Negotiations on future climate convention still at inception stage, while concerns on impact of climate actions on indigenous peoples' rights remain marginal

The recent United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) sessions in Bonn for a draft negotiating text for the Conference of the Parties (COP20) in Peru will resume in October. In the meantime discussions showed low concern on human-rights implications of climate-change related actions in particular land-based mitigation.

Consultations held in Bonn in June for the definition of a draft negotiating text for a new Climate Change convention (to be adopted at the UNFCCC COP21 in Paris) will resume in October. Parties still need to agree on key issues and outcomes for the post-2015 agreement and the Co-chairs of the dedicated working group, the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action (ADP) have prepared a series of draft decisions and background papers to be discussed at the next ADP session from 20-25 October. (notably summarising views and proposals for a draft negotiating text, and two draft decisions on how governments would provide information on their contributions to the post-2015 climate actions, and on mitigation action until 2020).

 

An issue extremely relevant for indigenous peoples relates to land-based mitigation actions. Workshops have been held in the past year stressing the need to address drivers of deforestation, participation of indigenous peoples, the role of market and non-market approaches, and lack of adequate funding for REDD and REDD+. Related decisions are expected to be mainstreamed in the new agreement, but it remains unclear whether it will be included in the mitigation section or as a self-standing element.

A high-level event on land sector and forests was held in Warsaw to coincide with the COP19 in December 2013. Participants supported the inclusion of a section on land-use and mitigation in the future agreement, stressing the importance of ensuring food security, land tenure, participation of indigenous peoples and that the REDD+ safeguards are not weakened in the future agreement. However, the risk of a weak or non-existing safeguard regime for all land-use related mitigation actions remains high. A technical expert meeting on “mitigation opportunities in the context of land-use, forests and agriculture pre 2020” was held in the UNFCCC June session, to allow for an exchange of national experiences and to define the scope of the negotiations. However, it remains unclear whether this negotiation would be related to the definition of policies and measures, or mere Greenhouse Gas (GHG) accounting methodologies. In any case, worryingly, safeguards and rights were only marginally dealt with.

Civil Society Organisations and Non-Governmental Organisations have produced a discussion document, endorsed by the Forest Peoples Programme, titled: “Comprehensive land-use planning: a rights-based approach / Discussion Paper for addressing the land sector in the ADP”. The purpose of this paper is to highlight the need to ensure that any agreement on mitigation and land-use is anchored to a strong human-rights framework that includes the principle of Free Prior Informed Consent (FPIC) for indigenous peoples and local communities. The human-rights implications of climate change and climate change actions are expected to be at the centre of advocacy efforts by indigenous peoples and civil society at large in the lead up to and during COP20 in Lima in December 2014.

Parallel to the ADP meetings, the SBSTA working group on REDD+ was tasked to develop a decision on non-carbon benefits and non-market approaches, two contentious issues that have been negotiated unsuccessfully in the last year. The draft text that had been produced marked a risky backwards step that would have jeopardised even the weak commitments on safeguards. It implied that non-carbon benefits, such as land tenure, livelihoods and food security etc., should not be meant as “hindrances” to accessing results-based payments and would be based on national circumstances and governmental discretion. The draft also contained a decision to close any further negotiation on the matter. Unexpectedly, the final text of the SBSTA decision kept the negotiation track open, with the purpose of working to bridge the gap in parties' positions on the matter.

 

The next step will be in Lima, in December, when SBSTA will discuss modalities to report on the implementation of REDD+ safeguards. Indigenous peoples are gearing up their preparations for advocacy activities in the build-up to Lima. Plans to hold a preparatory meeting with selected governments – similar to what happened before the Cancun COP in Mexico – are being developed. Various events, side events and platforms are being planned during the COP, among these an indigenous pavilion. Forest Peoples Programme will prioritise COP20 as a key opportunity to follow-up on the Palangka Raya declaration on deforestation and human rights, highlighting the connection between deforestation, mitigation actions and the obligation to respect indigenous peoples' rights. A public event will also be organised to publicise cases from various Latin American countries, supporting the attendance of a delegation of indigenous peoples in the COP and parallel events.