By: Jocabed R Solano Miselis
There is no climate justice without justice for all creation.
Every year, thousands of people from all over the world gather at the COP on climate change. COP29 is the Conference of the Parties, an annual meeting of countries that have ratified the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). At these conferences, decisions are made to combat climate change, such as reducing greenhouse gas emissions or adapting to the consequences of global warming.
As part of the delegation in Panama and the delegation of the World Council of Churches, participating in COP 29 was an opportunity to make an impact for my faith not only as a citizen in Panama, but as a citizen in the world.
Personally, faith in Jesus moves me to make an impact for indigenous territories, in local government and at an international level. For me, a faith that lives in solidarity, walking the realities of vulnerable peoples, is an impact of daily life intertwined with national realities and that involves announcing the good news and denouncing injustice.
There was significant the disappointment at COP29 due to the lack of commitment from the so-called “rich countries” from a capitalist perspective. From a Gunadule perspective, however, one is rich when we know how to relate to the land, when we cultivate it and learn from it. There is both respect and reciprocity.
A new global target for climate finance was agreed on at COP29, setting a goal of $300 billion annually by 2035 from a range of sources, including public and private funds. This target replaces the previous target of $100 billion and seeks to mobilise greater resources to help developing countries meet the challenges of climate change. However, many critics argue that the agreements reached at COP29 were not ambitious enough to limit global warming to 1.5°C, as set out in the Paris Agreement. Despite the new financial commitments, some consider that the proposed action was not sufficient to address the urgency of the climate crisis.
The Presidency of this COP 29 managed to reach a decision on articles 6.2 and 6.4 of the Paris Agreement, an agreement that will pave the way for carbon trading between countries and the creation of a regulated global market. The implications of this adoption should be addressed in urgent dialogue with the most vulnerable communities, such as the Indigenous Peoples, since much of this regulated market seeks to create a market in indigenous territories. Some critical points of article 6 of the Paris Agreement in the context of Carbon Markets from indigenous perspectives include the loss of lands and territories: Emission reduction projects, which support carbon markets, often involve the acquisition of indigenous lands, which violates their ancestral rights and way of life. Forced displacement: These initiatives can lead to the displacement of indigenous communities from their traditional territories, affecting their livelihoods and their cultural connection to the land. Violation of customary rights: Carbon markets can undermine indigenous peoples’ customary rights over their lands and natural resources, failing to recognise their role in the sustainable management of these. Lack of participation: Indigenous peoples are often not consulted in a free, prior and informed manner about projects that affect their territories, which violates their fundamental rights. Culturalisation: Projects can impose external development models that are not compatible with indigenous peoples’ worldviews and cultural practices, eroding their cultural identity. Unequal benefits: The economic benefits generated by carbon markets are often not shared equitably with indigenous communities, who bear the greatest environmental and social costs.
Other General Reviews
- Double counting: There is a risk that emissions reductions are counted twice, both in the country that generated them and in the country that acquired the carbon credits, undermining the environmental integrity of the system.
- Loss of ambition: There are fears that carbon markets could undermine national emissions reduction efforts as countries could become overly reliant on purchasing carbon credits rather than implementing more ambitious mitigation measures.
- Lack of transparency: The complexity of carbon markets and the diversity of mechanisms established in Article 6 can hinder transparency and accountability.
- Negative social and environmental impacts: Emissions reduction projects can have negative social and environmental impacts if not implemented with appropriate safeguards.
- Unequal distribution of benefits: Benefits generated by carbon markets may be concentrated among a few actors, rather than distributed equitably between developed and developing countries.
Reflecting on the Article 6.4 agreement, Olga Gassan-Zade, former chair of the Article 6.4 Supervisory Body, told Carbon Brief that it remains to be seen what difference the mechanism will make: “Only time will tell whether it will be able to mitigate large-scale effects or become another expensive toy to support the agenda of some parties.”
Personally, I believe that it is necessary to work on the education and training of faith communities, of Indigenous Peoples, of vulnerable communities, regarding these agreements and the implications they will have for peoples in the world. Our work as followers of Jesus, who are in favor of life, should lead us to work for seeking peace and justice. The neocolonialism that is present and threatens life should be denounced. Likewise, we should also be shrewd to work as daughters and sons of light prepared for these realities that are adopted at an international level. It is necessary to guarantee and respect the rights of indigenous peoples, women, children, society in general, promote climate justice, establish social and environmental safeguards, prioritize rights-based approaches, and strive for effective participation. Transparent, intercultural dialogue between governments, companies, civil society and indigenous peoples is necessary to address these criticisms and ensure that carbon markets become an effective tool for climate action. Since the root of the issue lies in economic systems—specifically capitalist and neoliberal models that are directly complicit in causing climate change—the greatest criticism is how these systems can offer solutions when they are responsible for the planet’s collapse. Drawing from our faith in Jesus and even from indigenous wisdom we seek proposals to permeate society with resilient systems—systems that have endured and offered alternative ways of communal, reciprocal, and supportive living, grounded in mutuality with the Earth. It is necessary that the applications of these alternatives of life be manifest in our ecclesiology, theologies and missiology. Furthermore, through faith in Jesus, we recognize and love God as the Creator. Consequently, we are called to love His creation, as taught in the Bible.
