Survival Worldwide condemns marketing campaign to “defend half the planet”

Survival has written to Avaaz to sentence its new marketing campaign to guard half the planet. If enacted, the plan will trigger catastrophic hurt to tens of millions of individuals:

– It poses a severe risk to Tribal and Indigenous peoples. Creating Protected Areas on land inhabited by Indigenous Peoples and native communities repeatedly results in their expulsion and persecution. The overwhelming majority of Protected Areas in Africa and Asia, for instance, have resulted within the eviction of Indigenous Peoples or different native communities. Pushing for extra Protected Areas will imply extra land theft, killings, torture and abuse.

– It is going to result in an enormous land seize. The present marketing campaign to “defend” 30% of Earth by 2030 (“30×30”) will already be the largest land seize in historical past. Indigenous Peoples affected by Protected Areas are strenuously objecting to it.

– It is going to endanger the lives of tens of millions of individuals. Avaaz’s marketing campaign proposes a harmful and diversionary ‘resolution’ to biodiversity loss with no safeguards for Indigenous rights. The conservation business has been promising to acknowledge Indigenous rights for many years (for instance within the Durban Accord in 2003, in CBD Article 8j, and within the insurance policies of conservation organisations like WWF) however has completely failed to take action. There is no such thing as a cause to count on issues to be completely different now. Avaaz’s push to guard half the earth will straight endanger the lands, livelihoods and security of tens of millions of Indigenous and Native Individuals. 

– It reinforces the false concept that folks and nature are separate. Requires ‘safety’ of fifty% of the Earth reinforce the false narrative that folks and nature are separate, and that nature have to be shielded from individuals: the idea on the very coronary heart of fortress conservation. Tribal and Indigenous Peoples know the other is true: their lands will not be “wildernesses” however landscapes they’ve formed and managed.

– It is going to intensify outsiders’ management of Indigenous lands. The overwhelming majority of Protected Areas in Asia and Africa are government-run – virtually none are run by Indigenous Peoples and native communities. They’ve been the reason for numerous human rights abuses. The Avaaz marketing campaign is more likely to make this worse. 

– It’s an assault on Indigenous autonomy. Resolution-making about, and funding of, Protected Areas has all the time been within the fingers of these with energy – governments and massively rich conservation organizations who’re closely funded and influenced by enterprise pursuits. Calling for extra such areas will increase their energy on the expense of the homeowners of the land.

– It undercuts Indigenous calls to scrap “30×30.” The marketing campaign undermines the demand from many Indigenous Peoples, together with these talking on the Our Land Our Nature Congress, for the prevailing “30×30” goal to be deserted. The considerations about 30×30 are supported by the just about 250 organisations which have signed the joint assertion to this impact. Avaaz’s marketing campaign is a betrayal of the numerous Indigenous Individuals who have misplaced their lives, lands and technique of survival within the title of conservation.

– It diverts consideration from the easiest way to save lots of biodiversity – to acknowledge Indigenous land possession rights. By far the simplest and simply technique to battle biodiversity loss and local weather change is to respect the rights of Indigenous Peoples to their lands. This reality is acknowledged in lots of scientific papers, insurance policies and declarations together with the current Coverage Temporary by the UN Particular Rapporteur on Human Rights and the Atmosphere.

Moreover these direct and disastrous penalties for Indigenous Peoples and native communities, the marketing campaign to “defend” 30% or 50% of Earth won’t assist the battle in opposition to local weather change:

– It is going to fail to halt environmental destruction and biodiversity loss. The mannequin of making Protected Areas has utterly didn’t halt environmental destruction and biodiversity loss. Of the 20 targets within the earlier world motion plan on biodiversity, (protecting 2010-2020), the one one achieved was to extend the realm of Earth designated as protected to 17%. But the conservation business itself states that biodiversity has declined ever quicker throughout this similar interval, elevating severe questions on any scientific foundation for the 30% or 50% demand.

– It diverts consideration from the true trigger of world warming. Calls to guard 30% or 50% of the planet are a diversion from stress for concrete motion to cease burning of fossil fuels, over-exploitation of pure assets and over-consumption, significantly within the International North. Many governments will signal as much as these pledges as a means of showing to take motion with out truly having to do something to deal with the true causes of the local weather crises and biodiversity loss – on the expense of Indigenous Peoples.