88373 Partnership in Practice: Engagement with Indigenous Peoples PARTNERSHIP IN PRACTICE: ENGAGEMENT WITH INDIGENOUS PEOPLES 1 Foreword Indigenous peoples, and their traditional knowledge and sustain- able resource management practices, have contributed effectively to safeguarding our global environment. Tragically, and despite their contributions to the global environment and to human culture, indig- enous societies are disappearing at an unprecedented rate. Indigenous peoples worldwide continue to be vulnerable and suffer from devastat- ing poverty, disease and discrimination.1 The adoption of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Dr. Naoko Ishii Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) highlights the important need to secure CEO and Chairperson a sustainable future for indigenous peoples globally. A rapidly develop- Global Environment Facility ing globalized economy is threatening the lands and resources many indigenous peoples rely upon for their cultural, spiritual and physical survival. Indigenous peoples are also highly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, given that they often reside in environmentally sensi- tive areas.2 Indigenous peoples are not only victims of a deteriorating global envi- ronment: they are also a source of effective solutions. Their knowledge systems are critical to helping us cope with changing environmental patterns and conditions. The remarkable spatial convergence between the globally important biodiversity sites and indigenous lands, ter- ritories and resources also presents an enormous opportunity for both conserving biodiversity and supporting indigenous peoples’ livelihoods. This publication updates a document on indigenous peoples prepared by the GEF Secretariat in 2008. In recent years, the GEF has enhanced its partnership with indigenous peoples. For example, it has developed the GEF Policy on Agency Minimum Standards on Environmental and Social Safeguards (which includes a safeguard policy on indigenous peoples), the Principles and Guidelines for Engagement with Indig- enous Peoples, and the establishment of the GEF Indigenous Peoples Advisory Group. Moreover, GEF projects involving indigenous peoples have more than doubled during the past six years to more than 220. The GEF will continue to fulfill its mandate to conserve the global envi- ronment through a multi-stakeholder approach, while supporting provi- sions of the UNDRIP. We remain open to feedback and guidance from our partners. And we invite indigenous groups and community organi- zations to help the GEF continue to evolve as an effective mechanism for championing the global commons. 1 United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, State of the World’s Indigenous People, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, United Nations, 2009. 2 Macchi, M. IUCN Issues Paper, Indigenous and Traditional Peoples and Climate Change, 2008. PARTNERSHIP IN PRACTICE: ENGAGEMENT WITH INDIGENOUS PEOPLES 1 2 The Global Environment Facility Indigenous Peoples: GEF Policies and Participation Why We Work with Indigenous to ensuring that its operations fully respect the dig- nity, human rights, economies, cultures and traditional Peoples knowledge of indigenous peoples and their members.5 Approximately 370 million indigenous peoples live in Further, the GEF sees an enormous opportunity given over 90 countries around the world.3 Many of these that indigenous peoples’ traditional knowledge and peoples have survived due to their relative isolation, in ecosystem management practices are recognized as territories that are increasingly recognized as physically particularly relevant for natural resources management, and biologically outstanding on a global scale. sustainable development and climate adaptation. In fact, a significant fraction of the world’s priority areas—based on biodiversity and ecosystem impor- Guidance of Related tance—overlap with indigenous peoples’ lands, territo- Multilateral Environmental ries and resources.4 For example, indigenous peoples Agreements in parts of North and South America, central Africa, Russia and Southeast Asia inhabit the world’s remain- International treaties and obligations recognize the ing large boreal forests and rain forests. These areas importance of protecting indigenous peoples and the play a critical role in the carbon cycle and also serve as lands and resources upon which they depend. The CBD reservoirs of irreplaceable biodiversity and ecosystem and the UNFCCC, among others, provide important services. This remarkable convergence presents both guidance to the GEF on these issues, as well as on in- an enormous opportunity, as well as a challenge for digenous knowledge valuable for conservation efforts. conservation efforts. The CBD, for example, calls to respect, preserve, and Indigenous peoples are distinct communities where maintain traditional knowledge, innovations and prac- the land and resources upon which they depend are tices of indigenous and local communities relevant for inextricably linked to their identities and cultures. the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, and Loss or destruction of indigenous peoples’ lands and their customary use of biological resources.6 Further, at resources due to natural or developmental changes can the 11th Conference of the Parties, the CBD invited the bring about economic impoverishment, loss of identity GEF to provide support to indigenous and local commu- and threatened cultural survival. The GEF is dedicated nities for training, capacity building, and other activities related to ecologically or biologically significant marine areas. The CBD also invited the GEF to provide support 3 United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, State of the World’s Indigenous People, Department of Economic and for indicators on traditional knowledge and customary Social Affairs, United Nations, 2009. 