Is FPIC working in conservation?
Sep 8
/
Adam Barlow
Quick answer
Eight peer reviewed papers published between 2024 and 2026 examine Free, Prior, and Informed Consent in the specific context of conservation, carbon markets, and biodiversity governance. Several document what happens when FPIC is skipped or done poorly: a forced eviction in Kenya, carbon contracts signed without community consent in Brazil and Peru, and conservation areas established with no consultation at all in Laos. Others set out how to do FPIC properly, from a fourteen-principle framework for conservation researchers through to a legal model for blue carbon projects built on strict FPIC compliance. A recurring finding across the set is that FPIC is most often treated as a legal obligation for Indigenous Peoples but applied inconsistently, or not at all, for the local communities who depend on the same land and resources. Each paper is summarised below with its citation and a direct link.
Contents
-
FPIC applied and withheld in protected areas
-
FPIC in carbon markets and climate finance
-
Guidance for doing FPIC properly
-
FPIC in wider biodiversity governance
-
FAQ
FPIC applied and withheld in protected areas
Larsen, P.B. and Chanthavisouk, C., "Free, prior, and informed consent, local officials, and changing biodiversity governance in Hin Nam No, Laos," Conservation Biology (2024).
This study examines an FPIC process tied to a prospective World Heritage Site nomination for Hin Nam No National Park in Laos, focusing on the role local officials played as mediators between the community and a top-down governance system. The authors found that local officials, a voice often missing from FPIC literature, helped secure commitments to address long-standing community grievances and reconcile conservation with development. The paper argues that conservation practice is shaped by local discourses and relationships that create real opportunities to tailor consent processes to context. A single template does not fit every situation.
Citation: Larsen, P.B. and Chanthavisouk, C. (2024) 'Free, prior, and informed consent, local officials, and changing biodiversity governance in Hin Nam No, Laos', Conservation Biology, 38(6), e14388. doi: 10.1111/cobi.14388.
Link: https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14388
Link: https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14388
Mau Forest, Kobei, D.M., Luari, S.L., Carroll, D., Gougsa, S., Pratt, V. and Redvers, N., "'Removing an Ogiek from the Forest is like removing a fish from water': A qualitative examination on Ogiek community impacts from forced land eviction for conservation," PLOS Global Public Health (2025).
This study documents the well-being impacts of forced land evictions on Ogiek Peoples in Kenya, based on twenty-six interviews and a sharing circle carried out with the community. The authors identify the eviction as a clear violation of Article 10 of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, since it took place with no free, prior, and informed consent to relocate. The paper calls on conservation organisations to make funding conditional on recognition of Indigenous land rights, and to withdraw support from projects tied to forced evictions.
Citation: Mau Forest, Kobei, D.M., Luari, S.L., Carroll, D., Gougsa, S., Pratt, V. and Redvers, N. (2025) '"Removing an Ogiek from the Forest is like removing a fish from water": A qualitative examination on Ogiek community impacts from forced land eviction for conservation', PLOS Global Public Health, 5(6), e0004460. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0004460.
Link: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0004460
Link: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0004460
FPIC in carbon markets and climate finance
Cubas-Báez, A., Sunderlin, W., Larson, A.M. and Frechette, A., "From promises to practice: Persistent challenges in safeguarding local rights in forest carbon market initiatives," CABI Reviews (2025).
This review examined 94 sources on forest carbon market initiatives across the Global South, proposing an eight-principle framework for assessing their impact on the rights and well-being of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities. The authors document specific cases where carbon contracts were signed without proper FPIC, including in Brazil's Alto Rio Guamá Indigenous Territory and Peru's Cordillera Azul National Park, where legal action was taken against the government for profiting from carbon credits without securing consent from Indigenous Kichwa communities. The review finds that despite the Cancun Safeguards of 2010 committing forest carbon initiatives to protect community rights, implementation continues to fall short across the cases studied.
Citation: Cubas-Báez, A., Sunderlin, W., Larson, A.M. and Frechette, A. (2025) 'From promises to practice: Persistent challenges in safeguarding local rights in forest carbon market initiatives', CABI Reviews, 20(1), 0025. doi: 10.1079/cabireviews.2025.0025.
