On today's Sustainability In Your Ear episode, discover a transformative approach to rainforest conservation with Dr. Hannah Peck, Deputy Director and Policy Lead at Cool Earth. She brings a decade of experience in the rainforests of Peru and Papua New Guinea with Cool Earth's innovative strategies that prioritize direct support over traditional carbon offset models. Cool Earth challenges the heavily promoted carbon offsets industry, arguing that they often serve as a smokescreen for continued emissions rather than a genuine solution to the climate crisis. Instead, the organization emphasizes reducing emissions at the source and investing in the people best prepared to protect nature: Indigenous communities. Cool Earth's approach is based on unconditional cash transfers that free Indigenous communities to make decisions based on sustainable practices and forest conservation rather than economic necessity. The cash transfers reduce the incentive for activities that lead to deforestation, such as illegal logging or mining.
In 2023, Cool Earth launched a pioneering basic income pilot in the Amazon rainforest. They provide about $5 million a year in funding Indigenous communities, where every adult receives a regular income to meet their needs. This initiative aims to support long-term sustainability and forest conservation by enabling individuals to focus on preserving their environment rather than engaging in environmentally harmful economic activities. Hannah explains that Indigenous communities manage most of the remaining ecologically healthy rainforests. Cool Earth presents a compelling case for a more equitable and effective approach to combating climate change. To learn more about Cool Earth's work and how you can support their mission, visit coolearth.org.
In 2023, Cool Earth launched a pioneering basic income pilot in the Amazon rainforest. They provide about $5 million a year in funding Indigenous communities, where every adult receives a regular income to meet their needs. This initiative aims to support long-term sustainability and forest conservation by enabling individuals to focus on preserving their environment rather than engaging in environmentally harmful economic activities. Hannah explains that Indigenous communities manage most of the remaining ecologically healthy rainforests. Cool Earth presents a compelling case for a more equitable and effective approach to combating climate change. To learn more about Cool Earth's work and how you can support their mission, visit coolearth.org.
- Subscribe to Sustainability In Your Ear on iTunes
- Follow Sustainability In Your Ear on Spreaker, iHeartRadio, or YouTube
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:08):
Hello, good morning, good afternoon, or good evening, wherever you
are on this beautiful planet of ours. Welcome to Sustainability
in your ear. This is the podcast conversation about accelerating
the transition to a sustainable carbon neutral society, and I'm
your host, Mitch Ratcliffe. Thanks for joining the conversation today.
As the climate crisis intensifies, carbon offsets are often sold
(00:29):
as a solution, but critics argue that they're more of
a smoke screen than a fix, and one of the
most vocal among them is cool Earth and International NGO,
working directly with indigenous communities to protect rainforests. Their message
is clear, it's too late for offsetting. The focus must
shift to real emissions cuts and investing in the people
(00:50):
best equipped to defend nature, and those are the indigenous
communities that live in the rainforest. Joining us today is
Hannah Peck, Deputy Director and policy lead at cool Earth.
She has a PhD in ecology and zoology and years
of experience working alongside rainforest communities. Hannah has helped shape
cool Earth's alternative model for climate action, one that rejects
(01:13):
extractive carbon markets and centers on indigenous leadership. The organization
makes cash payments to indigenous communities living in rainforests to
help them purchase essentials and make investments and resilience. It's
a clear alternative to cutting down the rainforest to survive economically.
We'll unpack why offsets are failing, the risks of relying
(01:33):
on tree planting schemes, and what real community led solutions
look like. You can learn more about cool Earth at
cool earth dot org. Cool earth is all one word,
no space, no dash, coolearth dot org. We'll get into
the conversation right after a quick commercial break. Welcome to
(01:55):
the show, Hannah. How you doing today?
Speaker 2 (01:57):
Really good? Thank you, it's great to be on the show.
Speaker 1 (02:01):
Well, thank you for joining me. You know, I just
got back from Circularity twenty twenty five at a conference
and one of the things everybody was talking about was
carbon off sets, and cool Earth argues that carbon off
sets are an excuse for continuing to emit CO two.
What do you see as the main failures in current
carbon off set markets that we need to be aware
(02:21):
of in address.
Speaker 2 (02:24):
The carbonov sets that they're not just a distraction from
reducing fossil fuel use, they are actively creating further damage
by creating a feeling that people are off the hook
from the damage they've created by their CO two emissions
and limiting global warming to two degrees above pre industrial
(02:46):
level levels and preventing that catastrophic climate impact is not achievable,
while carbon off setting is used as a means to
continue using fossil fuels. I think there's three main failures
we see, and the first is the design, regulation and
governance of carbon offset schemes are not fit for purpose
(03:08):
and they're open for abuse. And this is despite the
attempts more recently to try and regulate them so they've
got better. But I mean rigorous research. I think it
was shown in the journal Nature last year shows that
less than sixteen percent of carbon credits issued constitute real
emission reduction. And part of that issue is that by
(03:29):
monetizing carbon and going through offset providers, which are effectively
middle men, it creates an incentive to trade and make
profit from the offsets, which end up inflating the prices
and we end up with overcrediting. And then there's on
(03:50):
top of that, there's issues of the monitoring and regulations.
You can end up with double counting, so products being
sold more than once, and it's also really difficult to
accurately measure carbon saved and secured in offset projects. And
then the second one is that there's a fundamental flaw
in nature in using nature based offset projects. They don't
(04:12):
have the permanence of carbon storage. There's no guarantee that
that carbon will remain stored for example, forest fires, landslides, flooding,
political changes. But when we burn fossil fuels, the emissions
are in the atmosphere for hundreds of years, so you
really need to have that permanence to be able to
use it as an offset. So I think that's a
(04:33):
really key problem. And then the worst of the lot
from a cooler from the charities perspective is due to
the poor regulation and governance of many offset projects. They
prove to be unjust and unethical and so damaging to
indigenous people and local communities. So there's often a lack
of pre like a free prior informed consent, damage has
(04:58):
caused a sustainable livelihod and money just not reaching the
people whose land it is. And then there's actual cases
of abuse where people have been pushed off their land
or beaten. So yeah, those are the three main floors
that can see in them.
Speaker 1 (05:13):
Well, so small issues. I'm sure all all these problems
in the next twenty.
Speaker 2 (05:17):
Five a little depressing.
Speaker 1 (05:19):
Yeah, well, we've had folks on the show before who
dealt with indigenous communities and particularly provided healthcare. The result
was they didn't go cut down trees to pay for
hospital bills. Talk about the cool Earth approach. You give
cash payments to communities. How does that work? How do
you choose them, what do they do with them?
