Differentiating Indigenous Peoples from local communities under climate regimes in just energy transition: Implications for the Inuit and Sami Peoples

Abstract

The distinction between Indigenous peoples and local communities under climate regimes was initially addressed under the UNFCCC and has recently garnered renewed attention owing to energy policy changes to cope with rapid climate change such as in Alaska. The Montana climate litigation demonstrates the possibility of harmonizing Indigenous peoples and local communities by clearly identifying the unique climate-related indigenous culture and avoiding unintentional confrontation, given the difficulty of making clear distinctions in modern society and garnering sympathy from the local community against litigations that solely seek indigenous rights, but Indigenous peoples themselves may not see the need for harmony. Indigenous and Community Conserved Areas (ICCAs) is one approach to achieve a 30 by 30 target under the CBD by designating Indigenous peoples’ original land but may not be beneficial to assert inherent rights or the best way to achieve harmony if they work with local communities. The local community of Finnish non-Sami reindeer herders will not receive protection under the ICCPR unlike Sami herders in Norway, if a case similar to Norway’s Fosen case occurs. As just energy transition alone does not automatically reflect the perspectives of Indigenous peoples, green colonialism could easily occur when their rights are not considered.