{"id":59524,"date":"2025-11-13T09:12:14","date_gmt":"2025-11-13T09:12:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/africa\/?p=59524"},"modified":"2025-11-19T09:16:45","modified_gmt":"2025-11-19T09:16:45","slug":"soil-carbon-credits-in-tanzania-are-a-climate-solution-built-on-sand-and-kenya-could-be-next","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/africa\/en\/blog\/59524\/soil-carbon-credits-in-tanzania-are-a-climate-solution-built-on-sand-and-kenya-could-be-next\/","title":{"rendered":"Soil carbon credits in Tanzania are a climate solution built on sand \u2013 and Kenya could be next"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t\t\n\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n \t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\tStop auctioning Maasai land to carbon traders and trophy hunters\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

Demand the Tanzanian government protect the rights of the Maasai, stop these evictions and prioritise real solutions to the climate crisis<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t \n SIGN NOW\n <\/a>\n \t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/section>\n\t\n

In the fight against climate change, not all solutions are created equal. Some are clever. Some are flawed. And some \u2013 like the soil carbon credit schemes spreading across East Africa \u2013 are simply indefensible.<\/p>\n\n

At first glance, these projects seem like a win-win: protect the land, store carbon in the soil, and generate income for local communities. But when you read the fine print and speak to those who are involved, a different picture emerges \u2013 one where climate action becomes a cover for land control and exploitation.<\/p>\n\n

And this time, Kenya could be next.<\/p>\n\n

Two major projects are at the centre of the controversy in Tanzania.<\/p>\n\n

The Longido and Monduli Rangelands Carbon Project (LMRCP)<\/strong><\/a>, run by Soils for the Future Tanzania with Volkswagen ClimatePartner, seeks to control nearly 970,000 hectares of Maasai rangelands for 40 years. According to the Maasai International Solidarity Alliance (MISA), contracts were signed without legal advice or translation, and often without meaningful participation from women or youth. The project imposes rigid 14-day rotational grazing <\/strong>schedules \u2013 rules that directly clash with the centuries-old Maasai practice of nomadic herding, a system essential to surviving East Africa\u2019s arid landscapes.<\/p>\n\n

The second initiative<\/a>, the Resilient Tarangire Ecosystem Project (RTEP)<\/strong>, led by The Nature Conservancy with local partners, operates across roughly 830,000 hectares<\/strong> within a broader 3.5-million-hectare ecosystem<\/strong>. Together with the Longido and Monduli Rangelands Carbon Project, these schemes target nearly two million hectares <\/strong>of Maasai territory \u2013 an area larger than Qatar. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n

Media and community reports<\/a> indicate that participating villages receive as little as US $2 per hectare<\/strong> under 40-year contracts<\/strong>, while carbon credits from the same lands can fetch up to ten times that amount<\/strong> on global markets. <\/p>\n\n

Supporters claim these initiatives store carbon in soils while improving livelihoods. But the science tells another story.<\/p>\n\n

The Food and Agriculture Organization<\/a> notes that soil carbon sequestration in drylands is highly uncertain and difficult to sustain. Peer-reviewed research<\/a> further shows that carbon gains from grazing management are inconsistent and easily reversed by drought or erosion. Despite these uncertainties, communities are being asked to alter their entire way of life \u2013 at enormous social and economic cost \u2013 for climate results that may never materialise.<\/p>\n\n

Tanzania\u2019s 2022 carbon trading regulations<\/a> were designed for forests, not rangelands. That leaves soil carbon projects operating in a grey zone: unregulated, loosely monitored, and easily abused.<\/p>\n\n

In Kenya, the government has introduced the Climate Change (Carbon Markets) Regulations, 2024<\/a>, its first comprehensive framework to guide carbon trading. Yet despite this progress, the rules remain silent on soil carbon<\/strong> and unclear on community land governance<\/strong>. In counties like Kajiado<\/strong><\/a> and Laikipia<\/strong>, new soil-carbon projects are quietly emerging under the radar, locking communities into long-term agreements with little transparency or oversight. The law outlines how credits should be registered and revenues shared but says little about how projects should protect Indigenous tenure or pastoral mobility. This gap leaves space for powerful carbon investors to move faster than regulators, echoing the same power imbalances now unfolding in Tanzania.<\/p>\n\n

Some contracts even penalise \u201ccarbon leakage\u201d<\/a> \u2013 meaning if livestock from neighbouring areas graze on project land, community payments are reduced. This pits once-cooperative villages against each other and erodes traditions of shared grazing that have sustained pastoral life for centuries.<\/p>\n\n

Growing investor interest is turning Kenya\u2019s pastoral rangelands into the next testing ground for soil-carbon markets. From Kajiado to Laikipia, new deals are being brokered under the banner of sustainability, yet few have undergone proper community consultation or environmental due diligence. Without transparency and meaningful participation, Kenya risks repeating Tanzania\u2019s mistakes under the cover of \u201cgreen growth.\u201d<\/p>\n\n

Although Kenya\u2019s regulatory framework exists, its implementation in rangelands remains largely untested, and enforcement capacity is weak<\/a>. Without clear guidance on soil-carbon measurement, FPIC compliance, and pastoral land tenure, communities could once again bear the burden of climate solutions they did not design.<\/p>\n\n

The Maasai International Solidarity Alliance (MISA) has called for a five-year moratorium<\/a> on soil carbon projects in pastoral regions. This is not anti-climate action; it\u2019s a call for responsibility.<\/p>\n\n

Governments and investors must:<\/p>\n\n