Sixteen partners of Cycle 6 of the Indigenous Peoples Assistance Facility (IPAF) Asia-Pacific, represented by about 36 delegates, including Indigenous women and community leaders from  country and community partners, participated in a Project Learning Exchange on April 27–May 2, in Chiang Mai, Thailand. The Learning Exchange created a platform for intercultural dialogue among community partners, project implementers and Indigenous leaders as they shared outcomes, challenges and emerging impacts, particularly on women and youth.

Tebtebba Foundation, a co-manager of IPAF, convened the gathering to identify ways and strategies to sustain achievements beyond the project, ensuring that Indigenous knowledge, rights and community‑driven initiatives remain at the center of climate action and biodiversity conservation.

During the opening, Dr. Prasert Trakansuphakok, Director of Pgakenyaw Association for Sustainable Development (PASD) in Thailand, recalled IPAF milestones, including collaborations with International Food and Agricultural Development (IFAD) and North East Slow Food and Agrobiodiversity Society (NESFAS), as well as the introduction of the agroecology performance evaluation (TAPE) tool. He emphasized how these efforts strengthened traditional farming, improved food security, empowered youth and women and fostered social enterprises. He called for wider reach, stronger funding and sustainable implementation built on four pillars—biodiversity, nutrition, Indigenous economy and climate resilience.

Welcoming the participants, Tebtebba Executive Director Helen Biangalen‑Magata lauded the inspiring small‑scale, community‑led projects supported by IPAF, stressing their role in livelihoods, climate adaptation and food security and the importance of Indigenous knowledge systems in biodiversity management. “Indeed, Indigenous Peoples play a crucial role in knowledge systems, resilience and grassroots initiatives that often yield more sustainable and long‑term impacts. Despite their small scale, these initiatives are powerful and scalable, demonstrating that solutions rooted in community and tradition can make a significant difference worldwide.” She encouraged participants to share lessons, strengthen partnerships and draw on local knowledge for sustainable development.

IFAD and Indigenous Peoples

According to IFAD Social Inclusion Specialist Karla Sofia Pita Vidal, IPAF has reached Indigenous Peoples globally since 2007 and supported over 200 projects, with priorities in biodiversity, gender and youth. IPAF is an innovative funding mechanism of the IFAD, which supports projects developed and implemented by Indigenous Peoples and their communities and organizations through small funds. 

Margherita Loddoni, Technical Specialist at IFAD’s Environment, Climate, Gender and Social Inclusion Division, underscored IPAF’s deep connection with Indigenous communities and their holistic approach in integrating the environment, climate change, land and livelihoods. She stressed the importance of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) to ensure projects remain community‑led, adding that cycle assessments are vital for reflecting Indigenous perspectives. She described IPAF as a collective effort made possible by many partners, with growing momentum for direct access to financing for Indigenous Peoples. IFAD’s role, she said, is to support initiatives already being led by communities.

Highlights of Learning Exchange

“Are we the culprit in today’s crises?” 

Raising this question, Eleanor Dictaan‑Bang‑oa, IPAF Project Team Leader at Tebtebba, affirmed that Indigenous Peoples are actors moving towards the solution to the global environmental crises we face. “We are all building blocks to the solution,” she said.

Tebtebba IPAF Program Officer Jane Yap‑eo added that every gathering calls for shared action to address common issues with collective solutions, while facing the distinct challenges of climate change and biodiversity loss, the central focus of IPAF Cycle 6.

Dr. Dhrupad Choudhury, Senior Adviser at The Indigenous Partnership for Agrobiodiversity and Food Sovereignty and an expert on IFAD’s social, environmental and climate assessment procedures led a session on Outcome Framework for scaling up Indigenous Peoples’ food systems to benefit people, nature and climate. Dr. Dhrupad noted the role of agriculture in climate change, biodiversity loss and water insecurity. He stressed that Indigenous Peoples’ food systems offer solutions by providing nutritious food while protecting critical ecosystems. 

