Host Government Delegates Support IPs Struggle to Save Biodiversity
Contribute by Ibrahim NJOBDI
The Federal Minister of Economic Cooperation and Development and the Federal Minister of Environment Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety, Government of Germany express the will to assist Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (ILC) struggle to protect Biodiversity. The Ministers support the ILC struggles in two separate meetings with the representatives of ILC at Maritim Hotel, Bonn yesterday.
The Ministers promised to lobby the government and other stakeholders and consider the problems in policy making. Development Cooperation Terms with the governments of Developing Countries will be re-emphasis, according to the Ministers.
ILC representatives briefed the Ministers on the ground alarming loss of biodiversity and the emanating problems. The Minister of Economic Cooperation and Development promises to consider supporting ILC’s seminars and workshops to restitute CBD process and implementation.
She says, “We can’t deny governments to allow extractive industries but their role is to make sure a transparent process.”
The Minister supports Britain’s position to include the issue of ‘Climate Change’ as agenda in the United Nations’ Security Council. She further stresses that agro-fuels has no place at this time of food crisis. She adds that the production of food is to feed millions of hungry people in the world and not for machines and engines.
The Minister of Environment Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety pointed out that the Convention on Biological Diversity is the only international binding instrument where ILC exercise their rights and urges the ILC to utilize this opportunity to maximum, in his response to the call of the ILC to insure the inclusion of ILC in environmental projects or make a precondition for bilateral aid to governments.
He, however, regretted those sixteen years after its signing, the Convention’s full implementation is still a dream. The Minister opined that biodiversity will be protected if the overuse of nature is made more expensive than saving it and every individual have a moral responsibility to the conservation of biodiversity.
The Informal Contact Group on Article 8(j) has Finally Concluded
Contribute by Gam Shimray
The IIFB since its preparatory days in COP9 was skeptical of the negotiations that were to follow at the CBD. This has to do with the experience and outcome of the last Working Group on Art. 8(j). Both the Parties and the Indigenous Peoples (IPs) had complained of the unproductive meeting of the above but had different reasons to their justifications. IPs reasoned that it is because of ‘lack of political will’ and the politics of negotiation at the ABS on the International Regime spilled into the AHWG on 8(j), but of course, Parties have totally a different explanation to this. This was worrisome to the IIFB for it meant that the negotiations would not take place without prejudice.
Given this background, the IIFB and the Thematic Working Group on Art. 8(j) had three primary objectives at the COP9 negotiations. First, it was to secure the future work of 8(j) so that the AHWG continues and is not abundant. Secondly, it was to secure the important tasks of 8(j) for the next AHWG with a clear objective. Thirdly, it was to revitalize and bring back the foundational role that 8(j) plays in the participation of IPs at CBD and its crucial role in other thematic areas, especially on TK related negotiation within the International Regime.
As the negotiation began, it was not surprising that the IIFB’s 8(j) group were up against closed minds. But the IIFB were not ready to just cave-in without a fight. There was a long recess after the second Informal Group. However, it was not a break for any of the IIFB members. Lobby and reasoning with the Governments on one to one basis were pursued for days before the third Informal Group was reconvened. Positions remained stiff and were offered worthless words of compromises. However, the Latin American Governments came to the rescue. They stood by the IIFB and supported the voices of the IPs firmly. It was in this context that Governments began to bend and agreed to negotiate on compromised text and positions in a meaningful manner. What followed was convening of Friends of the Chair and bilateral negotiations. When flexibility became the basis of the negotiations, the Co-chairs were able to find the difficult path to ‘consensuses. The Informal Group was able to conclude in its fourth meeting with a document that was acceptable to the IPs as well.
The above objectives outlined by the IIFB finally seem to be secured to some extend. Further, the threat that convening of the future AHWG 8(j) meeting would be taken out of the core budget of the CBD has been dealt with, and now it remains as it was. With its funding secured and many tasks of priority being identified, it is implicit that both the IPs and Governments have plenty of serious homework to do for the realization of the decisions that would be adopted sometime tomorrow at the plenary.
Thursday, May 29, 2008
IIFB statement on Access and Benefit Sharing
Statement of IIFB on Access and Benefit Sharing for COP 9
Thank you Mr. Co-Chairs,
For allowing the IIFB to address the issue of ABS, which – as you are aware – is of great relevance to indigenous peoples. A substantial part of the subject matter being discussed originates from indigenous territories. We reaffirm our right to GR and associated TK in accordance with our right to self-determination. The international regime will directly impact on indigenous peoples’ lives. Key decisions on the road map forward as well as on material issues can be expected to be made at COP 9. Consequently, we humbly call on you Mr. Co-Chairs – as you have done in previous ABS WGs – to allow for the effective participation of indigenous peoples in all negotiations during this conference, including in informal consultation groups, contact groups and other informal settings, in accordance with Decisions VII/19 D and VIII/5 C.
Mr. Co-Chairs,
The IIFB is encouraged by the progress made at ABS WG 6, and we stand ready to accelerate the negotiations on an international regime in order to finalize the deliberations by 2010, based on the Annex coming out of the ABS WG 6. We do believe that the Annex can serve as a basis for further discussions. That said, certain elements are not yet reflected in the Annex which are essential in order to enable indigenous peoples to support the International Regime. Indigenous peoples are deeply concerned that lately, discussions on our rights and interests have been restricted solely to the question of TK. This approach fails to recognize that TK, and indigenous rights, are cross cutting issues relevant to all aspects of the ABS-regime due to the interrelation between TK and GR.
- We find Section D “Traditional Knowledge” in the “Main Components” part promising, as we see emerging consensus that indigenous peoples’ TK can only be accessed subject to our FPIC in accordance with our legal systems and with respect for our rights. However, any international regime must, to be acceptable to indigenous peoples, also recognize our rights to genetic resources.
- In the same vein, we reiterate that any reference in the international regime to state sovereignty over natural resources must include a confirmation that the exercise of state sovereignty is subject to human rights of indigenous peoples pertaining to GR and TK.
- Both Section A “Benefit Sharing” and Section B “Access” in the Main Components lack references to the FPIC of indigenous peoples. Any international regime must include language that affirms that indigenous peoples GR and TK can only be accessed after FPIC of indigenous peoples has been obtained, and that only then can benefit-sharing arrangements occur.
Mr. Co-Chairs,
Indigenous peoples participate in the ABS-process with the ambition that agreement will be reached on a strong and adequate international regime, respecting and ensuring compliance with the minimum standards just mentioned as also enshrined in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and other relevant human rights standards. As a consequence of these developments within international law, the international regime must also distinguish between indigenous peoples and local communities, and can no longer use the collective and term indigenous and local communities, which is now incorrect under international law. We are committed to cooperate with you Mr. Co-Chairs to the best of our ability, to meet that end.
Thank you.
Thank you Mr. Co-Chairs,
For allowing the IIFB to address the issue of ABS, which – as you are aware – is of great relevance to indigenous peoples. A substantial part of the subject matter being discussed originates from indigenous territories. We reaffirm our right to GR and associated TK in accordance with our right to self-determination. The international regime will directly impact on indigenous peoples’ lives. Key decisions on the road map forward as well as on material issues can be expected to be made at COP 9. Consequently, we humbly call on you Mr. Co-Chairs – as you have done in previous ABS WGs – to allow for the effective participation of indigenous peoples in all negotiations during this conference, including in informal consultation groups, contact groups and other informal settings, in accordance with Decisions VII/19 D and VIII/5 C.
Mr. Co-Chairs,
The IIFB is encouraged by the progress made at ABS WG 6, and we stand ready to accelerate the negotiations on an international regime in order to finalize the deliberations by 2010, based on the Annex coming out of the ABS WG 6. We do believe that the Annex can serve as a basis for further discussions. That said, certain elements are not yet reflected in the Annex which are essential in order to enable indigenous peoples to support the International Regime. Indigenous peoples are deeply concerned that lately, discussions on our rights and interests have been restricted solely to the question of TK. This approach fails to recognize that TK, and indigenous rights, are cross cutting issues relevant to all aspects of the ABS-regime due to the interrelation between TK and GR.
- We find Section D “Traditional Knowledge” in the “Main Components” part promising, as we see emerging consensus that indigenous peoples’ TK can only be accessed subject to our FPIC in accordance with our legal systems and with respect for our rights. However, any international regime must, to be acceptable to indigenous peoples, also recognize our rights to genetic resources.
- In the same vein, we reiterate that any reference in the international regime to state sovereignty over natural resources must include a confirmation that the exercise of state sovereignty is subject to human rights of indigenous peoples pertaining to GR and TK.
- Both Section A “Benefit Sharing” and Section B “Access” in the Main Components lack references to the FPIC of indigenous peoples. Any international regime must include language that affirms that indigenous peoples GR and TK can only be accessed after FPIC of indigenous peoples has been obtained, and that only then can benefit-sharing arrangements occur.
Mr. Co-Chairs,
Indigenous peoples participate in the ABS-process with the ambition that agreement will be reached on a strong and adequate international regime, respecting and ensuring compliance with the minimum standards just mentioned as also enshrined in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and other relevant human rights standards. As a consequence of these developments within international law, the international regime must also distinguish between indigenous peoples and local communities, and can no longer use the collective and term indigenous and local communities, which is now incorrect under international law. We are committed to cooperate with you Mr. Co-Chairs to the best of our ability, to meet that end.
Thank you.
IWBN statement for COP 9
Indigenous Women’s Biodiversity Network [IWBN] Statement
For COP 9, Bonn Germany
May 28, 2008
Indigenous women are food producers, providers and guardians of the gene pools of food crops for future generations. In our daily interaction with nature, we have developed a profound understanding of different ecosystems. Keeping the balance has been our way of life. Therefore, Empowering Indigenous women is an important prerequisite for environmental and poverty eradication.
However, as indigenous women, we are continually being marginalized at local, national, regional and international levels. Parties at this COP meeting have contributed to this marginalization by failing to support the Gender Plan of Action. We see the formalization of this document as instrumental to the full and effective participation of women, especially indigenous women, to all aspects and work of the CBD.
We want to remind parties that they have established in the preambular to the CBD, the “vital role that women play in the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity and affirming the need for full participation of women at all levels of policy making and implementation for biological diversity conservation”.
Therefore, Indigenous women call on parties to take note and to act on the following items:
That Climate Change is a serious threat for indigenous women’s food security and food sovereignty. We want parties to say no to false solutions to climate change such as REDD and CDM.
· Indigenous women do not want the establishment of any new national protected areas on indigenous lands and territories until our lands, territories and resources are fully recognized and respected. We call on parties to stop the encroachment of protected areas into our territories.
· Indigenous women experience marginalization in terms of heavy workload in harsh and impoverished situation. We want parties to put the Gender Plan of Action as a priority and allocate resources for its implementation and to ensure the full and effective participation and capacity building of indigenous women.
· We reiterate that Traditional Knowledge is fundamental to indigenous women and to the success of the Convention. We strongly support the renewed focus on the completion of concrete items such as the elements of sui generis systems, so that TK is protected and transmitted to our children.
· With the entry of development projects such as: mining; mega dams; logging and gas pipelines, they result in conflicts, such as prostitution; militarization; HIV Aids; rape; domestic violence; forced migration and drug addiction that directly affect women and biodiversity. We therefore, demand parties that for any development projects undertaken on our territories, free and prior informed consent must be obtained.
Finally, indigenous women believe in biodiversity use, protection and conservation for the people by the people. Thus, it is crucial that the Gender Plan of Action is adopted by parties and treated as a priority and resources are allocated for its implementation.
For COP 9, Bonn Germany
May 28, 2008
Indigenous women are food producers, providers and guardians of the gene pools of food crops for future generations. In our daily interaction with nature, we have developed a profound understanding of different ecosystems. Keeping the balance has been our way of life. Therefore, Empowering Indigenous women is an important prerequisite for environmental and poverty eradication.
However, as indigenous women, we are continually being marginalized at local, national, regional and international levels. Parties at this COP meeting have contributed to this marginalization by failing to support the Gender Plan of Action. We see the formalization of this document as instrumental to the full and effective participation of women, especially indigenous women, to all aspects and work of the CBD.
We want to remind parties that they have established in the preambular to the CBD, the “vital role that women play in the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity and affirming the need for full participation of women at all levels of policy making and implementation for biological diversity conservation”.
Therefore, Indigenous women call on parties to take note and to act on the following items:
That Climate Change is a serious threat for indigenous women’s food security and food sovereignty. We want parties to say no to false solutions to climate change such as REDD and CDM.
· Indigenous women do not want the establishment of any new national protected areas on indigenous lands and territories until our lands, territories and resources are fully recognized and respected. We call on parties to stop the encroachment of protected areas into our territories.
· Indigenous women experience marginalization in terms of heavy workload in harsh and impoverished situation. We want parties to put the Gender Plan of Action as a priority and allocate resources for its implementation and to ensure the full and effective participation and capacity building of indigenous women.
· We reiterate that Traditional Knowledge is fundamental to indigenous women and to the success of the Convention. We strongly support the renewed focus on the completion of concrete items such as the elements of sui generis systems, so that TK is protected and transmitted to our children.
· With the entry of development projects such as: mining; mega dams; logging and gas pipelines, they result in conflicts, such as prostitution; militarization; HIV Aids; rape; domestic violence; forced migration and drug addiction that directly affect women and biodiversity. We therefore, demand parties that for any development projects undertaken on our territories, free and prior informed consent must be obtained.
Finally, indigenous women believe in biodiversity use, protection and conservation for the people by the people. Thus, it is crucial that the Gender Plan of Action is adopted by parties and treated as a priority and resources are allocated for its implementation.
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Indigenous Voices Bulletin 6
IPs Disappointed at “Worst Negotiations”: A Critical Look at COP 9 CBD at Midway Mark
Contribution by Jannie Lasimbang, Asia Indigenous Peoples Pact Presented at Press Conference by IIFB and NGO Focal Point COP9
Indigenous Peoples have come to COP9 with an open mind, but also with some hope that hearing and understanding the many injustices suffered as a result of nature conservation would forge partnerships with governments and conservationists to correct the situation. However, we have been very disappointed on how the week has progressed.
· Worst COP Negotiations for the IIFB
Indigenous Peoples have been actively participating in the CBD since COP2, and under the umbrella of the International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity (IIFB) since COP5 formally recognized it in 2000. But negotiation efforts this week are assessed by indigenous peoples as the worst so far. Even decisions on traditional knowledge to implement Article 8(j) and Related Provisions, which forms the pillar in recognizing indigenous peoples’ roles in biodiversity conservation, fell apart.
· Veto Powers
Participation of indigenous peoples at this COP has been really limited by the rule that at least one Party has to support any text proposed by organizations. In Contact Groups and Friends of the Chair, deletions of proposed texts so fundamental to our lives simply because it did not get a single support from any government is like a stab straight to our hearts. Even if there were support from a number of governments, the so called “consensus” decision-making applied by the CBD has never before been so damaging. Governments who have the most uncompromising voice, have large delegations and are English speakers, like Canada, New Zealand, and even the EU which supported indigenous rights in previous meetings, now veto decisions in many Contact Groups.
· Poisoned Minds
Texts of key decisions addressing critical issues for indigenous peoples such as the alienation of indigenous territories for more marine and terrestrial protected areas, climate change adaptation and mitigation strategies including genetically engineered tree plantations, jetropa or oil palm plantations for agrofuels, ocean fertilizations, or the recognition and protection of traditional knowledge and resources as well as customary sustainable use, governance systems, trans-boundary water pollution are either immediately deleted or currently so weak, it is doubtful any Party will take actually pay attention to these decisions, let alone implement them. The energies and attention of Parties are sadly swallowed by issues related to access of resources and climate change adaptation and mitigation strategies.
· A Ray of Hope and Assertion of Rights
The only ray of hope of this process is mention of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in decisions or preambles (Protected Areas, Forest, Marine and Coastal). Indigenous Peoples will also continue to assert rights over our territories and revitalize our own traditional system i.e. conservation by the people, of the people and by the people.
ILCs Receive CEPA Support From Uganda
Contribution by Chinkhanmuan Gualnam, Asia Indigenous Peoples Pact
Uganda state officials made intervention for the inclusion of the Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (ILCs) in various activities on CEPA (communication, education, and public awareness) in yesterday session at Working Group II.
The African country called for support of the participation by Indigenous Peoples in the Agenda for Action for the period 2008/2010 and in the global initiative on CEPA.
Uganda intervened to include Indigenous representatives in the promotion of the CEPA toolkits, translation of information materials and regional training workshops. The inclusion of IPs in the promotion of partnership to transmit CEPA products in non-electronic formats to regions without web access was also included in the intervention statement.
Meanwhile, the IIFB Working Group on CEPA tried to intervene for the inclusion of the IPs in the program of work on CEPA, which was denied by the Chairperson. The IIFB delegates went to the extend of giving a note to the Chair seeking permission to intervene, however was not recognized to take the floor.
Discussion on CEPA continues among the Parties without intervention from the Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities, NGO’s, UN Agencies and other groups.
The intervention by Unganda on UNEP/CBD/COP/9/WG.2/CRP.12 paragraph 3, 4 and 5, for inclusion of the effective participation of the IPs, was adopted without opposition from the Parties at this time.
