USAID LEAF Regional Climate Change Curriculum DevelopmentModule: Social and Environmental Soundness (SES)

Section 2. What Social And Environmental Issues Exist: Strengthening Design And Implementation of REDD+2.6. Indigenous Peoples and their Empowerment

Name Affiliation Name AffiliationSurin Onprom; Co-Lead Kasetsart University,

ThailandTran Thi Thu Ha Vietnam Forestry University

Penporn Janekarnkij; Co-Lead Kasetsart University, Thailand

Nguyen Dinh Hai Vietnam Forestry University

Rejani Kunjappan; Co-Lead RECOFTCThailand

Vo Mai Anh Vietnam Forestry University

Claudia Radel; Co-Lead Utah State University Tran Tuan Viet Vietnam Forestry University

Sarah Hines; Co-Lead US Forest Service Cao Tien Trung Vinh University, Vietnam

Sidthinat Prabudhanitisarn Chiang Mai University, Thailand

Nguyen T. Trang Thanh Vinh University, Vietnam

Sharifah Zarina Syed Zakaria University Kebangsaan Malaysia Nguyen Thu Ha USAID Vietnam Forests & Deltas

Mohd Rusli Yacob University Putra Malaysia Maeve Nightingale IUCN MFF

Kaisone Phengspha National University of Laos Guada Lagrada PACT MPE

Phansamai Phengspha National University of Laos Le Van Trung DARD Lam Dong

Kethsa Nanthavongduangsy National University of Laos Nguyen Thi Kim Oanh AIT Thailand

Freddie Alei University of Papua New Guinea David Ganz USAID LEAF Bangkok

Chay Kongkruy Royal University of Agriculture, Cambodia

Kalpana Giri USAID LEAF Bangkok

Soreivathanak Reasey Hoy Royal University of Phnom Penh, Cambodia

Chi PhamProject Coordinator

USAID LEAF Bangkok

AcknowledgementsSo

cial

and

Env

ironm

enta

l Sou

ndne

ss

(SES

) Mod

ule

Dev

elop

men

t Tea

m

Soci

al a

nd E

nviro

nmen

tal S

ound

ness

(S

ES) M

odul

e

I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND1.1. Introduction to Climate Change1.2. The Climate Change Mitigation & Adaptation Context 1.3. Introduction to Social and Environmental Soundness (SES)1.4. Guiding Frameworks – Sustainable Development & Ethics

II. WHAT SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES EXIST: STRENGHENING DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION OF REDD2.1. Environmental Co-benefits: Introduction to Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services 2.1.1. Carbon/REDD+ Project Accounting, Carbon Monitoring & MRV2.2. Governance 2.2.1. Regulatory Framework, Forest Tenure, and Carbon Rights2.3. Stakeholder Participation 2.3.1. FPIC2.4. Social Co-benefits2.5. Gender Equity and Women’s Empowerment 2.5.1. Gender Analysis Tools 2.5.2. Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index2.6. Indigenous Peoples and their Empowerment2.7. Local Livelihoods: An Introduction 2.7.1 Livelihoods impact Case Study: April Salumei, PNG2.8. REDD+ Benefits Sharing2.9. Economic and Financial Viability and Sustainability

III. STATE OF THE ART IN ACTION: BRINGING THE PIECES TOGETHER3.1. Safeguard Mechanisms in REDD+ Programs 3.2. Streamlining of Safeguards and Standards3.3. Developing National Level Safeguards

Learning Objectives

At the end of this section, learners will be able to: Explain who are indigenous peoples Explain the scholarly critique of simplistic understandings of

community, in the context of conservation Understand the importance of partnerships to build respect for

natural and cultural heritage Apply Kabeer’s theory of empowerment to a case study

example Analyze the contribution of co-benefits to an empowerment

outcome

Outline

One Session: Indigenous Peoples: Definitions Intra-community difference Case study (Australian) Take-away writing assignment

Methodology

Presentation of key concepts Case study (reading or presentation) Group discussions Writing

Pre-Class Preparation

Students should read the following academic journal article for information on a PES and co-benefits case study for indigenous peoples in Australia:

Greiner, R., & Stanley, O. 2012. More than money for conservation: Exploring social co-benefits from PES schemes. Land Use Policy 31: 4-10.

Brainstorming 1

Who are “the community”? Who are indigenous communities? What about local communities? Why do we need to

think about thesequestions?

Brainstorming 2

View the slideshow “Sustainable Development.”

After, discuss the following questions: Who are “the community”? Who are the two men with black suitcases? Do you think what they did with the community

counts as ‘development’ or ‘sustainable development’? Explain why or why not.

What led to the situation depicted in this story?

Problem of Definition

Neither Indigenous Peoples nor Ethnic Minorities are clearly defined in international law.

?

UN Definition of Indigenous Peoples

Þ UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues describes Indigenous Peoples as:

“the descendants - according to a common definition - of those who inhabited a country or a geographical region at the time when people of different cultures or ethnic origins arrived”

Þ Emphasizes role of inhabiting a territory earlierÞ Indigenous Peoples ≠ ethnic minorities who migrated to

the land later

Indigenous Peoples should be regarded as those with a social or cultural identity distinct from the dominant or mainstream society, which makes them vulnerable to being disadvantaged in the processes of development.

Indigenous Peoples include: descent from population groups present in a given area, most

often before modern states or territories were created and before modern borders were defined; and

tribal groups or cultural minorities who have migrated into areas to which they are not indigenous, but have established a presence and continue to maintain a definite and separate social and cultural identity and related social institutions.