4 Some estimates indicate that traditional indigenous territories may contain up to 80% of the earth’s biodiversity. See GEF 5 GEF/C.41/10/Rev.1 project document on Assessment and Recommendations on Improving Access of Indigenous Peoples to Conservation 6 CBD Article 8(j), Strategic Plan on Biodiversity 2011-2020, and Funding, 2007. Aichi Target 18. PARTNERSHIP IN PRACTICE: ENGAGEMENT WITH INDIGENOUS PEOPLES 3 sustainable use, and implementation of the Nagoya ronmental and social impact assessments, consultations, Protocol on Access and Benefit-Sharing.7 access, and land tenure, among others. The UNFCCC has provided guidance related to the Further, the GEF’s Principles and Guidelines for En- participation of Indigenous Peoples and inclusion of in- gagement with Indigenous Peoples11 was adopted in digenous knowledge in the preparation of National Ad- 2011. This paper consolidates and reaffirms existing aptation Plans (NAP), which the GEF supports through GEF principles related to indigenous peoples. In ad- the LDCF and SCCF. Specifically, the UNFCCC stipulates dition, it elaborates new guidelines on applying these the NAP process should be participatory and inclusive policies to GEF Partner Agencies and other stakehold- of indigenous peoples – from design and implementa- ers interested in implementing relevant projects. Spe- tion to monitoring and evaluation. It also stipulates that cifically, it addresses project planning, participation, a variety of knowledge sources, including indigenous governance, benefit sharing, traditional knowledge, knowledge8, should guide the NAP process. gender, resettlement and accountability, and grievance systems related to indigenous peoples. It also clarified GEF Policy and Strategy mechanisms and practices in support of the effective implementation of the GEF Principles and Guidelines. Related to Indigenous Peoples Of note, as a result, the GEF Indigenous Peoples Advisory Group (IPAG) was established and tasked Recognizing the important role they play as key with helping the GEF Secretariat’s Indigenous Peoples partners and stakeholders, the GEF helps ensure that Focal Point to put the policy in action. With indigenous indigenous peoples are incorporated into all relevant people representatives self-selected from across the aspects of its work. The GEF was one of the first inter- globe, the IPAG began its work in 2013 and regularly national financial institutions to develop an indepen- meets to provide guidance to the GEF. dent policy supporting the effective involvement of civil society, including provisions for indigenous peoples Guidance from the Conventions and GEF policies are and local communities. This policy, entitled Public In- incorporated into the GEF’s Focal Area Strategies. volvement in GEF-financed Projects,9 provides the basis The GEF-6 Biodiversity Focal Area Strategy identifies for participation of indigenous peoples in all aspects of indigenous peoples as key partners in achieving its the GEF’s work, including the design, implementation strategic objectives. The strategy commits to continue and evaluation of GEF-financed projects. promoting the participation and capacity building of indigenous peoples in the design, implementation, More recently, the GEF Council adopted the GEF Policy and management of protected area projects through on Agency Minimum Standards on Environmental and established frameworks such as Indigenous and Com- Social Safeguards10 that all GEF Partner Agencies are ex- munity Conserved Areas (ICCAs) and co-management pected to meet. One of the eight core criteria stipulates regimes. It also establishes project support for capac- minimum standards for GEF Partner Agencies wishing to ity building among indigenous peoples to negotiate implement GEF projects involving indigenous peoples. access to genetic resources and benefit sharing, as well These minimum standards include provisions for use of as support for measures that promote the development cultural resources or traditional knowledge, use of envi- and implementation of access and benefit-sharing agreements.12 7 COP11 Decision xi/5. Convention on Biological Diversity. 8 CO17 Decision 5/CP.17 and Decision 12/CP.18, UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. 11 GEF/C.42/Inf.03/Rev.1. 9 GEF/C.7/6 and C.6/Inf.5, Draft Outline of Policy Paper on Public 12 These measures include agreements that recognize the core ABS Involvement in GEF-Financed Projects. principles of Free Prior Informed Consent (FPIC) and Mutually Agreed Terms (MAT). See Compilation of GEF-6 Focal Area 10 GEF/C.41/10/Rev.1. Strategies, 2014. 4 The Global Environment Facility The GEF-6 Sustainable Forest Management Strat- Engagement with Indigenous Peoples. For the latter, egy (SFM) also supports a multi-focal area approach. a special task force, comprised of indigenous peoples Among other priorities, it emphasizes forest manage- and experts, was assembled to provide detailed ment projects that enhance sustainable livelihoods feedback to the GEF at all stages of the Principles and for indigenous and local communities. It also applies Guidelines development. As a result of their feedback, a multi-stakeholder approach, including the involve- an Indigenous Peoples Advisory Group (IPAG) now pro- ment of indigenous peoples.13 In addition, it identifies vides continued guidance to the GEF Secretariat. engagement of indigenous peoples as key to identify- ing policy and economic incentives, tools and method- The GEF Secretariat, with advise and support from ologies to address the drivers of deforestation. With IPAG members, is reviewing and enhancing GEF’s advice from the IPAG, other focal areas have also made monitoring systems to track results and progress, efforts to incorporate indigenous peoples into relevant knowledge and capacity development, and support objectives of GEF-6 Focal Area Strategies.14 projects related to indigenous issues. The GEF Sec- retariat is also engaged in outreach program, which Participation of Indigenous raises awareness about the work of the GEF and its engagement with indigenous peoples, and solicits Peoples at the GEF feedback and guidance from them. Several dialogues and presentations have occurred at CBD meetings Indigenous peoples are active participants in GEF and the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indig- processes. Their involvement continues to grow and enous Issues (UNPFII), and others are expected in the expand as illustrated in the list below: coming year. n Accessing GEF funds for