To further elucidate TAPE, Gratia Embok Dhkar of NESFAS presented the adapted TAPE assessment. The results showed strong agroecological performance in India, Kenya, Mexico and Thailand, highlighting crop diversity, women’s leadership and collective governance. Through storytelling, communities underscored values of interconnectedness and respect for nature, demonstrating that Indigenous food systems are nature‑positive and aligned with global biodiversity and sustainable development goals.

Expanding on the Outcome Framework, Dr. Dhrupad emphasized Indigenous food systems’ biocentric values of harmony and diversity over monocultures. He outlined five priorities identified by communities—nutritious food, biodiversity, sustained income, risk aversion and spirit of sharing—which informed two main goals: valuing positive impacts while nurturing sociocultural traditions.

The Outcome Framework is structured around six pillars, including Nurture Nature, Nourishing People, Livelihoods and Climate Adaptation. It has cross‑cutting areas, which include Responsible Governance and Intercultural Knowledge Creation and Management and pathways, such as seed banks, school meal programs, social enterprises and carbon‑sequestering landscapes.

Community partners of the 16 project partners shared their stories highlighting their reflections, challenges encountered, lessons learned, achievements and sustainability plans or strategies as Cycle 6 is about to close. This allowed participants to see the breadth of initiatives across the region, from food security and biodiversity conservation to women’s leadership and youth empowerment. They also reflected on intergenerational knowledge transmission and ways to strengthen partnerships beyond the current cycle. This interactive session not only showcased project impacts but also deepened collective learning, reinforcing the value of Indigenous‑led approaches in shaping resilient communities.

Visits to two Karen communities in northern Thailand were part of the learning exchange. One group visited Huay Hin Lad Nai in Chiang Rai where they learned about sustainable rotational farming, beekeeping and forest conservation as well as the strong collaboration between youth and elders in preserving Indigenous knowledge and self‑determination. 

Another group visited Huay Ee Khang in Mae Wang District in Chiang Mai where they explored the pioneering Indigenous Women’s Forest initiative, traditional weaving, seed banking and natural dyeing. They engaged in hands-on activities such as dyeing and preparing herbal inhalers from medicinal plants, while observing how women’s leadership, youth‑elder collaboration and well‑documented practices strengthen cultural identity, livelihoods and territorial rights.

During the reflection session, the participants admired the Karen’s seed banking as well as documentation practices and clear land demarcations, which ensured recognition even by government institutions. Many of them pointed out the strong involvement of youth alongside elders, showing how knowledge is transmitted across generations, while women’s leadership in forest protection, weaving and cooperative management stood out as a model of empowerment. They also noted how Indigenous knowledge was blended with modern tools such as mapping and scientific analysis, strengthening resilience and advocacy. Forests were seen not only as sources of food but also as pharmacies and rice banks, sustaining households and reinforcing unity. 

While challenges such as landlessness, water scarcity and limited social services were acknowledged, the participants emphasized the communities’ confidence, hospitality and self‑determination as inspiring examples. The project partners also agreed to revitalize the project’s social media page by highlighting success stories and engaging content. This decision underscored the importance of visibility and digital advocacy in sustaining momentum and sharing lessons learned beyond the project cycle.

In her synthesis, Helen Valdez, Project Officer of Tebtebba’s IPAF Project, stressed the sustainable resource use, communal ownership and active participation of women and youth in the two communities visited. She underscored the principle of “taking only what you need”.

Since the launch of the IPAF 6th Cycle in 2024, 17 projects across Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, the Philippines and Vietnam have advanced Indigenous Peoples’ conservation and sustainable management of biodiversity as pathways to climate change adaptation and resilience. As these projects near completion–and with some already concluded–the gathering offered a timely opportunity to reflect on progress, share lessons and strengthen collective efforts to sustain the gains achieved.

The activity was co‑organized by Tebtebba Foundation, the Pgakenyaw Association for Sustainable Development and The Indigenous Partnership for Agrobiodiversity and Food Sovereignty, with support from the International Fund for Agricultural Development.

Indigenous leaders, climate finance experts, and development partners called for more equitable, accessible, and rights-based climate finance during the hybrid side event, Indigenous Peoples' Access to Climate and Development Finance: Status, Challenges, Practices, and Recommendations, held alongside the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (UNPFII) in New York, at the UN Headquarters on April 22.

