Global Forest Coalition

UTRECHT, 6 October, 2026 — At least 130 civil society organisations, networks and other stakeholders are calling on the Supervisory Body of the Paris Agreement Crediting Mechanism (PACM) to immediately suspend the first carbon credits issued under the UN’s new “high-integrity” Article 6.4 carbon market and commission an independent, comprehensive assessment of the project behind them.

The call comes as the Article 6.4 Supervisory Body meets in Bonn from 5–9 October for its 23rd meeting (SBM 023). At the centre of the controversy is PoA 10471, a Myanmar biomass cookstove programme backed by one of South Korea’s largest companies, which, in February 2026, became the first activity to receive credit issuance under Article 6.4. 

In an open letter signed by 130 civil society organisations, the groups call on the Supervisory Body to immediately suspend the project’s credits and undertake an independent assessment, citing serious concerns about environmental integrity, verification, human rights and other safeguards and stakeholder participation, particularly given the radically changed conditions in Myanmar following the February 2021 attempted military coup.

“The first project to receive credits under the UN’s new ‘high-integrity’ carbon market was implemented in communities experiencing war, displacement and grave human rights abuses, while independent analysis indicates that, even if the project had been implemented under ideal conditions, its claimed emissions reductions may still have been substantially overstated,” said Zaw Tuseng, foundation director of the Myanmar Policy Institute. “This is not simply a question of how many credits should be issued. It raises fundamental questions about whether carbon credits can represent genuine climate action when they are separated from the political and social realities in which projects operate.”

The concerns are wide-ranging. The June 2026 report Carbon Credits Under Fire: Myanmar, Crimes Against Humanity, and the Crisis of Credibility Facing the UN’s “High-Integrity” Carbon Markets documents serious concerns about the project’s operation amid conflict and human rights abuses, as well as safeguards, stakeholder participation and the wider conditions in which its claimed emissions reductions were generated. 

PoA 10471 was designed and registered before the February 2021 attempted military coup, but continued operating during all but one month of the monitoring period underlying the first Article 6.4 issuance, from January 2021 to May 2022. Its first six component activities covered 27 townships in Myanmar’s central Dry Zone, where communities experienced documented war crimes and crimes against humanity, including attacks on civilians, forced displacement, the burning of homes and public buildings, and conflict-related sexual and gender-based violence.

Project documentation identifies the Dry Zone Greening Department and other Myanmar government authorities in connection with implementation and data collection. The Dry Zone Greening Department operates under the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Conservation, which came under military control following the takeover, and is a major income earner for the junta through gemstone mining and other resource exploitation. 

The project’s monitoring documentation does not acknowledge these fundamental changes in the political, administrative and security environment or consider how they may have affected implementation and the claimed mitigation outcomes. However, verification reports indicate that security conditions prevented the verification team from conducting the required on-site inspections of monitored households in any of the project’s implementation areas. Instead, the verification team was granted an exceptional exemption and permitted remote inspection. Instead of site visits, the verification team conducted video interviews through Zoom with just 22 end-users from an office in Yangon. Only two of the interviewees were women.

Meanwhile, two independent analyses of the project’s emissions reductions calculations have raised substantial concerns about the quantity of credits issued: an earlier analysis estimated that the project was over-credited by a factor of 14 under the CDM, while more recent analysis estimates that it is still likely to be over-credited by approximately a factor of seven under Article 6.4’s supposedly tougher rules. These findings further undermine the claim that the first credits issued under the new mechanism represent genuine and verifiable emissions reductions.

“Environmental integrity cannot be reduced to accounting methodology alone. Simply refining the methodology used to calculate emissions reductions and slapping on a “high integrity” label does not guarantee that the resulting credits represent genuine mitigation, especially when they are so completely separated from the political, social and environmental circumstances in which they are supposedly generated,” said Oli Munnion, Global Forest Coalition (GFC)’s Climate Justice and Forests Campaign Coordinator. “The Paris Agreement Crediting Mechanism has fallen at the first hurdle. The Supervisory Body must immediately suspend this credit issuance and investigate how on earth it was approved in the first place.”

The organisations also raise concerns about safeguards and participation. Women and girls are presented as important beneficiaries of the cookstove programme, yet women in the project areas have experienced displacement, severe restrictions on movement and conflict-related sexual and gender-based violence. Of the 231 households surveyed for monitoring purposes, 80% of recorded heads of household were men, raising questions about whether women—whose unpaid labour the project depends on—were adequately represented as decision-makers rather than primarily as beneficiaries.