This theological creed, which we embrace as Christians, is affirmed by Minister Marina Silva in an interview.
Conversation with Jocabed Solano & Brazil’s Environment Minister Marina Silva at COP29
I also think that it is important that we continue to raise youth, indigenous peoples, children, and members of the church in general to influence these spaces. To do this, we must begin at local, national, regional and international levels by learning about the agreements that have been adopted over the years at the COPs, understanding the language of the documents, and preparing ourselves to make a concrete impact. We must also share stories—both positive ones of resilience, as seen in projects and community efforts, as well as negative ones, such as the devastating effects climate change and biodiversity loss on people’s lives.
Our pastoral ministry must embrace these dimensions. In my advocacy journey, I have participated in diverse dialogues and initiatives: speaking with the Brazilian Minister of Environment about the Church’s role, collaborating with a Methodist pastor leading negotiators in Korea, participating in discussions on with “land use,” in the food pavilion on the subject of food sovereignty, as well as in the faith pavilion on two occasions: once, in the science pavilion, on indigenous knowledge and science, and then in the indigenous pavilion on stories of hope, life narratives against extractivism towards the land. I have also dialogued with university students on the importance of advocacy and the profession in these spaces. Additionally, I have supported negotiations on agriculture, contributed to meetings for document submissions for upcoming workshops on the agriculture platform, advocated for integrating indigenous knowledge into state-level strategies, and accompanied efforts related to Article 6 and bilateral discussions.
Finally, personally, my hope is grounded in the recognition that the Creator loves His creation and that the power of His resurrection is mobilizing many people. Through their struggles, resistance, and resilience, they are offering alternative narratives to those that promote the destruction of the earth. This hope is expressed in concrete actions that bring life. Recognizing that evil will not prevail (Psalm 1:6) inspires us to continue raising our voices, proclaiming justice and confronting injustice. We long for the renewal of all creation and eagerly await total reconciliation found in Jesus.
I extend gratitude to the World Council of Churches for inviting me to be part of their delegation as part of the Indigenous Peoples’ Reference Group. Thank you to the Indigenous Memory team, to the Tearfund youth network, to the Indigenous Climate Change Caucus, to the Environment Ministry of Panama for accrediting me, to the Creation Care network and to Freedom and Justice in Lausanne for your prayers and support. To all my friends and family, thank you for for taking care of me and your encouragement in this work.
Editor’s note: This work is a translation, and has been minorly edited for clarity.By: Jocabed R Solano Miselis
There is no climate justice without justice for all creation.
Every year, thousands of people from all over the world gather at the COP on climate change. COP29 is the Conference of the Parties, an annual meeting of countries that have ratified the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). At these conferences, decisions are made to combat climate change, such as reducing greenhouse gas emissions or adapting to the consequences of global warming.
As part of the delegation in Panama and the delegation of the World Council of Churches, participating in COP 29 was an opportunity to make an impact for my faith not only as a citizen in Panama, but as a citizen in the world.
Personally, faith in Jesus moves me to make an impact for indigenous territories, in local government and at an international level. For me, a faith that lives in solidarity, walking the realities of vulnerable peoples, is an impact of daily life intertwined with national realities and that involves announcing the good news and denouncing injustice.
There was significant the disappointment at COP29 due to the lack of commitment from the so-called “rich countries” from a capitalist perspective. From a Gunadule perspective, however, one is rich when we know how to relate to the land, when we cultivate it and learn from it. There is both respect and reciprocity.
A new global target for climate finance was agreed on at COP29, setting a goal of $300 billion annually by 2035 from a range of sources, including public and private funds. This target replaces the previous target of $100 billion and seeks to mobilise greater resources to help developing countries meet the challenges of climate change. However, many critics argue that the agreements reached at COP29 were not ambitious enough to limit global warming to 1.5°C, as set out in the Paris Agreement. Despite the new financial commitments, some consider that the proposed action was not sufficient to address the urgency of the climate crisis.
The Presidency of this COP 29 managed to reach a decision on articles 6.2 and 6.4 of the Paris Agreement, an agreement that will pave the way for carbon trading between countries and the creation of a regulated global market. The implications of this adoption should be addressed in urgent dialogue with the most vulnerable communities, such as the Indigenous Peoples, since much of this regulated market seeks to create a market in indigenous territories. Some critical points of article 6 of the Paris Agreement in the context of Carbon Markets from indigenous perspectives include the loss of lands and territories: Emission reduction projects, which support carbon markets, often involve the acquisition of indigenous lands, which violates their ancestral rights and way of life. Forced displacement: These initiatives can lead to the displacement of indigenous communities from their traditional territories, affecting their livelihoods and their cultural connection to the land. Violation of customary rights: Carbon markets can undermine indigenous peoples’ customary rights over their lands and natural resources, failing to recognise their role in the sustainable management of these. Lack of participation: Indigenous peoples are often not consulted in a free, prior and informed manner about projects that affect their territories, which violates their fundamental rights. Culturalisation: Projects can impose external development models that are not compatible with indigenous peoples’ worldviews and cultural practices, eroding their cultural identity. Unequal benefits: The economic benefits generated by carbon markets are often not shared equitably with indigenous communities, who bear the greatest environmental and social costs.
