Indigenous Peoples' Actions Towards Solving the Biodiversity Crisis

By Victoria Tauli-Corpuz, UNPFII Chairperson and Tebtebba Executive Director

Thank you for inviting me to represent the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues in this High Level Event. Last week, the Forum held its International Expert Meeting on Indigenous Peoples' Development with Culture and Identity in New York. This meeting discussed the global environmental crises, which includes both the biodiversity and climate change crisis, and reiterated that indigenous peoples contributed the least to these but are the ones heavily suffering from the adverse impacts. We also discussed various proposals and actions indigenous peoples are taking to contribute in solving the crises. So I will share with you today some of the points which emerged from this Expert Meeting. I will also discuss some of the experiences of Tebtebba, my own indigenous organization, in its work in ensuring that the action plans of the CBD are implemented at the national and local level.

Indigenous peoples, through the Indigenous International Forum on Biodiversity (IIFB), have been actively participating in the CBD processes. The areas where they are most active are in protected areas, Article 8j (traditional knowledge), negotiations around the Access and Benefit-Sharing International Regime, indicators work and CEPA (Communication, Education and Public Awareness).

I looked at the reports made so far in terms of how the 2010 CBD targets are reached and the common conclusion is that most of these targets are not achieved. This says that there is a huge implementation gap by Parties and other stakeholders. So this is what I will like to talk about in my presentation. What can indigenous peoples and others do to address this implementation gap?

Diagnosis of biodiversity erosion

From the indigenous peoples' perspective it is clear that the drivers of biodiversity erosion are not addressed enough. The CBD identified, habitat loss, overexploitation, pollution, invasive alien species and climate change as the drivers, but the system which perpetuates these drivers is not significantly addressed. While the CBD identified the roots of these drivers, which include economic growth and population growth, its contributions in terms of the debate and actions needed to address these roots are not adequate. The fragmented manner in which the intergovernmental system deals with problems and the lack of coherence between different intergovernmental bodies have contributed to this situation. This is quite ironical as the CBD is the champion of the ecosystem approach which is a holistic approach.

A system which is obsessed with economic growth and an unfettered market and which fails to integrate fully cultural development, social justice, human rights and environmental sustainability, will inevitably lead to the biodiversity and climate change crisis. It is clear that the global economic crisis is also a logical result of such a system.

The erosion of cultural diversity, traditional knowledge and loss of languages is also a part of the crises. Values such as reciprocity, diversity, solidarity, accountability, equilibrium and harmony with Mother Earth, which continue to guide the daily lives of many indigenous peoples, are seen as romantic and not practical in real life. Traditional knowledge which is built upon the daily interaction of indigenous and local peoples with nature and with the seen and the unseen is fast disappearing.

To be fair to the CBD it discussed in some of its documents the failures of the system to factor in natural and social capital. Furthermore, sustainable development as defined by the UN includes the three pillars of economic, environment and social development. Obviously, the rhetoric is far from the actions which have been taken. So it is in the areas of rediagnosing the root causes of biodiversity loss and implementing the solutions that we need to focus in.

The Permanent's Forum's expert meeting on development with culture and identity, clearly identified that this dominant development and economic model is the main cause for the global economic and environmental crises. It identified the key elements of indigenous peoples' development with culture and identity and placed cultural, spiritual, environmental and social and human development in an equal place with economic development. It behooves all of us then to dare to deconstruct the unsustainable global economic system which is now collapsing and be serious in building, brick by brick, a truly sustainable world. The work of the CBD and the role of conservation of biodiversity in this reconstruction process is crucial and this is challenge we face as we prepare a post 2010 strategy.

Actions and role of indigenous peoples

In terms of actions taken by indigenous peoples, as I mentioned earlier, we have been closely engaged with the CBD processes at the global down to the local levels. For the work of Article 8j, we tried very hard to bring into the debate the importance of our traditional systems of protecting and sharing our indigenous knowledge systems as an example of a sui generis system of protection. The indicator on the status traditional knowledge, innovations and practices is the status and trends of linguistic diversity and number of speakers of indigenous languages. This was identified by the CBD and UNESCO is supporting the generation of data on this. However, in the assessment of CBD, much more work needs to be done on this.

Additional work on indicators was done by the IIFB Working Group, which was led by Tebtebba. The Permanent Forum helped in convening the regional and global workshops on developing indicators of indigenous peoples' well-being and sustainability. The additional indicators for traditional knowledge, innovations and practices are the status and trends in the practice of traditional occupations and the status and trends in land use patterns and land security in indigenous territories. We expect these to be included in the post 2010 targets.

The ILO which has Convention No. 111 on Traditional Occupations is partnering with various indigenous organizations to undertake research on the state of indigenous peoples' traditional livelihoods (e.g. Swidden agriculture, pastoralism, coastal and marine livelihoods, high mountain agriculture, etc.) and how this is linked in maintaining and enhancing biological and cultural diversity. How to generate data on land use patterns and land security needs to discussed and agreed upon.

The work on indicators is closely linked with the work of the Forum on data disaggregation. We are doing this work at the global and national levels. Unless there is disaggregated data on the indigenous peoples, it will be very difficult to build and use indicators.

Raising public awareness, advocating and implementing the ecosystem approach is an important area of work for indigenous peoples. In the Philippines we, in Tebtebba, are piloting this approach in one municipality in Ifugao which is in the Cordillera region. We are working in close cooperation with the municipal and provincial government. If we gather enough resources we plan to expand this in other indigenous territories.

