Sustainability, Population
& Land-Grabbing
Embedded Files
We have gotten so used to only counting people that:
We have forgotten to count the size of their footprints!
We need to add footprint size into the formula!
https://www.landrightsnow.org
2.5 Billion people are living sustainably. That leaves 5.5B people who are not living sustainably : 5.5 Billion people who are accused of being overpopulated, but, in reality, they are Over-Consuming.
1- Reducing the current population in time to avoid Global Warming would require unacceptable draconian measures.
2- Slowing population growth takes time, with no immediate results. Population growth or decline is measured by calculating the difference between births and deaths for a given period of time. Death rates are slowing because modern medicine allows Baby Boomers to live longer. The decline of births is slowing because, in most developed countries, the fertility rate has already reached replacement level, and, while there are more people today who want no children, or only one, there are still people who want two children. Also there are still people who do not have access to health care, and therefore: little or no access to contraception.
3- Climate change is happening now. We don't have time to rely on slowing population growth.
That leaves 2.5B people who are living sustainably and we need to protect these people from Land Grabs. Since they have succeeded in maintaining their environment for hundreds of years, it is they, the indigenous people, who should be in charge of their own land.
Unfortunately, the people who promote the Overpopulation Boogeyman narrative stubbornly insist that all people need to curtail their population. In doing so, they unintentionly send the message that, to save the environment, indigenous people should be removed from their ancestral home.
Crying Overpopulation validates Land-Grabbing efforts.
The other thing that we forgot to look at is Population Density. If people have a lot of land compared to the number of people, then they are not overpopulated if consumption is not big. Typically, in larger piece of land, there will be more resources per person.
For example, the 80,000 - 100,000 Maasai people in Ngorongoro Conservation Area, Loliondo, and Serengeti share an area the size of Belgium; the population density is 10 people per km2; and their settlements occupy only 5% of the area.
https://rightsandresources.org/wp-content/uploads/GlobalBaseline_web.pdf
Rights and Resources Initiative
In recent years, there has been growing attention and effort towards securing the formal, legal recognition of land rights for Indigenous Peoples and local communities.
Communities and Indigenous Peoples are estimated to hold as much as 65 percent of the world’s land area under customary systems, yet many governments formally recognize their rights to only a fraction of those lands. This gap—between what is held by communities and what is recognized by governments—is a major driver of conflict, disrupted investments, environmental degradation, climate change, and cultural extinction. While community land rights are garnering greater attention in national and international circles, the actual status and extent of legal recognition has not been well understood.
This report seeks to contribute to this field as the first analysis to quantify the amount of land formally recognized by national governments as owned or controlled by Indigenous Peoples and local communities around the world. The study includes data from 64 countries comprising 82 percent of global land area. It builds on the ongoing work of the Rights and Resources Initiative (RRI) to track ownership and control of the world’s forests, and expands that research to identify lands that are owned and controlled by local communities across all terrestrial ecosystems in the countries studied, including such diverse lands as grasslands in China, taiga in northern Canada, and rainforests in Brazil.
The finding that only 18 percent of land area in the countries studied is formally recognized as owned or controlled by local communities and Indigenous Peoples reveals the level of challenge facing the world today. Moreover, the findings that much of this recognized area is in just a few countries, that less than 5 percent of land is recognized as community owned or controlled in more than half of the countries, and that weaknesses and restrictions often impede the realization of rights, all demonstrate the need for action.
Fewer than half of the countries studied have the legal frameworks in place to recognize communities’ and Indigenous Peoples’ full ownership rights to their lands.
We hope that this report will be used by community and Indigenous Peoples’ organizations, policy makers, advocates, investors, donors, and researchers to measure governments’ progress in formally recognizing Indigenous Peoples and communities’ rights to the lands that they have held in practice for generations. In addition, we hope that the findings will spur more action by all of these stakeholders to seize the many immediate opportunities for tenure reform as a way to close the gap between national laws, corporate practice, and communities’ rights
https://rightsandresources.org/wp-content/uploads/GlobalBaseline_web.pdf
"Up to 2.5 billion women and men worldwide depend on indigenous and community lands to survive. These lands, which are held, used or managed collectively, cover more than 50% of the world’s surface."
"Yet, Indigenous Peoples and local communities who have protected these lands for centuries, legally own just one-fifth."