Moderated by Helen Magata, Executive Director of Tebtebba Foundation, Inc., the event brought together Indigenous representatives, multilateral institutions and funding organizations to examine the persistent barriers preventing Indigenous Peoples from accessing climate and development finance directly. Discussions also explored practical pathways to strengthen Indigenous leadership in financing mechanisms and decision-making.

Opening the discussion, Emil Sirén, a Kichwa leader from Sarayaku, Ecuador, shared reflections from the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development in Seville. He noted that Indigenous Peoples remain largely absent from global development finance discussions, where debates are dominated by private finance, multilateral development banks and financial reforms. He emphasized that Indigenous Peoples must define development finance based on their own priorities and rights, as recognized under the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples rather than relying solely on externally driven financing models.

Representing the Green Climate Fund (GCF), Jennifer Rubis, the GCF Indigenous Peoples Focal Point, presented the Fund's ongoing efforts to improve Indigenous Peoples' access to climate finance. She highlighted the outcomes of the first-ever GCF Global Conference with Indigenous Peoples, which reaffirmed Indigenous leadership in climate action while identifying gaps between the GCF's Indigenous Peoples Policy and its implementation.

Rubis outlined the GCF's plans to address recommendations from its Independent Evaluation Unit, including exploring dedicated entry points for Indigenous Peoples, supporting Indigenous-led initiatives, expanding readiness and accreditation support, and considering an Indigenous Peoples-specific financing window. She noted that these proposals are expected to be discussed by the GCF Board in 2026, while Indigenous-led concept notes and capacity-building initiatives are already underway.

Myrna Cunningham, Chair of the Pawanka Fund and Executive Director of the Center for Indigenous Peoples' Autonomy and Development, introduced a draft rights-based protocol for donors and intermediaries working with Indigenous Peoples. Developed by Indigenous-led funds from the Global South, the protocol aims to transform funding relationships by placing self-determination, equity, trust, reciprocity, transparency and mutual accountability at their core.

Cunningham emphasized that while intermediaries may continue to play a role in certain contexts, Indigenous Peoples should retain the agency to choose their partners and define the terms of those relationships. The protocol also promotes culturally appropriate accountability, respect for Indigenous governance systems, protection of Indigenous data sovereignty and clear pathways toward direct financing.

Sharing practical experiences, Nonette Royo, Executive Director of the International Land and Tenure Facility, demonstrated that Indigenous organizations are fully capable of managing large-scale funding when trusted and adequately supported. Drawing from the Facility's work, she highlighted how long-term investments, institutional capacity strengthening and partnerships with supportive governments have enabled Indigenous organizations to access and manage significant financial resources while advancing land rights and climate action.
Royo stressed that intermediaries should serve as facilitators rather than permanent gatekeepers, helping Indigenous institutions build the capacity needed to access financing directly. She also pointed to emerging opportunities within the Green Climate Fund to pilot more direct financing models for Indigenous Peoples.

In her closing reflections, Robie Halip, Executive Director of the Rights Energy Partnership with Indigenous Peoples (REP), emphasized that Indigenous Peoples must become more visible and influential in global financing for development discussions, where decisions shaping climate and development finance are made. She stressed that Indigenous Peoples should define what direct access to finance means based on their own priorities and governance systems rather than adapting to externally imposed models.

Halip also underscored that while intermediaries continue to play an important role, particularly in countries where Indigenous organizations face legal, political, or institutional barriers, their engagement should be guided by a rights-based framework that strengthens Indigenous institutions and supports a transition toward direct access. She further called on multilateral climate funds, including the Green Climate Fund, to move beyond policy commitments by strengthening implementation of Indigenous Peoples' policies, reinforcing the role of the Indigenous Peoples Advisory Group, and ensuring dedicated financial resources for Indigenous Peoples. She concluded by urging Indigenous organizations to remain united, emphasizing that climate finance should strengthen solidarity and collective action rather than create competition among Indigenous communities.

Throughout the discussion, speakers agreed that despite growing international commitments to Indigenous rights and climate action, significant structural barriers continue to limit Indigenous Peoples' access to funding. They called for financing systems that recognize Indigenous Peoples as rights holders and development partners, rather than merely beneficiaries, and urged donors, governments and financial institutions to invest in Indigenous-led solutions that reflect communities' own priorities, governance systems and visions for sustainable development.