Speaker 2 (05:40):
Yeah, so cool ass approach is about keeping the rainforest
we have left standing, and we've seen that well, we
know that forests are responsible for twenty three percent of
climate mitigation needed to prevent further global warming, and protecting
rainforests just vital for the health of the planet. And
(06:03):
we support indigenous people in local communities who've been sustainably
living on that land and protecting it for generations so
they can keep on doing that. And we really believe
it's the most effective way of keeping rainforest protected and
keeping the carbon protected. And we know that the frontline
communities have already been protecting fifty four percent of the
(06:24):
remaining intact forest, but they've received so little funds to
be able to continue to do that. So they're experiencing
a huge amount of marginalization and the colonization has created
a lot of that and a lack of access to
too healthcare and the resources they need. And so simply
providing cash to those people is a way that they
(06:48):
can then manage their land as they need, as they've
done for generations, and to be able to keep living there.
Speaker 1 (06:55):
When you make a cash payment to a community, how
big a difference does that make on it practical level
to them? Does it allow them to plan for a
year or two ahead? I mean, has it changed their
perspective on the decisions they're making about the relationship with
the rainforests.
Speaker 2 (07:12):
It's really different with different communities. We work in Peru
and Papua New Guinea and we've done some work in
the Congo as well, so it's different on the depending
on the different context. But generally it's just used to
be spent on whatever the pressures are of the day,
just like we would spend spend money on what we need,
so on healthcare, education, helping with the sustainable agriculture, and
(07:36):
we've we've had some results come out recently that have
shown yet it's been spent on those different things, but
it's also freed up people's time to be able to
work on the other things that are important to them,
so maybe being involved in conservation, locally political activity, and
being able to invest more in local economies. So it's
a really wide range of benefits, and it's enabling people
(08:00):
to plan plan ahead, so maybe keep some money money
back to save for things like the huge climate events
we're seeing that are affecting people more and more in
the communities we work with, so that they're able to
have some money available to deal with those when they happen.
Speaker 1 (08:16):
You set this up as an alternative to carbon offsets.
Talk about the principles that you applied to the decision
about where to deploy the resources you have. What are
the criteria for this is a good fit for our program.
Speaker 2 (08:30):
It's working with people that have management over their land,
so that they do need to have some sort of
rights over the land and rainforests that would be a
threat if they didn't have support. Yeah, there's that, There
isn't There isn't much to it in terms of the criteria.
We need to be able to work directly with the
(08:51):
indigenous communities and so have a really good opportunity to
communicate and spend time with them, listen to their needs.
So have indigenous associations that work with them is a
really great way of us doing that through partnering with them. Yeah,
I think it's pretty there's not too much complexity in
working out where to work. Well, we've chosen actually to
(09:15):
work in the previent Amazon and Papua New Guinea, which
are the huge areas of forest still standing. So that's
that's really important.
Speaker 1 (09:25):
Easy to see those things. Yeah, Let's imagine I'm an
indigenous leader and somebody comes to me from a tree
planting program and says we'll create jobs. In fact, I've
been involved in planting a couple of million trees when
I was working with Samsung, and it's attractive apparently to people,
And I can understand why. How do you pitch to
(09:49):
the alternative, which is we'd just like to give you
money and solve some problems for you.
Speaker 2 (09:54):
Yeah, yeah, I completely see how tree planting it's not
necessarily a bad thing. It's so incredibly valuable to be
reforesting areas, but the rainforest that's already standing is much
more important to keep it standing. It's full of biodiversity.
And it's already got that carbon in it and it's
(10:16):
providing huge ecosystem services in terms of water cycle, climate
regulation and reducing flooding things like that. But the problem
with tree planting is it takes thirty years or more
for a lot of the carbon to be absorbed for
the tree to grow, and there's no guarantee that the
tree will survive. So it means that selling it as
(10:39):
a carbon offsets it is flawed in terms of you
can't guarantee its permanence.
Speaker 1 (10:45):
Well, I understand that aspect. I'm thinking more about the
perspective of the indigenous leader. All right, well you show
up and you say, here's some money, and they say,
you're giving me money, what do you expect in return
in so many work?
Speaker 2 (11:02):
Yeah, so we don't actually expect anything in return in
terms of our art model. So it's putting trust in
indigenous people and we have that trust because we've seen,
i mean, across the seventeen years that cool Earth's been working,
we've seen that this works and the rainforest has remained standing.
We've had very little deforestation compared to similar areas that
(11:25):
aren't we're not partnering with. And we also saw it
see it in the literature as well that when when
communities have have got control of the land, that's where
the biodiversity and that the rainforest is staying standing. That's
really the idea is that you just provide funds for
people to be able to stay living on the land
and don't don't. There's no conditions attached to it, so
(11:48):
they get to spend it how they how they want.
So I think that that's a really in terms of
comparing to tree planting, then they don't have to go
out and plant trees. They just get to continue to
live their lives and manage their land as they wish. Yes,
I think that's the main benefit.
Speaker 1 (12:05):
So let's talk about the other side of the equation.
There's the funders who are going to provide the amount
of money that these communities are going to get. How
do you pitch the value of doing that to those funders?
Speaker 2 (12:19):
The value is not only are you helping indigenous people
protect their land and the carbon within it, you're also
really helping those people continue to live their lives. So
it's a humanitarian benefit as well. And so it's just
got so many pros. You're keeping carbon locked in, you're
(12:42):
keeping the biodiversity there or the ecosystems and surfaces that
come with it, and you're helping the indigenous people and
the cultures and the values that they have continue to
live there for generations. More so, it's just the yeah,
the multiple benefits that you get from that investment.
Speaker 1 (13:01):
Well, one of the things that struck me about this
is that you are trusting people to make good decisions,
and that's that's a beautiful alternative to this sort of interventionist,
well do it our way approach that many organizations take
with especially low and middle income communities. They come in
with a set of prescriptions for activity. You're literally letting
(13:24):
these indigenous communities make their best decisions.
Speaker 2 (13:27):
How do that?
Speaker 1 (13:27):
How does how does the dialogue with the leadership go?
Do they tell you what they're going to do? Do
they ask your advice?
Speaker 2 (13:35):
Yeah? So it's having that really good communication from from
the start. So we we explain what what we want
from the from the project, which is keeping that rain
keeping the rainforest standing, but also working with them being
being flexible in terms of how they want to spend
their results. So we don't actually always just give funds.
(13:56):
We do provide some support on the side. It depends
what what those business people want. So yeah, it's having
really good communication and being flexible adapting when things change.
Oh yeah, I think that's the main things.
Speaker 1 (14:14):
So I think this is this is a really interesting point,
this idea that we can allow people around the world
to live better lives preserving the lungs of the planet
in this case, did they understand their potential impact on
the rest of the world when you talk about these ideas.
I've spoken with a lot of people who have been
in the rainforest and talk about satellite imaging, for instance,
(14:36):
and the people on the ground are going, what are
you talking about? How can you see through the trees?
It's it must be a strange conversation for them too.
Speaker 2 (14:46):
Yeah. So we've actually started providing data directly to the rainforest.
