• Acknowledgements
• About the Authors
• Introduction
• Dimensions of Diversity
• Indigenous Peoples, Local Communities and the Convention on Biodiversity
• From Policy to Implementation?
• Executive Summary of COP5 Decisions
• Executive Summary of COP6 DecisionsReferences

The National Level

National Focal Points
National Reporting
Indigenous Peoples and Local Community Experts
Participation in Official Delegations

The key to the conservation of biodiversity is to be found on the local and the national level. That is, in the development of policies and practical action directed towards the conservation of biodiversity, sustainable use, and the removal of perverse incentives and activities which destroy the biodiversity upon which indigenous peoples and local communities depend.

As we have seen, indigenous peoples and local communities have a vital role to play in the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity by virtue of the fact that their lands and territories are located in the areas of highest biodiversity in the world and areas of outstanding environmental importance.

In seeking to develop strategies for engagement with the Convention from the local to the national level it is useful to note three main points.

• The Convention is increasingly calling for the creation of local level forums and committees in thematic areas.
• The Convention is seeking to apply what is called the ecosystem approach to all its work. The rationale for the Guiding Principles of the ecosystem approach explicitly state that the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities should be recognized and that cultural diversity is central to ecosystem management. The ecosystem approach also calls for the decentralisation of management to the lowest appropriate level (decision V/6).
• The decisions of the Convention call for the participation of indigenous peoples and local communities in the formulation of policies, strategies and action plans in thematic areas and the development and implementation of national biodiversity strategies and action plans . [1]

The important point here is that scattered throughout the various decisions taken under the Convention, and in particular the decisions that emerged from COP5, are elements through which a strategy and framework for engagement with governments from the local to the national level might be constructed.

A key problem in constructing and putting into operation such a framework is identifying with whom the creation of such a framework should be discussed. It is here that the problem of information becomes critical. This is a problem that also confronts governments.

In response to the problem of coordinating and reporting on action across 182 Parties the Convention has increasingly focused its attention upon encouraging Parties and other governments to nominate national focal points and thematic focal points (i.e. on Access and Benefit Sharing).

National Focal Points

To date a total of 233 national focal points have been nominated by Parties and non-Party observer governments such as the USA . [2] The focal points range between identified individuals, including ministers, ambassadors and government officials, to named government institutions. Lists of focal points can be accessed and downloaded through the Convention website by country, region and, in some cases, theme . [3] In the majority of cases it appears that national focal points are drawn from the Ministry of the Environment or its equivalent.

It has recently become clear that in reality there is considerable uncertainty about the actual role of national focal points with respect to the implementation of decisions. These roles will require clarification. In particular, for our purposes, the extent to which national focal points will prove transparent to indigenous peoples, local communities and civil society is unclear. Nevertheless, the existence of national focal points provides an important opportunity for engagement with the Convention and to pursue dialogue in developing strategies to ensure the participation of indigenous peoples and local communities in the work of the Convention on the national level.

In preparing for discussions with national focal points familiarity with the existing decisions of the Convention and their relevance will be a powerful potential tool. The following key questions may therefore prove useful in preparing for such discussions:

• What plans are in place for the establishment of local forums involving indigenous peoples and local communities under the decision on agricultural biodiversity (decision V/5)?
• What plans are in place for the establishment of environmental impact assessment committees involving indigenous peoples and local communities under the decision on impact assessment, liability and redress, and to secure their participation in the review of such assessments (decision V/18 para 1(d) and also V/16 task 9)?
• What plans are in place to implement the 12 principles of the ecosystem approach which in the rationale to the first principle specifies that "Indigenous peoples and other local communities living on the land are important stakeholders and their rights and interests should be recognized. Both cultural and biological diversity are central components of the ecosystem approach, and management should take this into account"(original wording) and, in principle 2, that "management should be decentralised to the lowest appropriate level" (decision V/6)?
• What plans are in place for the full and effective participation of indigenous peoples and local communities in the formulation of national strategies in thematic areas, national policies in thematic areas, and wider national biodiversity strategies and action plans (i.e. decisions V2/V3/V4/V5/V23/V24/V25)?
• What steps have been take to create mechanisms to secure the full and effective participation of women under the programme of work on Article 8(j) and the full participation of women throughout the work of the Convention in accordance with the preamble to the Convention (decision V/16, task 4 and preamble to the Convention).
• What measures are in place for the participation of indigenous peoples and local communities within the preparation of national reports (decision V/19, para. 6)?
• What provisions exist for indigenous peoples participation in reviewing and submitting comments on case studies to be presented to the Convention in a wide variety of areas (i.e. decision V/4/V5/V7/V15/V18/V23/V24)?
• How will the incorporation of indigenous peoples and local community experts within nominations to the roster of experts under the CBD, with due attention to gender balance and range of disciplines, be achieved (decision V/20, para 25 and 31)?
• What provisions exist for the inclusion of indigenous peoples and local community delegates within official delegations within CBD processes? How will such delegates be selected? What role will indigenous peoples and local community organisations play in this process and what will be the terms of reference for their participation within official delegations (see decision V/16)?

In some cases indigenous peoples organisations and local community organisations may be pleasantly surprised by the openness of focal points to contributions and proposals. Indeed, it seems likely that a significant number of focal points will be struggling to make progress in meeting the obligations set out under the Convention and its decisions. This will provide important opportunities to:

• Present the results of projects and the roles of indigenous peoples and local communities in the conservation of biodiversity. For example, a significant number of indigenous peoples organisations are engaged in innovative mapping and land demarcation projects. These increasingly include the development of local environmental management plans. In other cases, indigenous peoples organisations and local community organisations are actively creating various categories of locally managed protected areas. These, and other, experiences have an important and as yet largely unrecognised role to play in the implementation of the Convention.
• Present the results of case studies identifying problem areas and examples of good practice.
• Prepare concrete proposals for enhancing communications and the dissemination of information to indigenous peoples and local communities about the work of the Convention and action on the national level in accordance with the programme of work on Article 8(j) (decision V/16)
• Prepare concrete proposals for indigenous peoples and local community participation from the local to the national level as a basis for discussion and negotiation.

