Dar es Salaam. The government of Tanzania is not pleased with how carbon trading is operated and managed in the country, and now a new study launched Thursday is calling on the East African nation to halt all soil carbon projects until 2030 to allow for comprehensive community education and adequate regulatory frameworks.
During the March 7, 2025, conference on climate change and carbon trading in the city, Vice President Philip Mpango explained in no uncertain terms that “several weaknesses” characterise carbon trading in Tanzania, emphasising on improved transparency to solve the “mistrust” around carbon markets in the country.
“The conducting of this business is dominated by brokers, whose availability procedures are quite unclear,” Dr Mpango, whose office is tasked with coordinating national climate change responses, told leaders of private and public sectors during the conference. “I notice weaknesses in the coordination of carbon trade in Tanzania.”
Mr Mpango’s assessments of the controversial soil carbon markets in Tanzania are echoed in the report that the Maasai International Solidarity Alliance (MISA), an international alliance standing in solidarity with the Maasai of Ngorongoro Conservation Area and Loliondo, launched Thursday.
Titled Soil Carbon Credits: Another Wave of Land Alienation in Northern Tanzania?, the study examined the emerging soil carbon credit schemes in two districts of Longido and Monduli, in Northern Tanzania, and their potential for land alienation and adverse impacts on Maasai pastoralist communities.
READ MORE: Carbon Trading Is a False Solution for Climate Action. Here’s Why
The report examines two major soil carbon projects: the Longido and Monduli Rangelands Carbon Project (LMRCP) by Soils for the Future Tanzania Ltd (SftFTZ) funded by Volkswagen ClimatePartners, and the Resilient Tarangire Ecosystem Project (RTEP) by The Nature Conservancy (TNC), which target Longido, Monduli, and Simanjiro districts.
Adverse impacts
Both projects have received official plaudits for their potential to boost conservation measures as well as improving beneficiary villagers’ welfare. However, the MISA study concluded that the projects risk becoming yet another mechanism for land alienation, threatening Maasai’s cultural heritage, livelihoods, and food security of pastoralists.
“Without strong legal safeguards, transparent processes, and genuine community consent, these projects could exacerbate existing land conflicts, create community tensions and undermine climate justice,” the study reveals.
“Further, there is no scientific evidence that the imposed changes in grazing practices will result in additional carbon storage, rendering the carbon projects worthless for buyers,” it highlights. “MISA urges immediate action to protect Maasai rights and uphold the principles of environmental and social justice.”
Dr Ronald Ndesanjo, an independent climate, environment and sustainability expert, told this publication that he largely agrees with the study’s findings, describing free, prior, and informed consent, shortened as FPIC, as a “critical issue” in how projects are developed and implemented in local communities.
“Given the requirements of FPIC and the specific local contexts where carbon (and other) projects are carried out, it is unlikely that the projects in question adequately followed this process,” Dr Ndesanjo, the CEO of the Ecotan Consult (T) Ltd, a climate and environment consulting firm.
“The legal framework currently lacks clarity on how FPIC should be conducted, which I consider a significant limitation” as it only mentions a ‘letter of consent and participation of partners.’ “While other requirements, such as Environmental and Social Impact Assessments, may influence FPIC, they are still insufficient. For projects of this nature, I believe the law should explicitly mandate a thorough FPIC process.”
During the report-launching press conference on Thursday, Nailejileji Tipap, a co-investigator, said that one thing that was vividly clear during their investigation was the lack of free, prior, and informed consent from villagers, which she said was critical in the implementation of any project with potential adverse effects to community members.
READ MORE: Carbon Credits Trading: A New Form of Africa’s Colonialism?
“Villagers interviewed appeared very uninformed about the projects and their potential negative effects,” Ms Tipap, an advocate for indigenous women’s rights, told journalists.
“Even those villagers who have already signed the contracts seemed to be totally ignorant about the projects,” she added. “They reported very few meetings, and many of them signed the contracts after being promised some money.”
Tipap said that most discussions about the projects occur between the companies or their brokers and village authorities, with community members left out.
Saitoti Parmelo, another co-investigator, said that the carbon projects under investigation threaten to undermine community members’ control of their land as well as livestock as they introduce rotational grazing practices that will restrict traditional Maasai grazing patterns.
“These practices threaten to undermine pastoral mobility, a cornerstone of Maasai culture and rangeland sustainability,” Parmelo told a press conference. “These changes risk compromising food security and adaptive strategies against climate change.”
READ MORE: REDD+ and Local Communities’ Welfare in Tanzania: Past Lessons and Current Trends
Yonas Masiaya, another co-investigator, faulted the contracts that community members were forced to sign with carbon-trading companies, pointing out that many of them have “serious problematic areas” that bring their legality into question.
“For example, the contracts are very unclear on the issue of benefit-sharing,” Mr Masiaya, a lawyer, told journalists. “It is unclear how much the community retains from the sale of carbon credits against what is being retained by the companies. Pricing, as in how much would a ton of carbon costs, is also unclear.”
Effective coordination
During his speech at the recent conference on climate change, Dr Mpango touched on this lack of clarity and transparency in the contracts that community members and carbon companies and their brokers sign.
According to Mr Mpango, this lack of clarity makes it “very difficult to understand what is contained in the contracts between brokers and carbon buyers, and if the amount being paid is the original payment made by buyers.”
“We need to understand key contractual terms that need to be considered in the contracts, instead of allowing district councils to undertake those decisions,” he added.
READ MORE: Advancing Tanzania’s Green Transition: Why Industrial Policy Matters
Mr Mpango said that because the carbon trade involves many actors, it is very important to have an effective coordination to ensure that Tanzanians benefit from the trade instead of suffering from it.
“It’s also very important for government authorities, both the Union and the Zanzibar governments, to convene and discuss our experience so far with the carbon trading and develop a consensus on the appropriate ways in which to operate and manage carbon trading in Tanzania, and remedy reported weaknesses,” Dr Mpango said.