specific projects, including in a leadership role In addition to these channels, indigenous peoples have n Participation and involvement in GEF projects, been part of regular dialogues between the GEF at the including as beneficiaries GEF Council, CSO Consultation Meetings, side events/ n Involvement in policy processes through the GEF meetings at the Conference of Parties of the Conven- Assembly and Council tions and other major environmental policy fora. n Serving on the GEF’s Indigenous Peoples Advisory Group (IPAG) to advise the GEF Secretariat’s Indigenous Peoples Focal Point n Participation and involvement in the broader civil society GEF coalitions, including the GEF NGO Network n Involvement in the CBD, UNFCCC and other relevant policy processes, to help guide the GEF in its role as the financial mechanism of several multilateral conventions. Of note, indigenous peoples were very active dur- ing the development of the GEF Policy on Agency Minimum Standards on Environmental and Social Safeguards and the GEF Principles and Guidelines for 13 See Compilation of GEF-6 Focal Area Strategies, 2014. 14 See Compilation of GEF-6 Focal Area Strategies, 2014. PARTNERSHIP IN PRACTICE: ENGAGEMENT WITH INDIGENOUS PEOPLES 5 6 The Global Environment Facility GEF Projects Involving Indigenous Peoples The GEF has a long history of collaborating with indig- mented by indigenous organizations). 17 Among those, enous peoples in its operations and projects dating to 27 projects (87%) were biodiversity focal area projects. its inception in 1991. The GEF Publication, The A to Z In addition, a large share (61%) of these projects were of the GEF: A Guide to the Global Environment Facility from the Latin America and Caribbean region. This for Civil Society Organizations15, provides guidance for reflects the historical engagement of Latin American indigenous peoples and other CSOs on how to access indigenous peoples in biodiversity conservation related GEF funding, including project development and ap- activities. proval through the full- and medium-sized project win- dows. It also provides step-by-step guidance for access Figure 1 degree of indigenous to small grants through the GEF Small Grants Program. peoples involvement in gef projects GEF Full and Medium-sized projects 14% Number of projects and degree of involvement As of April 2014, the GEF had supported over 220 full- 38% and medium-sized projects that involved indigenous peoples. Among them, about 70% were full-sized proj- ects, while remaining were medium-sized projects.16 Their involvement ranges from being an executing or 48% implementing agency for projects to receiving benefits at the outcome level such as payments for ecosystem services. Significant Moderate Marginal As Figure 1 illustrates, of more than 220 projects, 31 projects (14%) demonstrated significant involvement of indigenous peoples (projects executed or imple- 17 Projects have been qualitatively categorized in the following three groups for analysis: 1. Significant involvement: Projects designed exclusively to benefit indigenous peoples or projects where the executing and/or implementing agency was an indigenous organization. 15 GEF, The A to Z of the GEF: A Guide to the Global Environment 2. Moderate involvement: Projects that had distinct components Facility for Civil Society Organizations, 2011. and/or sub-projects benefiting and targeting indigenous peoples. 16 Since 2013, projects with GEF grant of US$2 million are categorized as medium-sized projects. Until then, medium-sized 3. Limited involvement: Projects where indigenous peoples projects were up to US$1 million. participated in a few project activities. PARTNERSHIP IN PRACTICE: ENGAGEMENT WITH INDIGENOUS PEOPLES 7 Types of projects Biodiversity continues to dominate among focal areas for projects with indigenous peoples (71%, or 159 projects). However, in recent years, indigenous peoples have been increasingly included in the other focal areas, such as climate change and sustainable forest management (see figure 2). GEF projects involving indigenous peoples have ranged from co-management or direct participation in protected areas and buffer zones management, and mainstreaming biodiversity in the production land- scape (including use of traditional knowledge for natu- ral resources management) to support for policy influ- ence and capacity building. More recently, indigenous peoples have been involved in GEF- projects related to development of access and benefit-sharing frame- works, enhanced regional cooperation for management of persistent organic pollutants (POPs) and coping with the impacts of climate change through food security and pastoral management. Figure 2 dISTRIBUTION OF GEF PROJECTS BY FOCAL AREA 8 32 20 31 159 Biodiversity Land Management SFM POPs Climate Change International Waters 8 The Global Environment Facility Regional distribution Figure 4 regional distribution of Indigenous peoples’ involvement in GEF projects con- by focal area tinues to be focused in Latin America and the Carib- bean (39%); in recent years, however, there has been Mulit-country greater regional diversity with increasing number of Latin America and projects in Asia and Africa regions (see figure 3). Caribbean Europe and Central Asia Figure 3 regional distribution of gef projects involving indigenous Global peoples Asia 4.0% 1.3% Africa 0 20 40 60 80 100 7.6% Biodiversity Land Management Climate Change 38.1% SFM POPs International Waters 22.9% Trends by GEF replenishment cycle The GEF is continually working to expand projects that 26.0% integrate indigenous peoples. With the exception of GEF-4, the number of GEF projects that include indig- enous peoples has been steadily increasing in each re- plenishment cycle (see figure 5). The GEF Secretariat is Africa Europe and Central Asia assessing to determine why participation of indigenous Asia Latin American and Caribbean peoples dropped during GEF-4. Global Multi-country Figure 5 TRENDS IN PROJECTS INVOLVING INDIGENOUS PEOPLES, BY GEF Comparing the regional distribution of projects across all the focal areas illustrates that each region has a REPLENISHMENT CYCLE broad representation of projects involving indigenous peoples (see figure 4). GEF-5 