The Chairperson was obliged to the request of the IIFB for intervention at the end of the discussion session. Malia Nobrega (Hawaii) expressed appreciation to the states for the spirit of cooperation for the IPs on CEPA working group.
Report on Indigenous Delegates Lobbying and Meeting Activities over the Weekend
Contribution by Minnie Degawan, IPNC Coordinator
To facilitate the negotiation and lobbying at CBD, the indigenous delegates of IIFB joined the advisory committee of the CBD on CEPA (communication, education, and public awareness) this past weekend to hammer out the issues,
Through the deliberations on Saturday, we found out how far we still have to go in having indigenous issues getting integrated in this crucial part of the CBD. The participants were concentrating on how to have the issue of biodiversity become part of the national curricula, but the key message of Indigenous Peoples contribution to biodiversity conservation was completely ignored or had not been considered.
At that time, other Asian and Latin American IPs were attending other working groups, and they were pulled into the Agriculture Biodiversity group which was discussing bio-fuels.
We successfully lobbied Panama and Bolivia state officials to support the IP contribution on having the UN Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples be part of the decision and also the need to look into the negative impacts of biofuels in agri-biodiversity. We must recognize the efforts of the Latin American indigenous caucus in lobbying their governments.
Contribution by Jannie Lasimbang, Asia Indigenous Peoples Pact Presented at Press Conference by IIFB and NGO Focal Point COP9
Indigenous Peoples have come to COP9 with an open mind, but also with some hope that hearing and understanding the many injustices suffered as a result of nature conservation would forge partnerships with governments and conservationists to correct the situation. However, we have been very disappointed on how the week has progressed.
· Worst COP Negotiations for the IIFB
Indigenous Peoples have been actively participating in the CBD since COP2, and under the umbrella of the International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity (IIFB) since COP5 formally recognized it in 2000. But negotiation efforts this week are assessed by indigenous peoples as the worst so far. Even decisions on traditional knowledge to implement Article 8(j) and Related Provisions, which forms the pillar in recognizing indigenous peoples’ roles in biodiversity conservation, fell apart.
· Veto Powers
Participation of indigenous peoples at this COP has been really limited by the rule that at least one Party has to support any text proposed by organizations. In Contact Groups and Friends of the Chair, deletions of proposed texts so fundamental to our lives simply because it did not get a single support from any government is like a stab straight to our hearts. Even if there were support from a number of governments, the so called “consensus” decision-making applied by the CBD has never before been so damaging. Governments who have the most uncompromising voice, have large delegations and are English speakers, like Canada, New Zealand, and even the EU which supported indigenous rights in previous meetings, now veto decisions in many Contact Groups.
· Poisoned Minds
Texts of key decisions addressing critical issues for indigenous peoples such as the alienation of indigenous territories for more marine and terrestrial protected areas, climate change adaptation and mitigation strategies including genetically engineered tree plantations, jetropa or oil palm plantations for agrofuels, ocean fertilizations, or the recognition and protection of traditional knowledge and resources as well as customary sustainable use, governance systems, trans-boundary water pollution are either immediately deleted or currently so weak, it is doubtful any Party will take actually pay attention to these decisions, let alone implement them. The energies and attention of Parties are sadly swallowed by issues related to access of resources and climate change adaptation and mitigation strategies.
· A Ray of Hope and Assertion of Rights
The only ray of hope of this process is mention of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in decisions or preambles (Protected Areas, Forest, Marine and Coastal). Indigenous Peoples will also continue to assert rights over our territories and revitalize our own traditional system i.e. conservation by the people, of the people and by the people.
ILCs Receive CEPA Support From Uganda
Contribution by Chinkhanmuan Gualnam, Asia Indigenous Peoples Pact
Uganda state officials made intervention for the inclusion of the Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (ILCs) in various activities on CEPA (communication, education, and public awareness) in yesterday session at Working Group II.
The African country called for support of the participation by Indigenous Peoples in the Agenda for Action for the period 2008/2010 and in the global initiative on CEPA.
Uganda intervened to include Indigenous representatives in the promotion of the CEPA toolkits, translation of information materials and regional training workshops. The inclusion of IPs in the promotion of partnership to transmit CEPA products in non-electronic formats to regions without web access was also included in the intervention statement.
Meanwhile, the IIFB Working Group on CEPA tried to intervene for the inclusion of the IPs in the program of work on CEPA, which was denied by the Chairperson. The IIFB delegates went to the extend of giving a note to the Chair seeking permission to intervene, however was not recognized to take the floor.
Discussion on CEPA continues among the Parties without intervention from the Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities, NGO’s, UN Agencies and other groups.
The intervention by Unganda on UNEP/CBD/COP/9/WG.2/CRP.12 paragraph 3, 4 and 5, for inclusion of the effective participation of the IPs, was adopted without opposition from the Parties at this time.
The Chairperson was obliged to the request of the IIFB for intervention at the end of the discussion session. Malia Nobrega (Hawaii) expressed appreciation to the states for the spirit of cooperation for the IPs on CEPA working group.
Report on Indigenous Delegates Lobbying and Meeting Activities over the Weekend
Contribution by Minnie Degawan, IPNC Coordinator
To facilitate the negotiation and lobbying at CBD, the indigenous delegates of IIFB joined the advisory committee of the CBD on CEPA (communication, education, and public awareness) this past weekend to hammer out the issues,
Through the deliberations on Saturday, we found out how far we still have to go in having indigenous issues getting integrated in this crucial part of the CBD. The participants were concentrating on how to have the issue of biodiversity become part of the national curricula, but the key message of Indigenous Peoples contribution to biodiversity conservation was completely ignored or had not been considered.
At that time, other Asian and Latin American IPs were attending other working groups, and they were pulled into the Agriculture Biodiversity group which was discussing bio-fuels.
We successfully lobbied Panama and Bolivia state officials to support the IP contribution on having the UN Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples be part of the decision and also the need to look into the negative impacts of biofuels in agri-biodiversity. We must recognize the efforts of the Latin American indigenous caucus in lobbying their governments.
The IIFB delegates spent with the other groups in sharing information on what is being done on the ground. Interestingly, this side event was attended by indigenous and local community delegates not attending the IIFB sessions. Most were brought in by the Equator Initiative who had their own event going but we felt that they should also be informed of the IIFB efforts.
Sunday was a demonstration on how effectively the State Parties can block the process. In the Contact Group for climate change, China and Brazil were amazingly adept at filibustering. They are against the proposal for an Ad Hoc Technical Expert Group on climate change and biodiversity. IPs have welcomed such a development as it will bring the discussions on climate change at the CBD where IPs have some space. The whole afternoon was an exercise in futility. IPOs gave concrete proposals but since there were no governments supporting our proposals, these were not taken on board.
Why was there no support? Simply because there were only around 6~7 government representatives present ! Norway and South Africa were sympathetic to our call but due to fatigue and the need to pass something, they kept quiet. Concretely we want the inclusion of "biodiversity based livelihoods" in what the group should be looking at in terms on what is affected by climate change. This is to ensure that socio-economic issues will also be considered, and not just biodiversity per se. We are also pushing for the inclusion of "impacts of climate change mitigation schemes" in what the expert group will look into.
The contact group also discussed ocean fertilization. We supported the call for a moratorium on such activities. The contact group did not manage to agree on anything and will continue to meet in the coming days.
Lessons learned during the weekend: we need to coordinate our efforts with IP delegates all the working/contact groups for easier coordination with the other regions.
Friday, May 23, 2008
Bangladesh reports COP9 Press Release
PRESS RELEASE
For immediate release: Friday 23 May 2008
Parties to the CBD must promote sustainable use to achieve biological diversity
Bonn, Germany The findings of two new reports launched today at the Convention on Biological Diversity emphatically demonstrate that global biodiversity will continue to be lost if Protected Areas fail to recognise and respect the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities. The research, conducted in the largest mangrove forest in the world, conversely shows that customary use is fully compatible with conservation and sustainability.
The research finds that the policy of government-controlled protection in The Sundarbans, Bangladesh has led to both increased vulnerability of forest biodiversity and greater poverty of its indigenous peoples and local communities. The damning report Deserting the Sundarbans (1) demonstrates the impact of neglecting to involve indigenous and local communities in governance and of shutting them out of the richly biologically diverse areas that they have used for hundreds of years, and upon which their livelihoods depend.
Deserting the Sunarbans makes clear that the ADB-GEF-Netherlands funded Sundarbans Biodiversity Conservation Project abjectly failed in its aim to conserve biological diversity or reduce poverty, despite costing US$77.3m. The project was abandoned after just four years by the ADB. Reasons include a failure to:
• understand the profound interdependence of forest, its wildlife and its human inhabitants, the traditional resource users (2)
• accomplish transparency or local community involvement at any level in direct contravention of its funders’ policies
• take into account traditional knowledge and its key role in the conservation of this vast forest
Resuscitating the Sundarbans (3) demonstrates that the cultural practices, value systems and customary uses of the indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLCs) directly contribute to sustainable use and conservation. When implementing the expanded Programme of Work on Protected Areas the Parties should prioritise:
• community governance: indigenous peoples and local communities are the guardians of our biological diversity
• Legal reform: policies and laws that promote and support customary use of natural resources and related cultural practices of IPLCs
• Guaranteed land rights: indigenous territories provide the material and spiritual foundation for traditional knowledge and customary tenure over and use of biological resources
• Right of free, prior and informed consent: for all development and conservation initiatives, including actions taken to implement CBD
Jakir Hossein, Head of Programmes, Unnayan Onneshan said:
‘In the forest of The Sundarbans the approach of exclusive state protection did not achieve either biodiversity conservation or the security of livelihoods. Our research clearly shows that it is community governance that will achieve this. The forest peoples know best how to protect forests and its resources and their traditional cultural practices of resource harvesting are well tuned to conservation and sustainable utilisation.’
Maurizio Ferrari, Environmental Governance Coordinator, Forest Peoples Programme said:
‘Under international treaties like the Convention on Biological Diversity, Governments have obligations to conserve biological diversity and to protect indigenous peoples’ rights. If rights are protected first, conservation will follow. The Parties to the CBD must give priority to the implementation of Programme Element 2 of the Programme of Work on Protected Areas, related to Governance, Participation, Equity and Benefit Sharing and on the implementation of Articles 8(j) and 10(c).’(4)
Ends
Notes:
Both reports will be discussed in detail at a Side-Event at COP9 on Friday 23 May 2008. The event will focus on what progress has been achieved so far in the implementation of the CBD Programme of Work on Protected Areas. There will be speakers from Bangladesh, Suriname, Cameroon and Thailand.
Time: 6.15pm
Venue: Room 1.130 Environment (BMU)
Please contact info@unnayan.org for copies of the reports or download them at
For immediate release: Friday 23 May 2008
Parties to the CBD must promote sustainable use to achieve biological diversity
Bonn, Germany The findings of two new reports launched today at the Convention on Biological Diversity emphatically demonstrate that global biodiversity will continue to be lost if Protected Areas fail to recognise and respect the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities. The research, conducted in the largest mangrove forest in the world, conversely shows that customary use is fully compatible with conservation and sustainability.
The research finds that the policy of government-controlled protection in The Sundarbans, Bangladesh has led to both increased vulnerability of forest biodiversity and greater poverty of its indigenous peoples and local communities. The damning report Deserting the Sundarbans (1) demonstrates the impact of neglecting to involve indigenous and local communities in governance and of shutting them out of the richly biologically diverse areas that they have used for hundreds of years, and upon which their livelihoods depend.
Deserting the Sunarbans makes clear that the ADB-GEF-Netherlands funded Sundarbans Biodiversity Conservation Project abjectly failed in its aim to conserve biological diversity or reduce poverty, despite costing US$77.3m. The project was abandoned after just four years by the ADB. Reasons include a failure to:
• understand the profound interdependence of forest, its wildlife and its human inhabitants, the traditional resource users (2)
• accomplish transparency or local community involvement at any level in direct contravention of its funders’ policies
• take into account traditional knowledge and its key role in the conservation of this vast forest
Resuscitating the Sundarbans (3) demonstrates that the cultural practices, value systems and customary uses of the indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLCs) directly contribute to sustainable use and conservation. When implementing the expanded Programme of Work on Protected Areas the Parties should prioritise:
• community governance: indigenous peoples and local communities are the guardians of our biological diversity
• Legal reform: policies and laws that promote and support customary use of natural resources and related cultural practices of IPLCs
• Guaranteed land rights: indigenous territories provide the material and spiritual foundation for traditional knowledge and customary tenure over and use of biological resources
• Right of free, prior and informed consent: for all development and conservation initiatives, including actions taken to implement CBD
Jakir Hossein, Head of Programmes, Unnayan Onneshan said:
‘In the forest of The Sundarbans the approach of exclusive state protection did not achieve either biodiversity conservation or the security of livelihoods. Our research clearly shows that it is community governance that will achieve this. The forest peoples know best how to protect forests and its resources and their traditional cultural practices of resource harvesting are well tuned to conservation and sustainable utilisation.’
Maurizio Ferrari, Environmental Governance Coordinator, Forest Peoples Programme said:
‘Under international treaties like the Convention on Biological Diversity, Governments have obligations to conserve biological diversity and to protect indigenous peoples’ rights. If rights are protected first, conservation will follow. The Parties to the CBD must give priority to the implementation of Programme Element 2 of the Programme of Work on Protected Areas, related to Governance, Participation, Equity and Benefit Sharing and on the implementation of Articles 8(j) and 10(c).’(4)
Ends
Notes:
Both reports will be discussed in detail at a Side-Event at COP9 on Friday 23 May 2008. The event will focus on what progress has been achieved so far in the implementation of the CBD Programme of Work on Protected Areas. There will be speakers from Bangladesh, Suriname, Cameroon and Thailand.
Time: 6.15pm
Venue: Room 1.130 Environment (BMU)
Please contact info@unnayan.org for copies of the reports or download them at
http://www.unnayan.org/reports/Deserting.the.Sundarbans.pdf
http://www.unnayan.org/reports/Resuscitating.the.Sundarbans.pdf
Further notes:
(1) ‘Deserting the Sundarbans: Local Peoples’ Perspective on ADB-GEF-Netherlands Funded Sundarbans Biodiversity Conservation Project’
(Jakir Hossain, Kushal Roy)
(2) The local communities of resource users include bawalis (woodcutters), mouals (honey collectors), golpata (leaf) collectors, jele (fishers), chunery (snail and oyster collectors)
(3) ‘Resuscitating the Sundarbans: Customary Use of Biodiversity & Traditional Cultural Practices in Bangladesh (Dewan Muhammed Humayun Kabir, Jakir Hossain) April 2008
(4) Article 8(j) of the CBD encourages states to, ‘…respect, preserve and maintain knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities…’
Article 10(c) of the CBD encourages states ‘…to protect and encourage customary use of biological resources in accordance with traditional cultural practices that are compatible with conservation or sustainable use requirements…’
(5) Unnayan Onneshan is a centre for research and action on development based in Bangladesh.
(6) Forest Peoples Programme is a UK based NGO that supports forest peoples globally to secure their rights, build up their own organisations and negotiate with governments and companies as to how economic development and conservation is best achieved on their lands. www.forestpeoples.org
For further information please contact:
Jakir Hossain, Head of Programmes, Unnayan Onneshan
Telephone: 00 49 (0)15771654462
http://www.unnayan.org/reports/Resuscitating.the.Sundarbans.pdf
Further notes:
(1) ‘Deserting the Sundarbans: Local Peoples’ Perspective on ADB-GEF-Netherlands Funded Sundarbans Biodiversity Conservation Project’
(Jakir Hossain, Kushal Roy)
(2) The local communities of resource users include bawalis (woodcutters), mouals (honey collectors), golpata (leaf) collectors, jele (fishers), chunery (snail and oyster collectors)
(3) ‘Resuscitating the Sundarbans: Customary Use of Biodiversity & Traditional Cultural Practices in Bangladesh (Dewan Muhammed Humayun Kabir, Jakir Hossain) April 2008
(4) Article 8(j) of the CBD encourages states to, ‘…respect, preserve and maintain knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities…’
Article 10(c) of the CBD encourages states ‘…to protect and encourage customary use of biological resources in accordance with traditional cultural practices that are compatible with conservation or sustainable use requirements…’
(5) Unnayan Onneshan is a centre for research and action on development based in Bangladesh.
(6) Forest Peoples Programme is a UK based NGO that supports forest peoples globally to secure their rights, build up their own organisations and negotiate with governments and companies as to how economic development and conservation is best achieved on their lands. www.forestpeoples.org
For further information please contact:
Jakir Hossain, Head of Programmes, Unnayan Onneshan
Telephone: 00 49 (0)15771654462
Email: jhossain@unnayan.org
Maurizio Ferrari, Environmental Governance Coordinator, Forest Peoples Programme
Telephone: 00 44 (0)7733478307
Maurizio Ferrari, Environmental Governance Coordinator, Forest Peoples Programme
Telephone: 00 44 (0)7733478307
Email: Maurizio@forestpeoples.org
Amarantha Pike, Communications Officer, Forest Peoples Programme
Tel: 00 44 (0)7791691485
Amarantha Pike, Communications Officer, Forest Peoples Programme
Tel: 00 44 (0)7791691485
Email: amarantha@forestpeoples.org
(Spanish Version)
COMUNICADO DE PRENSA
Para publicación inmediata: viernes 23 de mayo de 2008
Las partes del CDB deben promover la utilización sustentable para conservar la biodiversidad
Bonn, Alemania Los resultados de dos nuevos informes presentados hoy en el Convenio sobre la Diversidad Biológica demuestran enfáticamente que la diversidad biológica mundial continuará perdiéndose si las Áreas Protegidas no reconocen y respetan los derechos de los pueblos indígenas y las comunidades locales. La investigación, llevada a cabo en el mayor manglar del mundo, demuestra, por el contrario, que la utilización consuetudinaria es totalmente compatible con la conservación y la sustentabilidad.