The side event reinforced a common message: achieving effective and equitable climate action requires financing mechanisms that move beyond consultation and enable Indigenous Peoples to directly access, manage and shape the resources intended to support their communities and territories.

At the 44th Green Climate Fund (GCF) Board Meeting in Songdo, Incheon, South Korea last March 25–28, various advocates including civil society, local communities and Indigenous Peoples called for better delivery of the GCF mandate, respect for and recognition of Indigenous Peoples’ rights, and direct access and arrangements for climate financing. The GCF Board approved a total of 18 Funding Proposals, amounting to USD 960.3 million of GCF Resources, with a total value of USD 2.54 billion, including co-financing.

The projects were presented by 7 Direct Access Entity (DAE) and 6 International Access Entity (IAE), which serve as the main partners through which the Fund channels climate finance. The Board also approved 10 new accredited entities (AE) and 2 upgrades of scope of accredited entities. The AE are organizations that have been formally approved to access and manage GCF resources on behalf of countries. In addition, internal policies and operational decisions of the Fund were discussed, including the Board retreat, regional presence, the Updated Strategic Plan for the GCF 2028–2031 and other evaluations and reviews conducted by the Secretariat and Independent Units.

Representing Tebtebba, Helen Biangalen-Magata, Abigail Kitma and Melessa Carrao participated in the 44th GCF Board Meeting. As part of the larger GCF Civil Society Organization (CSO) observer network, the team also joined several preparatory meetings held from March 21–24 with various organizations and representatives within the network.

Several concerns, recommendations and expressions of support regarding Indigenous Peoples were raised during the Board meeting. Some of these were highlighted in specific Funding Proposal designs, reports, evaluations and other action and information items, as well as during the consideration of Accreditation Proposals. These included the integration of Indigenous Peoples’ knowledge in project designs, inclusion of Indigenous Peoples in the planning committees, and engagements and meaningful consultations with Indigenous Peoples.

With regard to the funding proposals, the Board Members and CSO observers requested clarification on the Environmental and Social Safeguards of certain Accredited Entities' methodologies and frameworks in including Indigenous Peoples in their projects. The role of the Indigenous Peoples’ Advisory Group (IPAG) was also cleared up by the CSO network; while its mandate is to provide guidance to the Secretariat, Accredited Entities, Nationally Designated Authorities and the Board as needed, the IPAG cannot and should not speak on behalf of all Indigenous Peoples. Hence, the Secretariat is encouraged to engage with Indigenous Peoples directly on matters that affect them.

The CSO active observers urged the Fund to prioritize transparent, community-accessible processes for accountability and redress, and called for moving beyond token consultation toward direct, meaningful engagement with Indigenous Peoples in line with the GCF’s own Indigenous Peoples’ Policy. The CSO active observer from Developing Countries, Kairos Dela Cruz, highlighted the need for the Fund to ensure its commitment to human rights and for openness of Board Members and AEs in engaging with civil society, local communities and Indigenous Peoples. The Developed Countries' CSO active observer, Tara Daniel, expressed concern about the GCF's current direction, specifically on the unclear integration and prioritization of the Private Sector Facility, the lack of support for Direct Access Entities, and the use of AI in accessing data for reports and evaluations and where it is being deployed.

The GCF Board has decided to establish a Regional Presence. Moving from a centralized model to meeting the differentiated needs of Developing Countries on the ground, the decision ensures the GCF becomes closer to countries and establishes closer linkages with AEs and National Designated Authorities.

The regional offices are to be set up in:

1. Latin America and the Caribbean (Panama City, Panama);
2. Eastern Europe, Central Asia, and the SWANA (Southwest Asia and North Africa) / Middle East region (Amman, Jordan).

Africa is set to establish a regional office operating across two locations:

1. East and Southern Africa: Nairobi, Kenya, and
2. Central, North, and West Africa: Abidjan, Côte d'Ivoire.

A subregional office covering the Pacific will be located in Suva, Fiji.