The Conflict Over Carbon Credits in Northern Tanzania
Namnyak, a Maasai herder from northern Tanzania, is deeply concerned about a carbon credit scheme tied to Volkswagen. This initiative, criticized by various non-governmental organizations (NGOs) as “greenwashing,” threatens to disrupt the traditional way of life of her community. Under this program, local Maasai are being offered financial incentives to implement a strict “rotational grazing” system, which aims to allow grass to grow longer and absorb more carbon dioxide.
The underlying principle of this scheme is that companies like Volkswagen can offset their carbon emissions by purchasing these carbon credits. However, many researchers and NGOs question the validity of such programs, arguing that they often cause harm to local communities without delivering significant environmental benefits. Instead, they serve as a means for corporations to continue polluting while appearing environmentally responsible.
The carbon credit initiative in northern Tanzania is managed by Volkswagen’s partner, Soils for the Future Tanzania (SftFTZ), covering the districts of Longido and Monduli. This area spans 16,000 square kilometers—approximately 20 times the size of New York City. For Namnyak, a 33-year-old mother of three from Longido, the concept feels absurd. The Maasai have traditionally practiced sustainable land use, rotating their grazing based on weather patterns and seasons for centuries.
Many locals suspect that the company has ulterior motives and may eventually take over their land. “It doesn’t matter how much money they give us. We rely on our land for our cattle, crops, and beekeeping. This is our lives, and the future generations depend on it,” she told AFP.
A Questionable Approach
The term “implausible” was used by Survival International, an NGO supporting Indigenous communities globally, to describe a similar project in neighboring Kenya. Their 2023 study found that the new grazing regime was not effectively implemented, with vegetation continuing to deteriorate in large parts of the project area.
In September, Verra, the primary international body that validates carbon credit projects, suspended credits from a major forestry project in Zimbabwe, where Volkswagen was also a client. Verra stated that the benefits of the project had been exaggerated. However, Verra has yet to audit the project in Tanzania or a competing carbon credit scheme proposed by the US-based Nature Conservancy in the same region.
A Scam or a Solution?
Several researchers and NGOs believe the Maasai are unwitting participants in a large-scale “greenwashing” scheme by Volkswagen. Maasai lawyer Joseph Oleshangay called the initiative a “scam,” stating, “Ultimately, there is nothing done for the land, not even a tree is being planted.”
“Why is Volkswagen not doing this in Frankfurt or New York? Because they feel people here are easier to manipulate,” he added.
SftFTZ offers the local Maasai $2 per hectare to sign a 40-year contract, under which they promise to move their cattle roughly every two weeks. Some have agreed, as this amount represents a significant sum in local terms. “If someone gives you free money, who will refuse it?” said Namnyak.
Sherie Gakii, advocacy officer for Greenpeace, argues that such projects exist solely to let companies like Volkswagen “continue polluting and making big profits on the backs of indigenous people trying to protect their ancestral land.”
Corporate Response
Volkswagen’s environmental arm, ClimatePartner, strongly disagrees with these criticisms. It told AFP that the carbon credits would be “based on scientifically validated measurements,” including regular soil samples to ensure that carbon capture was increasing.
A Verra spokesperson defended carbon credit schemes as “one of the few vehicles that bring sustained investment into rural areas.” The SftFTZ contract promises to give 51 percent of the value of all carbon credits sold to the local community.
However, the Maasai International Solidarity Alliance, an NGO, questions whether this money will ever materialize and has called for a five-year pause on all such schemes until they can be properly evaluated.
Benja Faecks of think tank Carbon Market Watch told AFP the focus should be on getting companies to stop polluting in the first place. “When a company like Volkswagen or Danone or Nestle can buy these credits and claim they are carbon neutral… that’s misleading and false,” said Faecks. “Volkswagen should focus on phasing out the internal combustion engine.”