The organisations are calling on the Supervisory Body to immediately suspend any further issuance, transfer or use of credits associated with PoA 10471 and to commission an independent, comprehensive assessment of the project and the process through which the credits were approved. The assessment should examine the project’s environmental integrity, monitoring and verification, safeguards and stakeholder participation, as well as the impact of Myanmar’s radically changed political, administrative and security circumstances. 

The organisations are also calling for the assessment to consider the best available evidence and real-world conditions, rather than treating formal methodological compliance or previous validation and verification as conclusive, and for its findings to be made public. Where the evidence shows that applicable requirements were not met or that the credits do not represent genuine and verifiable emissions reductions, the Supervisory Body should take appropriate corrective action, including revoking credits already issued and preventing the project from participating further in the mechanism.

In support of these calls, a Formal Stakeholder Communication was also submitted to the Article 6.4 Supervisory Body in response to its call for stakeholder input on matters before SBM 023. The submission sets out the concerns in detail and calls for PoA 10471 to be considered under the relevant agenda items, including Agenda item 4.3 on issuance.

PoA 10471 is the first activity to receive issuance under the Article 6.4 mechanism and therefore represents an early test of what the mechanism’s stated commitment to “high integrity” means in practice.

“Climate mitigation cannot be based on human rights abuses and questionable carbon accounting. If the Article 6.4 mechanism is to have credibility, its first project must be assessed against the realities in which the claimed emissions reductions were generated, not simply against calculations on paper,” said Sooyoun Han, Plan 1.5’s Policy Activist.

From the forests of the Amazon to the streets of Puyo, FOSPA brought together Indigenous Peoples, Afro-descendants, local communities, and social movements to confront extractivism and build alternatives.

By: Andrea Echeverri Sierra

For six days in August, thousands of people from across the Amazon and beyond gathered in Puyo, Ecuador, to share experiences, strategies and hopes for the future of the region. Indigenous Peoples, Afro-descendant communities, social movements, youth, women, academics and civil society organisations came together through assemblies, workshops, ceremonies, cultural activities and a powerful march through the streets of the city.

The gathering took place against a stark reality. The Amazon is approaching a dangerous tipping point. Once imagined as an almost infinite forest, the region is increasingly threatened by deforestation, degradation, fires and global warming, with potentially devastating consequences for people, biodiversity and the climate system.

Yet FOSPA was not a gathering defined by despair. Again and again, what emerged from conversations, meals, ceremonies, a joint action plan and collective action was a sense that resistance is already happening, and that another future remains possible when people organise together.

The Amazon bioregion— larger than the European Union and shared across nine countries—once felt infinite to its ancestral guardians. Today, however, it stands at the precipice of a dangerous tipping point, one that seems straight out of a post-apocalyptic film, the rainforest is rapidly shifting toward savannization. This impending ecological collapse threatens not only the Amazonian web of life, but the entire planetary stability. The consequences are catastrophic: a global climate feedback loop that would render international climate targets entirely unattainable; the disruption of atmospheric circulation, triggering widespread droughts across South America and altering weather patterns as far away as the Asian monsoons and Antarctic ice systems; and a catastrophic loss of socio-agrobiodiversity across ecological, cultural, pharmaceutical, and economic dimensions.

Although there are localized tipping points, such as the savannization in specific regions of Bolivia and Brazil, and the loss of ecological connectivity between the Andes and the Amazon, we find ourselves at a critical and extremely fragile moment in which we must act to prevent the Amazon region from reaching a critical threshold. With scientific models warning that this tipping point could be reached between 2040 and 2050 if current trends of deforestation, degradation, fires, and global warming persist, immediate and transformative action is imperative. Amidst this urgency, grassroots hope and resistance shine through numerous regional and local initiatives.

The Global Forest Coalition (GFC) has joined the Pan-Amazonian Social Forum (FOSPA) at different times. FOSPA is a regional, autonomous, and pluralistic platform that brings together Indigenous Peoples, Afro-descendants, social movements, civil society, and academia from the nine countries of the Amazon basin. Formed in 2002 within the framework of the World Social Forum, it has become a key space for political coordination and action to defend life, territories, and justice in the face of the climate crisis and extractivism.

