What types of issues does the Indigenous climate justice movement seek to make people aware of?
The indigenous climate justice movement seeks to enhance the awareness of people regarding the effects climate change has on their livelihoods as well as opposing developments that may aggravate the situation. Additionally, the movement seeks to shed light on the injustices waged on indigenous communities based on climate deterioration to place them in an informed position to lobby for their rights (Horton 50). It is also to make known to the respective authorities on the perceived injustices and violation of fundamental rights in the course of implementing alternative sources of energy meant to alleviate the effects of climate change. Further, the movement also objectifies at incorporating opinions and divergent views of indigenous communities regarding solutions to the looming climate change crisis (Horton 52). In overall terms, the movement aims at empowering the voices of indigenous communities as interested parties in the fight against climate change because they are regarded as the vastly vulnerable category. Therefore, the Indigenous climate justice movement is a voice of the indigenous people who are in the segment of highly vulnerable persons, especially concerning violation of their fundamental rights when fighting against climate change.
Why do some people argue that how Indigenous peoples are harmed by climate change is unjust?
The harm imposed on indigenous people by the raging climate change is argued by some people as unjust because it adds to their already existing plight. The forms of the plight, in this case, include gender and racial discrimination, economic exploitation as well as being powerless in their political jurisdictions (Whyte 292). This is the primary reason that has led to increased campaigns against the broad issue of climate change and its adverse impact on the indigenous communities. Additionally, activities that aggravate the issue, such as the construction of projects which pose a threat to the livelihoods of these people such as those interfering with water bodies have been facing opposition from the activists of the traditional communities. The reason is mainly similar since they believe that it is unjust and unfair to subject the traditional communities to situations that worsen the already dire scenario.
How have some Indigenous peoples been harmed in the past by the fossil fuel industries?
Fossil fuel industries established in the territories of indigenous people in the past have resulted in numerous adverse impacts on their livelihoods. Contamination of water bodies is one of the forms of harm that were experienced by the indigenous communities as a result of the presence of fossil fuel industries. For instance, the Dakota Access Pipeline whose construction was aimed at transporting crude oil products to Illinois from North Dakota was cited by the locals as a way of increasing risks to the quality of water as well as altering the cultural heritage of the Lakota people (Miller, and Crane 321). This is because numerous fears were expressed regarding the threat to drinking water and detriment to their cultural heritage sites; in other words, the pipeline was cited to bring environmental and cultural detriment (Deer, and Nagle 35). Additionally, the indigenous communities have been forced to vacate their territories to pave the way for the establishment of the fossil fuel industries, and this has the potential of making them homeless as well as forsaking their heritage sites (Indigenous People Indigenous Voices 1). The result is an interruption in their way of life, which is a cultural impact. In other words, they are subjected by the corporations to violation of their fundamental rights and freedoms. Therefore, the primary forms of impacts that have faced indigenous people in the past from fossil fuel industries are threats to water sources, erosion of their cultural heritage sites, and violation of their basic freedoms and rights in the course of the establishment of the industries.
What is geoengineering? What is REDD?
Geoengineering refers to subjecting the global climate to intentional manipulation to alleviate climate changes (Buck 1). This manipulation involves establishing sustainable systems that satisfy the ecological requirements at a particular area under this form of development. As a result, the term geoengineering is interlinked with the sociopsychological concerns existent in a community, and thus, they ought to be considered before executing any form of climatic manipulation. On the other hand, REDD is an abbreviation for Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation that is regarded as a novel approach in the conservation efforts of forests. The approach is backed by the financial incentives offered by the World Bank, UNEP, and NGOs interested in global climate conservation with the end goal of integrating forests into schemes of carbon sequestration (Beymer-Farris, and Bassett 332). This program is a reward-oriented because of the compensation granted to governments in their efforts towards reducing the rate of carbon emissions.
What are Indigenous views on and concerns about REDD and geoengineering?
REDD and geoengineering, both of which are approaches aimed at fostering the conservation efforts of countries and reducing carbon emissions, have been met with diverse reactions and concerns by indigenous communities. In the Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation in Tanzania, the local communities have cried foul regarding the shift from the conservation of forests done by them to the fortress-based approach (Beymer-Farris, and Bassett 333). This is bound to escalate the conflict between the communities and the implementing authorities, and thus, a lose-lose scenario is likely to be witnessed in the process. They also expressed their concerns in the disruption of a source of income from mangrove poles when REDD efforts finally materialize, and this places the proposals on a delicate balance. Geoengineering, the intentional manipulation of the climate to avert rapid climatic changes, as well as establishing sustainable measures, has been met with various concerns from indigenous communities. One effect is the lack of proper education to the locals on the purpose of the geoengineering approach that would lead to indigenous people feeling duped hence, escalate the conflict between them and the implementing bodies (Buck 3). Therefore, the main adverse effects of REDD and geoengineering as interventions on climatic change is the perceived conflict between the indigenous communities with the authorities tasked with their implementation.