GEF-4 GEF-3 GEF-2 GEF-1 Pilot Phase 0 20 40 60 80 Full Size Medium Size PARTNERSHIP IN PRACTICE: ENGAGEMENT WITH INDIGENOUS PEOPLES 9 Distribution of GEF projects by Agencies GEF Small Grants Program UNDP and the World Bank implemented most of the GEF projects related to indigenous peoples (46% and In addition to its full- and medium-sized projects, the 33%, respectively). Compared to prior GEF analyses, GEF Small Grants Program (SGP) has benefited and in- however, the number of GEF Project Agencies incor- volved many indigenous peoples across the world. The porating indigenous peoples into their projects has SGP links global, national and local issues through a gone up significantly. Most GEF Project Agencies have transparent, participatory and country-driven approach projects that involve indigenous peoples (see figure 6). to project planning, design and implementation. Since 1992, the SGP has awarded more than 16,000 grants, totaling more than $650 million in 137 countries. Figure 6 DISTRIBUTION OF PROJECTS Approximately 15% of these projects were directed INVOLVING INDIGENOUS PEOPLES, toward indigenous peoples. BY GEF AGENCY The SGP has provided grants of up to $50,000 – aver- aging $20,000 to $35,000 – directly to indigenous peo- ples and local communities. In the process, it has made 6% a significant difference in their livelihoods and environ- 9% ments. Strategic features include support of activities that reconcile sustainable livelihoods with GEF global 46% priorities; the growing ownership by communities and local CSOs as a result of increased capacities and the experiences gained; and the active engagement of 33% diverse stakeholders working on global environmental issues at the local level. UNDP World Bank UNEP FAO IFAD AfDB IADB WWF-US UNIDO ADB 10 The Global Environment Facility Case study of Small Grants Program Achievements and lessons learned With the support from the project, a community con- servation area of 1,230 hectares was declared, which Community Engagement in REDD+: consists of semi-evergreen forest. This important out- The U’yool’ché A.C. Project come was enabled through enhanced capacities of in- digenous peoples, including youth and women, to un- Implementing Organization: U’yool’ché A.C. – Ejido Felipe derstand climate change, forest carbon monitoring and Carrillo Puerto other sustainable management issues and methodolo- Location: Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico gies. The project created more than 20 temporary jobs GEF SGP Contribution: Total US$ 61,731 (2008 and and improved access to medicines. U’yool’che A.C., the 2011) local NGO, has been leading the scaling-up process in 12 other communities in the region and transmitting Co-financing: Total US$ 93,977 capabilities from one community to another. Background A number of key findings can inform future projects The U’yool’ché A.C. project began in 2006 with the and improve upon this pilot: interest of indigenous communities to develop carbon sequestration techniques in the Mayan Zone. In Mexico, n Strong involvement of the landowners is key to 80% of forests are owned by ejidos and communities. ensure sustainability of the project. Activities such The Sian Ka’an—Calakmul Corridor, the project site, is as community-based research and participatory a vast forested area that links two biosphere reserves workshops allow for good ownership by of great importance in terms of biodiversity, and the community members. sustainability of its local communities. n The transmission of knowledge and capacities from community to community can lay the The project is piloting the participation of local and indig- foundation for projects in the future. enous communities to conserve the forest and its associ- n The support from local NGOs and scientific ated biodiversity that can serve as an example for REDD+ institutions is fundamental to achieving project (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Deg- objectives by supporting research activities and radation). The project assumes that identifying the needs generating alternative financial management and aspirations of local communities and equipping them activities. with the necessary tools is a key means by which to em- power them in the fight against climate change. PARTNERSHIP IN PRACTICE: ENGAGEMENT WITH INDIGENOUS PEOPLES 11 12 The Global Environment Facility Highlights of Projects The five GEF projects summarized in this section ex- Background emplify best practice in the engagement of indigenous Brazil is a country with significant biodiversity. Its 611 peoples in GEF projects, ensuring their priorities and indigenous lands have been identified as a highly stra- aspirations are taken into account within the overall tegic opportunity for achieving effective conservation project design and results framework. of the country’s forests, while also helping indigenous peoples continue their traditional way of life. A. Brazil: Sustainable Forest Management: Catalyzing the Contribution of Indigenous Covering 105.6 million hectares (12% of national terri- Lands to the Conservation of Brazil’s Forest tory), some of these indigenous lands cover areas iden- Ecosystem tified as highly important to biodiversity. The different cultural practices developed by indigenous peoples GEF Agency: UNDP over centuries play an important role in promoting con- servation and sustainable use of the resources within Executing Agency: Ministry of Environment their lands. Indigenous land and practices, however, (MMA), Brazilian Foundation for are increasingly under threat due to a combination of Indigenous Affairs (FUNAI), and externally and internally driven pressures. Indigenous Organizations GEF Grant: US$ 6,100,000 The goal of this project is to support the effective con- Co-financing: US$ 31,700,000 servation and sustainable use of forest biodiversity by GEF Project Endorsement: 2009 indigenous peoples of indigenous lands. The project is catalyzing the consolidation of indigenous lands as PARTNERSHIP IN PRACTICE: ENGAGEMENT WITH INDIGENOUS PEOPLES 13 essential protected areas for the conservation of biodi- B. Global: Enabling Sustainable Dryland versity in Brazilian forest ecosystems. Management through Mobile