FOSPA 2026. GFC

Although FOSPA is an ongoing process, its most visible milestones to date are reflected in its twelve editions held in various countries of the Amazon basin. In 2026, GFC participated in the 12th edition of FOSPA in Puyo (Ecuadorian Amazon) from August 16 to 21, with the participation of thousands of people from 32 countries, primarily from countries within the basin. The gathering was rich and diverse, including field trips to identify impacts and celebrate alternatives, a market and food fair, a youth camp, cultural and artistic activities, workshops, working groups, plenary sessions, ceremonies and spiritual guidance, Indigenous People´s and women’s gatherings, self-organized events, a large march; and many shared experiences during dinners and meetings to harmonize our feelings about life into new plans and strategies.

The vibrant convergence of ancestral wisdom, daily resistance, and unwavering solidarity through walking the territories, sharing meals, listening to Indigenous elders, youth, and women in spirited assemblies, and participating in spiritual ceremonies is striking, it leaves an indelible mark. Hearing firsthand accounts from defenders whose very cosmogonies, rivers, and bodies are targeted by corporate extractivism shifts our understanding from a conceptual awareness of crisis to a visceral, embodied recognition of interconnected struggles. FOSPA reinforced the conviction that defending the Amazon is not merely an environmental task; it is an urgent defense of plural ways of living, feeling, knowing, and being.

It is deeply moving to witness unity literally in motion, with everyone working tirelessly for a living Amazon and honoring its diverse peoples and cultures. It became clear that no one saves anyone else, nor does anyone save themselves alone; we truly need each other. We need a committed academia, radical church movements standing firm for the transformation of a model that exploits bodies and territories, and civil society organizations that vibrate with life, embracing their role of support rather than usurping the voices of those who dwell there. We need organized women and youth grounding their agendas, Indigenous Peoples constantly demonstrating dignity and a deep, harmonious kinship with Mother Earth, and resilient, joyful Quilombolas and afrodescendents communities bringing a stubborn hope through their words and actions. We need Amazonian city dwellers, artistic collectives, environmental organizations, producer associations… In moments like these, we know that by coming together, we can save the Amazon.

Faced with the multiple problems confronting the peoples and ecosystems of the region—and the world—we require diverse and coordinated struggles from different perspectives. In particular, our emphasis on this occasion, together with members and allies of our coalition, was focused on strengthening alliances and joint actions to curb the impact of industrial agribusiness and livestock production, as well as on promoting alternatives to these practices.

The conversion of forests and jungles to make way for new cattle grazing areas and crops such as soy, corn, and oil palm is the main cause of the accelerated loss of vegetation cover. Evidence is alarming; according to a 2023 report from the Amazon Georeferenced Socio-Environmental Information Network (RAISG) and the MapBiomas network, three out of every four hectares deforested in the Amazon over the last four decades have been used for cattle ranching, which accounts for 75% of accumulated deforestation. This figure becomes even more significant when we consider that, of the approximately 86 million hectares (Mha) of natural vegetation deforested between 1985 and 2022 in the Amazon region, 66.5 Mha were converted into pastureland, while of the additional 19.4 million hectares used for agricultural purposes, a large proportion is used for the production of soy or corn, inputs which are then used to feed the same livestock industry.

During a self-organized event, co-convened by GFC, our members CEDENMA, Brighter Green, and CIPCA, together with Acción Ecológica and GRAIN, we were able to hear diverse perspectives on these impacts in Colombia, Ecuador, Bolivia,Brazil and throughout Latin America. Among the key issues were: the serious harm caused by industrial livestock and soy production to Indigenous and peasant communities, which jeopardizes entire worldviews by affecting rivers, soils, and spiritual practices, and which generates sick, sad, displaced bodies and corporate memories; the links between industrial livestock and paramilitarism and drug trafficking in countries like Colombia; the strategies of persecution, harassment, and co-optation deployed by companies and governments against land defenders; the foreign ownership of land and water; the persistent dependence on an export-oriented extractive model; and, in short, the predatory practices of the livestock industry. All of this led us to recognize,along with around 24 organizations participating in this and other activities convened by this same group, that unsustainable livestock is in essence a core form of extractivism, placed on the exact same predatory footing as oil drilling and large mining.

This statement was ratified in the FOSPA Action Plan, which must guide coordinated actions until the holding of its XIII version in Colombia in 2028: “Industrial animal production is one of the main drivers of deforestation, pollution, and land grabbing, as well as human rights violations, and it is a form of extractivism that threatens our territories and ecosystems.” 