In other cases indigenous peoples and local communities may encounter difficulties in communicating with national focal points unfamiliar with the realities of biodiversity conservation, or with limited knowledge of participation and rights issues. In still others, indigenous peoples and local communities may encounter hostility born of elitist attitudes or institutionalised racism within public ministries. In such circumstances, either no action will be taken to secure the participation of indigenous peoples and local communities from the local to the national level, or government will seek to select those who they believe will be compliant with their wishes to provide a veneer of legitimacy to their 'consultations' with 'stakeholders'. This suggests a possible need to:

• Directly initiate forums to which government representatives and others may be invited and thus set the terms and conditions of their participation.
• Create parallel and independent forums through which to establish positions in discussions in official processes and as a mechanism for reporting upon the deficiencies of such processes at higher levels.

On the national level, it may be useful to consider:

• Nominating national or thematic focal points to serve as the focus for liaison with official focal points and the dissemination of information on CBD processes to indigenous peoples and local community organisations on the sub-national and local level.
• Promoting the creation of national biodiversity forums in order to debate national biodiversity strategies with government or, in the case of an exclusionary approach on the part of government, to establish parallel processes to monitor and report on CBD processes as they relate to indigenous peoples and local communities at a higher level.
• Promoting the realisation of consultation meetings with members of official delegations on a regular basis prior to relevant CBD meetings.

National Reporting

Under the terms of the Convention each Party is required to submit regular national reports. During COP5, under decision V/19, it was decided that these reports would be submitted every two years. For our purposes, it is important to note that the COP within paragraph 6 of this decision also:

" Recommends that Parties prepare their national reports through a consultative process involving all stakeholders, as appropriate, or by drawing upon information developed through other consultative processes."

This recommendation provides a potentially important opportunity for indigenous peoples and local communities to participate in the formulation of national reports. However, as the appearance of the phrase "as appropriate" suggests, indigenous peoples and local communities may be excluded from the consultations surrounding national reporting, or their views may not be adequately reflected in national reports. This suggests a need to consider:

• Preparing parallel reports highlighting concerns which may be submitted directly to the CBD through independent indigenous and NGO networks and the Clearing House Mechanism and be employed in regional and international level discussions.
• Submitting case studies and recommendations for consideration within CBD processes as a platform for gaining respect for the rights, needs and roles of indigenous peoples and local communities in the conservation of biodiversity.

Indigenous Peoples and Local Community Experts

With respect to expertise , the International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity has long argued for the need for the CBD to recognise the existence of expertise with respect to CBD processes among indigenous peoples and local communities. During COP5 this was finally recognised in decision V/20, paragraph 31, which:

" Encourages Parties, other Governments and relevant bodies when nominating their experts for inclusion in the roster to consider: (a) Gender balance; (b) Involvement of indigenous people and members of local communities; (c) Range of relevant disciplines and expertise, including, inter alia, biological, legal, social and economic sciences, and traditional knowledge."

This decision is of particular importance because it provides the basis for the increased participation of indigenous and local community experts and professionals throughout the work of the Convention including, national level discussions, international workshops, expert groups, expert panels, and SBSTTA.

Building on these advances this suggests the need to consider:

• Encouraging governments to support the participation of experts and professionals identified by indigenous peoples and local community organisations within national level debates on the implementation of the Convention.
• Adopting an ecosystem approach to the identification of indigenous peoples and local community experts and professionals that recognises the diversity of environments within the home country . [4]
• Promoting recognition of the variety of expertise possessed by indigenous peoples and local communities
• Considering the establishment of a national roster of experts in thematic areas based on consultations between indigenous peoples and local community organisations.

This issue will also be considered further below in relation to the emerging issue of the selection process for indigenous peoples and local community experts on the regional and international levels.

Participation in Official Delegations

With respect to the participation of indigenous and local community delegates within official delegations, paragraph 16 of decision V/16 on Article 8(j) and related provisions:

" Invites Parties and Governments to increase the participation of representatives of indigenous and local community organizations in official delegations to meetings held under the Convention on Biological Diversity."

In connection with the participation of indigenous delegates within official delegations it is important to note that indigenous delegates who formed part of government delegations played a very important role during the debates at COP5. However, the nomination of indigenous delegates as participants in official delegations raises important questions regarding:

• The role of representative indigenous peoples organisations in the nomination of such delegates; and
• The danger that such delegates may be used to legitimise positions which are contrary to the rights and aspirations of indigenous peoples.

As in the case of indigenous and local community experts this strongly suggests the need for internal discussions within indigenous peoples organisations in order to:

• Clarify the selection procedures, roles, responsibilities and accountability of indigenous delegates within official delegations.

In summary, the circumstances and options available to indigenous peoples and local communities for engagement in national debates on the CBD are likely to vary significantly. However, COP5 decisions provide indigenous peoples and local communities with potentially important tools for securing recognition of their rights, needs, and roles within the conservation of biodiversity from the local to the national level. In a context in which governments may seek to limit indigenous peoples and local community participation to narrow discussions of intellectual property rights instruments and access and benefit sharing issues, it is vitally important to note that:

• The decisions taken at COP5 on the participation of indigenous peoples and local communities range far beyond narrow debates on intellectual property rights and access and benefit sharing to encompass all aspects of the work of the Convention.