Systemic fossil fuel expansion threatens 20% of Amazon, Congo, SE Asia forests—integrated land-use and energy policies needed to break extractive cycles

Indigenous communities have long resisted fossil fuel expansion on their lands, as seen in the Achuar and Waorani resistance to oil drilling in Ecuador and Peru. Their land stewardship practices, such as agroforestry and controlled burns, have maintained forest biodiversity for centuries. However, their knowledge is systematically excluded from policy frameworks, which privilege Western scientific and economic models. The failure to integrate Indigenous land tenure into fossil-free zone policies perpetuates cycles of dispossession and environmental degradation.

The overlap between fossil fuel blocks and tropical forests is not accidental but a legacy of colonial land grabs and post-colonial resource extraction. The Congo Basin’s oil blocks, for example, trace back to 19th-century rubber concessions and later uranium mining for nuclear programs. Structural adjustment programs in the 1980s forced Global South nations to liberalize land markets, enabling foreign corporations to acquire vast tracts for extraction. These historical patterns reveal how colonial debt and trade imbalances continue to shape contemporary land-use conflicts.

In Latin America, the concept of *territorio* (territory) frames land as a collective right tied to cultural identity, contrasting with the Western commodification of nature. Southeast Asian activists draw parallels between palm oil expansion and fossil fuel extraction, both driven by global demand and corporate land grabs. African scholars highlight how Western conservation models, such as fortress conservation, have displaced communities in the name of biodiversity, mirroring colonial-era land seizures.

Satellite data confirms that oil and gas blocks overlap with 20% of tropical forests in the Amazon, Congo Basin, and Southeast Asia, with drilling infrastructure fragmenting ecosystems. Studies show that fossil fuel extraction in these regions increases deforestation rates by 30-50% due to road construction and human migration. Peer-reviewed research also demonstrates that Indigenous-managed lands have lower deforestation rates, challenging the assumption that economic development requires resource extraction.

Artists like the Brazilian collective *Rede Amazônia Livre* use murals and music to visualize the spiritual dimensions of deforestation, framing it as a violation of the forest’s sacredness. In Southeast Asia, Indigenous Dayak communities perform rituals to honor the spirits of the forest before logging operations, a practice that Western conservationists often dismiss as superstition. These artistic and spiritual expressions highlight the disconnect between mechanistic resource management and holistic worldviews that see forests as kin, not commodities.

Scenario modeling by the IPCC suggests that fossil-free zones could reduce deforestation by 40% by 2035 if paired with land reform and renewable energy investments. However, without addressing the political economy of extraction, such zones risk becoming greenwashing tools for corporations. Future models must incorporate Indigenous governance structures and circular economy principles to avoid replicating extractive logics. The transition also requires rethinking global trade agreements that incentivize deforestation for export-oriented agriculture.

Women and Indigenous leaders in the Amazon and Congo Basin have been at the forefront of resistance to fossil fuel expansion, yet their voices are sidelined in global climate negotiations. The marginalization of these voices is reinforced by funding structures that prioritize Western NGOs over grassroots organizations. Their exclusion from policy design perpetuates top-down solutions that fail to address root causes. Amplifying these voices requires dismantling the gatekeeping roles of international institutions and corporations.