Pastoral Custodianship (World Initiative for Achievements and lessons learned Sustainable Pastoralism ­—WISP) The project has created an enabling environment to recognize the role of indigenous lands in the conserva- GEF Agency: UNDP tion of biodiversity; carbon sequestration and stocks; Executing Agency: Dryland Development Center of sustainable livelihoods; and, foremost, for empowering UNDP indigenous peoples to discuss their future with govern- ment institutions. In this way, it has helped structure a GEF Grant: US$ 950,000 collaborative relationship between indigenous organi- Co-financing: US$ 1,875,000 zations and the Brazilian government. GEF Project Endorsement: 2005 The Policy for Environmental and Territorial Manage- ment of Indigenous Lands was signed in June 2012 Background and its development involved over 1,200 indigenous Pastoralism is among the most widespread land-use sys- peoples from 186 ethnic groups. The policy provides tems in the world’s drylands. Despite its role as a signifi- a framework for partnership between the government cant production system, pastoralism is poorly understood and indigenous peoples in the management of indig- and often mislabeled as an environmentally destructive enous lands. and economically unsustainable agricultural system. This misunderstanding has led to policy and systemic barriers The early phase of the project also succeeded in build- to the integration of pastoralism into mainstream agricul- ing government capacity in indigenous lands develop- tural and economic production systems. ment and management. It internalized the concept of management of indigenous lands, including recogni- This global project, the World Initiative for Sustainable tion of indigenous peoples’ contributions to biodiver- Pastoralism (WISP), was developed to address these sity conservation and ecosystem services. The project challenges. It aimed to generate knowledge and small also firmly established the project governance structure partnerships for advancing Mobile Pastoral Custodian- within the relevant government entity, FUNAI, including ship as a key mechanism for enabling sustainable dry- a robust system for FPIC based on its policy. lands management. The overall goal was to enhance the enabling environment for sustainable rangeland One important lesson learned from the project is to management, improve pastoral livelihoods and em- manage the expectations of various stakeholders to power pastoralists. maintain its focus. This can be accomplished during the project preparation phase through strong communica- Achievements and lessons learned tion and agreement of the project scope and limita- The project has delivered credible results by creating tions. Another lesson learned is the value of diverse knowledge, influencing policies and strengthening participation at the decision-making level. A project networks and partnerships for advocacy on behalf steering committee was established with equal rep- of pastoralism as a production system and pastoral resentation of government personnel and indigenous livelihoods. It has helped empower pastoralists and peoples. The project has found that inclusive participa- strengthened pastoral civil society and global network- tion is important for open communication and trans- ing through its unique partnership approach. parency. Finally, securing appropriate FPIC through a participatory process ensures the project starts off in a WISP targeted the development of a strong evidence- legitimate manner. based approach and capacity building. This approach has enabled stakeholders to use credible arguments, and engage effectively in persuasive dialogue. Pasto- 14 The Global Environment Facility ralists have increased respect and feel that this project Background has increased awareness and strengthened support The project aimed to develop and establish a sustain- towards mobile indigenous peoples and sustainable able framework to reduce environmental degrada- drylands management. tion of the Russian Arctic from land-based activities at a system-level. This included the development and A wide array of knowledge products were developed implementation of a nationally approved Strategic Ac- through the project, many in multiple languages en- tion Program (SAP). abling the easy use of pro-pastoralism arguments by stakeholders. While raising funds for translation contin- Projects in three model regions aimed to demonstrate ues to be a challenge, the initiative has proved valuable the potential for creating stable co-management prac- in bridging the gap between pastoral communities, tices. One project, COMAN, focused on balancing the and scientific and NGO communities. Knowledge interests of business/industries and indigenous peoples products from this project include pastoralist women’s in resolving economic and environmental concerns, rights and empowerment; pastoral organization to while preserving their traditional lifestyle and habitat. defend land rights; indigenous knowledge of rangeland COMAN was carried out by the Batani International De- monitoring indicators; and climate change and adapta- velopment Fund for Indigenous Peoples of the North, tion in the African livestock sector. A pastoralism toolkit Siberia and the Far East with the Russian Association of to help support implementation was also developed. Indigenous Peoples of the North (RAIPON). C. Arctic: Russia Federation: Support These demonstration projects were aimed to create the to the National Program of Action conditions for environmental co-management by feder- for the Protection of the Arctic Marine al and local government bodies, extracting companies Environment and the indigenous peoples of the North at locations of traditional habitat and economic activity. GEF Agency: UNEP Executing Agency: Ministry of Economic Develop- Achievements and lessons learned ment—ACOPS The project achieved its goals by successfully complet- ing the Strategic Action Program and updating the GEF Grant: US$ 6,191,000; Diagnostic Analysis of environmental problems of the Co-financing: US$ 12,484,000 Russian Arctic. It completed a number of activities spe- GEF Project Endorsement: 2003 cifically related to indigenous peoples, including: PARTNERSHIP IN PRACTICE: ENGAGEMENT WITH INDIGENOUS PEOPLES 15 1. Introductory seminar aimed at a common under- standing of objectives and expected results by all interested parties, including indigenous peoples and industry. 