So we've managed to create these rainforests what we call
rainforest labs, where we've provided internet connection and laptops so
that so that our indigenous partners have access to satellite
data if they want it. So that's been an exciting
(15:06):
new initiative that we've been doing over the last couple
of years. And then from visiting these communities myself over
the last ten years or so. It's been interesting to see, Well,
there's different generational differences in generations in terms of awareness
of what's going on. And I've seen mobile phones being
used so much more so people are now getting access
(15:26):
to Facebook and the Internet that they are aware of
climate change and the impact it's having globally. But I'd
say there's a generational difference so that they'd say the
younger generation a bit more aware maybe than some of
the others.
Speaker 1 (15:41):
They suffer from the same kind of youth flight that
a rural community and the rest of the world is
concerned about.
Speaker 2 (15:48):
Yeah, yeah, absolutely so, losing the youth to local towns
and jobs there. But I mean I have seen in
for example, a community in Peru that we work closely,
where the younger generation have gone back and then found
actually they actually didn't like it in the city and
have come back to the village and continue their lives there.
(16:09):
So that's really interesting to see when that happens. Actually
wanting to be near your family and where you've grown
up and the cultural ties has ended up being very
important to them.
Speaker 1 (16:19):
How many projects have you got active at this point
and how much money do you deploy on an annual basis.
Speaker 2 (16:26):
Oh, of course you're testing me. Now, I've forgotten the
exact number of partnerships we have. It's I think it's
something like fifteen or so partnerships across Peru and Papua
New Guinea, and we have an income of about four
million pounds. I'm not quite sure that what that is
in dollars, And we've actually recently been doing some cost
(16:48):
effectiveness evaluation work and realized that ninety five cents in
the dollar ends up going directly to our community. So
we're really really proud of how effective, cost effective that
that is is actually getting directly into the hands of
people on the ground.
Speaker 1 (17:06):
That's a better than the best suggested performance here in
the States. When I look at the deployment of philanthropic capital,
it's generally eight percent is roughly the minimum that people
are taking out before they can pass the money on.
This is a really interesting conversation. I need to take
a quick commercial break, and we're going to be right
back now. Let's return to the conversation with Hannah Pex.
(17:33):
She is deputy director and policy lead at cool Earth,
which works with indigenous leaders to develop rainforest protection strategies. Hannah,
what kinds of practices are you finding are most effective
in the rainforest communities that you are working with. Can
you share what you've learned so that we can begin
to apply some of these ideas at home.
Speaker 2 (17:55):
Yeah, I can only speak from what I've witnessed when
I've visited had the privilege of visits seeing the rainforest
communities in Peru and Papune, Guinea and a few other
areas around the world. And the key practices are the
knowledge of when to use the plants and the animals
in the forest and only taking what is needed at
(18:15):
the time, and things like slash and burn techniques of
clearing only small plots of land to grow crops and
allowing them to grow back, traditional material uses for building
homes and other structures that work well in the landscape,
with animal damage, and working together as a community to
(18:39):
deal with extreme events such as forest fires. And we've
been supporting a brilliant forest fires initiative in Peru that
there's been running with indigenous federation called Carrie, using their
knowledge of the forest and the climate and the traditional
ways of tackling fires to work with hundreds of villages
(19:00):
their area of the Peruvian Amazon to prevent forest fires
taking hold and they provide some training. So yeah, it's
it's that that community working together and the really great
traditional knowledge of the plants and the animals.
Speaker 1 (19:18):
So a couple of different dimensions of that. Let me
dig into the first one, that last thing you said,
that relationship with the plants and the animals. How do
you understand the difference between an indigenous relationship with nature
and the way that we do things in the West.
What do you learn from that?
Speaker 2 (19:33):
I think it's understanding your place within that landscape and
that nature is in control and you can benefit from it,
but not take advantage of it and have respect for it.
So not over harvesting and taking just what you need
at the time, and working with the seasons as well.
When you're living in the rainforest, you're so aware of
(19:54):
the changes happening. I mean, this is this is all
very well me saying this because but that's from that's
from what I've perceived when I'm there.
Speaker 1 (20:06):
And the other is you talked about fire prevention in
the rainforest. How are they using, for instance, prescribe burns
in order to prevent the fuel load from building up
to a point where it would be uncontainable if it
were to ignite.
Speaker 2 (20:21):
I actually don't know too many of the details of
how how they're managing it. I haven't I haven't been
to those projects and see them, seen them in action.
But yeah, making sure that yeah, areas that are really
going to be lit up quickly burnt in before that happens.
And also I think I think they're really relying on
(20:42):
quick alert systems, so you using local weather forecasting. I've
got radio systems going on. So there's a lot of
modern technology coming in as well as the traditional use,
which is great mix of the two.
Speaker 1 (20:56):
How do you how do you see those communities changing
with the introduction of technology.
Speaker 2 (21:02):
It has been fascinating in the in just the ten
years that I've seen how much has changed. And now
obviously we're helping introduce internet access as well, and I'm
it seems to be a really positive thing bringing the
traditional knowledge and the technology together. And we're seeing that
now with our new initiative with the Rainforest Labs, that
(21:25):
our community members are choosing to go out and monitor
and note down what species they've got in the forest,
and so, yeah, being able to record that traditional knowledge,
but in using technology to do it.
Speaker 1 (21:40):
So what role do metrics and the accountability that you
can create using metrics play and coolers approach. Do you
report back to the funders and so forth about the
impact that they're having in a quantified way?
Speaker 2 (21:54):
We do. We use both quantitative and qualitative data, so
we monitor things that you would expect us to monitors,
so things like how the money is spent. So we
don't we don't ask, we don't insist on the communities
telling us exactly how they're spending their money, but actually
(22:15):
they've it's been great that we've been able to do
that in a voluntary way and collect that information. So
we've got details on exactly how some of it's spent
and then what impact that has to the people's lives.
And then we also use satellite technologies as you expect,
to monitor the change in the forest, so that's that's deforestation,
(22:38):
but also regrowth as well, which is really important to monitor.
And something we really which is really important to us
is to make sure that that data is owned by
the community, not by us, so we make sure that
that information goes back to them as well. So we're
thinking about not just our funders, but the community is.
Speaker 1 (22:59):
Well, that's fascinating so they're becoming familiar with the physical
impact that they're having through data, rather than being just
hearing stories about it. For lack of a better way
of putting it, one of the things that we talked
about a little earlier is the role of the indigenous leader.
But as the technology comes in you mentioned colonization earlier,
(23:22):
is the technology itself potentially a form of appropriation of
their culture or a displacement of their culture. I'm just
curious if that's something that you all have run into
as a concern.
Speaker 2 (23:34):
Oh, it's a really good point. I haven't really thought
about it.
Speaker 1 (23:38):
I'll give you I'll give you an example. I've been
doing some work on digital public infrastructure in the Global South,
and one of the things that we found when we
were talking with people on the ground was don't show
up and give me a Western solution, give me something
that I can make my own. Do you find them
thinking about that when they use the technology you're providing.
Speaker 2 (23:58):
I need to speak to my Peruvian and Papa New
Guinea colleagues to see what they think will be really
interesting to ask them, So I will do that soon
to hear. But I think, as I said, I've seen
we've seen so much more use of technology by indigenous
communities anyway, it's it's coming into all of their villages,
(24:19):
apart from really the really remote, uncontacted villages. So I
haven't really thought about it. I haven't come across situations
where it's been we've been accused of appropriate appropriating and.
