From centralised confrontation to the fragmentation of conflict 

Colombia’s armed conflict is historically rooted in the civil war La Violencia (1948-1958) between the country’s Conservative Party and the Liberal Party. Following anti-communist repression in the rural areas, liberal and communist militants organised themselves into the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) in 1964. Shortly after, other leftist guerrillas formed, such as the National Liberation Army (ELN). Confrontations occurred between the government and the leftist guerrillas, with right-wing paramilitary groups being established as part of the government’s counterinsurgency strategy (University of Edinburgh, n.d.). Access to land, ideological struggle (communism versus far-right ideologies), and the marginalisation of peasant communities were at the centre of the conflict. 

After years of state and military operations in response to guerrillas and paramilitaries, the conflict in Colombia has shifted towards the country’s peripheral areas, putting those most vulnerable, Indigenous and Afro-Colombians communities, at a higher risk. Since 2016, the conflict has become more localised, the number of armed groups increased, and the conflict logic has fragmented. Killings of environmental defenders have emerged as a particularly acute manifestation of violence (Morales Muñoz, H. et al., 2025).

Land as a central issue 

Beyond social and political marginalisation and underdevelopment in peripheral areas, unequal access to land is a root cause of the conflict (Morales Muñoz et al., 2021). Extreme land ownership inequality historically compelled peasant communities to organise self-defence forces to assert land claim. Land remains central to contemporary violence, though its role has become increasingly entangled with territorial competition for drug trafficking corridors and control over extractive industries, such as mining and illegal timber logging (Morales Muñoz, H. et al., 2025). Today, coca cultivation for the drug economy intensifies deforestation, a form of land use change, in climate-vulnerable areas, further destabilising livelihoods and perpetuating the conflict cycle. 

Mounting environmental and climate-related security risks

Colombia is highly vulnerable to climate change, with extreme weather events, including droughts, floods and landslides, projected to increase. Moreover, it is estimated that between 1.4 and 1.7 million people in the country will be affected by sea-level rise by 2050 (World Bank, 2023).

Climate change is already having and will continue to have impacts on critical sectors, such as i) agriculture, with water supply shortages and heat stress for livestock; ii) human health, with altered range, seasonality and distribution of vector-borne diseases and increased risk of respiratory illnesses and waterborne diseases; and iii) energy and infrastructure, with water-powered energy under stress and mounting damage to infrastructure from extreme weather events. In addition, climate change is impacting water systems with 3-5 per cent loss of glacial coverage per year, as well as ecosystems through increased landslides, glacier retreat, and sedimentation from forest loss (Morales Muñoz, H. et al., 2025).

There is a vicious cycle linking deforestation, insecurity and climate change in the Colombian Amazon. Environmental degradation and deforestation—compounded by climate impacts that erode community resilience and intensify human insecurity—lead to overall insecurity and conflict in the country. This insecurity and conflict, in turn, tends to further environmental degradation and deforestation, through both illegal and unsustainable economic activities that harm the environment (such as illegal coca cultivation and illegal mining) and violence against local communities and environmental defenders (FIP and adelphi, 2021).

Over the years administrations have had different approaches to peacebuilding, each with different environmental implications. Beyond national responses to peace, conflict and environmental dynamics, local communities have carried out successful environmental peacebuilding initiatives from which best practices and lessons learned can be drawn.

Territorial Peace 

The concept of Territorial Peace emerged during the peace negotiations between the Colombian Government (Santos administration) and FARC. The concept suggests that the conflict is closely related to the absence of effective state institutions, especially in rural areas, that can address local disputes in an effective and timely manner (Baum, 2019). 

The Territorial Peace approach included elements related to the environment, such as natural resource management and land ownership. The programme “Visión Amazonía”, launched during the Santos administration as a form of building peace, aimed at reducing deforestation through forest protection and the sustainable use of natural resources. However, instead it led to land conflicts and impacted the legitimacy of property rights by marginalising smallholders as illegal occupiers and dismissing Indigenous communities as naive environmental guardians rather than legitimate land stewards (Hein et al., 2020).

Payments for ecosystem services to landowners who engage in conserving and generating environmental services, and the establishment of a transitional justice mechanism which extends rights to nature and is composed of representatives from Indigenous and Afro-Colombian people are also two essential components of the TerritorialPeace approach (Morales Muñoz, H. et al., 2025).

Another key element of Colombia’s conflict resolution efforts was the 2016 peace agreement between the government and FARC. Land governance and the management of environmental aspects were at the centre of the agreement, included as a requirement for achieving Territorial Peace. Environmental protection was integrated across three of the agreement's six chapters. Chapter One, on comprehensive rural reform, mentioned the establishment of a land administration system, Territorially Focused Development Programmes (plans focusing on economic and social development that respects and protects the local environment of conflict-affected zones), and environmental zoning plans. Chapter Three, on finalisation of the armed conflict (disarmament of the guerrillas), included humanitarian demining and environmental protection projects that actively engaged former combatants. Lastly, Chapter Four on the problem of illicit drugs, included a section on sustainability, restoration of nature and replacement of illicit cultivation, especially within protected areas. Although the peace agreement lays the groundwork for improved environmental governance, its implementation, including in the most-affected regions, has fallen short (Morales Muñoz, H. et al., 2025).

