Oct 16

IIFB Statement on Strategic Goal A at SBSTTA 17

International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity (IIFB)

SBSTTA 17- Strategic Goal A

Download IIFB Statement on Strategic Goal A- English

Honorable Chair

This is a statement on behalf of the International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity (IIFB), a network of Indigenous Peoples and local communities.

I would like to summarize and highlight our key points regarding Strategic Goal A and we will also submit a full document of our input to the Secretariat.  We fully agree with the summary conclusion that highlights the need for “greater coordination” as a means to improving the raising of awareness of biodiversity.  In order to achieve depth in any collaboration the IIFB feels that it is essential to forge equitable relationships, especially with Indigenous Peoples and local communities.

Finding opportunities for common successes is important, such as through Communication, Education, and Public Awareness processes (CEPA).  The IIFB Working Group on CEPA has our own programme of work however, we feel that an additional important indicator for Target 1 would be the number of collaborations between Parties and Indigenous Peoples and local communities at a national level.  Members of the IIFB are ready to collaborate with Parties at a national level and see this as an opportunity that will lead to the achievement of the Aichi Targets.

In addition, the IIFB feels that the recognition of multiple knowledge systems, including those of Indigenous Peoples and local communities, is an important factor for SBSTTA to fully support in it’s work.

Finally, for the IIFB, we feel that it is imperative for us to highlight Aichi Target 18 of Strategic Goal E that relates to the traditional knowledge of Indigenous Peoples but it also calls for the full and effective participation of Indigenous Peoples.

In-depth review of each target and recommendations

Target 1

It is clear to the IIFB that there is a need to find more effective forms of collaboration between Parties and Indigenous Peoples and local communities, which includes working through the IIFB Working Group on CEPA to affect systemic change.

The number of collaborations between Parties and Indigenous Peoples and local communities identified at a national level is an additional important indicator for Target 1.

Indigenous Peoples and local communities work directly with our communities, utilizing methodologies, materials, and languages that have proven to be successful.  There is a need for the allocation of resources for the participation of Indigenous Peoples and local communities in the National Biodiversity Strategic Action Plans (NBSAP) and activities.

We believe it is important to focus on CEPA at the national level because the issues of many IPLCs become side-lined or lost due to a variety of reasons that includes the belief that science and technology can solve all problems  The important insights of traditional knowledge in conservation issues are not picked up by the wider society.  Effective communication, education and public awareness activities done with the full and effective participation of Indigenous Peoples and local communities will ensure that our perspectives are heard.  Also, in achieving global awareness, systemic inclusion will ensure our approaches, our worldviews, and our sciences are considered.

The IIFB has been active in implementing our programme of work on CEPA, which is a cross-cutting issue.  For example, the IIFB has produced an educational resource kit titled “Indigenous Peoples and the CBD”.  This is a resource that was developed by indigenous representatives in Global Educator Workshops.   This is a useful tool that is currently being used in various trainings related to the CBD.

The IIFB Working Group on CEPA is interested in developing actions in collaboration with Parties, other governments, UN agencies, and others.  For example, sharing platforms by making use of national days of biodiversity and Indigenous Peoples, allocating airtime in the local and national media (radio, tv), print coverage, etc.  Collaborative CEPA work needs to be ongoing and integral, and avoid superficial acts that do not reflect deeper working relationships.

Capacity-building to document and record global experiences of IPLCs would be very helpful not only to Parties but to IPLCs.  The new monitoring system being tested may provide good results.

Target 2

Within the work of SBSTTA there is a challenge of working with multiple knowledge systems.  This must be overcome in order to recognize the importance and value of diverse knowledge systems.  We believe the process must begin with relationship-building with a view to implement the technological applications and common goals.  We recognize that often members of the scientific community do not understand worldviews of IPLCs and hence there is a diminished ability to forge equitable relationships, that respects diverse knowledge systems, value systems, methodologies, and appropriate methods. So, with the existence of equitable trusting relationships, IPLC worldviews can be included in research and advice that respects community perspectives of conservation and sustainable use.  Encouraging the inclusion of Indigenous faculty members and students is an important long term goal that will contribute to the creation of an ‘ethical space for collaboration’ and subsequently, this process.