Speaker 1 (24:34):
You would know, I'm sure you would now.
Speaker 2 (24:36):
Yeah, I hope, So I hope we would get that feedback.
Speaker 1 (24:39):
Yeah, let's go back to the comparison between the offset
programs people are hearing about all the time and what
you're doing. How does your direct investment change the CO
two emissions. Let's just index on carbon for a moment
in the in the regions that you're addressing. Have you
have you done that kind of quantitative analysis to compare
(25:01):
tree planting programs with the resilience that you're enabling with
the direct payment, So.
Speaker 2 (25:10):
Do you mean how much carbon we're managing to keep
in the rainforest compared to.
Speaker 1 (25:14):
Do you have a sense do you have a sense
of the carbon footprint of the two different alternatives.
Speaker 2 (25:22):
So, as I said, it's it's very difficult to actually
measure carbon, particularly in these massive rainforest intact rainforests because
you've got it in the roots of the whole whole kind.
But using satellite technology is a really great way of
doing that. So we've got an we've got an estimate
of how much is in in our partnerships by looking
(25:43):
at looking at that data and then just in terms
of comparing it to say, tree planting, as as I
explained earlier that there are the problems with trees not lasting,
not surviving, and the issues with monocultures and not having
that biodiversity and the resilience, particularly with climate change increasing
(26:06):
forest fires and drought and making making them difficult for
tree planting to survive. So yeah, haven't I haven't got
data off the top of I wouldn't know how those
carbon storage and density compares. But we're really sorry, really uh,
(26:27):
we know that that intact rainforest is full of carbonate
and and resilient.
Speaker 1 (26:34):
Going all the way back to the beginning of the
conversation again we talked about the fact that it's too
late for offsets. But as you think about where we
are headed as a species on a planet that is challenged,
can we turn this around and how do you see
our knitting together the truly global human community as a
(26:55):
way of doing that.
Speaker 2 (26:58):
Yeah, I'm really hopeful that we can turn it around,
and I think working with indigenous communities around the world
who hold so much of the biodiversity and the land
around the world, that we can make a real change.
It's just convincing governments and businesses or just everybody to
(27:18):
support Indigenous people to be able to keep living on
their land. And I think that's what gives me hope
if attitudes can change and we can give more rights
to indigenous and local communities, make sure that they're being
included in policy change and policy decision making and getting
(27:39):
the resources fundings that they can actually make it to
these events because the lack of access, convincing governments and
everyone to provide funds directly to those people.
Speaker 1 (27:51):
If you think out five or ten or fifteen years,
how do you imagine these community What would they look like?
Will they be for us, be denser, more biodiverse? What's
your vision? What's cool Earth aiming at as an outcome?
Speaker 2 (28:08):
I think what we're coolers aiming for it is not
to have to exist. So we would love it if
everybody adopts this model of supporting indigenous people, giving them,
just giving them ung conditional resources. I mean, we should
really be doing it as reparations in terms of the
injustice injustice that people have suffered. But yeah, in five
(28:30):
to ten years, if every indigenous community was funded, then
we'd see the rainforest still standing and rainforst recovering as well.
Speaker 1 (28:41):
It doesn't sound as though there's a great deal of
money needed to make a big difference in one of
these communities. In terms of the efficacy of the return
on investment of a dollar spent with the cool earth program,
how do you see the difference compared to a carbon
offset strategy.
Speaker 2 (28:58):
Absolutely, it's just it is really cost effective that there is.
You have to keep supporting communities, so it's not a
short term. A lot of a lot of offset projects
or conservation projects will go in for a few years
and then leave. That's not our point. So you need
to keep giving this funding. We're not expecting communities to
(29:21):
be able to create livelihood projects which suddenly are creating
masses of profit and they don't need us anymore. I
mean that that would be great, but it just doesn't
happen in reality. But it is so cost effective that
it really makes sense to just keep keep providing those
funds long long term, so that's what it relies on. Yeah,
(29:42):
and so in terms of comparing it to the cost
of offset offset projects, it just it makes so much
more sense and it means that other funds can be
spent on the climate mitigation that needs to be happened
locally here in the UK and here in the US
to gees stop all the carbon emissions happening elsewhere.
Speaker 1 (30:03):
So if folks wanted to get involved and support the program,
how can they do it?
Speaker 2 (30:07):
Well, if they specifically want to support cool earth, it's
just just going onto our website and pressing the button
to send funds over. It's as easy as that.
Speaker 1 (30:19):
Great, Well, I hope that they do that. Hannah. Thank
you very much for your time today. It's been fascinating.
Speaker 2 (30:24):
Thank you so much for having me. It's been really
interesting answering all your questions.
Speaker 1 (30:29):
Well, well, please come back and keep us up to
date on what's going on.
Speaker 2 (30:32):
Oh, that'd be great. Thank you.
Speaker 1 (30:39):
Thanks for sticking around through the commercial you've been listening
to my conversation with Hannah Peck, cool Earth's deputy director
and policy lead, about the nonprofits work with indigenous communities
in rainforests in Peru and Papuloa and New Guinea with
only about four million pounds sterling or about five point
three million dollars a year. Cool Earth helps keep people
(31:00):
in the places they know, love and care for, instead
of clear cutting or leaving that for a city to
earn a living and you can learn more about cool
Earth at coolearth dot org. Cool earth is all one word,
no space, no dash. I was really impressed by cool
Earth's no conditioned strategy providing unrestricted funding, and that means
(31:21):
that people can do with it what they need, not
that they will receive an unlimited amount of funding. This
unrestricted income provides the financial cushion that preserves the practices
that can conserve rainforests, which are the keystone systems for
the planet's air and water cycles as well as the
bedrock of planetary biodiversity. It's very easy to focus on
(31:43):
carbon dioxide when we talk about forests and when we
talk about climate change. Preserving the rainforest is not just
about supporting indigenous communities. It's about supporting all of us
and our health and our well being. By offering support
and giving people the opportunity to choose, we enable lies
choices rather than forced decisions that too easily can become
(32:03):
short term, financially driven and extractive. Trusting people, it turns out,
can reinvigorate societies and the ecosystems they depend on. And
a key point that Hannah made is that indigenous communities
take only what they need from the environment, and that
is something that is going to continue to change. That
definition of what they need and the opportunities that come
with extraction of materials from the rainforest. For example, as
(32:27):
science discovers more natural compounds in the rainforest that we
can use in medicines and foods and otherwise, the next
challenge will be to assist those indigenous peoples to conduct
sustainable harvests of those materials that we can use to eat,
to create medicines, and much more. Keeping the choice about
whether to harvest in their hands allows them to recognize
(32:49):
and resist extraction when it becomes a net negative for
the environment, For their environment and for ours. Indigenous communities
are on the front line of the climate crisis, and
cool earth keeps the power to decide the fate of
brainforests in their hands, where it belongs. If we all
learn to recognize and respond to climate change in our
own regions. Perhaps the world can unite even a little
(33:12):
bit more than today to reverse the damage caused by
industrial economies. We're going to keep an eye on Cool
Earth and on all of these programs. Stay tuned, and
I hope that you'll take a moment to look at
any of the more than five hundred episodes of Sustainability
in your Ear that we have and share them with
your community. Writing a review on your favorite podcast platform
(33:32):
will help your neighbors find us. Folks, you're the amplifiers
that can spread more ideas to create less waste. So
please tell your friends, your family, your coworkers, the people
you meet on the street that they can find us
on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, iHeartRadio, Audible or whatever purveyor of
podcast goodness they prefer. Thank you very much for your support.