Just as there are vehement struggles against oil exploitation and mining extraction, if we want to make the future possible again in the world and in the Amazon, we must add to these necessary battles those aimed at containing the expansion of agribusiness, largely concentrated around industrial livestock farming. These insights from FOSPA directly reinforce our core campaigns and policy positions. GFC has long advocated against false solutions to climate change and exposed the devastating drivers of deforestation and forest degradation. The lessons learned in Puyo validate our strategic focus on challenging corporate-led industrial livestock and agro-industrial models as central pillars of our work on just transitions.

FOSPA 2026. GFC

Environmental justice cannot be achieved while trade agreements, international financing, and corporate supply chains continue to reward land grabbing and ecosystem destruction under the guise of “feed security” or “green growth.” We take away from FOSPA a reinforced mandate to strengthen internationalist solidarity, bridge local community resistance with global policy advocacy, and amplify the voices of women, Indigenous Peoples, and local communities who champion genuine, rights-based alternatives such as agroecology, food sovereignty, and community forest management.

The challenges facing the Amazon and our global climate are immense, but FOSPA did not leave us paralyzed by the prospect of ecological collapse. Instead, it filled us with a deep sense of agency, hope, and concrete collective action.

The path forward lies in our unity. As the inspiring rallying cry echoed through the streets of Puyo. We are not the generations destined to watch the Amazon die in a slow, agonizing collapse. We are the generations choosing to stand together, bridging local resistance with global solidarity, to heal our relationship with the Earth and secure a vibrant, living future for all.

Português abaixo

New report documents decades of land dispossession, water depletion, Cerrado destruction and conflict as Aperam receives €250 million financing package

21 September, 2026 — A new, in-depth investigation published today exposes the devastating social and environmental costs of Aperam BioEnergia’s monoculture eucalyptus plantations in Minas Gerais, Brazil, which it uses to produce charcoal, biochar and “green steel”. The co-authors of the investigation have issued an urgent call for all investment in the company to be halted.

The report, Dry Streams in an Ocean of Eucalyptus: Aperam BioEnergia’s Green Steel and Carbon Removal Illusion, based on extensive field research and interviews with traditional and Quilombola communities and public officials, reveals that Aperam’s business model—promoted as a climate and sustainability solution—has been imposed through large-scale deforestation, leading to the loss of biodiversity and the depletion of water resources in the Jequitinhonha Valley. The report documents a drastic drop in water tables, drying of springs and rivers and the collapse of traditional agricultural and pastoral livelihoods.

Local communities recount decades of land dispossession, intimidation and health risks linked to pesticide use and air pollution from Aperam’s operations. Many now face food insecurity, economic hardship and a worrying increase in health problems, including cancer. The investigation also highlights the severe shortcomings of voluntary certification schemes and international financiers, such as the International Finance Corporation (IFC), whose recent €250-million financing package is enabling Aperam’s continued expansion despite clear evidence of harm.

“Aperam’s operations are being presented as part of the green transition, but what is being ‘greened’ is a polluting, extractive industrial model.” said Jana Uemura, coordinator of the Global Forest Coalition’s Climate Justice and Forests Campaign and the Biomass Action Network’s Latin America Working Group. “Eucalyptus plantations, charcoal and biochar are being sold as climate solutions, backed by international finance and carbon markets, while communities and ecosystems bear the costs.”

The investigation’s key demand is unequivocal: all financial support, investment and sourcing relationships with Aperam must be suspended immediately. The report calls on the IFC, World Bank Group and all other financiers to cancel contractual arrangements and commit to no future support for Aperam. Certification schemes such as the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and Puro.earth are urged to suspend Aperam’s certifications pending full investigations of community complaints.

“Justice for affected communities and the protection of the Cerrado’s unique biodiversity must take precedence over corporate profit and greenwashing,” the report concludes. It calls for a redirection of investment toward community-led restoration, agroecology and water security initiatives in the Jequitinhonha Valley, and a transition away from all carbon fuel-based energy.

The full report, published by the Global Forest Coalition with support from Biofuelwatch, the EPN’s Biomass Action Network and the Hands Off Mother Earth (HOME) Alliance, is available in English and Portuguese.

Media Contacts: 

Jana Uemera (Eng/Por): jana.uemura@globalforestcoalition.org

Ismail Wolff (Eng): ismail.wolff@globalforestcoalition.org

About the Investigation: This report centers the experiences and demands of the Jequitinhonha Valley’s traditional and Quilombola communities. It exposes the urgent need for a paradigm shift in climate and development finance, away from harmful monocultures and false climate solutions, and toward justice, community rights and ecological restoration.