Other General Reviews
- Double counting: There is a risk that emissions reductions are counted twice, both in the country that generated them and in the country that acquired the carbon credits, undermining the environmental integrity of the system.
- Loss of ambition: There are fears that carbon markets could undermine national emissions reduction efforts as countries could become overly reliant on purchasing carbon credits rather than implementing more ambitious mitigation measures.
- Lack of transparency: The complexity of carbon markets and the diversity of mechanisms established in Article 6 can hinder transparency and accountability.
- Negative social and environmental impacts: Emissions reduction projects can have negative social and environmental impacts if not implemented with appropriate safeguards.
- Unequal distribution of benefits: Benefits generated by carbon markets may be concentrated among a few actors, rather than distributed equitably between developed and developing countries.
Reflecting on the Article 6.4 agreement, Olga Gassan-Zade, former chair of the Article 6.4 Supervisory Body, told Carbon Brief that it remains to be seen what difference the mechanism will make: “Only time will tell whether it will be able to mitigate large-scale effects or become another expensive toy to support the agenda of some parties.”
Personally, I believe that it is necessary to work on the education and training of faith communities, of Indigenous Peoples, of vulnerable communities, regarding these agreements and the implications they will have for peoples in the world. Our work as followers of Jesus, who are in favor of life, should lead us to work for seeking peace and justice. The neocolonialism that is present and threatens life should be denounced. Likewise, we should also be shrewd to work as daughters and sons of light prepared for these realities that are adopted at an international level. It is necessary to guarantee and respect the rights of indigenous peoples, women, children, society in general, promote climate justice, establish social and environmental safeguards, prioritize rights-based approaches, and strive for effective participation. Transparent, intercultural dialogue between governments, companies, civil society and indigenous peoples is necessary to address these criticisms and ensure that carbon markets become an effective tool for climate action. Since the root of the issue lies in economic systems—specifically capitalist and neoliberal models that are directly complicit in causing climate change—the greatest criticism is how these systems can offer solutions when they are responsible for the planet’s collapse. Drawing from our faith in Jesus and even from indigenous wisdom we seek proposals to permeate society with resilient systems—systems that have endured and offered alternative ways of communal, reciprocal, and supportive living, grounded in mutuality with the Earth. It is necessary that the applications of these alternatives of life be manifest in our ecclesiology, theologies and missiology. Furthermore, through faith in Jesus, we recognize and love God as the Creator. Consequently, we are called to love His creation, as taught in the Bible.
This theological creed, which we embrace as Christians, is affirmed by Minister Marina Silva in an interview.
Conversation with Jocabed Solano & Brazil’s Environment Minister Marina Silva at COP29
I also think that it is important that we continue to raise youth, indigenous peoples, children, and members of the church in general to influence these spaces. To do this, we must begin at local, national, regional and international levels by learning about the agreements that have been adopted over the years at the COPs, understanding the language of the documents, and preparing ourselves to make a concrete impact. We must also share stories—both positive ones of resilience, as seen in projects and community efforts, as well as negative ones, such as the devastating effects climate change and biodiversity loss on people’s lives.
Our pastoral ministry must embrace these dimensions. In my advocacy journey, I have participated in diverse dialogues and initiatives: speaking with the Brazilian Minister of Environment about the Church’s role, collaborating with a Methodist pastor leading negotiators in Korea, participating in discussions on with “land use,” in the food pavilion on the subject of food sovereignty, as well as in the faith pavilion on two occasions: once, in the science pavilion, on indigenous knowledge and science, and then in the indigenous pavilion on stories of hope, life narratives against extractivism towards the land. I have also dialogued with university students on the importance of advocacy and the profession in these spaces. Additionally, I have supported negotiations on agriculture, contributed to meetings for document submissions for upcoming workshops on the agriculture platform, advocated for integrating indigenous knowledge into state-level strategies, and accompanied efforts related to Article 6 and bilateral discussions.
Finally, personally, my hope is grounded in the recognition that the Creator loves His creation and that the power of His resurrection is mobilizing many people. Through their struggles, resistance, and resilience, they are offering alternative narratives to those that promote the destruction of the earth. This hope is expressed in concrete actions that bring life. Recognizing that evil will not prevail (Psalm 1:6) inspires us to continue raising our voices, proclaiming justice and confronting injustice. We long for the renewal of all creation and eagerly await total reconciliation found in Jesus.
I extend gratitude to the World Council of Churches for inviting me to be part of their delegation as part of the Indigenous Peoples’ Reference Group. Thank you to the Indigenous Memory team, to the Tearfund youth network, to the Indigenous Climate Change Caucus, to the Environment Ministry of Panama for accrediting me, to the Creation Care network and to Freedom and Justice in Lausanne for your prayers and support. To all my friends and family, thank you for for taking care of me and your encouragement in this work.
Editor’s note: This work is a translation, and has been minorly edited for clarity.