The work programme on protected areas is another focus. The ecosystem approach and human rights based approach have to be used in the work on protected areas.We know fully well the way indigenous peoples' human rights have been violated in some actions taken to expand protected areas. The idea of wilderness without human intervention is heavily contested by indigenous peoples. Many of the world's territories which are now categorized as protected areas overlap with traditional territories of indigenous peoples. This is the reason why there is now a category called indigenous protected areas (IPAs), which are actually traditional territories of indigenous peoples which have protected biodiversity since time immemorial. An Indigenous Protected Area, as defined by Australian aborigines, is an area of Indigenous-owned land or sea where traditional owners have entered into an agreement with the Australian Government to promote biodiversity and cultural resource conservation. An IUCN-WWF Principles and Guidelines on Indigenous and Traditional Peoples and Protected Areas was developed in support of this concept.

What needs to be done is to develop such protected areas if agreed by the indigenous peoples concerned. There is a need to provide additional support to allow indigenous peoples to continue what they are still practicing in terms of biodiversity protection.

In the work on access and benefit sharing we are also playing an active role in the negotiations. Two of my colleagues in Tebtebba are experts in this area and are invited to join in the expert meetings of the ABS working group. We are hoping that when the regime gets adapted, the recognition of the rights of indigenous peoples to regulate and control access to their genetic resources and to equitably benefit from these will be ensured.

Finally, indigenous peoples are active players in ensuring that the role played by tropical rainforests in climate change mitigation is recognized and rewarded under the UNFCCC and also in the CBD. The links between biodiversity and climate change is most obvious in REDD Plus (Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation, Conservation, Sustainable Management of Forests and Enhancement of Forest Carbon Stocks) under the UNFCCC. Indigenous peoples are highly critical of this scheme because of its potential to exacerbate further the violation of their rights but also because of its links with carbon trading. Anyhow, many indigenous peoples think that they have to be engaged actively in designing, implementing and monitoring this to prevent the possible adverse impacts on them as well as to get the benefits.

Post 2010 Biodiversity Targets

Clearly, determining and achieving the targets for post 2010 will have to based on a thorough review and assessment of why most of the targets are unmet.

There are a few principles and areas which should guide the formulation of post 2010 targets from the perspectives of indigenous peoples. These are developed by my colleague, Joji Carino, who is the one heading our CBD Team in Tebtebba.

1. The post 2010 biodiversity targets need to be SMART (Simple, measurable, achievable, results-based and time-bound) and they also need to be wise. The SMART objectives reflect the strong science base of the CBD, and the wise objectives capture the underlying ethical and spiritual values guiding these SMART targets. Unless we are able to win the hearts and minds of society, it will be hard to secure the objectives of the CBD.

2. The CBD targets should be underpinned by the values I referred to earlier; reciprocity, sustainability, diversity, collectivity, solidarity, accountability, equilibrium and harmony with Mother Earth. During the Expert Meeting of the Forum on Development, we were fortunate to have with us John Bamba, a Dayak from Western Kalimantan. He reiterated these same values which his people live by and contrasted this with what predominates in the world today.

3. Knowledge and awareness, values and action, are the underlying motivations, underpinnings, to achieve SMART targets. As such, traditional knowledge and CEPA are central, not marginal tools towards attaining the biodiversity targets. These are priority cross-cutting measures.

4. The 2010 biodiversity targets need to be global, but understood to be implemented at appropriate local scale of ecosystems and peoples, and environmental governance delegated to the lowest possible level, respecting customary institutions and laws.

5. Applying the ecosystem approach builds on customary resource management and sustainable use practices of indigenous peoples and local communities. In conjunction with Article 8(j), the implementation of Article 10 (c)of the Convention in the post-2010 period will make a strong contribution to both the biodiversity targets and sustainable development.

6. The health and well-being of critical ecosystems and indigenous peoples and local communities dependent on biodiversity, are inextricably linked, as are the attainment of biodiversity targets and sustainable development goals.Indicators need to capture both the state of ecosystems and human well-being. The HDR (Human Development Report) is in its 20^th year now and the UNDP is in the process of reviewing this. Some indigenous experts, including a few members of the Permanent Forum, participated in the discussion to make the HDI more sensitive to indigenous peoples realities and contributions. The links between biodiversity, cultural diversity, spirituality and indigenous peoples' traditional knowledge, innovations and practices have to be enhanced. Various UN bodies such as UNESCO, CBD Secretariat, the UNPFII, among others should work effectively together to work on this.

7. The indicators developed by indigenous peoples and adapted by the CBD in relation to traditional knowledge, innovations and practices which I mentioned earlier need to be supported in terms of developing these further and using them.

   • status and trends in linguistic diversity and numbers of speakers of indigenous languages

   • status and trends in the practice of traditional occupations and the

   • status and trends in land use patterns and land security in indigenous territories.

8. The national implementation of Article 8(j) are still at the early stages as evidenced from the national reports. The post-2010 biodiversity targets need to make these central priorities, not marginal concerns. A significant achievement within the United Nations was the adoption of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), as a universal aspiration and the international standard to be applied in promoting the objectives of the CBD, and the sustainable development agenda. The CBD has established many good practices for the full and effective participation of indigenous peoples in the Convention, which should be adopted by other multilateral environmental agreements.

9. Finally, the 9^th Session of the UNPFII which deals with the special theme IP Development with Culture and Identity: focus on Articles 3 and Articles 32. This will be a very good opportunity to elaborate further on the role of biodiversity and cultural diversity in redesigning development.

We know fully well, that while we bear disproportionately the adverse impacts of the economic and environmental crises, we, indigenous peoples, are also in the frontlines in providing solutions. We cannot do this without others. Thus, partnership is crucial but this partnership should be based on respect for the rights and indigenous knowledge systems of indigenous peoples.

I look forward to seeing a strengthened partnership between indigenous peoples, States and intergovernmental bodies.

Speech during the 2010 International Year of Biodiversity, UNESCO High Level Segment, Paris, 21-22 January 2010

Download Speech in .pdf.