Convention on Biological Diversity: no more excuses to postpone adoption of term ‘indigenous peoples’

The text of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the decisions of the Conference of the Parties and its subsidiary bodies use the phrase ‘indigenous and local communities’. At its ninth session in 2010, the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (UNPFII) called upon the parties to the CBD “to adopt the terminology ‘indigenous peoples and local communities’, as an accurate reflection of the distinct identities developed by those entities since the adoption of the Convention almost 20 years ago.”[1]  At its tenth session in 2011, the UNPFII further stated that “Affirmation of the status of indigenous peoples as “peoples” is important in fully respecting and protecting their human rights”.[2]

However, despite these recommendations, the CBD still continues to use the term ‘indigenous and local communities’.

In October 2012, at the 7th Working Group on Article 8(j) (WG8(j)-7) and at the 11th meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP11) to the CBD, several Parties stated that they were in favour of updating the terminology, however, eventually it was decided (in Decision XI/14) to postpone further discussions and to further consider this matter, and all its implications for the CBD and its Parties, at the next WG8(j) (taking place this month) and at COP12 in 2014.[3]  

In Decision XI/14, Parties and others were invited to communicate their views to the Secretariat on the use of the term “indigenous peoples and local communities”. Submissions were received from four Parties and in excess of one hundred indigenous and non-governmental organisations.  All the views received are summarised in the official meeting document UNEP/CBD/WG8J/8/8. A full compilation of submissions is made available as UNEP/CBD/WG8J/8/INF/10/ADD1, to assist the Working Group in its discussions over the coming weeks. The various submissions emphasise that use of the preferred term “indigenous peoples and local communities” is linked to the right of identity, and that the term “peoples” has a particular legal status and all “peoples” have the right of self-determination.

However, at the end of document UNEP/CBD/WG8J/8/8, the draft recommendation for consideration by the WG8(j)-8 is just for COP12 to adopt a decision to note the recommendations arising from the eleventh and twelfth sessions of the UNPFII and request the Secretariat to continue to inform the UNPFII on developments of mutual interest; but nothing about using the term indigenous peoples. It is truly hoped that there will be serious discussions on the matter during the WG8(j)-8 meetings and that a strong recommendation on the terminology will still be added.

Below is a summary of the arguments brought forward by FPP and 70 other indigenous peoples’ organisations, community-based organisations, networks, and NGOs who also responded to the call for input by presenting a joint submission in April 2013 of comprehensive recommendations:

1. The CBD emerged from the Rio Earth Summit in 1992, and its implementation is guided by Agenda 21, which was also adopted at the Rio Summit, and uses the term “indigenous people” in Chapter 15 (Conservation of Biological Diversity) and Chapter 26 (Recognising and strengthening the role of indigenous people and local communities). The World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) meeting of 2002, on the ten-year anniversary of the Rio Summit, reaffirmed the importance of indigenous peoples in sustainable development and explicitly used the term ‘indigenous peoples’ in its political declaration.[4] On the twentieth anniversary of the Rio Summit, the international community again came together in Rio de Janeiro in June 2012 ( at ‘Rio +20’), and the outcome document ‘The Future We Want’ also uses the term ‘indigenous peoples’.[5]

2. In addition to the above-mentioned instruments emanating from the Rio processes, a wide range of other international instruments and standards reference indigenous peoples’ rights, the vast majority of which were adopted by environmental organisations and underscore the linkages between the recognition of indigenous peoples’ rights and the conservation and sustainable management of ecosystems and natural resources. They include the following:  

• 1991 International Labour Organisation (ILO) Convention concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries
• A large number of International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Resolutions and Recommendations in 1996, 2000, 2004, 2008, and 2012[6]  
• 1999 Ramsar Convention Guidelines for Establishing and Strengthening Local Communities’ and Indigenous People’s Participation in the Management of Wetlands
• 2002 Ramsar Convention Guiding Principles for Taking into Account the Cultural Values of Wetlands for the Effective Management of Sites
• Several Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO) Voluntary Guidelines on: how to Support the Progressive Realisation of the Right to Adequate Food in the Context of National Food Security (2004), Responsible Management of Planted Forests (2006), Fire Management (2006), the Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security (2012).
• 2005 UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions
• 2007 UN Forum on Forests Non-legally Binding Instrument on All Types of Forests, adopted as General Assembly Resolution 62/98
• 2010 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Cancun Agreements: Outcome of the work of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention
• 2011 UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights

3. In Decision X/43, CBD COP10 decided to hold an “ad hoc expert group meeting of local-community representatives… with a view to identifying common characteristics of local communities, and gathering advice on how local communities can more effectively participate in Convention processes, including at the national level...”. The CBD therefore has recognised the distinct nature of indigenous peoples and local communities in real terms, yet continues to conflate the groups in references in text.

4. The Parties to the CBD represent the same State Parties that have in all other international contexts used the terminology of “indigenous peoples”, including in the 2007 adoption of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) by the UN General Assembly. This Declaration recognises that “Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain and strengthen their distinct political, legal, economic, social and cultural institutions, while retaining their right to participate fully, if they so choose, in the political, economic, social and cultural life of the State” (Article 5, emphasis added). The countries that initially voted against the adoption of the UNDRIP (Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and the United States of America) later overturned their decisions and endorsed UNDRIP in 2009 (Australia) and 2010 (New Zealand, Canada and the USA).

In conclusion, the CBD is the only decision-making body of an international convention still using the term ‘indigenous and local communities’. It is high-time for the CBD to finally officially recognise indigenous peoples as peoples.  

Further information:

The full submission to the CBD, including additional and more specific arguments, is available in English, Spanish and French here: http://www.forestpeoples.org/topics/convention-biological-diversity-cbd/publication/2013/submission-convention-biological-diversi

The eighth meeting of the Working Group on Article 8(j) is due to take place on 7 – 11 October 2013 in Montreal, Canada. More information on this meeting, including the official and information documents, can be found here: http://www.cbd.int/doc/?meeting=WG8J-08

[1] Paragraph 112

[2] Paragraph 26

[3] http://www.forestpeoples.org/topics/convention-biological-diversity-cbd/news/2012/12/parties-biodiversity-convention-not-ready-ac

[4] Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development, para 25.

[5] Resolution adopted by the General Assembly 66/288, “The Future We Want”, paragraph 197.

[6] http://www.forestpeoples.org/sites/fpp/files/publication/2010/04/iucnrecommendationsonipstable-2012.pdf