(33:52):
I'm Metracliffe. This is Sustainability in Your Ear and we
will be back with another innovator interviews soon. In the meantime, folks,
take care of yourself, take care of one another. Unlet's
all take care of this beautiful planet of ours. Have
a green day.
Hello, good morning, good afternoon, or good evening, wherever you
are on this beautiful planet of ours. Welcome to Sustainability
in your ear. This is the podcast conversation about accelerating
the transition to a sustainable carbon neutral society, and I'm
your host, Mitch Ratcliffe. Thanks for joining the conversation today.
As the climate crisis intensifies, carbon offsets are often sold
(00:29):
as a solution, but critics argue that they're more of
a smoke screen than a fix, and one of the
most vocal among them is cool Earth and International NGO,
working directly with indigenous communities to protect rainforests. Their message
is clear, it's too late for offsetting. The focus must
shift to real emissions cuts and investing in the people
(00:50):
best equipped to defend nature, and those are the indigenous
communities that live in the rainforest. Joining us today is
Hannah Peck, Deputy Director and policy lead at cool Earth.
She has a PhD in ecology and zoology and years
of experience working alongside rainforest communities. Hannah has helped shape
cool Earth's alternative model for climate action, one that rejects
(01:13):
extractive carbon markets and centers on indigenous leadership. The organization
makes cash payments to indigenous communities living in rainforests to
help them purchase essentials and make investments and resilience. It's
a clear alternative to cutting down the rainforest to survive economically.
We'll unpack why offsets are failing, the risks of relying
(01:33):
on tree planting schemes, and what real community led solutions
look like. You can learn more about cool Earth at
cool earth dot org. Cool earth is all one word,
no space, no dash, coolearth dot org. We'll get into
the conversation right after a quick commercial break. Welcome to
(01:55):
the show, Hannah. How you doing today?
Speaker 2 (01:57):
Really good? Thank you, it's great to be on the show.
Speaker 1 (02:01):
Well, thank you for joining me. You know, I just
got back from Circularity twenty twenty five at a conference
and one of the things everybody was talking about was
carbon off sets, and cool Earth argues that carbon off
sets are an excuse for continuing to emit CO two.
What do you see as the main failures in current
carbon off set markets that we need to be aware
(02:21):
of in address.
Speaker 2 (02:24):
The carbonov sets that they're not just a distraction from
reducing fossil fuel use, they are actively creating further damage
by creating a feeling that people are off the hook
from the damage they've created by their CO two emissions
and limiting global warming to two degrees above pre industrial
(02:46):
level levels and preventing that catastrophic climate impact is not achievable,
while carbon off setting is used as a means to
continue using fossil fuels. I think there's three main failures
we see, and the first is the design, regulation and
governance of carbon offset schemes are not fit for purpose
(03:08):
and they're open for abuse. And this is despite the
attempts more recently to try and regulate them so they've
got better. But I mean rigorous research. I think it
was shown in the journal Nature last year shows that
less than sixteen percent of carbon credits issued constitute real
emission reduction. And part of that issue is that by
(03:29):
monetizing carbon and going through offset providers, which are effectively
middle men, it creates an incentive to trade and make
profit from the offsets, which end up inflating the prices
and we end up with overcrediting. And then there's on
(03:50):
top of that, there's issues of the monitoring and regulations.
You can end up with double counting, so products being
sold more than once, and it's also really difficult to
accurately measure carbon saved and secured in offset projects. And
then the second one is that there's a fundamental flaw
in nature in using nature based offset projects. They don't
(04:12):
have the permanence of carbon storage. There's no guarantee that
that carbon will remain stored for example, forest fires, landslides, flooding,
political changes. But when we burn fossil fuels, the emissions
are in the atmosphere for hundreds of years, so you
really need to have that permanence to be able to
use it as an offset. So I think that's a
(04:33):
really key problem. And then the worst of the lot
from a cooler from the charities perspective is due to
the poor regulation and governance of many offset projects. They
prove to be unjust and unethical and so damaging to
indigenous people and local communities. So there's often a lack
of pre like a free prior informed consent, damage has
(04:58):
caused a sustainable livelihod and money just not reaching the
people whose land it is. And then there's actual cases
of abuse where people have been pushed off their land
or beaten. So yeah, those are the three main floors
that can see in them.
Speaker 1 (05:13):
Well, so small issues. I'm sure all all these problems
in the next twenty.
Speaker 2 (05:17):
Five a little depressing.
Speaker 1 (05:19):
Yeah, well, we've had folks on the show before who
dealt with indigenous communities and particularly provided healthcare. The result
was they didn't go cut down trees to pay for
hospital bills. Talk about the cool Earth approach. You give
cash payments to communities. How does that work? How do
you choose them, what do they do with them?
Speaker 2 (05:40):
Yeah, so cool ass approach is about keeping the rainforest
we have left standing, and we've seen that well, we
know that forests are responsible for twenty three percent of
climate mitigation needed to prevent further global warming, and protecting
rainforests just vital for the health of the planet. And
(06:03):
we support indigenous people in local communities who've been sustainably
living on that land and protecting it for generations so
they can keep on doing that. And we really believe
it's the most effective way of keeping rainforest protected and
keeping the carbon protected. And we know that the frontline
communities have already been protecting fifty four percent of the
(06:24):
remaining intact forest, but they've received so little funds to
be able to continue to do that. So they're experiencing
a huge amount of marginalization and the colonization has created
a lot of that and a lack of access to
too healthcare and the resources they need. And so simply
providing cash to those people is a way that they
(06:48):
can then manage their land as they need, as they've
done for generations, and to be able to keep living there.
Speaker 1 (06:55):
When you make a cash payment to a community, how
big a difference does that make on it practical level
to them? Does it allow them to plan for a
year or two ahead? I mean, has it changed their
perspective on the decisions they're making about the relationship with
the rainforests.