"This gap represents at least 5 billion hectares of unprotected lands vulnerable to land grabs by governments and corporations. In Africa, 90% of rural lands are not documented."
"There is growing evidence of how vital the role played by full legal ownership of land by Indigenous Peoples and local communities is in preserving cultural diversity and in combating poverty and hunger. The failure to recognize community land rights not only undermines the human rights of local people. It also threatens humanity’s ability to achieve food security and fight climate change."
"70% of the world’s food is produced by small-scale producers, many of whom rely on natural resources that are held in common. Securing land rights help communities to manage their land more sustainably, to access credit, diversify activities and invest. It can boost farmers’ productivity by 60 percent and more than double family income. This is a key strategy to increase global food production as the population continues to grow."
"The collective natural resources governed by Indigenous Peoples and local communities are biodiversity hotspots that maintain the ecological balance of our planet and help regulate the climate that enables global food production. Research shows that their lands store massive amounts of carbon – at least 300 billion megatons – and that secure rights lead to lower rates of deforestation."
"Women’s land rights are particularly important given their crucial role in ensuring local food security and managing community resources. The FAO estimates that if we close the gender gap in agriculture, production could increase by 20-30%. Research shows that women’s land rights are also associated with better health and nutrition outcomes."
"Small-scale food producers not only produce most of the world’s food, but they also protect and sustain diverse food cultures and landscapes. Secure land rights are foundational to preserving diverse local food systems where consumption is less commodified, and traditional knowledge and practices around food are valued."
OXFAM says:
“Communities around the world rely on their customary lands to feed their families. But their lands also feed the world.”
Joan Carling, Advisory Board member of Land Rights Now
"Up to 2.5 billion women and men worldwide depend on indigenous and community lands to survive. These lands, which are held, used or managed collectively, cover more than 50% of the world’s surface."
"Yet, Indigenous Peoples and local communities who have protected these lands for centuries, legally own just one-fifth."
"This gap represents at least 5 billion hectares of unprotected lands vulnerable to land grabs by governments and corporations. In Africa, 90% of rural lands are not documented."
"How securing collective land rights benefits the whole planet"
"How securing collective land rights benefits the whole planet"
"There is growing evidence of how vital the role played by full legal ownership of land by Indigenous Peoples and local communities is in preserving cultural diversity and in combating poverty and hunger. The failure to recognize community land rights not only undermines the human rights of local people. It also threatens humanity’s ability to achieve food security and fight climate change."
"70% of the world’s food is produced by small-scale producers, many of whom rely on natural resources that are held in common. Securing land rights help communities to manage their land more sustainably, to access credit, diversify activities and invest. It can boost farmers’ productivity by 60 percent and more than double family income. This is a key strategy to increase global food production as the population continues to grow."
"The collective natural resources governed by Indigenous Peoples and local communities are biodiversity hot spots that maintain the ecological balance of our planet and help regulate the climate that enables global food production. Research shows that their lands store massive amounts of carbon – at least 300 billion megatons – and that secure rights lead to lower rates of deforestation."
"Women’s land rights are particularly important given their crucial role in ensuring local food security and managing community resources. The FAO estimates that if we close the gender gap in agriculture, production could increase by 20-30%. Research shows that women’s land rights are also associated with better health and nutrition outcomes."
"Small-scale food producers not only produce most of the world’s food, but they also protect and sustain diverse food cultures and landscapes. Secure land rights are foundational to preserving diverse local food systems where consumption is less commodified, and traditional knowledge and practices around food are valued. "
"Indigenous Peoples and local communities preserve 80% of the world’s biodiversity."
https://www.ecowatch.com/asian-elephants-habitat-human-impacts.html
The Maasai Live Sustainably with Elephants and other animals
SUSTAINABILITY and POPULATION GROWTH
For years, UNESCO said that the population of the Maasai in the Ngorongoro Conservation Area NCA would reach a point where overpopulation would occur. Yet the Maasai had been living sustainably, and with wild animals, in the area for hundreds of years.
Census were taken, but they included NCA employees, retirees of the NCA, their children and tourism employees, and retirees and families. When the NCA offices were moved out of the area, the new census did not reflect that change in population.