2. Analysis of environmental co-management practices along with the development of recommendations on how to improve these practices in pre-designated regions. This analysis included training indigenous peoples to register and use traditional knowledge for mapping and conducting ecological monitoring. 3. Regional consultations to accommodate interests and coordinate actions of stakeholders participating in environmental co-management, including indig- enous peoples. These consultations included the development of principles and methods for solving issues of co-management and ensuring balance and stability. The consultations also resulted in the adop- tion of a common process and initial work to develop formal institutional mechanisms to govern relations between indigenous peoples, state bodies and pri- vate business. 4. Regional roundtables to summarize results of the project and joint action plans for executive and lo- cal government bodies, companies and indigenous communities. These plans guide co-management by balancing interests of all parties and support the preservation of the traditional way of life and habitat of the indigenous peoples. As a result of this demonstration project, the model of the ethno-ecological council was established. The ethno-ecological councils serve as a forum to identify and resolve potential conflicts between the indigenous population, companies, executive authorities, local government bodies and other interested parties. The experiences and learning from this demonstration project were also later used to develop the federal law on “Protection of original habitat, traditional way of life and traditional nature use of the Russian Federation’s small-numbered indigenous peoples.” 16 The Global Environment Facility D. Community-based Adaptation Program Ten participating countries (Bangladesh, Bolivia, Gua- (CBA) temala, Jamaica, Kazakhstan, Morocco, Namibia, Niger, Samoa and Vietnam) have each developed a portfolio of 8-20 community-level adaptation projects. GEF Agency: UNDP Executing Agency: UNOPS For example, in Bolivia, where 56-70% of the popula- GEF Grant: US$ 4,525,140 tion is estimated to be indigenous, a National CBA Co-financing: US$ 4,525,140 Coordinating Committee (NCA) was established to provide the vertical linkage between community-based GEF Endorsement: 2007 activities and national-scale adaptation activities. Background Achievements and lessons learned It is increasingly recognized that small communities Most notably, the project has spread greater awareness are likely to be the most severely affected by climate about the effects of climate change and demonstrated change impacts and yet are least equipped to cope the building of adaptive capacity at the community and adapt. This pilot project was designed to imple- level. However, knowledge and understanding of ment community-based projects that seek to enhance climate change adaptation concepts and adaptive solu- the resiliency of communities, and/or the ecosystems tions in the face of climate change are still limited both on which they rely, to climate change impacts and among policy makers and indigenous peoples and variability. Lessons learned can then be leveraged to local communities. The projects in Bolivia, Kazakhstan, replicate successful community practices, and inte- Samoa and Niger are in advanced stages and have grate lessons learned into existing and new policies integrated policy makers at the national and local levels that promote increased community adaptive capacity. to a significant degree. Indigenous peoples are identified as an important target group due to their unique vulnerabilities to Many local NGOs and community-based organizations climate change. have limited technical and implementation capacity PARTNERSHIP IN PRACTICE: ENGAGEMENT WITH INDIGENOUS PEOPLES 17 for climate change adaptation projects. Therefore, ment of Japan, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur capacity building and awareness-raising needs to be an Foundation and the World Bank.   integral part of actions delivered to indigenous peoples and local agents. This strategy requires continued effort CEPF engages civil society, such as community groups, to ensure sustainability of the project impacts through NGOs, indigenous peoples, academic institutions and mainstreaming in relevant policies and planning. private enterprises in biodiversity conservation.  Since its creation in 2000, CEPF has provided more than $163 A unique blend between volunteerism, communities million for 23 hotspots in more than 60 countries and and technical support to local actors presents an op- territories to over 1,800 civil society partners, including portunity for grassroots organizations as well as com- indigenous peoples’ organizations. munities to learn to advocate for and sustain livelihood options that can adapt to climate change. For this, it is CEPF grants to indigenous peoples’ organizations have important that the communities have access to its local gone toward development of income-generating activi- resources, including natural, physical, human, social ties and skills, capacity building, management plans for and financial assets. indigenous territories, land titling and preservation of traditional knowledge, among others. E. Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund CEPF Case Study: Supporting the Kriol and GEF Agency: World Bank Rama Indigenous Peoples of Nicaragua Executing Agency: Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund Implementing Organization: Universidad de las Regiones Autonamas de la Costa GEF Grant: Total US$ 45 million Caribe Nicaraguense Co-financing: Total US$ 160 million Location: Rio San Juan Biosphere Reserve, GEF Project Endorsement: 2007 Southern Nicaragua CEPF Contribution: 3 Projects Total US$ 431,537 The Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund (CEPF) is designed to safeguard the world’s biologically richest Cofinancing: Total US$ 125,000 and most threatened regions, known as biodiversity hotspots. It is a joint initiative of Conservation Inter- Background national, the European Union, French Development CEPF has awarded a series of grants to assist the Rama Agency, the Global Environment Facility, the Govern- and Kriol peoples in southeastern Nicaragua on land 18 The Global Environment Facility titling, land management, and capacity building activi- local organizations in the region. Open dialogue and the ties. The area contains the most intact forest within the encouragement of inclusivity, active participation and Rio San Juan Biosphere Reserve, an important conser- direct communication among the various groups have vation corridor that is under threat from encroachment helped to reduce and diffuse conflicts. In addition, the of landless poor. need for community wide environmental education and awareness campaigns has proved to be very important With funding from CEPF and support from URACCAN to project success. To ensure that all the communities (University of the Autonomous Regions of the Carib- understand the land titling provisions, local partners bean Coast of Nicaragua), and other local partners, the have been training community members about laws and Rama and Kriol set out to assess and fulfill the require- policies, land management and conflict resolution. ments for Nicaraguan land title declaration, which included conducting a census of their territory and a As a result of these activities, the Rama and Kriol are detailed study of their communities. The projects also building on their expanded capacity and taking the focused on the development of skills to sustainably next steps toward being stewards of their land. They manage their land through participatory management have identified sites for ecotourism, sustainable land planning processes and negotiate with government management, and reforestation, and are also applying entities and other groups regarding land claims and for funding and support on their own. encroachment concerns. Achievements and Lessons Learned The projects supported securing legal title of their land in 2009, as well as the right to manage the area, 407,000 hectares for conservation and sustainable de- velopment. Park ranger stations were established and staffed with Rama, Kriol and mestizo (mixed European and indigenous heritage) guards trained to protect biodiversity and to combat poaching. The Rama and Kriol communities also developed land-use plans and sustainable alternatives to degradation. One of the important lessons from these projects is the value of collaboration among various communities and PARTNERSHIP IN PRACTICE: ENGAGEMENT WITH INDIGENOUS PEOPLES 19 20 The Global Environment Facility Lessons Learned Over the past two decades, the GEF has learned many Flexible institutional and governance arrange- lessons with respect to enhanced engagement with in- ments: Indigenous peoples often have institutional and digenous peoples. This learning has occurred through governance arrangements unique from governments formal and informal evaluations, as well as via consulta- and other project decision-makers. Flexible project tions with indigenous peoples and civil society more planning and design and support frameworks often fa- generally. The GEF will continue to learn and adjust cilitate the integration of indigenous peoples’ decision- actions based on these findings and incorporate them making processes. Allowing for unique arrangements into relevant policies, processes and programs: where indigenous peoples and developers can jointly develop plans will, in the longer term, provide for more Participation: Ensuring timely and effective involve- efficient and effective outcomes for all stakeholders. ment of indigenous peoples is a critical factor in suc- Further, to enhance sustainability, indigenous peoples’ cessful outcomes for all. Full and effective participation needs should be mainstreamed into municipal and involves prior consultation, participation and consent national-level policies and planning. Building strong processes that are acceptable to indigenous peoples linkages between indigenous peoples and national and culturally appropriate. Where appropriate, securing and municipal authorities during project development FPIC through a participatory process can help ensure can increase the chances of internalizing policies and the project or program starts off in a legitimate man- results. ner. Self-selection by indigenous peoples for represen- tation is another important factor to create legitimacy. Recognition rights: Project outcomes are more suc- The participation of women, youth and elders is also cessful and timely and lead to less conflict where in- essential to ensure a broad range of interests. Finally, digenous peoples have access to their local resources, formal agreements between indigenous peoples and have been assigned their lands and have had traditional government authorities before project initiation, as well knowledge assets recognized. The development of an as the establishment of governing committees with indigenous peoples’ plan or baseline assessment can equal representation of government and indigenous often help ensure that resource claims are addressed peoples, are also best practices. appropriately. Knowledge development and management: Sup- Livelihood activities: Projects that incorporated activi- port for knowledge development and management ties to improve livelihood of indigenous peoples often among indigenous peoples is critical. Capacity building found to increase effectiveness and sustainability of can facilitate strong ownership among local partners, the environmental outcomes. In particular, this includes particularly indigenous peoples, and increases the productive activities that will allow indigenous commu- sustainability of successful results. Knowledge devel- nities to maintain their lifestyles and well-being, without opment may include community-based research and compromising project investments and outcomes. participatory workshops, and should include technical Activities such as forest resource management and and non-technical tools flexible enough for adaptation ecotourism, among others, have greatly improved proj- to