Speaker 2 (07:12):
It's really different with different communities. We work in Peru
and Papua New Guinea and we've done some work in
the Congo as well, so it's different on the depending
on the different context. But generally it's just used to
be spent on whatever the pressures are of the day,
just like we would spend spend money on what we need,
so on healthcare, education, helping with the sustainable agriculture, and
(07:36):
we've we've had some results come out recently that have
shown yet it's been spent on those different things, but
it's also freed up people's time to be able to
work on the other things that are important to them,
so maybe being involved in conservation, locally political activity, and
being able to invest more in local economies. So it's
a really wide range of benefits, and it's enabling people
(08:00):
to plan plan ahead, so maybe keep some money money
back to save for things like the huge climate events
we're seeing that are affecting people more and more in
the communities we work with, so that they're able to
have some money available to deal with those when they happen.
Speaker 1 (08:16):
You set this up as an alternative to carbon offsets.
Talk about the principles that you applied to the decision
about where to deploy the resources you have. What are
the criteria for this is a good fit for our program.
Speaker 2 (08:30):
It's working with people that have management over their land,
so that they do need to have some sort of
rights over the land and rainforests that would be a
threat if they didn't have support. Yeah, there's that, There
isn't There isn't much to it in terms of the criteria.
We need to be able to work directly with the
(08:51):
indigenous communities and so have a really good opportunity to
communicate and spend time with them, listen to their needs.
So have indigenous associations that work with them is a
really great way of us doing that through partnering with them. Yeah,
I think it's pretty there's not too much complexity in
working out where to work. Well, we've chosen actually to
(09:15):
work in the previent Amazon and Papua New Guinea, which
are the huge areas of forest still standing. So that's
that's really important.
Speaker 1 (09:25):
Easy to see those things. Yeah, Let's imagine I'm an
indigenous leader and somebody comes to me from a tree
planting program and says we'll create jobs. In fact, I've
been involved in planting a couple of million trees when
I was working with Samsung, and it's attractive apparently to people,
And I can understand why. How do you pitch to
(09:49):
the alternative, which is we'd just like to give you
money and solve some problems for you.
Speaker 2 (09:54):
Yeah, yeah, I completely see how tree planting it's not
necessarily a bad thing. It's so incredibly valuable to be
reforesting areas, but the rainforest that's already standing is much
more important to keep it standing. It's full of biodiversity.
And it's already got that carbon in it and it's
(10:16):
providing huge ecosystem services in terms of water cycle, climate
regulation and reducing flooding things like that. But the problem
with tree planting is it takes thirty years or more
for a lot of the carbon to be absorbed for
the tree to grow, and there's no guarantee that the
tree will survive. So it means that selling it as
(10:39):
a carbon offsets it is flawed in terms of you
can't guarantee its permanence.
Speaker 1 (10:45):
Well, I understand that aspect. I'm thinking more about the
perspective of the indigenous leader. All right, well you show
up and you say, here's some money, and they say,
you're giving me money, what do you expect in return
in so many work?
Speaker 2 (11:02):
Yeah, so we don't actually expect anything in return in
terms of our art model. So it's putting trust in
indigenous people and we have that trust because we've seen,
i mean, across the seventeen years that cool Earth's been working,
we've seen that this works and the rainforest has remained standing.
We've had very little deforestation compared to similar areas that
(11:25):
aren't we're not partnering with. And we also saw it
see it in the literature as well that when when
communities have have got control of the land, that's where
the biodiversity and that the rainforest is staying standing. That's
really the idea is that you just provide funds for
people to be able to stay living on the land
and don't don't. There's no conditions attached to it, so
(11:48):
they get to spend it how they how they want.
So I think that that's a really in terms of
comparing to tree planting, then they don't have to go
out and plant trees. They just get to continue to
live their lives and manage their land as they wish. Yes,
I think that's the main benefit.
Speaker 1 (12:05):
So let's talk about the other side of the equation.
There's the funders who are going to provide the amount
of money that these communities are going to get. How
do you pitch the value of doing that to those funders?
Speaker 2 (12:19):
The value is not only are you helping indigenous people
protect their land and the carbon within it, you're also
really helping those people continue to live their lives. So
it's a humanitarian benefit as well. And so it's just
got so many pros. You're keeping carbon locked in, you're
(12:42):
keeping the biodiversity there or the ecosystems and surfaces that
come with it, and you're helping the indigenous people and
the cultures and the values that they have continue to
live there for generations. More so, it's just the yeah,
the multiple benefits that you get from that investment.
Speaker 1 (13:01):
Well, one of the things that struck me about this
is that you are trusting people to make good decisions,
and that's that's a beautiful alternative to this sort of interventionist,
well do it our way approach that many organizations take
with especially low and middle income communities. They come in
with a set of prescriptions for activity. You're literally letting
(13:24):
these indigenous communities make their best decisions.
Speaker 2 (13:27):
How do that?
Speaker 1 (13:27):
How does how does the dialogue with the leadership go?
Do they tell you what they're going to do? Do
they ask your advice?
Speaker 2 (13:35):
Yeah? So it's having that really good communication from from
the start. So we we explain what what we want
from the from the project, which is keeping that rain
keeping the rainforest standing, but also working with them being
being flexible in terms of how they want to spend
their results. So we don't actually always just give funds.
(13:56):
We do provide some support on the side. It depends
what what those business people want. So yeah, it's having
really good communication and being flexible adapting when things change.
Oh yeah, I think that's the main things.
Speaker 1 (14:14):
So I think this is this is a really interesting point,
this idea that we can allow people around the world
to live better lives preserving the lungs of the planet
in this case, did they understand their potential impact on
the rest of the world when you talk about these ideas.
I've spoken with a lot of people who have been
in the rainforest and talk about satellite imaging, for instance,
(14:36):
and the people on the ground are going, what are
you talking about? How can you see through the trees?
It's it must be a strange conversation for them too.
Speaker 2 (14:46):
Yeah. So we've actually started providing data directly to the rainforest.
So we've managed to create these rainforests what we call
rainforest labs, where we've provided internet connection and laptops so
that so that our indigenous partners have access to satellite
data if they want it. So that's been an exciting
(15:06):
new initiative that we've been doing over the last couple
of years. And then from visiting these communities myself over
the last ten years or so. It's been interesting to see, Well,
there's different generational differences in generations in terms of awareness
of what's going on. And I've seen mobile phones being
used so much more so people are now getting access
(15:26):
to Facebook and the Internet that they are aware of
climate change and the impact it's having globally. But I'd
say there's a generational difference so that they'd say the
younger generation a bit more aware maybe than some of
the others.
Speaker 1 (15:41):
They suffer from the same kind of youth flight that
a rural community and the rest of the world is
concerned about.
Speaker 2 (15:48):
Yeah, yeah, absolutely so, losing the youth to local towns
and jobs there. But I mean I have seen in
for example, a community in Peru that we work closely,
where the younger generation have gone back and then found
actually they actually didn't like it in the city and
have come back to the village and continue their lives there.
(16:09):
So that's really interesting to see when that happens. Actually
wanting to be near your family and where you've grown
up and the cultural ties has ended up being very
important to them.
Speaker 1 (16:19):
How many projects have you got active at this point
and how much money do you deploy on an annual basis.