La investigación revela que la política de protección estatal de los Sundarbans, en Bangladesh, ha aumentado la vulnerabilidad de la biodiversidad del bosque y ha incrementado la pobreza de sus pueblos indígenas y comunidades locales. El concluyente informe Deserting the Sundarbans (1) (El abandono de los Sundarbans) demuestra el impacto que ha tenido la exclusión de las comunidades indígenas y locales de la gobernanza de las áreas de gran diversidad biológica y su alejamiento de esas áreas que utilizaron durante milenios y de las cuales dependen sus formas de vida y sustento.
Deserting the Sundarbans (El abandono de los Sundarbans) (1) deja en evidencia que el Proyecto de Conservación de la Diversidad Biológica de los Sundarbans, financiado por ADB-GEF-Holanda fracasó lastimosamente en su objetivo de conservar la diversidad biológica o reducir la pobreza, a pesar de los 77,3 millones de presupuesto con que contó. El proyecto fue abandonado por el ADB después de tan solo cuatro años. Algunas de las razones que explican el fracaso se refieren a la incapacidad de:
• comprender la profunda interdependencia del bosque, la flora y fauna y sus habitantes humanos, los usufructuarios tradicionales de los recursos (2)
• tener transparencia o dar participación a las comunidades locales en todos los niveles, lo cual supuso una directa contravención a las políticas de sus financiadores
• tomar en cuenta el conocimiento tradicional y su papel fundamental en la conservación de este bosque extenso
Resuscitating the Sundarbans (La resurrección de los Sundarbans) (3) demuestra que las prácticas culturales, los sistemas de valores y los usos consuetudinarios de los pueblos indígenas y las comunidades locales contribuyen directamente a la utilización sustentable y la conservación. Al aplicar el Programa de Trabajo sobre Áreas Protegidas las Partes deberían dar prioridad a:
• la gobernanza comunitaria: los pueblos indígenas y las comunidades locales son los custodios de nuestra diversidad biológica
• una reforma jurídica que se refiera a políticas y leyes que promuevan y apoyen la utilización consuetudinaria de los recursos naturales y las prácticas culturales relacionadas de los pueblos indígenas y las comunidades locales
• garantizar los derechos territoriales -los territorios indígenas brindan el sustento material y espiritual para el conocimiento tradicional y la tenencia y utilización consuetudinaria de los recursos biológicos
• el derecho al consentimiento libre, previo e informado: para todas las iniciativas de desarrollo y conservación, en especial las acciones adoptadas para la aplicación del CDB
Jakir Hossein, Jefe de Programas de Unnayan Onneshan, expresó:
“En el bosque de los Sundarbans el enfoque de la protección exclusiva del Estado no logró ni la conservación de la diversidad ni la seguridad de las formas de vida y sustento. Nuestra investigación demuestra claramente que es la gobernanza comunitaria la que lo logrará. Los pueblos de los bosques son los que mejor saben cómo proteger los bosques y sus recursos y sus prácticas culturales tradicionales de manejo de los recursos están bien sintonizados con la conservación y la utilización sustentable”.
Mauricio Ferrari, Coordinador de Gobernanza Ambiental del Forest Peoples Programme declaró: “Conforme a tratados internacionales como el Convenio sobre la Diversidad Biológica, los gobiernos tienen la obligación de conservar la diversidad biológica y proteger los derechos de los pueblos indígenas. Si se protegen en primer lugar los derechos, la conservación vendrá por añadidura. Las Partes del CDB deben tener prioridad en la aplicación del Elemento 2 del Programa de Trabajo sobre Áreas Protegidas, relacionadas con la gobernanza, la participación, la equidad y la distribución de los beneficios y sobre la aplicación de los artículos 8(j) y 10(c).” (4)
Fin
Observaciones:
Ambos informes serán discutidos en detalle en un Evento Paralelo a realizarse en la COP9 el viernes 23 de mayo de 2008.
El evento se centrará en evaluar cuál es el progreso que se ha logrado hasta ahora en la aplicación del Programa de Trabajo del CDB sobre Áreas Protegidas. Habrá panelistas de Bangladesh, Surinam, Camerún y Tailandia.
Hora: 16 y 15
Lugar: Room 1.130 Environment (BMU)
Para obtener copias de los informes, comunicarse con info@unnayan.org, o bajarlos de www.unnayan.org
http://www.unnayan.org/reports/Deserting.the.Sundarbans.pdf
http://www.unnayan.org/reports/Resuscitating.the.Sundarbans.pdf
Notas:
(7) ‘Deserting the Sundarbans: Local Peoples’ Perspective on ADB-GEF-Netherlands Funded Sunderbans Biodiversity Conservation Project’
(Jakir Hossain, Kushal Roy)
(8) Las comunidades de usufructuarios locales de recursos incluyen bawalis (cortadores de árboles), mouals (recolectores de miel), colectores golpata (hojas), jele (pescadores) chunery (recolectores de víboras y ostras)
(9) ‘Resuscitating the Sundarbans: Customary Use of Biodiversity & Traditional Cultural Practices in Bangladesh’ (Dewan Muhammed Humayun Kabir, Jakir Hossain), abril de 2008
(10) El inciso (j) del artículo 8 del CDB alienta a que cada Parte, “…respetará, preservará y mantendrá los conocimientos, las innovaciones y las prácticas de las comunidades indígenas y locales…” El inciso (c) del Artículo 10 exhorta a que cada Parte “…protegerá y alentará la utilización consuetudinaria de los recursos biológicos, de conformidad con las prácticas culturales tradicionales que sean compatibles con las exigencias de la conservación o de la utilización sostenible…”
(11) Unnayan Onneshan es un centro de investigación y acción en el desarrollo, con sede en Bangladesh.
(12) Forest Peoples Programme es una ONG con sede en el Reino Unido, que apoya a los pueblos de los bosques de todo el mundo para obtener el reconocimiento de sus derechos, contribuir al fortalecimiento de sus propias organizaciones y negociar con gobiernos y empresas las formas de lograr de la mejor manera en sus tierras el desarrollo económico y la conservación. www.forestpeoples.org
Por mayor información, comunicarse con:
• Jakir Hossain, Jefe de Programas, Unnayan Onneshan
Teléfono: +49 (0)15771654462
(Spanish Version)
COMUNICADO DE PRENSA
Para publicación inmediata: viernes 23 de mayo de 2008
Las partes del CDB deben promover la utilización sustentable para conservar la biodiversidad
Bonn, Alemania Los resultados de dos nuevos informes presentados hoy en el Convenio sobre la Diversidad Biológica demuestran enfáticamente que la diversidad biológica mundial continuará perdiéndose si las Áreas Protegidas no reconocen y respetan los derechos de los pueblos indígenas y las comunidades locales. La investigación, llevada a cabo en el mayor manglar del mundo, demuestra, por el contrario, que la utilización consuetudinaria es totalmente compatible con la conservación y la sustentabilidad.
La investigación revela que la política de protección estatal de los Sundarbans, en Bangladesh, ha aumentado la vulnerabilidad de la biodiversidad del bosque y ha incrementado la pobreza de sus pueblos indígenas y comunidades locales. El concluyente informe Deserting the Sundarbans (1) (El abandono de los Sundarbans) demuestra el impacto que ha tenido la exclusión de las comunidades indígenas y locales de la gobernanza de las áreas de gran diversidad biológica y su alejamiento de esas áreas que utilizaron durante milenios y de las cuales dependen sus formas de vida y sustento.
Deserting the Sundarbans (El abandono de los Sundarbans) (1) deja en evidencia que el Proyecto de Conservación de la Diversidad Biológica de los Sundarbans, financiado por ADB-GEF-Holanda fracasó lastimosamente en su objetivo de conservar la diversidad biológica o reducir la pobreza, a pesar de los 77,3 millones de presupuesto con que contó. El proyecto fue abandonado por el ADB después de tan solo cuatro años. Algunas de las razones que explican el fracaso se refieren a la incapacidad de:
• comprender la profunda interdependencia del bosque, la flora y fauna y sus habitantes humanos, los usufructuarios tradicionales de los recursos (2)
• tener transparencia o dar participación a las comunidades locales en todos los niveles, lo cual supuso una directa contravención a las políticas de sus financiadores
• tomar en cuenta el conocimiento tradicional y su papel fundamental en la conservación de este bosque extenso
Resuscitating the Sundarbans (La resurrección de los Sundarbans) (3) demuestra que las prácticas culturales, los sistemas de valores y los usos consuetudinarios de los pueblos indígenas y las comunidades locales contribuyen directamente a la utilización sustentable y la conservación. Al aplicar el Programa de Trabajo sobre Áreas Protegidas las Partes deberían dar prioridad a:
• la gobernanza comunitaria: los pueblos indígenas y las comunidades locales son los custodios de nuestra diversidad biológica
• una reforma jurídica que se refiera a políticas y leyes que promuevan y apoyen la utilización consuetudinaria de los recursos naturales y las prácticas culturales relacionadas de los pueblos indígenas y las comunidades locales
• garantizar los derechos territoriales -los territorios indígenas brindan el sustento material y espiritual para el conocimiento tradicional y la tenencia y utilización consuetudinaria de los recursos biológicos
• el derecho al consentimiento libre, previo e informado: para todas las iniciativas de desarrollo y conservación, en especial las acciones adoptadas para la aplicación del CDB
Jakir Hossein, Jefe de Programas de Unnayan Onneshan, expresó:
“En el bosque de los Sundarbans el enfoque de la protección exclusiva del Estado no logró ni la conservación de la diversidad ni la seguridad de las formas de vida y sustento. Nuestra investigación demuestra claramente que es la gobernanza comunitaria la que lo logrará. Los pueblos de los bosques son los que mejor saben cómo proteger los bosques y sus recursos y sus prácticas culturales tradicionales de manejo de los recursos están bien sintonizados con la conservación y la utilización sustentable”.
Mauricio Ferrari, Coordinador de Gobernanza Ambiental del Forest Peoples Programme declaró: “Conforme a tratados internacionales como el Convenio sobre la Diversidad Biológica, los gobiernos tienen la obligación de conservar la diversidad biológica y proteger los derechos de los pueblos indígenas. Si se protegen en primer lugar los derechos, la conservación vendrá por añadidura. Las Partes del CDB deben tener prioridad en la aplicación del Elemento 2 del Programa de Trabajo sobre Áreas Protegidas, relacionadas con la gobernanza, la participación, la equidad y la distribución de los beneficios y sobre la aplicación de los artículos 8(j) y 10(c).” (4)
Fin
Observaciones:
Ambos informes serán discutidos en detalle en un Evento Paralelo a realizarse en la COP9 el viernes 23 de mayo de 2008.
El evento se centrará en evaluar cuál es el progreso que se ha logrado hasta ahora en la aplicación del Programa de Trabajo del CDB sobre Áreas Protegidas. Habrá panelistas de Bangladesh, Surinam, Camerún y Tailandia.
Hora: 16 y 15
Lugar: Room 1.130 Environment (BMU)
Para obtener copias de los informes, comunicarse con info@unnayan.org, o bajarlos de www.unnayan.org
http://www.unnayan.org/reports/Deserting.the.Sundarbans.pdf
http://www.unnayan.org/reports/Resuscitating.the.Sundarbans.pdf
Notas:
(7) ‘Deserting the Sundarbans: Local Peoples’ Perspective on ADB-GEF-Netherlands Funded Sunderbans Biodiversity Conservation Project’
(Jakir Hossain, Kushal Roy)
(8) Las comunidades de usufructuarios locales de recursos incluyen bawalis (cortadores de árboles), mouals (recolectores de miel), colectores golpata (hojas), jele (pescadores) chunery (recolectores de víboras y ostras)
(9) ‘Resuscitating the Sundarbans: Customary Use of Biodiversity & Traditional Cultural Practices in Bangladesh’ (Dewan Muhammed Humayun Kabir, Jakir Hossain), abril de 2008
(10) El inciso (j) del artículo 8 del CDB alienta a que cada Parte, “…respetará, preservará y mantendrá los conocimientos, las innovaciones y las prácticas de las comunidades indígenas y locales…” El inciso (c) del Artículo 10 exhorta a que cada Parte “…protegerá y alentará la utilización consuetudinaria de los recursos biológicos, de conformidad con las prácticas culturales tradicionales que sean compatibles con las exigencias de la conservación o de la utilización sostenible…”
(11) Unnayan Onneshan es un centro de investigación y acción en el desarrollo, con sede en Bangladesh.
(12) Forest Peoples Programme es una ONG con sede en el Reino Unido, que apoya a los pueblos de los bosques de todo el mundo para obtener el reconocimiento de sus derechos, contribuir al fortalecimiento de sus propias organizaciones y negociar con gobiernos y empresas las formas de lograr de la mejor manera en sus tierras el desarrollo económico y la conservación. www.forestpeoples.org
Por mayor información, comunicarse con:
• Jakir Hossain, Jefe de Programas, Unnayan Onneshan
Teléfono: +49 (0)15771654462
correo electrónico: jhossain@unnayan.org
• Maurizio Ferrari, Coordinador de Gobernanza Ambiental, Forest Peoples Programme
Teléfono: +44 (0)7733478307
• Maurizio Ferrari, Coordinador de Gobernanza Ambiental, Forest Peoples Programme
Teléfono: +44 (0)7733478307
correo electrónico: maurizio@forestpeoples.org
• Amarantha Pike, Encargada de comunicacions, Forest Peoples Programme
Tel: +44 (0)7791691485
• Amarantha Pike, Encargada de comunicacions, Forest Peoples Programme
Tel: +44 (0)7791691485
correo electrónico: amarantha@forestpeoples.org
(France Version)
COMMUNIQUÉ DE PRESSE
À diffuser immédiatement : le vendredi 23 mai 2008
Pour conserver la diversité biologique, les parties à la CDB doivent promouvoir l’utilisation durable
Bonn, Allemagne Les résultats de deux nouveaux rapports lancés aujourd’hui à l'occasion de la conférence de la Convention sur la diversité biologique démontrent catégoriquement que la biodiversité mondiale continuera de diminuer si les aires protégées ne reconnaissent pas et ne respectent pas les droits des peuples autochtones et des communautés locales. Effectuées dans la plus grande mangrove du monde, les recherches en question établissent inversement que l'usage coutumier des ressources est entièrement compatible avec la conservation et la durabilité.
Ces recherches indiquent que les principes de protection contrôlée par le gouvernement dans les Sundarbans (Bangladesh) ont entraîné un accroissement de la vulnérabilité de la biodiversité de la forêt et une augmentation de la pauvreté de ses peuples autochtones et communautés locales. Le rapport accablant intitulé Deserting the Sundarbans (L’abandon des Sundarbans) (1) démontre combien il a été néfaste de ne pas faire participer les communautés autochtones et locales à la gouvernance et de les exclure des aires de grande diversité biologique qu'elles utilisaient depuis des centaines d'années et dont elles tiraient leurs moyens de subsistance.
Le rapport Deserting the Sundarbans fait ressortir clairement que le projet de conservation de la biodiversité des Sundarbans financé par ADB-GEF-Pays-Bas a échoué lamentablement et n’a pas réalisé ses objectifs de conserver la diversité biologique ou de réduire la pauvreté, bien qu’il ait coûté 77,3 millions USD. Abandonné au bout de quatre ans seulement, ce projet s’est avéré un échec notamment parce qu’il n'a pas su :
• comprendre la profonde interdépendance existant entre la forêt, sa faune et sa flore et ses habitants humains, les utilisateurs traditionnels de ses ressources (2) ;
• promouvoir la transparence ou la participation des communautés locales à quelque niveau que ce soit, en violation directe des principes de ses bailleurs de fonds ;
• prendre en considération le savoir traditionnel et le rôle essentiel de celui-ci pour la conservation de cette vaste forêt.
Le rapport Resuscitating the Sundarbans (La résurrection des Sundarbans) (3) constate que les pratiques culturelles, les systèmes de valeurs et les us et coutumes des peuples autochtones et des communautés locales contribuent directement à l'utilisation durable et à la conservation. Lors de la mise en œuvre du programme de travail élargi sur les aires protégées, les parties doivent donner la priorité aux éléments suivants :
• la gouvernance communautaire : les peuples autochtones et les communautés locales sont les gardiens de notre diversité biologique ;
• la réforme juridique : des directives et des lois qui favorisent et soutiennent l'utilisation coutumière des ressources naturelles et les pratiques culturelles connexes des peuples autochtones et communautés locales ;
• la garantie des droits fonciers : les territoires autochtones fournissent les bases matérielles et spirituelles du savoir traditionnel ainsi que de la jouissance coutumière et de l’utilisation des ressources biologiques ;
• le droit au consentement libre, préalable et éclairé : pour toutes les initiatives d'aménagement et de conservation, y compris les mesures prises pour faire appliquer la CDB.