Target 3

As in our earlier comments on relationship-building, if the status quo is maintained, IPLCs and Parties cannot make positive progress on discussing and raising awareness of the need to reduce harmful policies on economic and non-economic incentives.   Insights into positive trade-offs for these policies need to be made by a variety of government departments and IPLCs.   In order for all members of society to contribute to solutions, there must be dialogue about both impacts and alternatives.

Target 4

Achieving this target, and Strategic Goal A in general, is critical to sustaining human life.   Solutions must be found, for example, in reviewing national policies of concern within multiple sectors including social, economic and environmental.   The limitations of current observational data sets can be augmented by the geographic and temporal observations of IPLCs for sustainable production and consumption and to keep the impacts of use of natural resources well within safe ecological limits.

Oct 16

Community Based Monitoring and Information Systems Statement During SBSTTA 17

International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity (IIFB)


October 14, 2013

Download IIFB Statement on CBMIS- English


The International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity (IIFB), a network of Indigenous Peoples and local communities, is encouraged by the support given by Parties and other participants in the recently concluded meeting of the Working Group on Article 8j for initiatives to develop community-based monitoring and information systems (CBMIS). The IIFB Working Group on Indicators has identified next steps to take this work forward – including international and regional capacity-building workshops, strengthening of information-sharing and communications, harnessing technical expertise within the network on monitoring tools and methodologies, and working with Parties and other collaborators to extend the coverage into more communities. We look forward to contributing to national reports and the mid-term assessment of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity (2011-2020).

The IIFB would like to call your attention to document UNEP/CBD/WG8J/8/9 on Indicators Relevant for Traditional Knowledge and Customary Sustainable Use and we highlight a few key messages relating to CBMIS-

  • Indigenous Peoples and local communities have developed their own ways of monitoring ecosystems and community health and well-being.  These are based on traditional knowledge and a holistic view of people and environment, but use and adapt new technologies.
  • At a local level, CBMIS brings the community together and provides a basis for local self-determined development planning and decision-making.  At a national level, the contributions of CBMIS to national information systems can make indigenous peoples and local communities and their issues more visible to policymakers.  In the current economic climate, United Nations agencies have insufficient resources to produce global statistics, but community-based monitoring can provide reliable snapshots of trends on the ground.

Thank you Mr. Chair

Oct 15




11 de Octubre 2013

Descarga declaración final FIIB- Español

El FIIB, agradece al pueblo indígena Mohak por la cálida bienvenida que nos ha brindado durante esta semana, en la cual hemos participado de manera activa en la reunión del Articulo 8 (j) y disposiciones conexas. De igual manera agrademos a los Estados que han contribuido con el Fondo Voluntario para facilitar la participación de los pueblos indígenas y comunidades locales, esperamos que nuestra participación en el proceso del CBD este garantizada incluyendo la obtención de los visados de manera oportuna.

Sr. Presidente, reconocemos algunos avances logrados en este proceso, que ha permitido a la vez consolidar derechos de los pueblos indígenas a nivel nacional, esto es importante porque permite llevar este proceso en un dialogo de diversidad cultural, basado en el respeto a sistemas propios de los pueblos indígenas, idiomas, culturas, y formas de gestión en relación estrecha con la Madre Naturaleza.

También es importante resaltar el uso del termino de “pueblos indígenas”, que es referirse a nuestra identidad, que es parte de una demanda de lucha histórica, Sr. Presidente, a lo largo de este proceso los pueblos indígenas hemos sufrido una serie de denominaciones, creemos que como un justo reconocimiento, enfatizamos y les pedimos que nos respeten como somos.  La concepción de “pueblos indígenas” es importante para nuestros pueblos porque es parte del respeto a la diversidad cultural.  Por lo cual llamamos la atención a algunos Estados, dada la existencia de una coherencia respecto a las normas internacionales y nacionales en referencia a la protección de derechos de los pueblos indígenas. Recordamos que el uso del termino de pueblos indígenas ya se encuentran en instrumentos internacionales como la Declaración de los Derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas de las Naciones Unidas, Rio +20. Convención de RAMSAR entre otros.