Speaker 2 (16:26):
Oh, of course you're testing me. Now, I've forgotten the
exact number of partnerships we have. It's I think it's
something like fifteen or so partnerships across Peru and Papua
New Guinea, and we have an income of about four
million pounds. I'm not quite sure that what that is
in dollars, And we've actually recently been doing some cost
(16:48):
effectiveness evaluation work and realized that ninety five cents in
the dollar ends up going directly to our community. So
we're really really proud of how effective, cost effective that
that is is actually getting directly into the hands of
people on the ground.
Speaker 1 (17:06):
That's a better than the best suggested performance here in
the States. When I look at the deployment of philanthropic capital,
it's generally eight percent is roughly the minimum that people
are taking out before they can pass the money on.
This is a really interesting conversation. I need to take
a quick commercial break, and we're going to be right
back now. Let's return to the conversation with Hannah Pex.
(17:33):
She is deputy director and policy lead at cool Earth,
which works with indigenous leaders to develop rainforest protection strategies. Hannah,
what kinds of practices are you finding are most effective
in the rainforest communities that you are working with. Can
you share what you've learned so that we can begin
to apply some of these ideas at home.
Speaker 2 (17:55):
Yeah, I can only speak from what I've witnessed when
I've visited had the privilege of visits seeing the rainforest
communities in Peru and Papune, Guinea and a few other
areas around the world. And the key practices are the
knowledge of when to use the plants and the animals
in the forest and only taking what is needed at
(18:15):
the time, and things like slash and burn techniques of
clearing only small plots of land to grow crops and
allowing them to grow back, traditional material uses for building
homes and other structures that work well in the landscape,
with animal damage, and working together as a community to
(18:39):
deal with extreme events such as forest fires. And we've
been supporting a brilliant forest fires initiative in Peru that
there's been running with indigenous federation called Carrie, using their
knowledge of the forest and the climate and the traditional
ways of tackling fires to work with hundreds of villages
(19:00):
their area of the Peruvian Amazon to prevent forest fires
taking hold and they provide some training. So yeah, it's
it's that that community working together and the really great
traditional knowledge of the plants and the animals.
Speaker 1 (19:18):
So a couple of different dimensions of that. Let me
dig into the first one, that last thing you said,
that relationship with the plants and the animals. How do
you understand the difference between an indigenous relationship with nature
and the way that we do things in the West.
What do you learn from that?
Speaker 2 (19:33):
I think it's understanding your place within that landscape and
that nature is in control and you can benefit from it,
but not take advantage of it and have respect for it.
So not over harvesting and taking just what you need
at the time, and working with the seasons as well.
When you're living in the rainforest, you're so aware of
(19:54):
the changes happening. I mean, this is this is all
very well me saying this because but that's from that's
from what I've perceived when I'm there.
Speaker 1 (20:06):
And the other is you talked about fire prevention in
the rainforest. How are they using, for instance, prescribe burns
in order to prevent the fuel load from building up
to a point where it would be uncontainable if it
were to ignite.
Speaker 2 (20:21):
I actually don't know too many of the details of
how how they're managing it. I haven't I haven't been
to those projects and see them, seen them in action.
But yeah, making sure that yeah, areas that are really
going to be lit up quickly burnt in before that happens.
And also I think I think they're really relying on
(20:42):
quick alert systems, so you using local weather forecasting. I've
got radio systems going on. So there's a lot of
modern technology coming in as well as the traditional use,
which is great mix of the two.
Speaker 1 (20:56):
How do you how do you see those communities changing
with the introduction of technology.
Speaker 2 (21:02):
It has been fascinating in the in just the ten
years that I've seen how much has changed. And now
obviously we're helping introduce internet access as well, and I'm
it seems to be a really positive thing bringing the
traditional knowledge and the technology together. And we're seeing that
now with our new initiative with the Rainforest Labs, that
(21:25):
our community members are choosing to go out and monitor
and note down what species they've got in the forest,
and so, yeah, being able to record that traditional knowledge,
but in using technology to do it.
Speaker 1 (21:40):
So what role do metrics and the accountability that you
can create using metrics play and coolers approach. Do you
report back to the funders and so forth about the
impact that they're having in a quantified way?
Speaker 2 (21:54):
We do. We use both quantitative and qualitative data, so
we monitor things that you would expect us to monitors,
so things like how the money is spent. So we
don't we don't ask, we don't insist on the communities
telling us exactly how they're spending their money, but actually
(22:15):
they've it's been great that we've been able to do
that in a voluntary way and collect that information. So
we've got details on exactly how some of it's spent
and then what impact that has to the people's lives.
And then we also use satellite technologies as you expect,
to monitor the change in the forest, so that's that's deforestation,
(22:38):
but also regrowth as well, which is really important to monitor.
And something we really which is really important to us
is to make sure that that data is owned by
the community, not by us, so we make sure that
that information goes back to them as well. So we're
thinking about not just our funders, but the community is.
Speaker 1 (22:59):
Well, that's fascinating so they're becoming familiar with the physical
impact that they're having through data, rather than being just
hearing stories about it. For lack of a better way
of putting it, one of the things that we talked
about a little earlier is the role of the indigenous leader.
But as the technology comes in you mentioned colonization earlier,
(23:22):
is the technology itself potentially a form of appropriation of
their culture or a displacement of their culture. I'm just
curious if that's something that you all have run into
as a concern.
Speaker 2 (23:34):
Oh, it's a really good point. I haven't really thought
about it.
Speaker 1 (23:38):
I'll give you I'll give you an example. I've been
doing some work on digital public infrastructure in the Global South,
and one of the things that we found when we
were talking with people on the ground was don't show
up and give me a Western solution, give me something
that I can make my own. Do you find them
thinking about that when they use the technology you're providing.
Speaker 2 (23:58):
I need to speak to my Peruvian and Papa New
Guinea colleagues to see what they think will be really
interesting to ask them, So I will do that soon
to hear. But I think, as I said, I've seen
we've seen so much more use of technology by indigenous
communities anyway, it's it's coming into all of their villages,
(24:19):
apart from really the really remote, uncontacted villages. So I
haven't really thought about it. I haven't come across situations
where it's been we've been accused of appropriate appropriating and.
Speaker 1 (24:34):
You would know, I'm sure you would now.
Speaker 2 (24:36):
Yeah, I hope, So I hope we would get that feedback.
Speaker 1 (24:39):
Yeah, let's go back to the comparison between the offset
programs people are hearing about all the time and what
you're doing. How does your direct investment change the CO
two emissions. Let's just index on carbon for a moment
in the in the regions that you're addressing. Have you
have you done that kind of quantitative analysis to compare
(25:01):
tree planting programs with the resilience that you're enabling with
the direct payment, So.
Speaker 2 (25:10):
Do you mean how much carbon we're managing to keep
in the rainforest compared to.
Speaker 1 (25:14):
Do you have a sense do you have a sense
of the carbon footprint of the two different alternatives.
Speaker 2 (25:22):
So, as I said, it's it's very difficult to actually
measure carbon, particularly in these massive rainforest intact rainforests because
you've got it in the roots of the whole whole kind.