« Dans la forêt des Sundarbans, la stratégie de protection exclusive par l’État n’a abouti ni à la conservation de la biodiversité, ni à la garantie des moyens de subsistance. Notre recherche montre clairement que c’est la gouvernance communautaire qui réalisera ces objectifs. Les peuples forestiers savent mieux que quiconque comment protéger les forêts et ses ressources, tandis que leurs pratiques culturelles traditionnelles en matière de récolte des ressources sont en harmonie avec la conservation et l'utilisation durable », a dit Jakir Hossain, Responsable des programmes, Unnayan Onneshan
Maurizio Ferrari, Coordinateur en gouvernance environnementale, Forest Peoples Programme, a déclaré : « Au titre des traités internationaux comme celui de la Convention sur la diversité biologique, les gouvernements sont dans l’obligation de conserver la diversité biologique et de protéger les droits des peuples autochtones. Il suffit de commencer par protéger ces droits et la conservation se fera d’elle-même. Les parties à la CDB doivent donner la priorité à la mise en œuvre de l’élément 2 du programme de travail sur les aires protégées, soit gouvernance, participation, équité et partage des avantages, et à l’exécution des articles 8(j) et 10(c). »(4)
Fin
Notes :
Les deux rapports susmentionnés seront discutés en détail lors d’un événement en marge de la COP9 le vendredi 23 mai 2008. Cet événement se concentrera sur les progrès effectués jusqu'à présent sur la mise en œuvre du programme de travail sur les aires protégées de la CDB. Des intervenants du Bangladesh, du Suriname, du Cameroun et de la Thaïlande y prendront la parole.
Heure : 18 h 15
Lieu : Salle 1.130 Environment (BMU)
Veuillez contacter info@unnayan.org pour demander une copie des rapports ou téléchargez-les à partir du site www.unnayan.org
http://www.unnayan.org/reports/Deserting.the.Sundarbans.pdf
http://www.unnayan.org/reports/Resuscitating.the.Sundarbans.pdf
Notes supplémentaires :
(13) « Deserting the Sundarbans: Local Peoples’ Perspective on ADB-GEF-Netherlands Funded Sundarbans Biodiversity Conservation Project » (L’abandon des Sundarbans : La perspective des peuples locaux sur le projet de conservation de la biodiversité des Sundarbans financé par ADB-GEF-Pays-Bas) (Jakir Hossain, Kushal Roy).
(14) Les communautés locales d’utilisateurs de ressources comprennent : les Bawali (bûcherons), les Moual (récolteurs de miel), les Golpata (cueilleurs de feuilles), les Jele (pêcheurs) et les Chunery (récolteurs d'escargots et d’huitres).
(15) « Resuscitating the Sundarbans: Customary Use of Biodiversity & Traditional Cultural Practices in Bangladesh » (La résurrection des Sundarbans : Usage coutumier de la biodiversité & pratiques culturelles traditionnelles au Bangladesh) (Dewan Muhammed Humayun Kabir, Jakir Hossain), avril 2008.
(16) Selon l’article 8(j) de la CDB, chaque État contractant « respecte, préserve et maintient les connaissances, innovations et pratiques des communautés autochtones et locales…»
Selon l’article 10(c) de la CDB, chaque État contractant « Protège et encourage l'usage coutumier des ressources biologiques conformément aux pratiques culturelles traditionnelles compatibles avec les impératifs de leur conservation ou de leur utilisation durable... ».
(17) Unnayan Onneshan est un centre de recherche et d’action sur le développement basé au Bangladesh.
(18) Forest Peoples Programme est une ONG basée au Royaume-Uni qui aide les peuples forestiers du monde entier à protéger leurs droits, à établir leurs propres organisations de défense et à négocier avec les gouvernements et entreprises sur la meilleure façon d'assurer le développement et la conservation sur leurs terres. www.forestpeoples.org
Pour en savoir plus, veuillez contacter :
• Jakir Hossain, Responsables des programmes, Unnayan Onneshan,
Téléphone : +49 (0)15771654462
(France Version)
COMMUNIQUÉ DE PRESSE
À diffuser immédiatement : le vendredi 23 mai 2008
Pour conserver la diversité biologique, les parties à la CDB doivent promouvoir l’utilisation durable
Bonn, Allemagne Les résultats de deux nouveaux rapports lancés aujourd’hui à l'occasion de la conférence de la Convention sur la diversité biologique démontrent catégoriquement que la biodiversité mondiale continuera de diminuer si les aires protégées ne reconnaissent pas et ne respectent pas les droits des peuples autochtones et des communautés locales. Effectuées dans la plus grande mangrove du monde, les recherches en question établissent inversement que l'usage coutumier des ressources est entièrement compatible avec la conservation et la durabilité.
Ces recherches indiquent que les principes de protection contrôlée par le gouvernement dans les Sundarbans (Bangladesh) ont entraîné un accroissement de la vulnérabilité de la biodiversité de la forêt et une augmentation de la pauvreté de ses peuples autochtones et communautés locales. Le rapport accablant intitulé Deserting the Sundarbans (L’abandon des Sundarbans) (1) démontre combien il a été néfaste de ne pas faire participer les communautés autochtones et locales à la gouvernance et de les exclure des aires de grande diversité biologique qu'elles utilisaient depuis des centaines d'années et dont elles tiraient leurs moyens de subsistance.
Le rapport Deserting the Sundarbans fait ressortir clairement que le projet de conservation de la biodiversité des Sundarbans financé par ADB-GEF-Pays-Bas a échoué lamentablement et n’a pas réalisé ses objectifs de conserver la diversité biologique ou de réduire la pauvreté, bien qu’il ait coûté 77,3 millions USD. Abandonné au bout de quatre ans seulement, ce projet s’est avéré un échec notamment parce qu’il n'a pas su :
• comprendre la profonde interdépendance existant entre la forêt, sa faune et sa flore et ses habitants humains, les utilisateurs traditionnels de ses ressources (2) ;
• promouvoir la transparence ou la participation des communautés locales à quelque niveau que ce soit, en violation directe des principes de ses bailleurs de fonds ;
• prendre en considération le savoir traditionnel et le rôle essentiel de celui-ci pour la conservation de cette vaste forêt.
Le rapport Resuscitating the Sundarbans (La résurrection des Sundarbans) (3) constate que les pratiques culturelles, les systèmes de valeurs et les us et coutumes des peuples autochtones et des communautés locales contribuent directement à l'utilisation durable et à la conservation. Lors de la mise en œuvre du programme de travail élargi sur les aires protégées, les parties doivent donner la priorité aux éléments suivants :
• la gouvernance communautaire : les peuples autochtones et les communautés locales sont les gardiens de notre diversité biologique ;
• la réforme juridique : des directives et des lois qui favorisent et soutiennent l'utilisation coutumière des ressources naturelles et les pratiques culturelles connexes des peuples autochtones et communautés locales ;
• la garantie des droits fonciers : les territoires autochtones fournissent les bases matérielles et spirituelles du savoir traditionnel ainsi que de la jouissance coutumière et de l’utilisation des ressources biologiques ;
• le droit au consentement libre, préalable et éclairé : pour toutes les initiatives d'aménagement et de conservation, y compris les mesures prises pour faire appliquer la CDB.
« Dans la forêt des Sundarbans, la stratégie de protection exclusive par l’État n’a abouti ni à la conservation de la biodiversité, ni à la garantie des moyens de subsistance. Notre recherche montre clairement que c’est la gouvernance communautaire qui réalisera ces objectifs. Les peuples forestiers savent mieux que quiconque comment protéger les forêts et ses ressources, tandis que leurs pratiques culturelles traditionnelles en matière de récolte des ressources sont en harmonie avec la conservation et l'utilisation durable », a dit Jakir Hossain, Responsable des programmes, Unnayan Onneshan
Maurizio Ferrari, Coordinateur en gouvernance environnementale, Forest Peoples Programme, a déclaré : « Au titre des traités internationaux comme celui de la Convention sur la diversité biologique, les gouvernements sont dans l’obligation de conserver la diversité biologique et de protéger les droits des peuples autochtones. Il suffit de commencer par protéger ces droits et la conservation se fera d’elle-même. Les parties à la CDB doivent donner la priorité à la mise en œuvre de l’élément 2 du programme de travail sur les aires protégées, soit gouvernance, participation, équité et partage des avantages, et à l’exécution des articles 8(j) et 10(c). »(4)
Fin
Notes :
Les deux rapports susmentionnés seront discutés en détail lors d’un événement en marge de la COP9 le vendredi 23 mai 2008. Cet événement se concentrera sur les progrès effectués jusqu'à présent sur la mise en œuvre du programme de travail sur les aires protégées de la CDB. Des intervenants du Bangladesh, du Suriname, du Cameroun et de la Thaïlande y prendront la parole.
Heure : 18 h 15
Lieu : Salle 1.130 Environment (BMU)
Veuillez contacter info@unnayan.org pour demander une copie des rapports ou téléchargez-les à partir du site www.unnayan.org
http://www.unnayan.org/reports/Deserting.the.Sundarbans.pdf
http://www.unnayan.org/reports/Resuscitating.the.Sundarbans.pdf
Notes supplémentaires :
(13) « Deserting the Sundarbans: Local Peoples’ Perspective on ADB-GEF-Netherlands Funded Sundarbans Biodiversity Conservation Project » (L’abandon des Sundarbans : La perspective des peuples locaux sur le projet de conservation de la biodiversité des Sundarbans financé par ADB-GEF-Pays-Bas) (Jakir Hossain, Kushal Roy).
(14) Les communautés locales d’utilisateurs de ressources comprennent : les Bawali (bûcherons), les Moual (récolteurs de miel), les Golpata (cueilleurs de feuilles), les Jele (pêcheurs) et les Chunery (récolteurs d'escargots et d’huitres).
(15) « Resuscitating the Sundarbans: Customary Use of Biodiversity & Traditional Cultural Practices in Bangladesh » (La résurrection des Sundarbans : Usage coutumier de la biodiversité & pratiques culturelles traditionnelles au Bangladesh) (Dewan Muhammed Humayun Kabir, Jakir Hossain), avril 2008.
(16) Selon l’article 8(j) de la CDB, chaque État contractant « respecte, préserve et maintient les connaissances, innovations et pratiques des communautés autochtones et locales…»
Selon l’article 10(c) de la CDB, chaque État contractant « Protège et encourage l'usage coutumier des ressources biologiques conformément aux pratiques culturelles traditionnelles compatibles avec les impératifs de leur conservation ou de leur utilisation durable... ».
(17) Unnayan Onneshan est un centre de recherche et d’action sur le développement basé au Bangladesh.
(18) Forest Peoples Programme est une ONG basée au Royaume-Uni qui aide les peuples forestiers du monde entier à protéger leurs droits, à établir leurs propres organisations de défense et à négocier avec les gouvernements et entreprises sur la meilleure façon d'assurer le développement et la conservation sur leurs terres. www.forestpeoples.org
Pour en savoir plus, veuillez contacter :
• Jakir Hossain, Responsables des programmes, Unnayan Onneshan,
Téléphone : +49 (0)15771654462
E-mail : jhossain@unnayan.org
• Maurizio Ferrari, Coordinateur en gouvernance environnementale, Forest Peoples Programme, Téléphone : +44 (0)7733478307
• Maurizio Ferrari, Coordinateur en gouvernance environnementale, Forest Peoples Programme, Téléphone : +44 (0)7733478307
E-mail : maurizio@forestpeoples.org
• Amarantha Pike, Responsable des communications, Forest Peoples Programme,
Téléphone : +44 (0)7791691485
• Amarantha Pike, Responsable des communications, Forest Peoples Programme,
Téléphone : +44 (0)7791691485
E-mail: amarantha@forestpeoples.org
IIFB statement on Dry and Sub-Humid Lands
Statement by the IIFB on Agenda Item 4.6 COP9 CBD
Bonn, Germany
21 May 2008
Dry and Sub-Humid Lands
Dear Madam Chair,
We, indigenous peoples and local communities welcome the attention given by Parties to the theme of dry and Sub-humid lands.
We want to emphasise that indigenous peoples and local communities have had a sustainable approach to living with biodiversity in dry and sub-humid lands since time immemorial.
Madam Chair, We believe that all the solutions available to States and peoples in dry and sub-humid lands exist already within the framework of the three Rio Conventions. The challenge is to understand the causes of the problems, to harmonise the key elements of the international instruments, and to establish an effective partnership between indigenous peoples and local communities at regional and national levels.
Madam Chair, if we recognise the relationship between an ecosystem approach to biodiversity conservation and traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples and local communities, we already have adequate solutions to current environmental challenges.
Madam Chair, we note the following threats to biodiversity in dry and sub-humid lands:
Colonial approaches to range management did not take into consideration traditional knowledge about mobility and ecosystems;
Out-of-date scientific theories which continue to play a role in state planning related to the ecology of dry and sub-humid lands;
Agricultural incursion into sensitive ecosystems is causing rapid land degradation and promoting conflict between peoples. Equally mining and extractive industries pose environmental and demographic threats;
There is currently, in many countries, a policy bias in favour of urban or farming communities, which results in violation of indigenous and local communities land rights, insufficient consultation and participation by indigenous peoples in dry and sub-humid lands;
Traditional knowledge is not being used effectively for decision making by States in environmental and economic policy making
Madam Chair, we recommend to the State Parties:
Encourage more attention by UN agencies and Parties to enhance the conservation of biodiversity in dry and sub-humid lands;
Promote a human rights approach to dry and sub humid lands policies and programming at international, regional and national levels as well as recognizing the indigenous peoples and local communities land rights, including valuing cultural diversity. This includes inter alia respect for the principles contained in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and other instruments at the regional and national level;
Dry and sub-humid lands policies and programming need to evolve in cooperation with indigenous peoples and local communities traditional knowledge, notably as set out by the Ad Hoc Working Group on 8J;
There should be greater harmonisation between CBD’s inter-related elements related to dry lands (i.e. 8J, 10C,ABS and Ecosystems Approach) and the work of the Convention to Combat Desertification (CCD) and the Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC);
Harmonisation between the Rio Conventions notably applies to the full recognition by Parties of indigenous peoples and local communities as a Major Group in all three instruments;
Lastly madam chair, we recommend full and effective participation of indigenous peoples and local communities especially indigenous women in the UNCBD SBSTTA activities dealing with dry and sub-arid lands as well as related working groups.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Bonn, Germany
21 May 2008
Dry and Sub-Humid Lands
Dear Madam Chair,
We, indigenous peoples and local communities welcome the attention given by Parties to the theme of dry and Sub-humid lands.
We want to emphasise that indigenous peoples and local communities have had a sustainable approach to living with biodiversity in dry and sub-humid lands since time immemorial.
Madam Chair, We believe that all the solutions available to States and peoples in dry and sub-humid lands exist already within the framework of the three Rio Conventions. The challenge is to understand the causes of the problems, to harmonise the key elements of the international instruments, and to establish an effective partnership between indigenous peoples and local communities at regional and national levels.
Madam Chair, if we recognise the relationship between an ecosystem approach to biodiversity conservation and traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples and local communities, we already have adequate solutions to current environmental challenges.
Madam Chair, we note the following threats to biodiversity in dry and sub-humid lands:
Colonial approaches to range management did not take into consideration traditional knowledge about mobility and ecosystems;
Out-of-date scientific theories which continue to play a role in state planning related to the ecology of dry and sub-humid lands;
Agricultural incursion into sensitive ecosystems is causing rapid land degradation and promoting conflict between peoples. Equally mining and extractive industries pose environmental and demographic threats;
There is currently, in many countries, a policy bias in favour of urban or farming communities, which results in violation of indigenous and local communities land rights, insufficient consultation and participation by indigenous peoples in dry and sub-humid lands;
Traditional knowledge is not being used effectively for decision making by States in environmental and economic policy making
Madam Chair, we recommend to the State Parties:
Encourage more attention by UN agencies and Parties to enhance the conservation of biodiversity in dry and sub-humid lands;
Promote a human rights approach to dry and sub humid lands policies and programming at international, regional and national levels as well as recognizing the indigenous peoples and local communities land rights, including valuing cultural diversity. This includes inter alia respect for the principles contained in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and other instruments at the regional and national level;
Dry and sub-humid lands policies and programming need to evolve in cooperation with indigenous peoples and local communities traditional knowledge, notably as set out by the Ad Hoc Working Group on 8J;
There should be greater harmonisation between CBD’s inter-related elements related to dry lands (i.e. 8J, 10C,ABS and Ecosystems Approach) and the work of the Convention to Combat Desertification (CCD) and the Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC);
Harmonisation between the Rio Conventions notably applies to the full recognition by Parties of indigenous peoples and local communities as a Major Group in all three instruments;
Lastly madam chair, we recommend full and effective participation of indigenous peoples and local communities especially indigenous women in the UNCBD SBSTTA activities dealing with dry and sub-arid lands as well as related working groups.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thursday, May 22, 2008
IIFB statement on Communication, Education and Public Awareness
International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity (IIFB) Statement on Communication, Education and Public Awareness
Dear Madame Chair,
On behalf of the International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity (IIFB), I am reading our comments on Agenda Item no 4.17 related to Communication, Education and Public Awareness (CEPA) documents no. UNEP/CBD/COP/9/25.
