Three years on, the Forests, People, Climate initiative is struggling to say what it is—and why that matters more than anyone wants to admit. Since the Glasgow Climate Pact’s 2021 pledge to halt and reverse deforestation by 2030, major philanthropic foundations have mobilised billions of dollars behind that commitment. The Climate and Land Use Alliance (CLUA), a collaborative of six philanthropies, pioneered the donor-collaborative approach and subsequently played a central role in creating the larger Forests, People, Climate (FPC) initiative. Together they shape the strategic alignment of some of the world’s largest private climate and land-use grant portfolios—determining which geographies and communities receive support and setting the terms of engagement between international philanthropy and forest-dependent peoples across the tropics. How these players collaborate has direct consequences for whether the global pledge to protect forests is met, and for the hundreds of millions of people whose lands, livelihoods, and futures depend on it. Over the past two decades, I have had a front-row seat to this evolution. I was there in the early days of CLUA, as we attempted something both pragmatic and ambitious: align strategies without surrendering institutional autonomy. FPC was born out of that lineage, as a recognition that the CLUA model might no longer be sufficient. The urgency of climate change had intensified. Indigenous Peoples and local communities (IPLCs) had moved from the margins to the centre of discourse. And large-scale philanthropic commitments, particularly post-Glasgow, sought new mechanisms to do grant making differently. Three years on, however, FPC…This article was originally published on Mongabay

From Conservation news via This RSS Feed.