How are other current solutions to climate change harming Indigenous peoples, such as solar, wind, or hydropower?
The current solutions objectified at alleviating climate change, such as wind, solar, and hydropower, have encountered numerous resistances from indigenous people because of the supposed harm they are likely to cause. One of the adversities is the possible displacement of people from their territories to pave the way for the construction of the projects, which makes them lose their historically and culturally significant lands (Avila-Calero 992). This leads to interference with their traditional culture that counters the potential benefits such projects were meant to realize. Additionally, harnessing water from rivers to generate hydropower was viewed as a looming threat to the quality of water as well as limiting access to the water bodies since they would now be under authority. In some way, this is a depiction of violation of their basic freedoms. Further, the construction of windmills to harness wind energy causes an interference with the forests because they have to be cleared to make way for their construction. Therefore, this has seen the proposed solutions in implementing alternative energy face resistance from the indigenous communities.
What is the best way to characterize the solutions that Indigenous peoples have suggested for dealing with climate change?
The best way to characterize the solutions suggested by indigenous communities in the conservation of climate is vesting powers and responsibility to the local community to implement their historical approaches to conservation. This means that the existence of forests in their territories, as well as water bodies, have been due to their communal commitment and awareness of the accrued benefits. These communal-based solutions result in a win-win scenario between the locals and the governments in their calls for conservation of the environment (Miller, and Crane 322). Additionally, granting the responsibility of conserving the environment to the indigenous communities is crucial in the aversion of the conflicts witnessed between them and the interested companies awarded investment opportunities in the territories. In line with this, the aspect of greater good is fostered on the end of the communities instead of allowing few individuals to enrich themselves at the expense of the traditional communities. This way, the vulnerability the communities are exposed to is considerably reduced because of their empowerment.
What lessons do Indigenous science fiction, in the films Wakening and The 6th World, convey to us about what our future should be like?
Indigenous science fiction shows us that our future will be similar to one shown in the movies because of the global change likely to happen regarding climate. This period has been described as Anthropocene that essentially denotes the timeframe whose occurrence is highly likely to cause a life-threatening crisis, including eliminating some populations of the world (Whyte 230). Besides, the films show the indigenous communities that are presently vastly affected by modern discrimination will be direly affected in the future if the current climate patterns are anything to go by. Generally, the two films show to us that the future will be defined by the crisis because climate change is likely to impact various dimensions of our lives, as is the case in fictional movies. Erasing of people, especially the indigenous communities, are the most likely scenario given the level of their vulnerabilities.
How does Indigenous art demonstrate possible solutions to climate change?
Possible solutions to climate change are demonstrated by indigenous art through plays that incorporate both indigenous actors as well as the audience. For instance, Breathing Hole by Reneltta Arluk is an example of a work of art that seeks to explore the history of the indigenous community, which is an important step in knowing the genesis of climatic changes (La Rose). This way, both the actors on stage and the audience can relate to the predicament, which helps them create formidable solutions to the problem of climatic change. This could include cooperating with the modern-day governments in a combination of efforts objectified towards alleviating the dire effects of climatic change, given that this category is vastly vulnerable. Therefore, making the indigenous communities understand the impacts of climatic changes that have occurred over the years through plays is a way that art emphasizes the vitality of establishing modern solutions to the menace.
How are Indigenous peoples using political instruments, like treaty rights, as part of their solutions to climate change?
Indigenous communities use political instruments such as treaty rights in the enforcement of solutions to climate change by coming to a consensus with various authorities regarding aspects such as land allocation to establish alternative sources of energy. Additionally, such instruments enable them to ensure that the development activities do not harm the local communities, including contamination of their sources of water. The treaties ensure that not only does the community benefit from the developments oriented towards conservation of climate, but also, no conflict arises between the two parties (Grossman 8). Therefore, the agreements give indigenous communities the voice as well as gaining their approval regarding various measures aimed at curbing the issue of climate change.