different circumstances. Further, documentation in ects’ environmental and socio-economic outcomes. a culturally sensitive manner with acceptable norms is important to safeguard knowledge. PARTNERSHIP IN PRACTICE: ENGAGEMENT WITH INDIGENOUS PEOPLES 21 22 The Global Environment Facility Future Direction Engagement with indigenous peoples is crucial to the projects. This could include enhancing collabora- successful achievement of the GEF’s mission. With tion and communication with the GEF Small Grants increased understanding of linkages between indig- Programme, Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund, enous peoples and global environmental outcomes, and other relevant projects. the GEF has adopted new standards and guidelines to help ensure appropriate and consistent engagement 4. Continued and enhanced representation and par- of indigenous peoples in GEF programs, projects and ticipation of indigenous peoples in relevant GEF processes. policies, processes, programs and projects. This may include, but not limited to, involvement in the The GEF will continue to implement the standards set development of the guideline paper for the Public forth in the GEF’s Policy on Agency Minimum Stan- Involvement Policy, the Gender Action Plan, National dards on Environmental and Social Safeguards (Mini- Portfolio Formulation Exercises, SGP National Steer- mum Standard 4 related to indigenous peoples) and ing Committee and GEF project cycle activities. the Principles and Guidelines for Engagement with Indigenous Peoples. 5. Enhanced GEF results-based management and monitoring systems to track engagement of indig- Several actions are planned or underway to facilitate a enous peoples in GEF projects and processes. This more effective and systematic approach to incorporat- monitoring will also allow for improved reporting on ing indigenous peoples into GEF activities: the contribution and results of indigenous peoples’ involvement in GEF projects. 1. Support for the Indigenous Peoples Advisory Group. This group has been instrumental in guiding the GEF Indigenous Peoples Focal Point on appropriate modalities to enhance indigenous peoples’ engage- ment with the GEF. 2. Enhanced capacity development among GEF Sec- retariat and Agencies staff to support improved un- derstanding of key indigenous peoples’ issues and how to address them in project review and program development. This capacity building is particularly important as indigenous peoples are broadly inte- grated into Focal Area Strategies. 3. Explore further opportunities to support initia- tives that are concerned and related to indigenous peoples through existing and new programs and PARTNERSHIP IN PRACTICE: ENGAGEMENT WITH INDIGENOUS PEOPLES 23 24 The Global Environment Facility PHOTOGRAPHY Cover: Masaai shepherd leading a flock of goats Andrzej Kubik / shutterstock.com Inside Cover: Women in traditional dresses, Peru meunierd / shutterstock.com Page 2: Young Masaai Avatar_023 / shutterstock.com Page 4: Quechua Indian women, Cusco, Peru Christian Vinces / shutterstock.com Page 6: Plains zebra in Kenya Larsek / shutterstock.com Page 10–11: Traditional hand weaving, Andes Mountains, Peru Curioso / shutterstock.com Page 12: Deer & reindeer breeder Sami in Honningsvag, Norway V. Belov / shutterstock.com Page 13: Triana tribe in the Amazon region of Brazil Julio Pantoja / World Bank Page 15: Women herder in Burkina Faso Ray Witlin / World Bank ABOUT THE GEF Page 16: Traditional Sami reindeer-skin tents in Tromso V. Belov / shutterstock.com The Global Environment Facility, established in 1991 as an Page 17: Himba boys in Namibian village independent financial mechanism, provides resources to developing erichon / shutterstock.com countries and countries with economies in transition for projects that Page 18: Vezo women fishing in Morondava, Madagascar benefit the global environment and promote sustainable livelihoods. sunsinger / shutterstock.com The GEF is the financial mechanism for implementation of the United Page 19: View of Rio San Juan From El Castillo in Nacaragua Nations (UN) Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC), stevebphotography / istock.com the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), the Stockholm Convention on Page 20: Rice fields on terraced of Vietnam Cristal Tran / shutterstock.com Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), and the Minamata Convention on Mercury. Page 22: Silhouettes of traditional fishermen, Sri Lanka Jaromir Chalabala / shutterstock.com The GEF unites 183 countries—in partnership with international Page 24: Indigenous Sri Lankan Tea Picker Picking Leaves Rawpixel / shutterstock.com institutions, civil society organizations (CSOs), the private sector, indigenous peoples and local communities—to address global environmental issues in the areas of biodiversity, climate change, international waters, land degradation, the ozone layer, and chemicals. The GEF is the largest funder of projects to improve the global environment. In addition to the GEF Trust Fund, the GEF also administers the Least Developed Countries Fund (LDCF), the Special Climate Change Fund (SCCF) and the Nagoya Protocol Implementation Fund (NPIF). In addition, it provides interim secretariat services for the Adaptation Fund. Since its inception, the GEF has invested over $11.5 billion, supplemented by more than $57 billion in co-financing, for 3,215 projects in more than 165 developing countries and countries with economies in transition. PRODUCTION CREDITS Over 23 years, the GEF has established itself as a mechanism that Text: Laura Ledwith and Yoko Watanabe operates in an effective and efficient manner, delivering solid Data Collection: Bjoern Buesing and Sarah Amy Wyatt outcomes with its resources. Through its network of Partner Agencies Review and Edit: Gustavo Alberto Fonseca and Mark Foss with a broad set of competencies, the GEF is able to have a Production Date: May 2014 balanced, transparent and global reach. Design: Patricia Hord.Graphik Design Printer: Professional Graphics Printing Co. For more information, visit www.thegef.org. PARTNERSHIP IN PRACTICE: ENGAGEMENT WITH INDIGENOUS PEOPLES 25 www.theGEF.org Printed on Environmentally Friendly Paper