Communication and education has allowed us to accomplish an environment of peace, freedom, social justice, equity, full exercise of our rights for the sustainable use of the Biodiversity of indigenous peoples.
Since time immemorial, Indigenous Peoples have had the symbols and codes of communication. These have been tools which allowed the holistic development as individuals and collective beings.
In present time, communication and education are the ‘spine’ of our identity and global integration of Indigenous Peoples and this has allowed us to strengthen and apply the real labor of communication, education and sensitization society, for living in harmony with nature and the global society.
We call upon the Parties to implement the Program of Work and allow the full and effective participation of Indigenous Peoples in the work of CEPA as a key stakeholder in achieving the success of this PoW.
We acknowledge and appreciate the contributions of the EU on the recommendation of regional training on CEPA. However, we stress that these trainings should include the participation of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities.
We again urge the parties to highlight and incorporate ‘the Central Role of the Indigenous Peoples and the Local Communities in the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity’ as one of the key messages in the CEPA programme of work. All key messages should be translated, in collaboration with the Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities, into indigenous and local languages and broadcast/disseminate the same in community radio, media and include in the formal and non-formal education.
We support the proposal to celebrate 2010 as the International Year of Biodiversity. However, we once again urge the Parties to ensure the full and effective participation of the Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities in the celebration of the Year of Biodiversity.
We acknowledge the inclusion of the representative of the Indigenous Peoples in the Informal Advisory Committee (IAC) on CEPA and we look forward to a useful collaboration in future. The IIFB urges the implementation of Agenda for Action 2008/2010 in partnership with the Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities. It should be noted that Indigenous Peoples have organized themselves in order to work on implementation of CEPA programmes of work. The launching of the indigenous portal in 2007 which is available in four languages, in collaboration with the Indigenous ICT Task Force, and the initiative to formulate a CEPA Working Group are remarkable initiatives of the indigenous peoples in the implementation of CEPA programme of work.
We welcome all parties, civil societies, UN agencies and others to visit our portal at http://indigenousportal.com/.
We urge parties, donors and international organization to support Indigenous Peoples’ initiatives in the implementation of CEPA’s programme of work.
The IIFB WG on CEPA went through the document UNEP/CBD/COP/9/25 and urge the Parties to include ‘parties’ in the draft decision 4 after the beginning word –invites. Henceforth the draft decision should be read as:
“Invites parties, interested donors and relevant international organization to provide adequate and predictable financial resources for implementation of the CEPA program of work.”
The IIFB also urges the parties to include the words “Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (ILC)” in the draft decision no. 6. And it should be read as:
“Invites parties, Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities and relevant International Organizations to enhance the implementation at National level the program of work of CEPA and coordinate their efforts for the celebration of 2010 International Year on Biodiversity and submit their report to the Executive Secretary.”
Madame Chair, we would also like to comment on the draft decision no. 2 of UNEP/CBD/COP/9/25 Add.1. Here, we would like to remind the parties about COP 8 decision VIII/6 that the indigenous peoples’ and local communities’ representative have been included in the national advisory committees for the implementation of the CEPA programmes of work. Therefore, we like to suggest that the decision no. 2 should be read as:
“Encourages all parties to create national committees including Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities to celebrate the Year and invites all international organizations to mark this event;”
Thank you.
Dear Madame Chair,
On behalf of the International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity (IIFB), I am reading our comments on Agenda Item no 4.17 related to Communication, Education and Public Awareness (CEPA) documents no. UNEP/CBD/COP/9/25.
Communication and education has allowed us to accomplish an environment of peace, freedom, social justice, equity, full exercise of our rights for the sustainable use of the Biodiversity of indigenous peoples.
Since time immemorial, Indigenous Peoples have had the symbols and codes of communication. These have been tools which allowed the holistic development as individuals and collective beings.
In present time, communication and education are the ‘spine’ of our identity and global integration of Indigenous Peoples and this has allowed us to strengthen and apply the real labor of communication, education and sensitization society, for living in harmony with nature and the global society.
We call upon the Parties to implement the Program of Work and allow the full and effective participation of Indigenous Peoples in the work of CEPA as a key stakeholder in achieving the success of this PoW.
We acknowledge and appreciate the contributions of the EU on the recommendation of regional training on CEPA. However, we stress that these trainings should include the participation of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities.
We again urge the parties to highlight and incorporate ‘the Central Role of the Indigenous Peoples and the Local Communities in the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity’ as one of the key messages in the CEPA programme of work. All key messages should be translated, in collaboration with the Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities, into indigenous and local languages and broadcast/disseminate the same in community radio, media and include in the formal and non-formal education.
We support the proposal to celebrate 2010 as the International Year of Biodiversity. However, we once again urge the Parties to ensure the full and effective participation of the Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities in the celebration of the Year of Biodiversity.
We acknowledge the inclusion of the representative of the Indigenous Peoples in the Informal Advisory Committee (IAC) on CEPA and we look forward to a useful collaboration in future. The IIFB urges the implementation of Agenda for Action 2008/2010 in partnership with the Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities. It should be noted that Indigenous Peoples have organized themselves in order to work on implementation of CEPA programmes of work. The launching of the indigenous portal in 2007 which is available in four languages, in collaboration with the Indigenous ICT Task Force, and the initiative to formulate a CEPA Working Group are remarkable initiatives of the indigenous peoples in the implementation of CEPA programme of work.
We welcome all parties, civil societies, UN agencies and others to visit our portal at http://indigenousportal.com/.
We urge parties, donors and international organization to support Indigenous Peoples’ initiatives in the implementation of CEPA’s programme of work.
The IIFB WG on CEPA went through the document UNEP/CBD/COP/9/25 and urge the Parties to include ‘parties’ in the draft decision 4 after the beginning word –invites. Henceforth the draft decision should be read as:
“Invites parties, interested donors and relevant international organization to provide adequate and predictable financial resources for implementation of the CEPA program of work.”
The IIFB also urges the parties to include the words “Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (ILC)” in the draft decision no. 6. And it should be read as:
“Invites parties, Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities and relevant International Organizations to enhance the implementation at National level the program of work of CEPA and coordinate their efforts for the celebration of 2010 International Year on Biodiversity and submit their report to the Executive Secretary.”
Madame Chair, we would also like to comment on the draft decision no. 2 of UNEP/CBD/COP/9/25 Add.1. Here, we would like to remind the parties about COP 8 decision VIII/6 that the indigenous peoples’ and local communities’ representative have been included in the national advisory committees for the implementation of the CEPA programmes of work. Therefore, we like to suggest that the decision no. 2 should be read as:
“Encourages all parties to create national committees including Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities to celebrate the Year and invites all international organizations to mark this event;”
Thank you.
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
IIFB opening statement on Forest Biodiversity (agenda item 3.4)
IIFB Opening Statement on Forest biodiversity (agenda item 3.4)
Thank you Madam Chair,
Madam Chair, today we are discussing the in-depth review of the implementation of the expanded programme of work on forest biological diversity. With respect to the implementation of this Programme of Work, we have some grave concerns, drawing on the outcomes of the review that was carried out by the Ad Hoc Technical Expert Group (AHTEG), that we’d like to share with you. Since sixty million indigenous people worldwide are dependent on forests, this agenda item, and the successful implementation of the Programme of Work, is of vital importance to us. Unfortunately, most Indigenous peoples and local communities are not aware of the expanded programme of work, but also many governments, who have the responsibility to implement it, are not. Hence there is a need for capacity building and awareness raising on this issue at all levels.
One of the overall findings of the Ad Hoc Technical Expert Group was, that ‘Despite the importance of forest biodiversity for the economic and spiritual well-being of indigenous and local communities, forest decision-making processes often do not take their rights and concerns sufficiently into account’. This is a worrying conclusion.
Also, although ‘seeking to resolve land tenure and resource rights is encouraged in the PoW (goal 2.1.2) the in-depth review revealed unresolved or unclear land tenure issues are amongst the most commonly mentioned obstacles to implementation’, and that lack of land rights and disputes over land rights are major obstacles for land management by indigenous and local communities’. This means that solving these issues have not been successful in most countries as yet. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples shall be the basis to solve this problem.
We want to raise another concern. Protected areas are increasingly proposed as a solution to combat forest loss and degradation. We, Indigenous organisations and networks, are profoundly concerned about this because we know from our own experience that the establishment of Protected Areas can cause harm to Indigenous Peoples including violation of our rights.
We would like to take this opportunity to stress, that in order to achieve results in terms of the implementation of the Programme of Work, we recommend Parties to:
solve and address land rights and tenure issues as a matter of priority
place community-based indigenous management systems of forests at a more central stage and recognise traditional knowledge related to forest as equal to western, scientific knowledge.
guarantee Indigenous Peoples and local communities’ full and effective participation in forest policy design, development, implementation and monitoring at all levels.
ensure that indigenous peoples and local communities who were forcibly removed and relocated from their forest receive restitution and compensation
address other obstacles to implementation of the Programme of Work such as illegal logging and concessions.
Moreover, Madam Chair,
we, forest-dependent Indigenous Peoples and local communities, reject REDD and the production of biofuels in and around our territories
We reject GE trees and call for a total ban on GE trees
and finally, protected areas should not be promoted to conserve forest biodiversity until our rights to our lands, territories and resources are fully recognised and protected.
During this session we will provide you with suggested text changes on these important issues.
Thank you. Madam Chair.
(Spanish Version)
Intervención del Foro Internacional Indígena sobre Biodiversidad Forestal (punto 3.4. de la agenda)
Gracias Sra. Presidenta,
Hoy día estamos discutiendo la revisión profunda sobre la implementación del Programa Extendida de Trabajo sobre biodiversidad forestal. Con respecto a la implementación del Programa de Trabajo tenemos algunas preocupaciones graves, basadas en los resultados de la evaluación hecha por el Grupo de Expertos Técnico Ad-Hoc, que gustaríamos compartir con Uds.
Hace 60 millón de años que los pueblos indígenas somos dependientes de los bosques, entonces este punto de la agenda y la implementación exitoso del Programa de Trabajo son de importancia crucial para nosotros. Sin embargo, la mayoría de Pueblos Indígenas y comunidades locales no conocemos el programa de trabajo expandido así como muchos gobiernos que tienen la responsabilidad de implementarlo. Por eso existe la necesidad de fortalecer las capacidades y aumentar la noción sobre este asunto en todos niveles.
Una de las conclusiones generales del Grupo de Expertos era que “no obstante la importancia de la biodiversidad forestal para el bienestar de las comunidades indígenas y locales, los procesos de decisión sobre bosques muchas veces no toman en cuenta los derechos y preocupaciones de los mismos. Esta conclusión es muy preocupante.
También, aunque se respalda en el Programa de Trabajo (objetivo 2.1.2.) que hay que “tratar de resolver cuestiones pendientes u obscura sobre manejo de tierra y recursos la evaluación mostró que son precisamente estos asuntos no-resueltos que son los obstáculos mayores contra la implementación”, y que la ausencia de derechos territoriales y conflictos sobre derechos territoriales son los mayores obstáculos para manejo del tierra para comunidades indígenas y locales. Esto significa que la resolución de estos asuntos todavía no ha sido muy exitoso en la mayoría de países. La Declaración de la ONU sobre los Derechos de Pueblos Indígenas debe ser el base para resolver este problema.
También queremos manifestar otra preocupación que tenemos, es saber que las áreas protegidas se presenta cada vez más como solución para combatir la pérdida y degradación de bosques. Nosotros, organizaciones y redes de Pueblos Indígenas, estamos muy preocupados sobre eso porque conocemos de experiencia que el establecimiento de nuevos áreas protegidas puede ser perjuicioso para Pueblos Indígenas, incluso la violación de nuestros derechos.
Gustariamos tomar esta oportunidad de enfatizar y recomendar, para llegar a mejores resultados en la implementación del Programa de Trabajo, lo siguiente:
Tratar y resolver como prioridad los asuntos de conflictos sobre derechos territoriales y uso de tierra;
Situar más central que los sistemas de manejo comunitario indígena para el manejo de bosques sean reconocidos, y que también se reconozca que los conocimientos tradicionales son de igual valor como los conocimientos occidentales científicos;
Que se garantice la participación plena y efectiva de los Pueblos Indígenas y comunidades locales en el diseño, desarrollo, implementación y monitoreo de políticas sobre biodiversidad forestal;
Que se asegure que los Pueblos Indígenas y comunidades locales que fueron desechados y relocalizados con fuerza de sus bosques, reciban restitución y compensación;
Que se trata otros obstáculos de implementación del Programa de Trabajo tales como tala de árboles ilegal y concesiones comerciales.
Además, Sra. Presidenta,
Nosotros, Pueblos Indígenas y comunidades locales dependientes de los bosques, rechazamos REDD y la producción de agrocombustibles dentro y alrededor de nuestros territorios;
Rechazamos árboles modificados genéticamente y llamamos por un alto completo sobre árboles modificados genéticamente;
Que áreas protegidas de ningún manera deben ser promovidas para conservación de biodiversidad forestal hasta que se reconozcan y protegen plenamente nuestros derechos a nuestras tierras, territorios y recursos.
Durante la sesión le proveemos con cambios de texto sugeridos sobre estos puntos importantes.
Gracias Sra. Presidenta.
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
IIFB statement on Agriculture Biodiversity
International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity
Convention on Biological Diversity
Nine Conferences of Parties
Statement on Agriculture Biodiversity
Thank you Madame chair.
The agricultural biodiversity of Indigenous Peoples has a unique relationship with the land, territories, culture, traditional food systems and spiritual expressions of Indigenous Peoples. The discussion on agriculture cannot be limited to the conservation of seeds and cultivations. The debate must include a holistic approach that includes Indigenous Peoples’ traditional agricultural landscapes, biocultural systems, food sovereignty and their right to life as peoples. Our families are attached to our homes, our seeds learn to thrive in their place of cultivation by developing a relationship with soil, water, agricultural practices, ceremonies, and prayers; thereby giving seeds a sacred place in our families and communities. This is our agrobiodiversity.
The importance of indigenous traditional knowledge, innovation and practices is clearly evident in light of the current climate and food crisis. Local food systems, traditional seed exchange systems and maintaining ecosystem and seed diversity are examples of how Indigenous Peoples use their traditional knowledge to respond to climate pressures and be food self-sufficient. In the face of climate change, indigenous farmers are doing better with more genetic variation and are selecting from a larger pool of local material -- rather than waiting for breeders to supply them with varieties that will be at best only narrowly adapted.
To protect the diversity of our food systems and agrobiodiversity we call for the ban of GMO in our territories. GMO crops have escaped into the environment with maize in Oaxaca, Mexico and Canola in Canada and crossed into native seeds and wild plant. Therefore we call for the end of GMO/GE technologies; in particular we call for termination of “terminator seed”. We also call for the outlaw of biopiracy and the ban of patents on seed, we believe corporate ownership claims of landrace crop genomes and patent law represent a legal framework for the justification of the possession and destruction of our stolen cultural property.
The IIFB and the Indigenous Women Biodiversity Network call on Parties to end perverse subsidies that hurt agrobiodiversity and instead should support indigenous peoples and small farmer’ s food systems, thereby protecting agrobiodiversity from the negative impact of corporate driven agriculture and global trade.
Taking note the negative impacts of agro-fuel in our food sovereignty and security, we strongly demand the immediate ban of agro-fuel and bio fuel production.
Madame chair, in closing we call for the repatriation of seed diversity and associated knowledge from CGIAR Centers to indigenous and local communities farms and landscapes to generate a creative economies based on TK, build the adaptive capacity of the population and resilience of the system. We call for guarantee to our rights to freely save, exchange and sell their seeds without restrictions. Lastly, we call for an immediate and permanent stoppage to the release of GMO trees.
Thank you.
Convention on Biological Diversity
Nine Conferences of Parties
Statement on Agriculture Biodiversity
Thank you Madame chair.
The agricultural biodiversity of Indigenous Peoples has a unique relationship with the land, territories, culture, traditional food systems and spiritual expressions of Indigenous Peoples. The discussion on agriculture cannot be limited to the conservation of seeds and cultivations. The debate must include a holistic approach that includes Indigenous Peoples’ traditional agricultural landscapes, biocultural systems, food sovereignty and their right to life as peoples. Our families are attached to our homes, our seeds learn to thrive in their place of cultivation by developing a relationship with soil, water, agricultural practices, ceremonies, and prayers; thereby giving seeds a sacred place in our families and communities. This is our agrobiodiversity.
The importance of indigenous traditional knowledge, innovation and practices is clearly evident in light of the current climate and food crisis. Local food systems, traditional seed exchange systems and maintaining ecosystem and seed diversity are examples of how Indigenous Peoples use their traditional knowledge to respond to climate pressures and be food self-sufficient. In the face of climate change, indigenous farmers are doing better with more genetic variation and are selecting from a larger pool of local material -- rather than waiting for breeders to supply them with varieties that will be at best only narrowly adapted.
