UNDRIP Report - English FINAL - International Forum on Globalization

More documents

Recommendations

Info

needs to ask people, and listen very carefully to, what the grassroots community’s answers are. When it comes to governments, Kruse said, “What we need to do is to figure out how to show them that, by acting ethically and listening to and working with indigenous peoples, they can: 1) secure resources to do the good things that they should be doing, and 2) play a political leadership role, which is part of what they are supposed to be doing.” With progressive governments, and governments striving to be progressive, Kruse said that we face a ”challenge of how to positively engage governments, instead of attacking and criticizing. Social movements can begin to push forward government’s coherence.” Discussion Tom Goldtooth of the Indigenous Environmental Network said Tauli-Corpuz addressed crucial moments in the path of the UNFCCC. He felt it important to note certain steps in the struggle, so that people could understand the history of why “the trust factor” in the role of NGOs (and the protocols for working with indigenous peoples and securing indigenous support for their agendas) is extremely important. In the late 1990s, when the Kyoto Protocol was being ratified and its modalities were being developed, there was a push by nation-states to allow “carbon sinks,” such as forests, into the CDM. Goldtooth said, “There was consistent resistance by indigenous peoples within the UNFCCC, opposing carbon market mechanisms.” In 2000, at a meeting in The Hague, indigenous peoples, many NGOs, and some nation-states resisted the inclusion of counting emissions reductions from carbon sinks. The debate over sinks was what sunk any agreements coming out of The Hague. NGOs supported indigenous concerns that including forests in carbon markets could negatively affect their rights. In 2001 in Bonn, political pressure by nation-states, large NGOs, and transnational corporations forced concessions and compromise. “At Bonn, the Third <strong>International</strong> <strong>Forum</strong> of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities on Climate Change strongly opposed any UNFCCC mitigation measures based on mercantilist and utilitarian visions of the forests, seas, territories, and resources of our indigenous peoples. These mechanisms conflicted with and negated our traditional cultural practices and spiritual values,” Goldtooth said. “So, there was a line drawn at that time where indigenous peoples felt that our position was abandoned in the negotiations. There were no answers in Bonn to our questions about securing the right of indigenous peoples’ representation in the UNFCCC,” Goldtooth claimed. Our concerns about the importance of using our own traditional knowledge in dealing with climate change, mitigation, and adaptation, as well as our need for funding, weren’t heard, and this problem still continues to this day,” Goldtooth argued. Athena Ballesteros of the World Resources Institute supported Kruse’s point by adding, “Everybody has to realize that the landscape is changing. When we went into Bali, ten years after Kyoto, everything was different,” she said. “There was that moment in Bali that confirmed where the real power now lies: when China spoke from the floor and drove the UNFCCC Secretary to tears.” Ballesteros noted how some of the more bold and ambitious proposals have actually come out of the G77 countries, “which we have never seen before. That scale of ambition, that level of ambition, has never manifested itself from any group of governments,” she said. Ballesteros also proposed ways to institutionalize indigenous peoples’ representation in UNFCCC negotiations. While she agreed that a formalized indigenous working group could be useful, it might be more important to participate directly in the governance structures of the UNFCCC’s distinct mechanisms, such as the REDD mechanism. Ballesteros believes indigenous peoples have a much greater chance than NGOs at getting a seat at some of the governance structures. Joseph Ole Simel of the Mainyoito Pastoralist Integrated Development Organization in Kenya raised the questions “What capacity do indigenous peoples have when they negotiate with the governments? And how do we raise that capacity?” 35
Secondly, Ole Simel made the point that “we need to bring very inventive, specific ideas to the table, rather than just general statements.” Ole Simel also stressed the need to identify some progressive governments and institutions that would support the language and ideas of indigenous peoples. Ole Simel concluded by proposing “a seminar and a workshop between indigenous peoples, NGOs, and those other institutions, including governments, in the middle of 2009 so that all can better understand the challenges and frustrations facing indigenous peoples.” John Fitzgerald of the Society for Conservation Biology raised the issue of representation in the UNFCCC. He said he believes that two tracks might be pursued. The first track is for specific governance structures like REDD, because, “As First Nations,” Fitzgerald argued, “as managers of areas, there is a case to be made that a certain amount of representation, like a quasi-governmental presence, is legally warranted.” The second track is the civil society track, since certain treaty negotiations are pretty much open to any technically qualified NGO. “We need to ensure that both as NGOs, whether it be indigenous NGOs or other NGOs, and as quasigovernmental representatives, we have representation,” Fitzgerald argued. On the question of what the policy package might be, Fitzgerald said, “We saw a great change, even within the United States Senate…with very progressive people saying they knew that this Lieberman-Warner climate bill wasn’t good enough.” This, Fitzgerald believes, illustrates the fact that a lot of people are open to negotiation right now. “So, we should be imaginative in what we propose,” Fitzgerald suggested. Claire Greensfelder of the <strong>International</strong> <strong>Forum</strong> on Globalization (IFG) spoke about how NGOs and others can help support the agendas of indigenous peoples. “If you look at the UNFCCC website, you see that the number of NGOs and indigenous organizations is going up exponentially,” she said. Greensfelder believes that this is partly due to the increase in global concern, but also to the idea that the science getting worse. “One thing that NGOs have an opportunity to do,” Greensfelder continued, “is to increase the visibility of indigenous peoples for the new people who are now coming to these negotiations.“ Greensfelder stressed that this gives NGOs a responsibility to support the agendas of indigenous peoples in the upcoming meetings, and also to be educating the new people who are entering the debate. Victor Menotti of the IFG recalled an IFG meeting on climate with an interesting reaction by indigenous peoples and peasant farmers, who were simply saying “We don’t want your financing or your technology. Just get off our land and give us back our rights.” Menotti said that Tauli-Corpuz’s presentation made him realize “how we might work to make recognizing land rights and demarcating indigenous territories into legitimate mitigation measures.” He suggested it would be “worth our spending time to figure out how we move that forward, to legitimize it and figure out the entry points in the UNFCCC architecture.” Menotti also asked Tauli-Corpuz to clarify what it is that indigenous peoples want in terms of formal representation in the talks, and “how nonindigenous NGOs can support their demands about formalizing participation.” In her response, Victoria Tauli-Corpuz identified an important opportunity going into Copenhagen. “One of the objectives of the Copenhagen Summit is for the parties to come up with a long-term ‘shared vision’ on climate change.” Tauli-Corpuz said, “I think we should use that opportunity to challenge the economic model that is really causing all the problems.” For Tauli-Corpuz, climate change is really the proof of the failure of this model, and she argued that what needs to be done now is to define what the alternatives are. “I think this is really where a lot of indigenous peoples can help to prepare for a low-carbon society to come about,” Tauli-Corpuz said. She added that the idea of challenging the development model is precisely why the UN Permanent <strong>Forum</strong> on Indigenous Issues shaped its theme for the next sessions to focus on development with cultural identity. In response to Menotti’s question about indigenous mitigation measures, Tauli-Corpuz said that NGOs could contribute by looking closely at what’s already been known to be working for indigenous peoples’ development. This, she argued, should really be the main framework to guide the transition to lowcarbon development. “However, we cannot just continue criticizing generally. We have to go into the concrete situations—identify, for example, what the World Bank is doing wrong, what all these other 36
Page 1 and 2: [Strategy Session] IMPLEMENTING THE
Page 3 and 4: [ S U M M A R Y R E P O R T ] I M P
Page 5 and 6: INT ROD UCT IO N Victor Menotti of
Page 7 and 8: determine the Alliance’s prioriti
Page 9 and 10: spiritual practices that are not bu
Page 11 and 12: Discussion Trevor Stevenson of the
Page 13 and 14: utilize members of the indigenous S
Page 15 and 16: their rights had been violated when
Page 17 and 18: their climate change impact, and ar
Page 19 and 20: change conference in Bali, Indonesi
Page 21 and 22: concerns and explaining why they we
Page 23 and 24: wondered. She also pointed out that
Page 25 and 26: plantations, due to the increase in
Page 27 and 28: indigenous peoples take up to prote
Page 29 and 30: many times that they can shut down
Page 31 and 32: implementation of the different pro
Page 33 and 34: implementation of UNDRIP</s
Page 35 and 36: and indigenous issues.” He told t
Page 37: Indigenous peoples also took part i
Page 41 and 42: evaluating CDM, then projects would
Page 43 and 44: measure, would never be able to do
Page 45 and 46: Jintiach finished by saying that al
Page 47 and 48: industry, and about twenty percent
Page 49 and 50: discussion came up in Accra, and th
Page 51 and 52: end he was challenged on whether No
Page 53 and 54: to be very attentive to the argumen
Page 55 and 56: about it. “Even if you are a nati
Page 57 and 58: could [potentially] generate $50 bi
Page 59 and 60: Discussion Athena Ballesteros of th
Page 61 and 62: change and by which they are mitiga
Page 63 and 64: In response to Tom Goldtooth’s st
Page 65 and 66: although the IFIP can be a champion
Page 67 and 68: their lands and natural resources.
Page 69 and 70: lawyers who work pro-bono in ”dev
Page 71 and 72: that if it takes a network for this
Page 73 and 74: indigenous delegation and articulat
Page 75 and 76: Aaron Goldzimer of the Environmenta
Page 77 and 78: what they were doing was trying to
Page 79 and 80: participants to coordinate with oth
Page 81 and 82: LIST OF PA RTICI PA N TS Brazil Ms.
Page 83 and 84: United States Mr. David Gordon Paci
Page 85 and 86: UNI TED NA TI ON S DE CL AR A TI ON
Page 87 and 88: Recognizing that the situation of i
Page 89 and 90:
histories and aspirations which sha
Page 91 and 92:
2. Unless otherwise freely agreed u
Page 93 and 94:
Article 42! The United Nations, its
show all

UNDRIP Report - English FINAL - International Forum on Globalization

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?