cbd-ts-66-en

Part I: Impacts of Climate-related Geoengineering on Biological Diversity
6.4.1 Geoengineering, indigenous and local communities and stakeholders
CBD Decision X/33 calls for the integration of the views and experiences of indigenous and local communities
and stakeholders into the consideration of the possible impacts of geoengineering on biodiversity and related
social, economic and cultural considerations. Integrating such views is important as indigenous peoples and local
communities, especially in developing countries, tend to be among the populations whose livelihoods are most
reliant upon biodiversity resources. In addition, disadvantaged users of ecosystems and their associated ecosystem
services, are at constant risk of losing out in conflicts related to local resources, have less of a voice in decisionmaking
at all levels, and may have fewer opportunities to engage in regulatory and other policy forums to support
their interests.453, 454
The issue here is as much about physical resources, as about cultural uses and worldviews associated with ecosystems
and their management. Forest taboo systems in Madagascar455 and the unique cultural features of Balinese water
temples456 are just two examples.
All forms of environmental change—resulting from geoengineering or not—have local implications for livelihoods
and ecosystem services. In fact, the Second Ad hoc Technical Expert Group on Biodiversity and Climate Change
concluded that indigenous people will be disproportionately impacted by climate change because their livelihoods
and cultural ways of life are being undermined by changes to local ecosystems.457 As such, if geoengineering can
reduce the negative impacts of climate change, without effecting more environmental change than that which is
avoided, geoengineering could contribute to the preservation of traditional knowledge, innovations and practices.
However, there is considerable uncertainty regarding the impacts of any environmental change on indigenous
peoples and local communities since these changes are difficult to predict with current modelling capabilities.458
Furthermore, there is the risk that SRM geoengineering, could effect change more rapidly than unmitigated climate
change itself.459
In order to ensure that the impacts of geoengineering on indigenous peoples and local communities are adequately
considered and addressed, there is a role for such stakeholders in various phases of geoengineering research,
ranging from theory and modelling, technology development, subscale field-testing; and potential deployment.
The participation of indigenous peoples and local communities could hence be included in all parts of research
development, especially in cases where technological interventions are projected to have impacts for biodiversity
and ecosystem services.
Guidelines for the consideration of the views and knowledge of indigenous peoples and local communities have
already been proposed by the Second Ad hoc Technical Expert Group on Biodiversity and Climate Change with
regards to climate change.460 These guidelines (see box 1) may be useful to consider by scientists and national
governments alike when assessing the social, economic and cultural impacts of geoengineering.
As noted above, the CBD Secretariat has initiated a separate process to bring in the views of indigenous communities,
and the results are presented in a separate report.461
453 Trumper et al. (2009).
454 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005b).
455 Tengö et al. (2007).
456 Lansing (2006).
457 Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2009a).
458 Robock et al. (2010).
459 The Royal Society (2009).
460 Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2009a).
461 Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2012a).
76