To protect the diversity of our food systems and agrobiodiversity we call for the ban of GMO in our territories. GMO crops have escaped into the environment with maize in Oaxaca, Mexico and Canola in Canada and crossed into native seeds and wild plant. Therefore we call for the end of GMO/GE technologies; in particular we call for termination of “terminator seed”. We also call for the outlaw of biopiracy and the ban of patents on seed, we believe corporate ownership claims of landrace crop genomes and patent law represent a legal framework for the justification of the possession and destruction of our stolen cultural property.
The IIFB and the Indigenous Women Biodiversity Network call on Parties to end perverse subsidies that hurt agrobiodiversity and instead should support indigenous peoples and small farmer’ s food systems, thereby protecting agrobiodiversity from the negative impact of corporate driven agriculture and global trade.
Taking note the negative impacts of agro-fuel in our food sovereignty and security, we strongly demand the immediate ban of agro-fuel and bio fuel production.
Madame chair, in closing we call for the repatriation of seed diversity and associated knowledge from CGIAR Centers to indigenous and local communities farms and landscapes to generate a creative economies based on TK, build the adaptive capacity of the population and resilience of the system. We call for guarantee to our rights to freely save, exchange and sell their seeds without restrictions. Lastly, we call for an immediate and permanent stoppage to the release of GMO trees.
Thank you.
IIFB Intervention on Financing Mechanisms
Spanish Version
Intervención sobre Mecanismos Financieros
Gracias Sra. Presidenta,
Hablo en nombre del Foro Internacional indígena sobre Biodiversidad (FIIB) sobre la movilización de recursos financieros y el nuevo Plan Estrategico del GEF. Estamos muy preocupados por la estrategia de movilización de recursos y los elementos propuestos para la programación prioritaria del GEF para los años 2010–2014, que han sido elaborado sin participación significativa de los Pueblos Indígenas. También manifestamos nuestra profunda preocupación que el CDB está pidiendo financiación de mecanismos financieros tales como el Fondo de Adopción del FMAM y la Facilidad de Asociados de Carbono del Banco Mundial, que son fondos que potencialmente violan derechos humanos y particularmente derechos de los pueblos indígenas, y que estos dos mecanismos no tienen estándares adecuados para la protección de derechos humanos.
Por lo tanto Sra. Presidente, proponemos lo siguiente:
1. Que el COP proponga y apruebe el aumento del presupuesto bajo articulo 8j y disposiciones conexos para actividades en su plan de trabajo que pueden ser implementados por los Pueblos Indígenas, como actores activos y cruciales en la implementación del Plan de Trabajo del Grupo de Trabajo sobre 8j;
2. Que la estrategia 2010–2014 del GEF sea revisado con el fin de ser más coherente con los derechos e intereses de los Pueblos Indígenas;
3. Solicitamos que los Pueblos Indígenas participen activamente en las discusiones entre el CDB, el GEF y el Banco Mundial, para que los tipos de actividades a financiar sean coherente con los derechos humanos y derechos colectivos de los pueblos indígenas;
4. Proponemos que en el Plan Estratégico del GEF también incluya el establecimiento, con nuestra participación en el diseño, de un mecanismo de financiación directa a organizaciones de pueblos indígenas para proyectos que estén basados en nuestras propias prioridades y que serán ejecutados bajo nuestro manejo.
Gracias Sra. Presidenta y esperamos que podamos contribuir más a las discusiones siguientes sobre estos asuntos durante este COP.
English Version
Intervention on Financing Mechanisms
Thank you Madam Chair,
I speak on behalf of the International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity (IIFB) on the issues of financial resource mobilization and the new Strategic Plan of the GEF. We are very concerned that the strategy for resource mobilization, and the proposed elements for the priority programming of the GEF for the years 2010–2014 have been developed without a significant participation of Indigenous Peoples. We also express our deep concern that the CBD is requesting financing from financial mechanisms such as the Adaptation Fund of the GEF and the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility of the World Bank, which are funds that potentially violate human rights and particularly the rights of Indigenous Peoples, and which have no adequate standards for the protection of human rights.
We therefore make the following recommendations:
1. That the COP proposes and approves an increase of the budget under article 8j and related articles for those activities in its Work Plan that can be implemented by Indigenous Peoples, as active and crucial actors in the implementation of the Work Plan of the Working Group on 8j;
2. That the strategy for 2010–2014 of the GEF be revised with the objective of being more coherent with the rights and interests of Indigenous Peoples;
3. We request that Indigenous Peoples participate actively in the discussions between the CBD, GEF and the World Bank, in order that the type of activities for which financing is sought, are coherent with human rights and particularly the collective rights of Indigenous Peoples;
4. We propose that the Strategic Plan of the GEF 2010–2014 also include the establishment, with our participation in such design, of a mechanism for direct financing to Indigenous Peoples’ organizations for projects that are based on our own priorities and will be implemented under our own management.
Thank you Madam Chair, and we hope to make further contributions to the following discussions about these topics during this COP.
Intervención sobre Mecanismos Financieros
Gracias Sra. Presidenta,
Hablo en nombre del Foro Internacional indígena sobre Biodiversidad (FIIB) sobre la movilización de recursos financieros y el nuevo Plan Estrategico del GEF. Estamos muy preocupados por la estrategia de movilización de recursos y los elementos propuestos para la programación prioritaria del GEF para los años 2010–2014, que han sido elaborado sin participación significativa de los Pueblos Indígenas. También manifestamos nuestra profunda preocupación que el CDB está pidiendo financiación de mecanismos financieros tales como el Fondo de Adopción del FMAM y la Facilidad de Asociados de Carbono del Banco Mundial, que son fondos que potencialmente violan derechos humanos y particularmente derechos de los pueblos indígenas, y que estos dos mecanismos no tienen estándares adecuados para la protección de derechos humanos.
Por lo tanto Sra. Presidente, proponemos lo siguiente:
1. Que el COP proponga y apruebe el aumento del presupuesto bajo articulo 8j y disposiciones conexos para actividades en su plan de trabajo que pueden ser implementados por los Pueblos Indígenas, como actores activos y cruciales en la implementación del Plan de Trabajo del Grupo de Trabajo sobre 8j;
2. Que la estrategia 2010–2014 del GEF sea revisado con el fin de ser más coherente con los derechos e intereses de los Pueblos Indígenas;
3. Solicitamos que los Pueblos Indígenas participen activamente en las discusiones entre el CDB, el GEF y el Banco Mundial, para que los tipos de actividades a financiar sean coherente con los derechos humanos y derechos colectivos de los pueblos indígenas;
4. Proponemos que en el Plan Estratégico del GEF también incluya el establecimiento, con nuestra participación en el diseño, de un mecanismo de financiación directa a organizaciones de pueblos indígenas para proyectos que estén basados en nuestras propias prioridades y que serán ejecutados bajo nuestro manejo.
Gracias Sra. Presidenta y esperamos que podamos contribuir más a las discusiones siguientes sobre estos asuntos durante este COP.
English Version
Intervention on Financing Mechanisms
Thank you Madam Chair,
I speak on behalf of the International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity (IIFB) on the issues of financial resource mobilization and the new Strategic Plan of the GEF. We are very concerned that the strategy for resource mobilization, and the proposed elements for the priority programming of the GEF for the years 2010–2014 have been developed without a significant participation of Indigenous Peoples. We also express our deep concern that the CBD is requesting financing from financial mechanisms such as the Adaptation Fund of the GEF and the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility of the World Bank, which are funds that potentially violate human rights and particularly the rights of Indigenous Peoples, and which have no adequate standards for the protection of human rights.
We therefore make the following recommendations:
1. That the COP proposes and approves an increase of the budget under article 8j and related articles for those activities in its Work Plan that can be implemented by Indigenous Peoples, as active and crucial actors in the implementation of the Work Plan of the Working Group on 8j;
2. That the strategy for 2010–2014 of the GEF be revised with the objective of being more coherent with the rights and interests of Indigenous Peoples;
3. We request that Indigenous Peoples participate actively in the discussions between the CBD, GEF and the World Bank, in order that the type of activities for which financing is sought, are coherent with human rights and particularly the collective rights of Indigenous Peoples;
4. We propose that the Strategic Plan of the GEF 2010–2014 also include the establishment, with our participation in such design, of a mechanism for direct financing to Indigenous Peoples’ organizations for projects that are based on our own priorities and will be implemented under our own management.
Thank you Madam Chair, and we hope to make further contributions to the following discussions about these topics during this COP.
IIFB statement on Agenda Item 3.7
STATEMENT MADE BY THE INTERNATIONAL INDIGENOUS FORUM ON BIODIVERSITY (IIFB)
AGENDA ITEM 3.7 Progress in the implementation of the Strategic Plan and progress towards the 2010 target and relevant Millennium Development Goals
Madame Chairperson,
The IIFB believes that a review of implementation of Goal 4 of the Strategic Plan is very important to fully understand the progress of implementation of the CBD Strategic Plan.
In this regard, the IIFB Working Group on Indicators has proposed the adoption of three indicators assessing progress in the implementation of Goal 4, Target 3,
Full and effective participation of indigenous and local communities in CBD processes at all levels
Þ Numbers of indigenous and local community representatives participating in CBD official meetings disaggregated by region, country , gender
Þ Number of partnerships with and initiatives of indigenous and local communities in implementation of programs of the CBD (including CEPA & NBSAPS) at national regional and international levels (national reports done in a participatory way)
Þ Finances spent to support effective participation of indigenous and local communities in the implementation of the CBD at all levels.
In addition, a few practical indicators were also proposed for assessing progress in the 2010 Biodiversity target on protection of traditional knowledge, innovations and practices.
These proposed indicators are among the results of the International Expert Seminar on Indicators Relevant for Indigenous Peoples, the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Millennium Development Goals, held in Banaue, Philippines in March 2007.
We would urge Parties to take note of these indicators, and to consider them in a review of implementation of Goal 4, Target 3, and also in the submission of the 4th national reports.
This global indicators process increased the capacity of indigenous participants to fully understand the CBD Strategic Plan and 2010 Biodiversity Target, and are more prepared with work closely with Parties for their fuller implementation, and in their monitoring through GBO3.
Thank you, Madame Chairperson.
ATTACHED: PROPOSED TEXTUAL CHANGES IN DRAFT DECISION:
Under Recommendation 2/1 (UNEP/CBD/COP/9/4)
National Biodiversity strategies and Actions Plans
Support processes
(l) Engage indigenous and local communities, and all relevant sectors and stakeholders including representatives of society and economy that have a significant impact on, benefit from or use biodiversity and its related ecosystem services. Activities might include:
(i) Preparing, updating, implementing, ADD reviewing and monitoring national biodiversity strategies and action plans with the participation of a abroad set of representatives from all major groups to build partnership and commitment;
…..
(m) Respect, preserve, maintain and ADD develop the traditional knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities consistent with Article 8(j), ADD and other relevant international instruments, particularly the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples;
AGENDA ITEM 3.7 Progress in the implementation of the Strategic Plan and progress towards the 2010 target and relevant Millennium Development Goals
Madame Chairperson,
The IIFB believes that a review of implementation of Goal 4 of the Strategic Plan is very important to fully understand the progress of implementation of the CBD Strategic Plan.
In this regard, the IIFB Working Group on Indicators has proposed the adoption of three indicators assessing progress in the implementation of Goal 4, Target 3,
Full and effective participation of indigenous and local communities in CBD processes at all levels
Þ Numbers of indigenous and local community representatives participating in CBD official meetings disaggregated by region, country , gender
Þ Number of partnerships with and initiatives of indigenous and local communities in implementation of programs of the CBD (including CEPA & NBSAPS) at national regional and international levels (national reports done in a participatory way)
Þ Finances spent to support effective participation of indigenous and local communities in the implementation of the CBD at all levels.
In addition, a few practical indicators were also proposed for assessing progress in the 2010 Biodiversity target on protection of traditional knowledge, innovations and practices.
These proposed indicators are among the results of the International Expert Seminar on Indicators Relevant for Indigenous Peoples, the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Millennium Development Goals, held in Banaue, Philippines in March 2007.
We would urge Parties to take note of these indicators, and to consider them in a review of implementation of Goal 4, Target 3, and also in the submission of the 4th national reports.
This global indicators process increased the capacity of indigenous participants to fully understand the CBD Strategic Plan and 2010 Biodiversity Target, and are more prepared with work closely with Parties for their fuller implementation, and in their monitoring through GBO3.
Thank you, Madame Chairperson.
ATTACHED: PROPOSED TEXTUAL CHANGES IN DRAFT DECISION:
Under Recommendation 2/1 (UNEP/CBD/COP/9/4)
National Biodiversity strategies and Actions Plans
Support processes
(l) Engage indigenous and local communities, and all relevant sectors and stakeholders including representatives of society and economy that have a significant impact on, benefit from or use biodiversity and its related ecosystem services. Activities might include:
(i) Preparing, updating, implementing, ADD reviewing and monitoring national biodiversity strategies and action plans with the participation of a abroad set of representatives from all major groups to build partnership and commitment;
…..
(m) Respect, preserve, maintain and ADD develop the traditional knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities consistent with Article 8(j), ADD and other relevant international instruments, particularly the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples;
Joint Declaration of the Indigenous Women's Biodiversity Network and the Indigenous Youth
Joint Declaration of the Indigenous Women’s Biodiversity Network and the Indigenous Youth
Bonn, Germany, May 18, 2008
Thank you, Mr. President.
We, the indigenous women and youth wish to make the following observations on the issues that will be discussed during COP9.
We thank the German government and people for their hospitality and are grateful to the international cooperation agencies for supporting our participation in this Conference.
Mr. Chair,
Climate change is adversely affecting the conservation of our biodiversity and our traditional knowledge causing the loss of our native seeds, medicinal plants, food security and food sovereignty, water scarcity and rising sea levels.
The expansion of protected areas systems in our lands and territories has caused adverse socioeconomic and cultural impacts on our peoples and our traditional management systems, increasing extreme poverty and contradicting the MDG, the Millennium Development Goals. Indigenous women are the keepers and developers of our food. We guarantee food security and we develop our seeds for the benefit of future generations.
Monocrops and the introduction of GMOs are greatly undermining the role of women as keepers and developers of seed and traditional knowledge of food production systems for current and future generations.
Mr. Chair,
We, therefore, recommend the following:
We urge Parties, the private sector and the conservation NGOs to guarantee the conservation of biodiversity by stopping all support of agrofuels, monoculture tree plantations, genetically modifies organisms and extractive industries, including mining and logging that destroy Mother Earth.
We reiterate the urgent need for the Parties to recognize and respect our customary systems for the protection of our traditional knowledge and associated genetic resources.
We urge Parties to implement the Gender Plan and provide human, technical and financial resources and inform you that the Indigenous Women’s Biodiversity Network is eager to contribute to this work.
Bonn, Germany, May 18, 2008
Thank you, Mr. President.
We, the indigenous women and youth wish to make the following observations on the issues that will be discussed during COP9.
We thank the German government and people for their hospitality and are grateful to the international cooperation agencies for supporting our participation in this Conference.
Mr. Chair,
Climate change is adversely affecting the conservation of our biodiversity and our traditional knowledge causing the loss of our native seeds, medicinal plants, food security and food sovereignty, water scarcity and rising sea levels.
The expansion of protected areas systems in our lands and territories has caused adverse socioeconomic and cultural impacts on our peoples and our traditional management systems, increasing extreme poverty and contradicting the MDG, the Millennium Development Goals. Indigenous women are the keepers and developers of our food. We guarantee food security and we develop our seeds for the benefit of future generations.
Monocrops and the introduction of GMOs are greatly undermining the role of women as keepers and developers of seed and traditional knowledge of food production systems for current and future generations.
Mr. Chair,
We, therefore, recommend the following:
We urge Parties, the private sector and the conservation NGOs to guarantee the conservation of biodiversity by stopping all support of agrofuels, monoculture tree plantations, genetically modifies organisms and extractive industries, including mining and logging that destroy Mother Earth.
We reiterate the urgent need for the Parties to recognize and respect our customary systems for the protection of our traditional knowledge and associated genetic resources.
We urge Parties to implement the Gender Plan and provide human, technical and financial resources and inform you that the Indigenous Women’s Biodiversity Network is eager to contribute to this work.
IIFB opening statement in COP9 (Spanish Version)
Foro Internacional Indígena sobre Biodiversidad en el
Convenio sobre la Diversidad Biológica
Novena Conferencia de las Partes
Declaración de Apertura
Gracias señor presidente. Esta declaración es realizada por el Foro Internacional Indígena sobre Biodiversidad (FIIB).
Agradecemos al Gobierno de Alemania y la Ciudad de Bonn por auspiciar la COP9.
Estamos orgullosos de anunciar que el FIBB, tiene más de 500 participantes de Pueblos Indígenas y comunidades locales de todo el mundo. Señor Presidente, la gran mayoría de nuestro Foro puede participar mediante sus propios esfuerzos de conseguir fondos y las donaciones por parte entes privados y de gobiernos, especialmente Alemania, Noruega y Suecia.