Novo relatório documenta décadas de expropriação de terras, esgotamento hídrico, destruição do Cerrado e conflitos, enquanto a Aperam recebe um pacote de financiamento de € 250 milhões

21 de setembro de 2026 — Uma nova pesquisa aprofundada, publicada hoje, expõe os custos sociais e ambientais devastadores das plantações de eucalipto em monocultura da Aperam BioEnergia em Minas Gerais, Brasil, utilizadas para produzir carvão vegetal, biochar e “aço verde”. Os coautores da investigação fizeram um apelo urgente para que todo investimento na empresa seja interrompido.

O relatório, intitulado Córregos secos em um oceano de eucalipto: Aço verde e a ilusão da remoção de carbono da Aperam BioEnergia, baseia-se em extensa pesquisa de campo e entrevistas com integrantes de comunidades tradicionais e quilombolas e representantes do poder público. O documento revela que o modelo de negócios da Aperam — promovido como uma solução climática e de sustentabilidade — foi imposto por meio de desmatamento em larga escala, levando à perda de biodiversidade e ao esgotamento dos recursos hídricos no Vale do Jequitinhonha. O relatório documenta uma queda drástica nos níveis do lençol freático, a secagem de nascentes e rios e o colapso dos meios de subsistência tradicionais ligados à agricultura e à pecuária tradicionais.

Comunidades locais relatam décadas de expropriação de terras, intimidação e riscos à saúde, especialmente de mulheres e crianças, associados ao uso de agrotóxicos e à poluição do ar decorrente das operações da Aperam. Muitas pessoas agora enfrentam insegurança alimentar, dificuldades econômicas e um aumento preocupante de problemas de saúde, incluindo casos de câncer. A investigação também destaca as graves falhas dos sistemas de certificação voluntária e dos financiadores internacionais, como a International Finance Corporation (IFC), cujo recente pacote de financiamento de € 250 milhões está viabilizando a continuidade da expansão da Aperam, apesar de evidências claras de danos.

“As operações da Aperam estão sendo apresentadas como parte da transição verde, mas o que está sendo ‘pintado de verde’ é um modelo industrial poluente e extrativista”, disse Janaina Uemura, coordenadora da campanha de Justiça Climática e Florestas da GFC e do Grupo de Trabalho Latinoamericano e do Caribe da Rede de Ação Contra a Biomassa Industrial. “Plantações de eucalipto, carvão vegetal e biochar estão sendo vendidos como soluções climáticas, sustentados pelo financiamento internacional e pelos mercados de carbono, enquanto comunidades e ecossistemas arcam com os custos.”

A principal exigência da investigação é inequívoca: todo apoio financeiro, bem como todos os investimentos e as relações de fornecimento com a Aperam devem ser suspensos imediatamente. O relatório insta a IFC, o Grupo Banco Mundial e todos os demais financiadores a encerrarem seus vínculos contratuais e a se comprometerem a não oferecer apoio futuro à Aperam. Sistemas de certificação, como o Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) e a Puro.earth, são instados a suspender as certificações da Aperam até que as denúncias das comunidades sejam plenamente investigadas.

“A justiça para as comunidades afetadas e a proteção da biodiversidade única do Cerrado devem prevalecer sobre o lucro corporativo e o greenwashing“, conclui o relatório. O documento defende o redirecionamento de investimentos para iniciativas de restauração lideradas pelas comunidades, de agroecologia e de segurança hídrica no Vale do Jequitinhonha, bem como para uma transição para abandonar todas as fontes de energia baseadas em combustíveis de carbono.

O relatório completo, publicado pela Global Forest Coalition com o apoio da Rede de Ação contra a Biomassa (da EPN), da Biofuelwatch e da aliança Hands Off Mother Earth (HOME), está disponível em inglês e português.

Contatos para a imprensa:

Sobre a investigação: Este relatório coloca no centro as experiências e reivindicações das comunidades tradicionais e quilombolas do Vale do Jequitinhonha. Expõe a necessidade urgente de uma mudança de paradigma no financiamento climático e para o desenvolvimento, afastando-se de monoculturas prejudiciais e falsas soluções climáticas e voltando-se para a justiça, os direitos das comunidades e a restauração ecológica