Link: https://doi.org/10.1079/cabireviews.2025.0025
Link: https://doi.org/10.1079/cabireviews.2025.0025
Redvers, N., Chan, J., Odochao, S., Pratt, V., Sim, J., Gougsa, S., Kobei, D.M. and Willetts, L., "Carbon markets: a new form of colonialism for Indigenous Peoples?," Lancet Planetary Health (2025).
This Personal View asks whether carbon markets represent a new form of colonialism for Indigenous Peoples, given their continued exclusion from decision making despite being key stewards of biodiverse landscapes. The authors set this exclusion against the scale of the voluntary carbon market, projected to grow from two billion dollars in 2020 to roughly 250 billion dollars by 2050, and argue that Indigenous Peoples' roles in carbon market design have not been given the weight the scale of the market demands. The paper grounds its argument in the same research group's field work with the Ogiek and Batwa Peoples.
Citation: Redvers, N., Chan, J., Odochao, S., Pratt, V., Sim, J., Gougsa, S., Kobei, D.M. and Willetts, L. (2025) 'Carbon markets: a new form of colonialism for Indigenous Peoples?', Lancet Planetary Health. doi: 10.1016/S2542-5196(25)00086-5.
Link: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(25)00086-5
Link: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(25)00086-5
Cabezas Alban, V.D., "Why Climate Finance Cannot Afford to Ignore Human Rights? Lessons from the South," Journal of Human Rights Practice (2025).
This article reviews two Colombian court cases, Pirá Piraná and Cumbal, involving REDD+ carbon offset projects implemented without adequate FPIC from Indigenous communities. In Pirá Piraná, the Constitutional Court found the REDD+ initiative violated Indigenous rights to self-determination and cultural integrity, while in Cumbal the courts invalidated the carbon credit contracts due to the absence of effective prior consultation. The paper proposes a three-pillar safeguard architecture built around legally binding FPIC, arguing that climate finance mechanisms which omit human rights protections create vulnerabilities to litigation and social unrest that undermine their own credibility.
Citation: Cabezas Alban, V.D. (2025) 'Why Climate Finance Cannot Afford to Ignore Human Rights? Lessons from the South', Journal of Human Rights Practice, 17(3), huaf020. doi: 10.1093/jhuman/huaf020. Link: https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huaf020
Cui, H. and Liu, J., "Operationalizing international human rights law for pro-poor blue carbon governance: the HCPP framework," International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management (2026).
This study proposes the HCPP framework for blue carbon governance, built around human rights protections for coastal communities, and examines the Mikoko Pamoja mangrove project in Kenya as a case where strict adherence to FPIC and accountability allowed the project to successfully finance community development through carbon credits. The paper contrasts this Empowering Model with a Rights-Recognizing Model seen in the Philippines and Indonesia, where legal recognition of rights exists on paper but bureaucratic hurdles still leave communities unable to exercise effective oversight. The framework is offered as a practical route to closing the gap between rights recognised in law and rights exercised in practice.
Citation: Cui, H. and Liu, J. (2026) 'Operationalizing international human rights law for pro-poor blue carbon governance: the HCPP framework', International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management, 18(4), pp. 1 to 17. doi: 10.1108/IJCCSM-09-2025-0345.
Link: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCCSM-09-2025-0345
Link: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCCSM-09-2025-0345
Guidance for doing FPIC properly
Newing, H., Brittain, S., Buchadas, A., del Giorgio, O., Grasham, C.F., Ferritto, R., Garcia Marquez, J.R., Khanyari, M., König, B., Kulkarni, A., Murali, R., Qin, S., Rakowski, J., Winn, F. and Ghoddousi, A., "'Participatory' conservation research involving indigenous peoples and local communities: Fourteen principles for good practice," Biological Conservation (2024).
Written by a group of researchers who work with Indigenous Peoples and local communities, this paper reviews the history of participatory research in conservation and sets out fourteen broad principles for good practice, covering the research process, data collection methods, and ethics. The principles are framed as a response to the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework's stipulations that conservation should be rights-based and grounded in traditional knowledge as well as scientific evidence. The authors treat this as a necessary next step for conservation science as a whole, applicable well beyond researchers who happen to work with Indigenous communities.
