“No More Green Colonialism”: Lessons from Indigenous Peoples for Sovereignty

By Neeraja Kulkarni

Indigenous peoples are increasingly referring to a phenomenon called “green colonialism.” The term finds its roots in the recurrent injustices indigenous peoples face today, at the behest of the energy transition.

Around 42% of the land and biodiversity are governed by Indigenous peoples. The accelerated deployment of renewable energy technologies like solar and wind power requires a massive land surface. However, Indigenous peoples have been frequently marginalized, especially in efforts to take control of their lands or other natural resources for economic prosperity

Prominent Indigenous peoples and First Nation leaders, including human rights lawyers, have deployed participatory policy tools to counter green colonialism while building on Indigenous knowledge. These tools ensure that Indigenous peoples can reap the benefits of the energy transition while conserving land and protecting biodiversity.

Following are a few lessons we can learn from Indigenous peoples to bridge this gap, toward a just energy transition:

Involve communities from the outset of green projects, ensuring their perspectives are central to the decision-making processes. Let the communities define their needs and what role they want to take in combating climate change for future generations.

One of the most significant tools deployed to empower community organizations and leaders is the Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC). This tool ensures that any decision on the land governed by Indigenous Peoples incorporates their concerns and perspectives, ensuring respectful engagement, and mitigating any negative socio-ecological outcomes of such green deployment projects.

Indigenous people may also want to share the benefits of the green transition and are increasingly vocal about climate action and preserving biodiversity. Instead of imposing the green industrial revolution onto these communities, increasing their participation can make projects more inclusive and effective. 

Recognize the central role of communities in land stewardship. Policymaking and science have often excluded generationally accumulated Indigenous knowledge that can be crucial for addressing climate change. Their knowledge can produce ecologically sound approaches or nature-based solutions to conserve biodiversity.

For example, the Karuk tribes in California have practiced controlled burnings for thousands of generations to manage forests that reduce the risk of wildfire while promoting biodiversity conservation. These practices are now being replicated in addressing escalating forest fires in the state.

Without indigenous peoples' stewardship, the land can be vulnerable to ecological damage. Neglecting land rights can lead to exploitation, displacement, and damage to this delicate socio-ecological balance. Thus, clean project deployments must follow legal frameworks and reinforcing the sovereignty of Indigenous land, such as titling and co-management agreements. 

Support Indigenous ownership and livelihoods. Co-ownership, full ownership, or equity sharing of clean technology projects can ensure that project development aligns with ecological goals while respecting cultural practices and benefits the communities.

The Indigenous Economic Development Corporations (EDCs) decentralized governance in the hands of First Nation leaders, proving to be a model for dismantling archaic power structures. Over 25 EDCs in Canada that run approximately 47 solar, wind, and energy infrastructural projects have proven instrumental in creating opportunities and sustaining growth. They do this while remaining in tune with Indigenous cultures, ensuring environmental and cultural preservation.  Such self-governance governance structures for Indigenous peoples are not as robust in the United States. 

A notable shortcoming of these projects is the need for credit-based loans and other financing pathways. Community leaders have accordingly called for an Indigenous loan guarantee program to bridge this gap.

Participation must go beyond initial consultations, building trust is key. Mechanizing monitoring and accountability can ensure that the community’s needs are being met throughout the project implementation; feedback systems create spaces for all community members to put forth their grievances that have arisen due to the project.

The Global Mining Legacy Fund presents a prominent example. It has introduced a proposal to finance grievance mechanisms for communities affected by mining​ operations. These restorative funds do not always sustain the communities in the long term.

Recently, several Indigenous leaders and NGOs teamed up to form the SIRGE coalition that holds businesses accountable for violating internationally recognized human rights through clean technology supply chains. These groups actively participate and present their concerns and tools in international climate forums like the recent UN Biodiversity Summit COP16.

Foster Indigenous representation in international forums. Indigenous and First Nation leaders have successfully carved spaces for themselves in international fora addressing climate action. The fight for representation and self-determination took them decades of resistance against larger and colonial forces.

The Arctic Council presents a prominent example of meaningful and respectful engagement with Indigenous Peoples. Since its inception, it has fostered inclusivity and strengthened indigenous governance and knowledge in combating climate change. Currently, six Indigenous organizations are permanent members of the Arctic Council.

This collective strength and resilience led to the ground-breaking United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), which recognizes Indigenous land rights as fundamental to their self-determination and cultural preservation. Such international legal instruments are vital, acting as a blueprint for national governments to protect Indigenous people's rights and lands. Additionally, projects that use UNDRIP principles allow for effective Indigenous consultation and equal decision-making authority.

Another such instrument is The Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization. Under the aegis of the Convention on Biological Diversity, it provides a transparent legal framework to promote fair and equitable benefits  sharing from the commercial use of Indigenous genetic resources, especially in pharmaceutical industries.

Similarly, the International Labour Organization’s Convention 169 (ILO 169) aims to protect Indigenous and Tribal Peoples' rights, by ensuring their consultation in decisions that affect them, especially regarding land, resources, and cultural preservation. 

The energy transition has colonial embeddings where larger forces are being displaced or harmed due to capital and economic gains; the violation of human rights in critical minerals extraction of Sub-Saharan Africa, unjust labor conditions in East Asian RE manufacturing factories, and displacement due to clean energy deployment.

To address these disproportionate impacts of the transition, Indigenous-led mechanisms can be replicated and made more accessible ensuring that our path to a greener future is equitable and peaceful too.

Neeraja Kulkarni currently supports the Wilson Center’s Environmental Change and Security Program.

This blog post is part of our Native American Heritage Month series. Read more here.