Peace with Legality 

Against a backdrop of popular dissatisfaction with the peace agreement, with many Colombians perceiving it as too lenient on former guerilla fighters, the Duque administration advocated for a return to legality and justice—an approach named Peace with Legality. The political motto of Duque's partywas “Tear the accord to shreds.” Efforts to regain state authority were done through military and police forces. Reducing deforestation, as a priority for Duque’s Government, partly due to international pressure, was conducted primarily through the military operation Artemisa (Morales Muñoz, H. et al., 2025).

Although deforestation decreased during Duque’s administration, the government did not invest in long-term forest governance and sustainability beyond reducing deforestation. In 2019, CO2 emissions from fossil fuels increased by 17 per cent from the 2010-2018 average (Salazar et al., 2022). Moreover, the Artemisa military operation jeopardised the relationship between the state and local communities, with critics arguing that the military campaign endangered the safety of park rangers as they were being perceived as allies of the military, disrupted dialogue between civilian authorities and farmers occupying protected areas that had initiated during the Santos administration, proceeded without coordination with civilian authorities, and led to violence against civilian populations (Morales Muñoz, H. et al., 2025).

In response to the problem of illegal crops and narcotraffic, the government introduced Ruta Futuro, a policy which involved various ministries, public forces, and regulatory bodies. Although the policy had a socioeconomic element, the focus was put on spraying glyphosate on coca crops (which had environmental, health and economic impacts for local communities) and shedding light on the capture of armed group individuals. Duque’s stringent approach contrasted with the armed groups’ provision of salaries and public goods (Morales Muñoz, H. et al., 2025).

Total Peace

Elected in 2022, Petro’s administration has centred its efforts on the Total Peace approach, pursuing simultaneous peace negotiations with several armed groups. The approach focuses on participatory processes and regional consultations; deforestation through joint initiatives with communities; developing regulations related to land that address the access and formalisation of land, as well as development plans with a territorial focus; and military operations that focus on extinguishing fires and working together with investigative authorities to arrest the major deforesters. This military approach contrasts with the Duque administration’s strategy of prosecuting small-scale farmers who engaged in deforestation due to economic pressures from criminal organisations (Republic of Colombia, 2022). Moreover, Petro’s strategy has a stronger focus on integrating environmental considerations into peace agreements (Taylor, 2023).

The success of the transition from militarisation to conservation underpinning the Total Peace approach hinges on its prompt implementation. The approach has encountered some challenges, including the ruling by Colombia’s Constitutional Court that the country was in a “state of unconstitutional affairs” based on a lawsuit filed by victims during the Duque administration. The ruling argued that the state did not establish adequate security for citizens to exercise their rights freely, failed to provide timely and effective protection for leaders, and did not tackle the problem of stigmatisation of social leaders. Another challenge to the approach’s implementation is the managing of parallel negotiations with multiple major armed groups characterised by internal fragmentation and loose coalitions of diverse factions (Morales Muñoz, H. et al., 2025).

Regarding the problem of coca cultivation, the policy has shifted from the National Comprehensive Programme for the Substitution of Illicit Crops (NPSI) under the Santos administration which promised technical assistance to transition to substitute crops, to the spraying of glyphosate under the Duque administration, to the targeting of traffickers (through international cooperation on tackling illicit financial flows and money laundering) rather than growers under the Petro administration (Morales Muñoz, H. et al., 2025).

Locally led environmental peacebuilding

Colombia offers multiple examples of locally led initiatives that simultaneously advance environmental protection and peacebuilding. Forest restoration of native trees in the Colombian Amazon by former combatants exemplifies this approach. Restoring the environment tends to have a healing effect on the relationship between people and their lands and can be understood as a form of reparation for war crimes and other forms of violence (Morales Muñoz, H. et al., 2025).

Communal forestry through sustainable timber use in the departments of Guaviare and Caquetá has provided an income for Indigenous communities and farmers, demonstrating the economic benefits of forests when they are protected and sustainably used. These efforts have also improved the relations between local communities and the state, as lands previously used for coca production which had been part of the armed conflict are now integrated into the peace process. Moreover, cocoa agroforestry in the country is combining conservation with agricultural production. It is leading to the mitigation of climate change driven by deforestation, advancing employment and reducing resource disputes (Morales Muñoz, H. et al., 2025).

Eco-tourism offers an alternative pathway for economic and ecological recovery, with former guerilla fighters and locals living in rural areas once impacted by armed conflict spearheading initiatives that combine ecological restoration, cultural preservation, and economic reinvestment in these areas (Supelano, 2019).

Biodiversity conservation, through scientific expeditions to biodiversity hotspots once controlled by the FARC, is being used as a tool to exchange knowledge between multiple stakeholders with different knowledge systems –former combatants, park rangers, farmers, local communities and scientists. It is promoting reconciliation, economic opportunities and the recognition of indigenous knowledge (Morales Muñoz, H. et al., 2025).

Nature-based solutions are being deployed in Colombian municipalities, such as La Ceja and Soacha, enhancing the resilience of communities to climate impacts and related security and peace risks (International Climate Initiative, 2024).

Lastly, collective protection measures are creating safe zones, preventing armed entry, and protecting communities. Afro-Colombians, Indigenous groups and peasant communities are establishing civilian-only zones that restrict armed actors' access and create safe spaces protecting children from recruitment into armed forces (Morales Muñoz, H. et al., 2025).