Citation: Newing, H., Brittain, S., Buchadas, A., del Giorgio, O., Grasham, C.F., Ferritto, R., Garcia Marquez, J.R., Khanyari, M., König, B., Kulkarni, A., Murali, R., Qin, S., Rakowski, J., Winn, F. and Ghoddousi, A. (2024) '"Participatory" conservation research involving indigenous peoples and local communities: Fourteen principles for good practice', Biological Conservation, 296, 110708. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2024.110708.
Link: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2024.110708
Link: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2024.110708
FPIC in wider biodiversity governance
Lumosi, C., Hazin, C., Fitzsimons, J. and Qin, S., "Understanding the Role and Challenges for Indigenous and Community-Governed Lands in Contributing to Target 3 of the Global Biodiversity Framework," Land (2025).
This study examines whether and how Indigenous and traditional territories are recognised and reported as contributors to the 30 by 30 target under the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, analysing 18 countries. The authors find that legal recognition of tenure rights, particularly ownership and stewardship rights, is the strongest predictor of whether these territories are formally counted in global conservation databases. The paper names FPIC as a principle underlying implementation of the Framework, and argues that adopting rights-based approaches, including conducting FPIC, is necessary for Indigenous and traditional territories to be recognised within national protected area systems.
Citation: Lumosi, C., Hazin, C., Fitzsimons, J. and Qin, S. (2025) 'Understanding the Role and Challenges for Indigenous and Community-Governed Lands in Contributing to Target 3 of the Global Biodiversity Framework', Land, 14(7), 1493. doi: 10.3390/land14071493.
Link: https://doi.org/10.3390/land14071493
Link: https://doi.org/10.3390/land14071493
FAQ
Do these papers show FPIC working well in conservation, or mostly failing?
Both. The Hin Nam No case in Laos and the Mikoko Pamoja carbon project in Kenya are presented as examples where FPIC, or a process built around it, produced real commitments and community benefit. The Ogiek eviction and the carbon contracts signed in Brazil, Peru, and Colombia without proper consent document the opposite outcome. FPIC works as an ongoing relationship maintained throughout a project. It fails when it is skipped, rushed, or used as a one-time formality.
Is FPIC treated the same way for Indigenous Peoples and local communities?
No. Several papers note that FPIC is a binding legal right for Indigenous Peoples under the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. For local communities it applies as best practice. The Land journal study on Target 3 of the Global Biodiversity Framework found that legal recognition of tenure rights was the strongest predictor of whether a territory's governance was properly accounted for, which points to the same underlying issue: protection depends heavily on formal legal status.
Which sector shows up most often in this research: land-based conservation or carbon markets?
Carbon markets and climate finance account for four of the eight papers in this set, more than any other single area. This reflects the rapid growth of forest and blue carbon projects and the parallel rise in documented cases where those projects proceeded without proper community consent, including specific legal disputes in Colombia, Brazil, and Peru.
Where can I read the full papers referenced in this post?
Each paper listed above includes a full Harvard style citation and a direct link. Most are published under open access licences or have a freely available version through the publisher, so the full text is reachable through the links provided without needing a journal subscription.
Latest from our blog
UNLOCK OUR FULL BEST PRACTICES AND GET CERTIFIED CONSERVATION SKILLS
Ready to go deeper?
Build practical skills for wildlife conservation by exploring our expert-led courses designed to help you apply what you’ve learned in real-world contexts. From career development to technical conservation tools, our training is built to support your next step.
EXPLORE
Success stories
Blog
Courses
Bursaries
Best practices
Team membership
Conservation Trainers Network
JOIN THE CONVERSATION
EMPOWERING CONSERVATIONISTS TO RESTORE NATURE
We give conservationists worldwide the knowledge, the skills, and the community support they need to design and deliver conservation projects that have more impact.
WILDTEAM is a registered charity in England and Wales. Number 1149465. © 2026 by WildTeam
Stay connected with WildTeam
Get practical tools, training insights, and opportunities to help you deliver more effective conservation projects.
Thanks for connecting!