The number of cattle in Ngorongoro Conservation Area has not risen, on average, over the years
Maasai Population In Ngorongoro Conservation Area
A document from the Multiple Land Use Managment (MLUM) documentation from the Ngorongoro Conservation Authorities (NCAA) gives us information about the census and how non-indigenous people were included in the census, amounting to 40% of the census.
Scroll to 3.0 Resettlement Strategy ----
Resettlement 3.1.pdfCheck out the text highlighted in blue (see below). You can see that 40% of the population is not indigenous. Recently the NCAA (authority) moved out of the NCA, but the new census failed to subtract that number from the census.
Conclusion: the Census was "cooked".
Lets look at this document again. It says Homewood and Rodgers (1991) estimated average annual growth rates for NCA at 2.5%. But since the population has grown more than expected, then they conclude that "it must be 3.5% a year" - but is the growth a result of cooking the census, or is it due to more of the so-called immigrants (and not the Maasai).
It could be that the 2.5% growth rate described by Homewood and Rodgers was more accurate in describing Maasai population growth. 2.5% is much lower than the 4% cited for non-indigenous cultivators who are encroaching upon the NCA (Ngorongoro Conservation Area).
Given that most Maasai women don't give birth in hospitals and that a there is a high infant and maternal death rate due to malnutrition, the 2.5% might be accurate.
Also there is a high number of men who have left the NCA, due to loss of livelihood. Left behind are "widows" - single women with children, who are left with a few sheep and goats, and some with no livestock. Some of these women go to Karatu to beg for food for their children. That is why the HIV rate is high in the area.
The census also counts secondary school students, who are usually attending school outside of the area.
In addition, a large number of people, who are not indigenous, are living in the NCA, many are NCAA staff, others are tourist hotel staff, tourist shop staff, health clinic, school and religious staff. These people have a much larger per person impact on the NCA environment. Other non-indigenous are immigrants, many coming into the area in the 70s and 80s. The total population of Maasai would be only 65,000.
Human population is mentioned 50 times in the MLUM document. It sounds like the author is trying to justify evicting people, using population as a reason.
______
What the Maasai will tell you about their population (pardon grammar and spelling errors)
The population of Ngorongoro community grow slowly compare [compared] to the population of wild animals... Now days it's totally differently [different] because the area covered by wild animal [animals] in Ngorongoro is bigger than the pastrolist [pastoralist] activities [that] take place ....
The population of animal in ngorongoro increase [increases] more compare [compared] to other PAs (Protected Areas) ....This is enough evidence for people who visit there ...for instance you may look the population of Rhino previous years compare with numbers of rhino found in Ngorongoro crater nowadays.
Comparison [Compare] between wild animal in ngorongoro conservation area with other places: animal in Ngorongoro around the community settlement and in the forest living friendly with people, the herbivore like zebra during the night, early the morning and late evening must go near maasai bomas for their safety ...and this every one know ..so how [do] maasai became enemies of wild animal while their [they] protect them during harsh and normal time???? In other areas with people, [but] no animal around.
Black rhinos population increased from 163 in year of 2019 to 238, 2022. Nation wide
TIPPING POINT
An article published 29/12/2020, NGORONGORO IS AT TIPPING POINT AS POPULATION SOARS claims the native population is at 100,000 and "threatening the wellbeing of one of nature's wonders that attract millions of foreign and local tourists earning Tanzania billions of schillings annually".
From 1980 to 2010 UNESCO reports concluded that the increase of the human population posed a threat to the ecological value and integrity of NCA as a WHS (Olenasha, 2014; UNESCO, 2009; WHC, ICOMOS and IUCN, 2012).
For 40 years UNESCO has been predicting this same threat and wildlife has still not diminished. Have you ever heard of “crying wolf?”
Also counted in the 65,000 are the men who left the NCA to find work, and the students attending secondary school and universities most of the year outside the NCA. There are also a number of people who were counted and who work for NGOs but live outside the NCA (in modern housing). If their spouses and children were also counted, that would add up to a big difference.
Also consider that, if the NCAA replaced the 700 NCAA employees who are not Maasai, with Maasai employees, wouldn’t those Maasai employees be able to live like the former 630 employees live - in modern houses? For many it would be the same employee houses that are already there, or they would be outside the NCA. Don’t Maasai deserve to live in houses like that? There would be 700 less people (plus their family household members) in the NCA, and no difference in the number of houses.