Señores Presidentes, distinguidos delegados, el FIIB quiere aprovechar esta ocasión para celebrar la aprobación de la Declaración de las Naciones Unidas sobre los Derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas y deseamos expresar nuestro sincero agradecimiento a los Estados que votaron a favor de su adopción. La Declaración afirma la existencia y el establecimiento de estándares internacionales de derechos humanos para la protección de los derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas. La implementación de decisiones bajo el Convenio sobre la Diversidad Biológica debe ser consistente con los derechos contenidos en esta Declaración.
Apoyamos la intervención que realizará la Red de Mujeres Indígenas sobre Biodiversidad junto a la juventud indígena.
En las próximas 2 semanas daremos recomendaciones a las Partes en los diferentes grupos de trabajo, pero ofrecemos las siguientes recomendaciones generales ahora:
Biodiversidad y Cambio Climático
Hacemos un llamado para el fortalecimiento de la colaboración entre el CDB y el UNFCCC en el tema de Biodiversidad y Cambio Climático. Por lo que hacemos un llamado al CBD para que tome un rol activo en todas las discusiones de cambio climático.
El cambio climático amenaza la seguridad y soberanía alimentaria de los Pueblos Indígenas a pesar de que nuestra contribución a dicho problema es mínima. También estamos preocupados por las políticas de mitigación y adaptación que se están proponiendo e implementando para tratar este tema. Estos mecanismos basados el mercado como el MDL (Mecanismos de Desarrollo Limpio) y particularmente REDD violarán nuestros derechos humanos y nuestros recursos. Hacemos un llamado urgente a Los países desarrollados para cumplir con sus metas de Emisión de Gases de Efecto Invernadero para reducir la degradación de nuestra biodiversidad de la cual dependemos para nuestra supervivencia.
Áreas protegidas
Los Pueblos Indígenas estamos preocupados por la continua expansión de las áreas protegidas. Queremos el reconocimiento de nuestros propios territorios de conservación: territorios bioculturales indígenas y áreas conservadas por la comunidad. Nos oponemos al establecimiento de nuevas áreas protegida en tierras o territorios indígenas hasta que nuestros derechos a las tierras, territorios y recursos sean plenamente reconocidos y respetados.
Urgimos a las partes que no se sujete la administración, monitoreo y evaluación de las Áreas de Protección existentes a legislación nacional dado que prácticamente todos los países fallan en garantizar la participación de Pueblos Indígenas.
Dado esto, apreciamos plenamente el Grupo de Trabajo sobre Áreas Protegidas ha acordado dar prioridad a la aplicación del Elemento de Programa 2 del Programa de Trabajo. Además instamos a las Partes a abordar el tema de restitución para nuestras tierras y territorios que han sido tomados para establecer APs sin nuestro consentimiento libre, previo e informado para que los Pueblos Indígenas puedan volver a ejercer nuestros sistemas de gestión tierras y territorios.
Acceso a Beneficios
Cualquier propuesta de régimen internacional sobre el Acceso y Distribución de Beneficios deberá respetar las normas mínimas establecidas en la Declaración de la ONU sobre los Derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas. Esto significa que el Régimen deberá reconocer, inter alia, que los Pueblos Indígenas tenemos derechos sobre nuestros recursos genéticos y no solamente nuestros conocimientos tradicionales relacionados con los recursos genéticos. El consentimiento libre, previo e informado de los Pueblos Indígenas es un requisito para acceder a nuestros recursos genéticos y conocimientos tradicionales relacionados. Se deberá reconocer y emplear la terminología apropiada – “Pueblos Indígenas” en el instrumento que se consagra en cualquier Régimen Internacional.
Artículo 8(j)
Reiteramos que el programa de trabajo del Grupo de Trabajo sobre el artículo 8(j) y provisiones relacionadas es fundamental para el éxito de la implementación de la Convención y es vital para los Pueblos Indígenas. Recibimos los resultados positivos de Trabajo sobre el Art. 8(j) tal como las directrices de Akwe:Kon y apoyamos fuertemente la renovación del enfoque al completar ítems de trabajo, tales como el sistema sui generis, el código de conducta ética y los elementos de un Régimen Internacional sobre ABS. Estamos preocupados con los asuntos que enfrenta el Grupo de Trabajo sobre el ABS quienes están socavando el el Programa de Trabajo del Grupo de Trabajo sobre el Artículo 8(j), hacemos un llamado a las Partes a que se respete, preserve y mantenga el conocimiento, las innovaciones y prácticas de los Pueblos Indígenas a través del compromiso de convocar a grupos de trabajo separados del Art. 8(j) y el ABS.
Mecanismos Financieros
Estamos muy preocupados que los elementos propuestos para el cuadro de programación prioritaria relacionados con la utilización de recursos del GEF para los cuatro años 2010 – 2014, han sido elaborado sin participación significativa de los pueblos indígenas, y estos pueden resultar en violaciones de los derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas. Pedimos que el GEF (FMAM) cree modalidades de financiamiento directo para programas y proyectos diseñado y manejado en todas sus etapas por pueblos indígenas.. Además, Sr. Presidente, manifestamos nuestra profunda preocupación que el CDB esta financiándose de mecanismos tales como el Fondo de Adaptación del FMAM y la Facilidad de Asociados de Carbono del Banco Mundial, que son fondos que potencialmente violan derechos humanos y particularmente derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas, y que no tienen estándares adecuados para la protección de derechos humanos.
Biodiversidad agrícola y forestal
El asunto de biodiversidad agrícola es crucial para los Pueblos Indígenas especialmente en vista del agravante crecimiento de la crisis global de alimentos. Urgimos a los Estados a que garanticen que los pueblos indígenas podamos guardar, intercambiar y vender nuestras semillas sin ninguna restricción.
También exigimos a los Estados que terminen con los subsidios perversos que perjudican a los pueblos indígenas y que apoyen los sistemas alimentarios de los pueblos indígenas y los pequeños agricultores quienes protegen del daño a la biodiversidad que se deriva de la agricultura industrial y del comercio mundial.
Reconociendo los impactos negativos de los biocombustibles, pedimos un alto a la producción de biocombustibles y que acabe con las tecnologías terminator y de OGM/IG.
Exigimos también a las Partes y a las organizaciones internacionales que den prioridad a la protección y promoción del conocimiento indígena sobre la agricultura y prohíban las patentes sobre el conocimiento y las semillas.
Con respecto a la Biodiversidad Forestal, hacemos un llamado a la necesidad de resolver y tratar los asuntos de derechos sobre las tierras, territorios y recursos como asuntos prioritarios.
Aguas continentales / Especies invasivas
La contaminación de las aguas continentales, la construcción de centrales hidroeléctricas, desarrollo de actividades extractivas y los trasvases artificiales de los ríos llevan a la perdida de la biodiversidad que está estrechamente relacionada con el conocimiento tradicional de los pueblos indígenas.
Es necesario que las Partes reconozcan las practicas de gestión tradicional de los recursos hídricos y el derecho consuetudinario de los pueblos indígenas y las comunidades locales. En relación con el acceso a los biorecursos de las aguas continentales solicitamos a las Partes que apoyen la elaboración de estudios sobre los impactos sobre la biodiversidad de la contaminación de las aguas continentales, incluidas las aguas transfronterizas..
Biodiversidad marina y costera / Biodiversidad de las Islas
Los pueblos indígenas, poseemos conocimientos ancestrales para la gestión sostenible de nuestros eco sistemas marinos. Los criterios de gestión de áreas protegidas marinas han de ser congruentes con el enfoque sistémico y deben incluir elementos sociales, tradicionales y espirituales y deben cumplir con el consentimiento libre, previo e informado y la participación plena y efectiva de los pueblos.
Los términos mar abierto y aguas profundas no tienen una definición universalmente aceptada y tienen interpretaciones diferentes según la comunidad científica y jurídica y según los pueblos indígenas. Las definiciones de estos términos deben clarificarse y los pueblos indígenas debemos estar incluidos en el proceso de definición.
Indicadores, el Enfoque Eco sistémico, la Implementación de EPANB
El FIIB da gran importancia al Plan Estratégico y la meta del 2010 del CBD, congruente con asegurar los derechos y el bienestar de los Pueblos Indígenas y comunidades locales. La Agenda de la COP9 incluye la consideración de algunos indicadores prácticos para evaluar el progreso en la protección del conocimiento tradicional, las innovaciones y prácticas. Estos indicadores son el resultado de una consulta global con Pueblos Indígenas, el CDB y los Objetivos de Desarrollo del Milenio. Urgimos a las Partes para que tomen en cuenta estos indicadores y los utilicen en la preparación de los 4tos Reportes Nacionales. Hacemos un llamado a las partes para fomentar la participación plena y efectiva de los Pueblos Indígenas y comunidades locales en la elaboración de EPANB y el monitoreo realizado para la implementación de estos.
Comunicación, Educación y Conciencia Pública
Los Pueblos Indígenas han priorizado la comunicación, educación y conciencia pública (CEPA) como componentes esenciales de nuestro programa de trabajo. Acogemos la decisión VIII/6 que hace un llamado para la inclusión de representantes de comunidades indígenas y locales en el comité asesor informal y esperamos una cooperación fructífera en el futuro. El FIIB debe tener un rol clave en la implementación de CEPA para asegurar que nuestros derechos sean conocidos y entendidos, y se garantice la plena y efectiva participación de los Pueblos Indígenas. Creemos que un mensaje esencial que se debe incorporar en todas las actividades de CEPA debe reflejar el rol clave de los Pueblos Indígenas en la conservación y el uso sostenible de la biodiversidad.
Finalmente, señor Presidente, el FIIB espera trabajar con las Partes en el espíritu de confianza, respeto mutuo y la colaboración durante las próximas dos semanas. Muchas gracias señor Presidente.
Convenio sobre la Diversidad Biológica
Novena Conferencia de las Partes
Declaración de Apertura
Gracias señor presidente. Esta declaración es realizada por el Foro Internacional Indígena sobre Biodiversidad (FIIB).
Agradecemos al Gobierno de Alemania y la Ciudad de Bonn por auspiciar la COP9.
Estamos orgullosos de anunciar que el FIBB, tiene más de 500 participantes de Pueblos Indígenas y comunidades locales de todo el mundo. Señor Presidente, la gran mayoría de nuestro Foro puede participar mediante sus propios esfuerzos de conseguir fondos y las donaciones por parte entes privados y de gobiernos, especialmente Alemania, Noruega y Suecia.
Señores Presidentes, distinguidos delegados, el FIIB quiere aprovechar esta ocasión para celebrar la aprobación de la Declaración de las Naciones Unidas sobre los Derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas y deseamos expresar nuestro sincero agradecimiento a los Estados que votaron a favor de su adopción. La Declaración afirma la existencia y el establecimiento de estándares internacionales de derechos humanos para la protección de los derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas. La implementación de decisiones bajo el Convenio sobre la Diversidad Biológica debe ser consistente con los derechos contenidos en esta Declaración.
Apoyamos la intervención que realizará la Red de Mujeres Indígenas sobre Biodiversidad junto a la juventud indígena.
En las próximas 2 semanas daremos recomendaciones a las Partes en los diferentes grupos de trabajo, pero ofrecemos las siguientes recomendaciones generales ahora:
Biodiversidad y Cambio Climático
Hacemos un llamado para el fortalecimiento de la colaboración entre el CDB y el UNFCCC en el tema de Biodiversidad y Cambio Climático. Por lo que hacemos un llamado al CBD para que tome un rol activo en todas las discusiones de cambio climático.
El cambio climático amenaza la seguridad y soberanía alimentaria de los Pueblos Indígenas a pesar de que nuestra contribución a dicho problema es mínima. También estamos preocupados por las políticas de mitigación y adaptación que se están proponiendo e implementando para tratar este tema. Estos mecanismos basados el mercado como el MDL (Mecanismos de Desarrollo Limpio) y particularmente REDD violarán nuestros derechos humanos y nuestros recursos. Hacemos un llamado urgente a Los países desarrollados para cumplir con sus metas de Emisión de Gases de Efecto Invernadero para reducir la degradación de nuestra biodiversidad de la cual dependemos para nuestra supervivencia.
Áreas protegidas
Los Pueblos Indígenas estamos preocupados por la continua expansión de las áreas protegidas. Queremos el reconocimiento de nuestros propios territorios de conservación: territorios bioculturales indígenas y áreas conservadas por la comunidad. Nos oponemos al establecimiento de nuevas áreas protegida en tierras o territorios indígenas hasta que nuestros derechos a las tierras, territorios y recursos sean plenamente reconocidos y respetados.
Urgimos a las partes que no se sujete la administración, monitoreo y evaluación de las Áreas de Protección existentes a legislación nacional dado que prácticamente todos los países fallan en garantizar la participación de Pueblos Indígenas.
Dado esto, apreciamos plenamente el Grupo de Trabajo sobre Áreas Protegidas ha acordado dar prioridad a la aplicación del Elemento de Programa 2 del Programa de Trabajo. Además instamos a las Partes a abordar el tema de restitución para nuestras tierras y territorios que han sido tomados para establecer APs sin nuestro consentimiento libre, previo e informado para que los Pueblos Indígenas puedan volver a ejercer nuestros sistemas de gestión tierras y territorios.
Acceso a Beneficios
Cualquier propuesta de régimen internacional sobre el Acceso y Distribución de Beneficios deberá respetar las normas mínimas establecidas en la Declaración de la ONU sobre los Derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas. Esto significa que el Régimen deberá reconocer, inter alia, que los Pueblos Indígenas tenemos derechos sobre nuestros recursos genéticos y no solamente nuestros conocimientos tradicionales relacionados con los recursos genéticos. El consentimiento libre, previo e informado de los Pueblos Indígenas es un requisito para acceder a nuestros recursos genéticos y conocimientos tradicionales relacionados. Se deberá reconocer y emplear la terminología apropiada – “Pueblos Indígenas” en el instrumento que se consagra en cualquier Régimen Internacional.
Artículo 8(j)
Reiteramos que el programa de trabajo del Grupo de Trabajo sobre el artículo 8(j) y provisiones relacionadas es fundamental para el éxito de la implementación de la Convención y es vital para los Pueblos Indígenas. Recibimos los resultados positivos de Trabajo sobre el Art. 8(j) tal como las directrices de Akwe:Kon y apoyamos fuertemente la renovación del enfoque al completar ítems de trabajo, tales como el sistema sui generis, el código de conducta ética y los elementos de un Régimen Internacional sobre ABS. Estamos preocupados con los asuntos que enfrenta el Grupo de Trabajo sobre el ABS quienes están socavando el el Programa de Trabajo del Grupo de Trabajo sobre el Artículo 8(j), hacemos un llamado a las Partes a que se respete, preserve y mantenga el conocimiento, las innovaciones y prácticas de los Pueblos Indígenas a través del compromiso de convocar a grupos de trabajo separados del Art. 8(j) y el ABS.
Mecanismos Financieros
Estamos muy preocupados que los elementos propuestos para el cuadro de programación prioritaria relacionados con la utilización de recursos del GEF para los cuatro años 2010 – 2014, han sido elaborado sin participación significativa de los pueblos indígenas, y estos pueden resultar en violaciones de los derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas. Pedimos que el GEF (FMAM) cree modalidades de financiamiento directo para programas y proyectos diseñado y manejado en todas sus etapas por pueblos indígenas.. Además, Sr. Presidente, manifestamos nuestra profunda preocupación que el CDB esta financiándose de mecanismos tales como el Fondo de Adaptación del FMAM y la Facilidad de Asociados de Carbono del Banco Mundial, que son fondos que potencialmente violan derechos humanos y particularmente derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas, y que no tienen estándares adecuados para la protección de derechos humanos.
Biodiversidad agrícola y forestal
El asunto de biodiversidad agrícola es crucial para los Pueblos Indígenas especialmente en vista del agravante crecimiento de la crisis global de alimentos. Urgimos a los Estados a que garanticen que los pueblos indígenas podamos guardar, intercambiar y vender nuestras semillas sin ninguna restricción.
También exigimos a los Estados que terminen con los subsidios perversos que perjudican a los pueblos indígenas y que apoyen los sistemas alimentarios de los pueblos indígenas y los pequeños agricultores quienes protegen del daño a la biodiversidad que se deriva de la agricultura industrial y del comercio mundial.
Reconociendo los impactos negativos de los biocombustibles, pedimos un alto a la producción de biocombustibles y que acabe con las tecnologías terminator y de OGM/IG.
Exigimos también a las Partes y a las organizaciones internacionales que den prioridad a la protección y promoción del conocimiento indígena sobre la agricultura y prohíban las patentes sobre el conocimiento y las semillas.
Con respecto a la Biodiversidad Forestal, hacemos un llamado a la necesidad de resolver y tratar los asuntos de derechos sobre las tierras, territorios y recursos como asuntos prioritarios.
Aguas continentales / Especies invasivas
La contaminación de las aguas continentales, la construcción de centrales hidroeléctricas, desarrollo de actividades extractivas y los trasvases artificiales de los ríos llevan a la perdida de la biodiversidad que está estrechamente relacionada con el conocimiento tradicional de los pueblos indígenas.
Es necesario que las Partes reconozcan las practicas de gestión tradicional de los recursos hídricos y el derecho consuetudinario de los pueblos indígenas y las comunidades locales. En relación con el acceso a los biorecursos de las aguas continentales solicitamos a las Partes que apoyen la elaboración de estudios sobre los impactos sobre la biodiversidad de la contaminación de las aguas continentales, incluidas las aguas transfronterizas..
