Green Colonialism: How Environmentalism Risks Repeating the Sins of the Past

In the urgent global push to combat climate change, a new form of colonialism is emerging, one that threatens to repeat the mistakes of history under the guise of environmentalism. This phenomenon, known as "green colonialism," refers to the imposition of environmental policies and practices by developed nations on developing countries, often with little regard for the needs, rights, and sovereignty of the local population. As the world rallies to mitigate climate change, it is essential to recognize and address the risks of green colonialism to ensure that the transition to a sustainable future does not come at the expense of the most vulnerable.

Green colonialism is the modern-day continuation of historical patterns of exploitation and domination, where powerful nations impose their environmental agendas on less powerful ones. This dynamic often manifests in the global North dictating the terms of climate action to the global South, without adequately considering the social, economic, and cultural contexts of the regions affected. The term encapsulates the power imbalances that arise when wealthy countries, international organizations, and multinational corporations pursue climate goals that disproportionately impact poorer nations.

Historically, colonialism involved the extraction of resources and the exploitation of indigenous peoples for the benefit of imperial powers. Today, green colonialism can be seen in the way some climate initiatives prioritize global environmental goals over the rights and well-being of local communities. For instance, there have been cases where vast tracts of land were repurposed for renewable energy projects, leading to the displacement of local populations who had lived there for generations. Similarly, conservation efforts have sometimes resulted in the restriction of access to natural resources for indigenous peoples, who depend on these resources for their livelihoods. Additionally, the implementation of carbon offset schemes often benefits distant polluters more than the local populations who bear the brunt of environmental degradation. Even international climate change policies are infringing on the rights of Indigenous people all in the name of “green transition”

One of the primary mechanisms of green colonialism is the imposition of renewable energy projects, such as large-scale wind and solar farms, in developing countries. While these projects are essential for reducing global carbon emissions, they often come with significant social and environmental costs. For example, in Kenya's Lake Turkana region, a massive wind farm was constructed to provide clean energy to the national grid. However, the project displaced local communities disrupted traditional livelihoods and led to conflicts over land rights. The local people, who had little say in the planning and implementation of the project, bore the brunt of its negative impacts while the benefits largely flowed elsewhere.

One of the primary mechanisms of green colonialism is the imposition of renewable energy projects, such as large-scale wind and solar farms, in developing countries. While these projects are essential for reducing global carbon emissions, they often come with significant social and environmental costs. For example, in Kenya's Lake Turkana region, a massive wind farm was constructed to provide clean energy to the national grid. However, the project displaced local communities disrupted traditional livelihoods and led to conflicts over land rights. The local people, who had little say in the planning and implementation of the project, bore the brunt of its negative impacts while the benefits largely flowed elsewhere.

Carbon offset schemes, where companies or countries pay for projects that reduce or sequester carbon emissions in other parts of the world, are another tool of green colonialism. While these schemes are intended to mitigate climate change, they can have unintended consequences for the communities hosting these projects. For example, in Kenya's Mau Forest, the Ogiek people are being forcibly evicted from their ancestral lands by the government, allegedly to make way for carbon offsetting projects. These evictions disrupt the lives and livelihoods of the Ogiek, while the carbon credits generated from the reforested areas often benefit polluting companies in the global North. Despite a 2017 African Court ruling affirming their right to the land, the Ogiek continue to face displacement, highlighting the ongoing injustices tied to such schemes.

In another example, the World Bank's promotion of large-scale hydropower projects in Africa has raised concerns about green colonialism. While hydropower is a key component of the global transition to renewable energy, the construction of dams has often led to the displacement of thousands of people, the destruction of ecosystems, and conflicts over water resources. In Ethiopia, the construction of the Gibe III dam on the Omo River displaced indigenous communities and disrupted their access to vital water sources. The project, funded by international donors and development banks, prioritized the energy needs of urban areas and industrial development over the rights of the affected communities.

Green colonialism is also evident in the imposition of Western environmental standards on developing countries, often disregarding local realities. A prime example is the European Union's push for sustainable palm oil production in Southeast Asia, which has led to the certification of large plantations under the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) standards. While these certifications aim to meet EU demands, they have come under fire for severe labor abuses, including exploitation of workers and poor living conditions, particularly in Indonesia's Sumatra and Kalimantan regions. This process, driven by Western consumer interests, often benefits multinational corporations at the expense of local communities and farmers, exacerbating social and environmental harm

The consequences of green colonialism are far-reaching and multifaceted. At its core, green colonialism exacerbates existing inequalities and injustices, both within and between nations. By imposing environmental policies that prioritize global goals over local needs, green colonialism undermines the sovereignty and self-determination of developing countries and their communities.

Moreover, green colonialism can lead to social unrest and conflict, as local populations resist the imposition of external agendas on their lands and resources. The displacement of communities for renewable energy projects, conservation efforts, and carbon offset schemes can result in the loss of livelihoods, cultural heritage, and social cohesion. In some cases, these projects have sparked violent conflicts between local communities and the state or private entities involved.

Green colonialism also risks alienating developing countries from the global climate movement. When climate initiatives are perceived as tools of exploitation rather than genuine efforts to address environmental challenges, they can breed resentment and mistrust. This can undermine international cooperation on climate change and hinder the achievement of global climate goals.

To address the risks of green colonialism, it is essential to decolonize environmental policy and practice. This requires a shift in the way climate initiatives are designed and implemented, with greater emphasis on the rights, needs, and aspirations of local communities. Decolonizing environmental policy means recognizing the knowledge and agency of indigenous peoples and local communities in managing their lands and resources. It also means ensuring that climate initiatives are developed through inclusive and participatory processes that respect the sovereignty of developing countries.

One approach to decolonizing environmental policy is to support community-led conservation and renewable energy projects. These initiatives, which are designed and managed by local communities, prioritize the needs and rights of the people directly affected by environmental policies. For example, in the Amazon rainforest, indigenous communities have successfully implemented forest management practices that protect biodiversity while sustaining their livelihoods. These community-led initiatives offer a model for achieving environmental goals without perpetuating the injustices of green colonialism.

Another approach is to reform international climate finance to ensure that resources are directed to the communities most affected by climate change. This includes providing financial support for locally-led adaptation and mitigation projects, as well as ensuring that carbon offset schemes and other market-based mechanisms are designed to benefit local populations. By prioritizing the needs of the global South, climate finance can help to redress the imbalances of power that underpin green colonialism.

Green colonialism presents a significant challenge in the global fight against climate change. As we strive to transition to a sustainable future, it is crucial to acknowledge and address the risks of perpetuating past injustices. Decolonizing environmental policies and empowering community-led initiatives are key to ensuring that the global climate movement is both inclusive and just. In our efforts to achieve a green transition, we must avoid infringing on the rights and livelihoods of others, recognizing that true sustainability cannot come at the expense of marginalized communities. We can build a future where environmental sustainability and social justice are inherently connected if only we can adhere to this belief.