Asian Development Bank (ADB) Definition

Definitions, continued

In some other contexts, indigenous peoples are referred to by governments using terms like ethnic minorities, hill tribes, tribal people, aboriginal people, native people, or others.

Need to be clear of what the term means in the specific contexts of the research, or project, or documents.

This course will apply the definition as used by the Asian Development Bank.

Indigenous Peoples in the Region

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

From Article 33:

1. Indigenous peoples have the right to determine their own identity or membership in accordance with their customs and traditions. This does not impair the right of indigenous individuals to obtain citizenship of the States in which they live.

From Article 26:

1. Indigenous peoples have the right to the lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired.

2. Indigenous peoples have the right to own, use, develop and control the lands, territories and resources that they possess by reason of traditional ownership or other traditional occupation or use, as well as those which they have otherwise acquired.

3. States shall give legal recognition and protection to these lands, territories and resources. Such recognition shall be conducted with due respect to the customs, traditions and land tenure systems of the indigenous peoples concerned.

Note emphases on: (1) self-identification, (2) territory

Video: “Our Forest Our Life! Indigenous People and REDD+”

View the 17 minute animated film made by Asia Indigenous Peoples Pact (AIPP): http://vimeo.com/54351554

For Discussion:

1. How does this film, made for sharing with indigenous peoples, portray the relationship between indigenous peoples and forests? Between indigenous peoples and climate change?

2. How does the film portray the role of indigenous peoples in REDD+?

3. How does the film treat diversity within indigenous communities?

Activity: What is a Community?

Activity in Small Groups (3 to 5 students):

1. Generate a list of the various ways that members of communities

can be different from each other.

2. Generate a second list of how each dimension of difference might

translate into different interests with respect to forests and forest

resources.

3. Share these lists among the groups to generate two “master”

class lists.

Is everyone in a community the same?No, of course not.

“Community” and Conservation

CASE STUDY Group Discussion

Having read the Greiner & Stanley (2012) case study prior to class, discuss the following questions:

1. What benefits did the aboriginal communities realize in this case study? Categorize these benefits according to an approach outlined earlier in the course, e.g. types a, b, and c (module section 2.4).

2. Who realized these benefits and how?

3. Were the communities in question “empowered” through their participation in the PES program? (refer to SES module section 2.5) How might the PES program have been designed to further facilitate this empowerment?

1. Lifeline

2. Transect with walk

3. Venn-Diagram

4. Cycles

5. Drawing

6. Historic diagram

7. Life cycle

8. Village map

9. Calendar

10. Mindmap

11. Matrix

12. Fishbone

13. Ethno-classification

Some Topics:A. From whom I learn…

B. Where and what do we play…

C. My daily activities (mother, father, child…)

D. I am now… I will be in 20 years…

E. Family life

F. Production and food

G. Ceremonies

H. Gender differences

I. Plants and animals

J. My changing environment

TOOLS looking into indigenous knowledge

CASE STUDY Writing Assignment

To be submitted at a later time, determined by instructor

Assignment Objective: Further apply the introduced concept of empowerment from

SES Module Section 2.5 to an indigenous community co-benefits case study.

Directions: Write a 2-3 page analysis of the Greiner & Stanley case study in which you

apply Kabeer’s (1999) conceptual framework for empowerment (resources, agency,

and achievements) to the case.

In your analysis, consider as well the following questions:

(a) Does an empowerment lens lead to any different conclusions from simply

considering the anti-poverty or wellbeing co-benefits?

(b) Communities are not homogeneous or single entities. For this case study, do the

authors provide any information on the distribution of co-benefits within the

community? If not, what questions might you ask to gather this information and to

understand potential social impacts of the distribution?

Who exactly qualifies as indigenous peoples could be debated, as no one definition exists.

However, the United Nations has adopted a particular approach that emphasizes self-identification.

Territory plays a key role in the self-identity of many indigenous groups.

Indigenous peoples or communities are not homogenous; ethnicity intersects with other aspects of identity such as gender or class status.

Use of an “empowerment lens” may lead to a different assessment of project outcomes compared to use of a benefits lens focused more narrowly on income and employment.

TAKE HOME MESSAGE

1. Agrawal, A. and C. Gibson. 1999. Enchantment and Disenchantment: The Role of Community in Natural Resource Conservation. World Development, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp. 629-649.

2. Asia Indigenous Peoples’ Pact (AIPP) and the International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs (IWGIA). 2010. REDD+ and Indigenous Peoples: A Briefing Paper for Policy Makers.

3. Asia Indigenous Peoples’ Pact Website: http://www.aippnet.org/home/index.php (various documents and videos available)

4. Greiner, R., & Stanley, O. 2012. More than Money for Conservation: Exploring Social Co-benefits from PES Schemes. Land Use Policy 31: 4-10.

References

5. Kabeer, N. 1999. Resources, Agency, Achievements: Reflections on the Measurement of Women's Empowerment. Development and Change. 30 (3): 435-64.

6. United Nations. 2008. United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

7. United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues. Indigenous Peoples, Indigenous Voices. Factsheet.

8. Waylen, K.A., Fischer, A., McGowan, P. and E.J. Milner-Gulland. 2013. Deconstructing Community for Conservation: Why Simple Assumptions are Not Sufficient. Human Ecology 41:575–585.

References