But using satellite technology is a really great way of
doing that. So we've got an we've got an estimate
of how much is in in our partnerships by looking
(25:43):
at looking at that data and then just in terms
of comparing it to say, tree planting, as as I
explained earlier that there are the problems with trees not lasting,
not surviving, and the issues with monocultures and not having
that biodiversity and the resilience, particularly with climate change increasing
(26:06):
forest fires and drought and making making them difficult for
tree planting to survive. So yeah, haven't I haven't got
data off the top of I wouldn't know how those
carbon storage and density compares. But we're really sorry, really uh,
(26:27):
we know that that intact rainforest is full of carbonate
and and resilient.
Speaker 1 (26:34):
Going all the way back to the beginning of the
conversation again we talked about the fact that it's too
late for offsets. But as you think about where we
are headed as a species on a planet that is challenged,
can we turn this around and how do you see
our knitting together the truly global human community as a
(26:55):
way of doing that.
Speaker 2 (26:58):
Yeah, I'm really hopeful that we can turn it around,
and I think working with indigenous communities around the world
who hold so much of the biodiversity and the land
around the world, that we can make a real change.
It's just convincing governments and businesses or just everybody to
(27:18):
support Indigenous people to be able to keep living on
their land. And I think that's what gives me hope
if attitudes can change and we can give more rights
to indigenous and local communities, make sure that they're being
included in policy change and policy decision making and getting
(27:39):
the resources fundings that they can actually make it to
these events because the lack of access, convincing governments and
everyone to provide funds directly to those people.
Speaker 1 (27:51):
If you think out five or ten or fifteen years,
how do you imagine these community What would they look like?
Will they be for us, be denser, more biodiverse? What's
your vision? What's cool Earth aiming at as an outcome?
Speaker 2 (28:08):
I think what we're coolers aiming for it is not
to have to exist. So we would love it if
everybody adopts this model of supporting indigenous people, giving them,
just giving them ung conditional resources. I mean, we should
really be doing it as reparations in terms of the
injustice injustice that people have suffered. But yeah, in five
(28:30):
to ten years, if every indigenous community was funded, then
we'd see the rainforest still standing and rainforst recovering as well.
Speaker 1 (28:41):
It doesn't sound as though there's a great deal of
money needed to make a big difference in one of
these communities. In terms of the efficacy of the return
on investment of a dollar spent with the cool earth program,
how do you see the difference compared to a carbon
offset strategy.
Speaker 2 (28:58):
Absolutely, it's just it is really cost effective that there is.
You have to keep supporting communities, so it's not a
short term. A lot of a lot of offset projects
or conservation projects will go in for a few years
and then leave. That's not our point. So you need
to keep giving this funding. We're not expecting communities to
(29:21):
be able to create livelihood projects which suddenly are creating
masses of profit and they don't need us anymore. I
mean that that would be great, but it just doesn't
happen in reality. But it is so cost effective that
it really makes sense to just keep keep providing those
funds long long term, so that's what it relies on. Yeah,
(29:42):
and so in terms of comparing it to the cost
of offset offset projects, it just it makes so much
more sense and it means that other funds can be
spent on the climate mitigation that needs to be happened
locally here in the UK and here in the US
to gees stop all the carbon emissions happening elsewhere.
Speaker 1 (30:03):
So if folks wanted to get involved and support the program,
how can they do it?
Speaker 2 (30:07):
Well, if they specifically want to support cool earth, it's
just just going onto our website and pressing the button
to send funds over. It's as easy as that.
Speaker 1 (30:19):
Great, Well, I hope that they do that. Hannah. Thank
you very much for your time today. It's been fascinating.
Speaker 2 (30:24):
Thank you so much for having me. It's been really
interesting answering all your questions.
Speaker 1 (30:29):
Well, well, please come back and keep us up to
date on what's going on.
Speaker 2 (30:32):
Oh, that'd be great. Thank you.
Speaker 1 (30:39):
Thanks for sticking around through the commercial you've been listening
to my conversation with Hannah Peck, cool Earth's deputy director
and policy lead, about the nonprofits work with indigenous communities
in rainforests in Peru and Papuloa and New Guinea with
only about four million pounds sterling or about five point
three million dollars a year. Cool Earth helps keep people
(31:00):
in the places they know, love and care for, instead
of clear cutting or leaving that for a city to
earn a living and you can learn more about cool
Earth at coolearth dot org. Cool earth is all one word,
no space, no dash. I was really impressed by cool
Earth's no conditioned strategy providing unrestricted funding, and that means
(31:21):
that people can do with it what they need, not
that they will receive an unlimited amount of funding. This
unrestricted income provides the financial cushion that preserves the practices
that can conserve rainforests, which are the keystone systems for
the planet's air and water cycles as well as the
bedrock of planetary biodiversity. It's very easy to focus on
(31:43):
carbon dioxide when we talk about forests and when we
talk about climate change. Preserving the rainforest is not just
about supporting indigenous communities. It's about supporting all of us
and our health and our well being. By offering support
and giving people the opportunity to choose, we enable lies
choices rather than forced decisions that too easily can become
(32:03):
short term, financially driven and extractive. Trusting people, it turns out,
can reinvigorate societies and the ecosystems they depend on. And
a key point that Hannah made is that indigenous communities
take only what they need from the environment, and that
is something that is going to continue to change. That
definition of what they need and the opportunities that come
with extraction of materials from the rainforest. For example, as
(32:27):
science discovers more natural compounds in the rainforest that we
can use in medicines and foods and otherwise, the next
challenge will be to assist those indigenous peoples to conduct
sustainable harvests of those materials that we can use to eat,
to create medicines, and much more. Keeping the choice about
whether to harvest in their hands allows them to recognize
(32:49):
and resist extraction when it becomes a net negative for
the environment, For their environment and for ours. Indigenous communities
are on the front line of the climate crisis, and
cool earth keeps the power to decide the fate of
brainforests in their hands, where it belongs. If we all
learn to recognize and respond to climate change in our
own regions. Perhaps the world can unite even a little
(33:12):
bit more than today to reverse the damage caused by
industrial economies. We're going to keep an eye on Cool
Earth and on all of these programs. Stay tuned, and
I hope that you'll take a moment to look at
any of the more than five hundred episodes of Sustainability
in your Ear that we have and share them with
your community. Writing a review on your favorite podcast platform
(33:32):
will help your neighbors find us. Folks, you're the amplifiers
that can spread more ideas to create less waste. So
please tell your friends, your family, your coworkers, the people
you meet on the street that they can find us
on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, iHeartRadio, Audible or whatever purveyor of
podcast goodness they prefer. Thank you very much for your support.
(33:52):
I'm Metracliffe. This is Sustainability in Your Ear and we
will be back with another innovator interviews soon. In the meantime, folks,
take care of yourself, take care of one another. Unlet's
all take care of this beautiful planet of ours. Have
a green day.
Popular Podcasts
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com