If Maasai were treated fairly, and education was sufficient, you would see many more Maasai living outside the NCA.
Because of their expertise in management and conservation of resources for wildlife and livestock, the Maasai ecosystem is home to spectacular assemblages of African wildlife populations.
Approximately 25,000 large animals, mostly ungulates, are confined in the 250km sq Ngorongoro Crater. This crater contains the highest density of mammalian predators in Africa, including the lion population, endangered wildlife species including the black rhino, wild dog, cheetah and elephant.
The area is the calving grounds for over 1 million wildebeest of the Great Serengeti-Mara ecosystem ...(Melabo 2020)
This is in contrast to most of the rest of the world where the average size of wildlife populations has plummeted more than two-thirds in less than 50 years, according to the WWF (World Wildlife Fund).
Traditional indigenous territories encompass around 22 per cent of the world's land surface and they coincide with areas that hold 80 per cent of the planet's biodiversity. There is increasing recognition that the ancestral lands of indigenous peoples contain the most intact ecosystems and provide the most effective and sustainable form of conservation." From Vicky Tauli-Corpuz, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in her Statement to the UN General Assembly.
In the NCA, the number of people is not what is contributing to the degradation of the property. Degradation is made by people with large ‘footprints’, tourism, wild and domestic animals, and failure to burn unpalatable grasses. And even failure to bring livestock into the crator. See Environmental Degredation in the Crator. But there is no evidence of cattle causing the degradation, and cattle numbers have stopped growing, due to restrictions. Unpalatable grasses seems to be the biggest part of the degradation. Yet the NCA Authority fails to burn them like the Maasai did when they were in charge. Wildlife numbers are stable, and the “footprint” of the Maasai is small so the value of the “property” would still be the same if it weren’t for tourism.
The country of Tanzania has sustained relatively high growth, averaging 6–7 percent a year, over the past decade. At the same time, the East African nation of 55 million people already has one of the world’s highest birth rates - around 5 children per woman. These numbers of people are putting pressure on the park property from the outside.
MLUM 5.2.3 Human settlements (FALSE CLAIM)
The Multiple Land Use Model, a plan proposed for the NCA says:
“There is an increase in construction of improved houses with corrugated-iron sheets. Most of these improved houses do not blend with the environment and changes the scenic view of NCA. The situation is caused by absence of guideline to ongoing constructions. Hence, it is necessary to design and use building code to guide settlement development in areas earmarked for settlements within NCA.Plates 4A and 4B show Kimba business center as well as a primary school, a dispensary and settlements in Kayapus and Misigiyo villages respectively.”
SUSTAINABILITY and BIODIVERSITY
See Whose Responsible for the Environmental Degredation in the Crater?
Maasai Community Report - written by Maasai scholars
LAND GRAB via OVERPOPULATION BOOGEYMAN
The eviction was called off, but the efforts to push the Maasai out of their land continued, with massive human rights issues.
The Ngorogoro Conservation Area is very large. The population density of the Maasai is only 10 people for every km2. Combined with the district of Loliondo, it is the size of the country of Belgium...
This is an example of how the specter of overpopulation can be used as an excuse to force indigenous people out of their land.
Now in 2023, more and more abuses have been piled on the Maasai people, including the demolishing an entire village, raping, shooting people with rifles, and removing the social services that were part of the bargain the time the Maasai were forced out of the Serengeti.
See
https://www.global-focus-50x50-indigenous.org/tanzania/maasai-live-sustainably-with-wildebeest
https://www.global-focus-50x50-indigenous.org/tanzania/maasai-eviction
https://mondediplo.com/2023/04/08masai
This is a big lie, ignoring the fact that the Maasai are living sustainably on their land. No sign of environmental degradation
LAND GRABS
Muduruku people in the Sawre Muybu Indigenous Territory in Northern Brazil
successfully fought a major copper mining company in 2020
Alessandra Korap Munduruku, 2023 Goldman Environmental Prize winner from Brazil
https://youtu.be/-9ku3t9JesM
In very low input systems as the ones present in Sub-Saharan Africa or South Asia, livestock could be occupying the ecological niche of wild herbivores https://researchgate.net/publication/330782313… & most of its GHG emissions belong to the ecosphere - they are not anthropogenic.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse