexual harassment and abuse at the Kasigau carbon offset project, run by Wildlife Works Carbon, in Kenya.

    The allegations of abuse dated back at least a decade and affected current and former employees of Wildlife Works and women living in the nearby communities. The company, which failed to identify this long-standing abuse, set up an investigation based on our reporting, and this led to the dismissal of one individual “for gross misconduct, including conduct in violation of the company’s policy against sexual harassment.”

    Wildlife Works also terminated its Human Resources manager because he “created a culture of fear and intimidation that, according to interviewed personnel, prevented reporting of sexual harassment incidents.”

    Wildlife Works subsequently alleged that SOMO had paid individuals to come forward with testimony. This is a baseless claim. Neither KHRC nor SOMO have ever paid people to provide information. Our organisations have a combined eighty-year record of ethical research and human rights activism.

    The carbon credits client list for Wildlife Works REDD Projects in Kenya and DRC.

    KHRC and SOMO are unable to disclose the names of those who provided testimony to us, as we guarantee the anonymity of individuals, which is of paramount importance in research involving survivors of sexual harassment and abuse.

    Protecting the victims’ identities is one of the reasons why KHRC and SOMO enjoy the trust of victims of corporate harm and abuse. When women and men come forward, they should be able to do so with their privacy and dignity protected. For this reason, we went to lengths to protect the women who came forward to tell their stories.

    It is clear that the company found that the allegations documented by KHRC and SOMO were manifestly correct. However, the company has not investigated all the information provided.

    Our research makes evident that allegations of sexual abuse were not confined to one perpetrator or one department. Our report and correspondence with Wildlife Works have been clear about the scope of the allegations we documented.

    The decision by Verra to temporarily suspend the Kasigau project appears to have created a situation where communities believe that reports of abuse can lead to a loss of (potential) benefits.

    This is consistent with the testimony given to us by an auditor of Kasigau (cited in our report) who told us that “local communities who benefit from project carbon revenues are less likely to share such issues, as doing so may risk the continuation of project benefits”.

    The risk is that people are left with a choice to either live with abuse or lose benefits.

    Meanwhile, at Kasigau, we understand that individuals who asked for anonymity and got it from KHRC and SOMO are being identified. This deepens our concern that a culture is emerging whereby those who suffer abuse may hear the message – do not expose abuse because the whole community may lose their benefits.

    This case exposes the insidious core of the carbon offsetting industry: reporting abuse can threaten the profits of the carbon offset business. No community anywhere should have to choose between reporting abuse or losing benefits. Communities at Kasigau should not lose benefits due to a corporate failure to identify and prevent sexual harassment and abuse. Nor should any woman ever have to face the choice of silent acceptance of sexual harassment and abuse to preserve wider community benefits from a company.