Biodiversidad marina y costera / Biodiversidad de las Islas
Los pueblos indígenas, poseemos conocimientos ancestrales para la gestión sostenible de nuestros eco sistemas marinos. Los criterios de gestión de áreas protegidas marinas han de ser congruentes con el enfoque sistémico y deben incluir elementos sociales, tradicionales y espirituales y deben cumplir con el consentimiento libre, previo e informado y la participación plena y efectiva de los pueblos.
Los términos mar abierto y aguas profundas no tienen una definición universalmente aceptada y tienen interpretaciones diferentes según la comunidad científica y jurídica y según los pueblos indígenas. Las definiciones de estos términos deben clarificarse y los pueblos indígenas debemos estar incluidos en el proceso de definición.
Indicadores, el Enfoque Eco sistémico, la Implementación de EPANB
El FIIB da gran importancia al Plan Estratégico y la meta del 2010 del CBD, congruente con asegurar los derechos y el bienestar de los Pueblos Indígenas y comunidades locales. La Agenda de la COP9 incluye la consideración de algunos indicadores prácticos para evaluar el progreso en la protección del conocimiento tradicional, las innovaciones y prácticas. Estos indicadores son el resultado de una consulta global con Pueblos Indígenas, el CDB y los Objetivos de Desarrollo del Milenio. Urgimos a las Partes para que tomen en cuenta estos indicadores y los utilicen en la preparación de los 4tos Reportes Nacionales. Hacemos un llamado a las partes para fomentar la participación plena y efectiva de los Pueblos Indígenas y comunidades locales en la elaboración de EPANB y el monitoreo realizado para la implementación de estos.
Comunicación, Educación y Conciencia Pública
Los Pueblos Indígenas han priorizado la comunicación, educación y conciencia pública (CEPA) como componentes esenciales de nuestro programa de trabajo. Acogemos la decisión VIII/6 que hace un llamado para la inclusión de representantes de comunidades indígenas y locales en el comité asesor informal y esperamos una cooperación fructífera en el futuro. El FIIB debe tener un rol clave en la implementación de CEPA para asegurar que nuestros derechos sean conocidos y entendidos, y se garantice la plena y efectiva participación de los Pueblos Indígenas. Creemos que un mensaje esencial que se debe incorporar en todas las actividades de CEPA debe reflejar el rol clave de los Pueblos Indígenas en la conservación y el uso sostenible de la biodiversidad.
Finalmente, señor Presidente, el FIIB espera trabajar con las Partes en el espíritu de confianza, respeto mutuo y la colaboración durante las próximas dos semanas. Muchas gracias señor Presidente.
IIFB opening statement in COP9
International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity at Convention on Biological Diversity
9th Conference of the Parties
Opening Statement
Thank you, Mr. Chairperson. This statement is made on behalf of the International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity (IIFB).
We thank the Government of Germany and City of Bonn for hosting COP9.
We are very proud to announce that the IIFB, has more than 500 participants of Indigenous Peoples and local communities from all over the world. Mr. Chairperson, the vast majority of our Forum is able to participate through our own fundraising efforts and the generosity of both private and government donations, especially the Government of Germany, Norway and Sweden.
Chairpersons, distinguished delegates, the IIFB would like to take this occasion to celebrate the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and express our sincere thanks to all the States that voted for its adaptation. This Declaration affirms the existence and establishment of the universal human rights standards for the protection of the rights of Indigenous Peoples Implementation of decisions under the Convention on Biological Diversity must be consistent with the rights enshrined in this Declaration.
We strongly support the statement of the Indigenous Women’s biodiversity Network together with indigenous youth.
In the upcoming two weeks we will offer specific recommendations to the Parties in the various working groups, but we offer these general comments.
Biodiversity and Climate Change
We call for stronger collaboration between the CBD and the UNFCCC to address the issue of biodiversity and climate change. Therefore, we call on the CBD to take active role in all climate change discussions.
Climate change is threatening the food security and sovereignty of Indigenous Peoples despite the fact that we have contributed very little to its causes. We are likewise, concerned that the mitigation and adaptation strategies being proposed and implemented to address climate change are causing more violations to our rights as Indigenous Peoples. These marked based mechanisms urge industrialized countries to meet their Green House Emissions Targets in order to reduce the degradation of our biodiversity that we rely on for our very survival.
Protected Areas
Indigenous Peoples are very concerned about the continued expansion of protected areas. What we want is the recognition of indigenous bio-cultural territories and community conserved areas and their importance for the maintenance of cultural and biological diversity. We do not want the establishment of any new national protected areas in indigenous lands and territories until our rights to our lands, territories and resources are fully recognized and respected.
We urge Parties NOT to subject the management, monitoring and evaluation of existing Protected Areas to national legislation which in almost all countries failed to provide for participation of Indigenous Peoples. We also ask Parties to adopt the recommendation made by the 2nd Working Group on Protected Areas to give priority to the implementation of Element 2 of restitution of our lands and territories taken for protected areas without our free, prior and informed consent so that Indigenous Peoples can re-establish control over our lands and territories.
Access and Benefit Sharing
Any proposed International Regime on Access and Benefit Sharing must accord with the minimum standards set out in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. This means that any Regime must recognize, inter alia, that Indigenous Peoples have rights over our genetic resources, and not just our traditional knowledge associated to genetic resources. Indigenous Peoples’ free and informed consent must be obtained before access to out genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge can occur. The appropriate terminology – “indigenous peoples’ – must be acknowledged and used in the instrument embodying any International Regime.
Article 8 (j)
We reiterate that the programme of the Working Group on Article 8(j) and Related Provisions is fundamental to the successful implementation of the Convention, and is vital to Indigenous Peoples. We welcome the positive outcomes of the 8(j) WG such as the Akwe:Kon Guidelines and strongly support the renewed focus on the completion of concrete items such as the elements of sui generis systems, the code of ethical conduct, and 8(j)-related elements of any possible International Regime on ABS. We are gravely concerned that the issues facing the ABS WG are threatening to undermine the work programme of the 8(j) WG and call on the Parties to respect, preserve and maintain the knowledge, innovations and practices of Indigenous Peoples through the commitment of holding separate meetings of the 8(j) and ABS working groups.
Financial Mechanisms
We are deeply concerned that the proposed elements for the four-years (2010-2014) framework for programme priorities related to utilization of GEF resources for biodiversity have been elaborated without significant participation of indigenous peoples, and might lead to violations of Indigenous Peoles rights. We request that the GEF creates direct funding modalities for programmes and projects designed and managed at all stages by indigenous peoples. Furthermore, we are very concerned that the CBD is accessing funds from financial mechanisms such as the GEF Adaptation Fund and the World Bank’s Carbon Partnership Facility which are potentially violating indigenous peoples’ rights and do not have effective Human Rights safeguards.
Forest and Agricultural Biodiversity
The issue of agricultural biodiversity is crucial to Indigenous Peoples especially in the face of the growing global food crisis. We urge States to guarantee rights of Indigenous Peoples to save, exchange and sell our seeds without restrictions.
We also call on States to end perverse subsidies that hurt Indigenous Peoples. Parties must encourage Indigenous Peoples and small farmers’ food systems, which protect us from biodiversity damage due to corporate driven agriculture and global trade.
Recognizing the negative impacts of biofuels, we call for the stoppage of biofuel production. We also call for the termination of terminator and genetic modification technologies.
In addition, we urge parties and international organizations to give priority to the protection and promotion of indigenous knowledge in agriculture and outlaw the patenting of knowledge and seeds.
With respect to Forest Biodiversity, we make an urgent call to the need to solve and deal with issues regarding our lands, territories and resources as priority issues.
Inland Waters/Invasive Species
Contamination of inland waters, construction of hydroelectric power stations, development of extractive industries and artificial diversion of rivers leads to loss of biodiversity and related traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples.
It is necessary that Parties recognize traditional water resource management and the customary laws of Indigenous Peoples and local communities with respect to access to bioresources, We urge Parties to support conducting studies on the impacts of dams and pollution of inland waters on biodiversity, including Tran boundary waters.
Marine and Coastal Biodiversity/ Island biodiversity
Indigenous Peoples have the ancestral knowledge to manage our marine eco-systems. Criteria, guidance and steps for managing existing marine and coastal biodiversity areas must be consistent with the ecosystem approach and include social, cultural, traditional, and spiritual elements, based on the free, prior and informed consent of Indigenous Peoples, with our full and effective participation.
The term open-seas and deep-seas are non-legal terms, understood different by the scientific and legal communities and indigenous peoples. The definition of these terms must be clarified and Indigenous Peoples must be included in the definition process.
Indicators, Ecosystem Approach, NBSAP Implementation
The IIFB give highest importance to implementation of the CBD Strategic Plan and the 2010 Biodiversity Target, consistent with securing the rights and well-being of Indigenous Peoples and local communities. The COP9 Agenda includes consideration of a few practical indicators for assessing progress in the protection of traditional knowledge, innovations and practices. These emerged from a global consultation with indigenous peoples, culminating in the International Expert Seminar on Indicators Relevant fro Indigenous Peoples, the CBD and the MDGs. We urge parties to take note of these indicators, and to use them in the preparation of their 4th national Reports. We call on parties to foster full and effective participation of Indigenous Peoples and local communities in the elaboration of NBSAPS and in the monitoring of progress made towards their implementation.
Communications, Education and Public Awareness
Indigenous Peoples have prioritized communication, education and public awareness (CEPA) as key components of our programme of work. We welcome decision VIII/6 that calls for the inclusion of representatives from indigenous and local communities in the informal advisory committee and we look forward to a useful collaboration in the future. The IIFB must play a key role in the implementation of CEPA in order to ensure that our rights are known and understood, and our full and effective participation guaranteed. We also believe that a fundamental message that must be incorporated into all CEPA activities should reflect the central role of Indigenous Peoples in the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, the IIFb looks forward to working with the Parties in the spirit of trust, mutual respect, and collaboration over the next two weeks.
Thank you Mr. Chairman.
9th Conference of the Parties
Opening Statement
Thank you, Mr. Chairperson. This statement is made on behalf of the International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity (IIFB).
We thank the Government of Germany and City of Bonn for hosting COP9.
We are very proud to announce that the IIFB, has more than 500 participants of Indigenous Peoples and local communities from all over the world. Mr. Chairperson, the vast majority of our Forum is able to participate through our own fundraising efforts and the generosity of both private and government donations, especially the Government of Germany, Norway and Sweden.
Chairpersons, distinguished delegates, the IIFB would like to take this occasion to celebrate the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and express our sincere thanks to all the States that voted for its adaptation. This Declaration affirms the existence and establishment of the universal human rights standards for the protection of the rights of Indigenous Peoples Implementation of decisions under the Convention on Biological Diversity must be consistent with the rights enshrined in this Declaration.
We strongly support the statement of the Indigenous Women’s biodiversity Network together with indigenous youth.
In the upcoming two weeks we will offer specific recommendations to the Parties in the various working groups, but we offer these general comments.
Biodiversity and Climate Change
We call for stronger collaboration between the CBD and the UNFCCC to address the issue of biodiversity and climate change. Therefore, we call on the CBD to take active role in all climate change discussions.
Climate change is threatening the food security and sovereignty of Indigenous Peoples despite the fact that we have contributed very little to its causes. We are likewise, concerned that the mitigation and adaptation strategies being proposed and implemented to address climate change are causing more violations to our rights as Indigenous Peoples. These marked based mechanisms urge industrialized countries to meet their Green House Emissions Targets in order to reduce the degradation of our biodiversity that we rely on for our very survival.
Protected Areas
Indigenous Peoples are very concerned about the continued expansion of protected areas. What we want is the recognition of indigenous bio-cultural territories and community conserved areas and their importance for the maintenance of cultural and biological diversity. We do not want the establishment of any new national protected areas in indigenous lands and territories until our rights to our lands, territories and resources are fully recognized and respected.
We urge Parties NOT to subject the management, monitoring and evaluation of existing Protected Areas to national legislation which in almost all countries failed to provide for participation of Indigenous Peoples. We also ask Parties to adopt the recommendation made by the 2nd Working Group on Protected Areas to give priority to the implementation of Element 2 of restitution of our lands and territories taken for protected areas without our free, prior and informed consent so that Indigenous Peoples can re-establish control over our lands and territories.
Access and Benefit Sharing
Any proposed International Regime on Access and Benefit Sharing must accord with the minimum standards set out in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. This means that any Regime must recognize, inter alia, that Indigenous Peoples have rights over our genetic resources, and not just our traditional knowledge associated to genetic resources. Indigenous Peoples’ free and informed consent must be obtained before access to out genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge can occur. The appropriate terminology – “indigenous peoples’ – must be acknowledged and used in the instrument embodying any International Regime.
Article 8 (j)
We reiterate that the programme of the Working Group on Article 8(j) and Related Provisions is fundamental to the successful implementation of the Convention, and is vital to Indigenous Peoples. We welcome the positive outcomes of the 8(j) WG such as the Akwe:Kon Guidelines and strongly support the renewed focus on the completion of concrete items such as the elements of sui generis systems, the code of ethical conduct, and 8(j)-related elements of any possible International Regime on ABS. We are gravely concerned that the issues facing the ABS WG are threatening to undermine the work programme of the 8(j) WG and call on the Parties to respect, preserve and maintain the knowledge, innovations and practices of Indigenous Peoples through the commitment of holding separate meetings of the 8(j) and ABS working groups.
Financial Mechanisms
We are deeply concerned that the proposed elements for the four-years (2010-2014) framework for programme priorities related to utilization of GEF resources for biodiversity have been elaborated without significant participation of indigenous peoples, and might lead to violations of Indigenous Peoles rights. We request that the GEF creates direct funding modalities for programmes and projects designed and managed at all stages by indigenous peoples. Furthermore, we are very concerned that the CBD is accessing funds from financial mechanisms such as the GEF Adaptation Fund and the World Bank’s Carbon Partnership Facility which are potentially violating indigenous peoples’ rights and do not have effective Human Rights safeguards.
Forest and Agricultural Biodiversity
The issue of agricultural biodiversity is crucial to Indigenous Peoples especially in the face of the growing global food crisis. We urge States to guarantee rights of Indigenous Peoples to save, exchange and sell our seeds without restrictions.
We also call on States to end perverse subsidies that hurt Indigenous Peoples. Parties must encourage Indigenous Peoples and small farmers’ food systems, which protect us from biodiversity damage due to corporate driven agriculture and global trade.
Recognizing the negative impacts of biofuels, we call for the stoppage of biofuel production. We also call for the termination of terminator and genetic modification technologies.
In addition, we urge parties and international organizations to give priority to the protection and promotion of indigenous knowledge in agriculture and outlaw the patenting of knowledge and seeds.
With respect to Forest Biodiversity, we make an urgent call to the need to solve and deal with issues regarding our lands, territories and resources as priority issues.
Inland Waters/Invasive Species
Contamination of inland waters, construction of hydroelectric power stations, development of extractive industries and artificial diversion of rivers leads to loss of biodiversity and related traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples.
It is necessary that Parties recognize traditional water resource management and the customary laws of Indigenous Peoples and local communities with respect to access to bioresources, We urge Parties to support conducting studies on the impacts of dams and pollution of inland waters on biodiversity, including Tran boundary waters.
Marine and Coastal Biodiversity/ Island biodiversity
Indigenous Peoples have the ancestral knowledge to manage our marine eco-systems. Criteria, guidance and steps for managing existing marine and coastal biodiversity areas must be consistent with the ecosystem approach and include social, cultural, traditional, and spiritual elements, based on the free, prior and informed consent of Indigenous Peoples, with our full and effective participation.
The term open-seas and deep-seas are non-legal terms, understood different by the scientific and legal communities and indigenous peoples. The definition of these terms must be clarified and Indigenous Peoples must be included in the definition process.
Indicators, Ecosystem Approach, NBSAP Implementation
The IIFB give highest importance to implementation of the CBD Strategic Plan and the 2010 Biodiversity Target, consistent with securing the rights and well-being of Indigenous Peoples and local communities. The COP9 Agenda includes consideration of a few practical indicators for assessing progress in the protection of traditional knowledge, innovations and practices. These emerged from a global consultation with indigenous peoples, culminating in the International Expert Seminar on Indicators Relevant fro Indigenous Peoples, the CBD and the MDGs. We urge parties to take note of these indicators, and to use them in the preparation of their 4th national Reports. We call on parties to foster full and effective participation of Indigenous Peoples and local communities in the elaboration of NBSAPS and in the monitoring of progress made towards their implementation.
Communications, Education and Public Awareness
Indigenous Peoples have prioritized communication, education and public awareness (CEPA) as key components of our programme of work. We welcome decision VIII/6 that calls for the inclusion of representatives from indigenous and local communities in the informal advisory committee and we look forward to a useful collaboration in the future. The IIFB must play a key role in the implementation of CEPA in order to ensure that our rights are known and understood, and our full and effective participation guaranteed. We also believe that a fundamental message that must be incorporated into all CEPA activities should reflect the central role of Indigenous Peoples in the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, the IIFb looks forward to working with the Parties in the spirit of trust, mutual respect, and collaboration over the next two weeks.
Thank you Mr. Chairman.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