En el  tema de sui generis, señalamos la importancia de trabajar en los protocolos comunitarios, profundizando procesos de investigación, estudios de caso, acciones en el marco de CEPA, para reforzar acciones de información, comunicación, formación, incentivando las potencialidades locales de los pueblos indígenas y mujeres indígenas. También alentamos las acciones realizadas en el marco del dialogo profundo, queremos manifestar nuestro interés en llevar estas experiencia en los procesos nacionales, incentivando la recuperación, la promoción de los conocimientos tradicionales, en el contexto de las acciones del 8 (j).

El proceso de repatriación de conocimiento tradicional implica muchas cuestiones de profundo significado para nuestra identidad y la revitalización de nuestras tradiciones, innovaciones y practicas. Necesitamos que este trabajo se agilize para que podamos reparar los muchos daños que han ocasionado con la modernidad y el cambio mundial ambiental. Necesitamos asegurar que este proceso plenamente reconozca y respete nuestros derechos sobre nuestros conocimientos y el patrimonio cultural asociado a los mismos.

Son necesarios mayores esfuerzos y programas mas centrados en comunicación, educación, y concienciación publica (CEPA). El grupo de trabajo sobre CEPA del FIIB tiene su propio plan de trabajo sobre CEPA y desea realizar contribuciones durante esta Década Internacional sobre la Diversidad Biologica. Resaltamos la necesidad  de que se traduzca a mas idiomas indígenas el Convenio sobre la Diversidad Biológica, el Protocolo de Nagoya y otros materiales educativos del CDB.

El FIIB se siente alentado por el apoyo prestado por las Partes y otros participantes a las iniciativas para desarrollar sistemas comunitarios de monitoreo e información (CBMIS). En la última reunión del Grupo de Trabajo sobre Indicadores del FIIB, se identificaron los siguientes pasos para avanzar en este trabajo,  incluyendo talleres internacionales y regionales de creación de capacidades, el fortalecimiento del intercambio de información y las comunicaciones,   aprovechar los conocimientos técnicos de la red de herramientas y metodologías de monitoreo,  trabajar con las Partes y otros colaboradores para extender la cobertura a más comunidades. Esperamos contribuir a los informes nacionales y la evaluación a mediano plazo del Plan Estratégico para la Diversidad Biológica (2011-2020).

El FIIB está complacido con el buen progreso alcanzado en esta semana sobre los elementos acordados para la Primera fase del Proyecto del Plan de Acción sobre el uso consuetudinario sostenible de la biodiversidad. Varias de las acciones propuestas en el Plan están diseñadas para ser   implementadas muy directamente y llamamos a las partes ha empezar la implementación de esas acciones de manera inmediata. Reiteramos que estamos totalmente comprometidos con la realización de la primera fase de este plan con la buena colaboración y asociación con las Partes y otros. Esperamos seguir siendo informados sobre el progreso de este tema en los futuros reportes nacionales y en el Portal de información sobre el conocimiento tradicional.

El FIIB agradece el apoyo recibido del Sr. Olivier Jalbert durante las reuniones del grupo de trabajo 8 (j), y le deseamos muchos éxitos en sus actividades futuras.

Finalmente, el FIIB desea a todos y todas un feliz retorno a sus casas y que gocen de buena salud.


Muchas gracias Sr.  Presidente



Oct 15

IIFB Statement on Agenda Item 4b on Repatriation

International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity

WG8j-8- Agenda Item 4b

Best-practice guidelines that would facilitate enhancement of the repatriation of traditional knowledge (task 15)

Download IIFB Statement in ENGLISH

On Item 4(b) on the development of Best Practice guidelines that would facilitate enhancement of the repatriation of traditional knowledge, the IIFB supports the organization of the Expert Group on Traditional Knowledge Repatriation with the full and effective participation of the representatives from indigenous peoples and local communities.

We look forward to working with the parties on developing the terms of reference for this group and related supporting activities, including such issues as mechanisms for the protected disclosure and discovery of traditional knowledge associated with biodiversity held in collections, museums, libraries, the patent system and other institutions that has been collected without our free, prior and informed consent. We recommend that this group include 3 IPLCs indigenous experts per region. We say protected disclosure, because the process of repatriation should not result in our traditional knowledge being treated as being in the public domain.

We reemphasize that for us, guidelines need to be developed in a holistic way, not only tied to traditional knowledge associated with genetic resources, but also with traditional knowledge associated with the full range of the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity.

We have concerns about the use of concepts drawn from the intellectual property system, such as the public domain, as being inappropriate when applied to our intangible cultural heritage. Our knowledge systems predate the existence of states and intellectual property systems, and are spiritual gifts that lie at the core of our identities and ways of being. The public domain does not capture these complex and fundamental dimensions of our cultural survival.

While we cannot resolve these complex issues, we believe we need to begin to develop “Bonn-like guidelines” for national legislation within the competence of the CBD on traditional knowledge associated with the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity. Our governance rights over repatriated knowledge cannot be ignored. This should not be seen merely in relation to ABS, but in ABS+, addressing access, benefit sharing and control over repatriated knowledge in accordance with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. This does not prejudice other negotiations and conversations, but informs them on issues arising under the competency of the CBD and the Nagoya Protocol.

We also emphasize that any effective regime will need to start to address the complex issues of the repatriation of resources associated with the traditional knowledge taken without our free, prior and informed consent and the co-protection of our traditional knowledge and land tenure systems.

Oct 12

CSU Side Event at WG8j-8 October 7, 2013

Thanks to Malia Nobrega-Olivera for filming this side event.

Organized by Forest Peoples Programme (FPP)

Montreal FPP side event flyer WG8(j)-8 & SBSTTA-17, October2013 CJ


Networking and sharing ideas and initiatives on the plan of action on customary sustainable use This week the Working Group on Article 8(j) discusses the new (draft) plan of action on customary sustainable use (CSU) (Article 10c), as a new major component of the revised programme of work on Article 8(j) and related provisions. The first priority tasks of this plan are

1. to incorporate CSU in National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAP)

2. to support relevant community-based initiatives in support of Article 10c

3. and to identify best practices related to CSU and protected areas. This side event will facilitate informal discussion and information-sharing on this issue, with the following objectives:

Raising awareness and sharing information among indigenous and local community organisations and others (government policy-makers, conservationists and other professionals who work in indigenous territories) on article 10(c). This will include a background overview of Article 10(c), but will focus on the current draft plan of action, in particular the priority tasks and initiatives at national and local levels relevant to these tasks

Building a diverse and empowered network of indigenous and local community organisations and other organisations who are interested and committed to work on 10(c) issues at local, national and global levels, and who are interested to share information and provide input on a regular basis. There is already an ad-hoc ‘10c network’ within the International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity (IIFB), but this network would greatly benefit from additional members bringing in new experiences and views.

This side event is scheduled just before the plenary takes up the agenda item and will therefore be a timely opportunity to prepare inputs and shape the discussions.

Oct 12

GEF Side Event at WG8j-8 Featuring Yoko Watanabe and Lucy Mulenkei

Thanks to Malia Nobrega-Olivera for filming this side event.

October 8, 2013

As the financial mechanism of the CBD and other multilateral environmental agreements, the Global Environment Facility has acknowledged the important role that Indigenous Peoples play in GEF policy, program and process development as key partner and stakeholder. In 2012, the GEF has reaffirmed its commitment to enhance engagement with Indigenous Peoples by adopted a paper on Principles and Guidelines for Engagement with Indigenous Peoples. This side-event will introduce the GEF Principles and Guidelines for Engagement with Indigenous Peoples, and provide opportunity to inform and discuss about the work of the newly launched GEF Indigenous Peoples Advisory Group. The IPAG provides advice to the GEF Secretariat on the operationalization and reviewing of the Principles and Guidelines, particularly on the appropriate modality to enhance dialogue among Indigenous Peoples, GEF Partner Agencies, the GEF Secretariat representatives and other experts.

Older posts «