1.4 Carrying out national level advocacy regarding recognition and support to ICCAs in appropriate ways

In conjunction with the consultations mentioned above, Kalpavriksh and relevant partners furthered their advocacy efforts to get ICCAs recognized in appropriate ways. Each of the consultations discussed the pros and cons of existing laws and policies, experiences with past or ongoing advocacy, and strategies for more effective advocacy. In India, Kalpavriksh continued its inputs to and lobbying with the central government and some state governments, for appropriate legal and administrative recognition of ICCAs. In Nepal, Forest Action and other groups began this process as part of the Swedbio-sponsored and the current project, including at the national workshop mentioned above, where government officials were present. As part of this project a national level of federation of CCAs in Nepal came into existence. This federation played an important role in raising people’s concerns about the creation of three new conservation areas. The federation is now lobbying for acceptance of traditional and new systems of conservation by the people. In Pakistan, our partner Tahir Rashid of Habitat & Species Conservation Project, SUSG-Central Asia, began advocacy to include ICCAs into the legal regimes of Balochistan province, succeeding in achieving this in the revised wildlife legislation draft; he is now attempting the same in Punjab and North-West Frontier Provinces. In Bangladesh, the local partner Wildlife Trust of Bangladesh along with UNDP Bangladesh and the local groups has started a programme on documenting, facilitating and supporting ICCAs in Bangladesh, particularly, in Chittogong Hills District. Bangladesh has also included the CCAs as one of the category of PAs in version of the Wildlife Protection Act which is currently being amended. No follow up action has been taken by the groups in Sri Lanka but it is hoped that they will start soon.

Chittagng bdesh8

Consultation with the community members in the Chittogong Hills, Bangladesh  (Ashish Kothari)

2. Activities at a global level

2.1 Overall technical guidance of global process to document, recognize, and support ICCAs

Kalpavriksh continued its involvement in the following:
i. The ICCA Consortium, a global network of organizations (indigenous, civil society) working on ICCAs; efforts are ongoing to raise resources to put this Consortium on a sound footing, and step up activities of experience sharing, advocacy, and research.
ii. IUCN networks carrying out documentation and advocacy related to ICCAs, especially the WCPA-CEESP Strategic Direction on Governance, Equity and Livelihoods in Relation to Protected Areas (TILCEPA,www.tilcepa.org).

iii. Participation in the drafting of a policy brief on dos and don’ts while supporting ICCAs “  Strengthening what works-recognising and supporting the conservation achievements of indigenous peoples and local communities” (www.iccaforum.org)

iv. With the help of additional support from The Christenson Fund a Workshop was co-organised on ICCAs at Shirakawa-Go village in Japan coinciding with the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).

v. Kalpavriksh is also a member of the ICCA Consortium and participates in the activities of the Consortium, including commenting on various documents, organizing events and activities, and participating in debates and discussions related to the consortium, its governance and strategic direction.

2.2 Guidance to WCMC regarding global ICCA database

Kalpavriksh continued its inputs to the formulation of a global registry on ICCAs, being managed by UNEP WCMC in Cambridge, UK. This includes comments on its structure, protocols for inclusion of ICCAs (prior informed consent processes), and parameters of analysis. The consultations mentioned above also included a section to discuss the registry, seeking views of participants on the pros and cons of such a database, and ideas for ensuring community benefits and safeguarding local knowledge in the process. These ideas are being fed into the WCMC initiative. 

2.3 Coordination of national assessments of legal measures for ICCA recognition and support.

Kalpavriksh built on an earlier assessment of national level legal and policy measures for ICCA recognition, being carried out for TILCEPA (iccaforum.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=84&Itemid=100). Several more countries have been covered, and these along with the earlier ones (updated where necessary) are being consolidated and analysed. This analysis will help assess progress of implementation of the CBD Programme of Work on Protected Areas, which contains specific provisions for national recognition and support to ICCAs. A review covering 25 countries was conducted and presented to the meeting of the CBD Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice, in May 2010 (Nairobi); and to the CBD COP10 in October 2010 (Nagoya).

See Annexure 8 for details

2.4 Framing and helping to produce policy briefing notes on ICCA recognition and support, and ICCAs in relation to climate change (this was done as part of a larger team including others members of the ICCA forum and funds for the production were raised separately).

A fully updated briefing note on ICCAs was produced along with a team consisting of other ICCA Consortium members, building on the previous such note by TILCEPA (http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/ceesp_briefing_note_9_iccas.pdf). This has a special section on the dos and don’ts of recognizing ICCAs. Both were aimed at official delegations at the SABSTTA and CBD meetings, at national government agencies in other forums, and at conservation NGOs, and to help indigenous peoples and local communities in their efforts to gain recognition. Kalpavriksh provided inputs to these notes, including taking a lead on the brief policy supplement on dos and don’ts. These documents have been widely distributed during the above mentioned events and through various websites.

Part II: Plans for the rest of the project

Kalpavriksh had requested and was given an extension of the project period till May 2010. In the coming period, the following activities were carried out:
1. National ICCA workshops in Bangladesh and Sri Lanka (with additional funding provided by UNDP Bangladesh and GEF SGP Global)
2. Consolidation of inventory of ICCAs in South Asia
3. Consolidation and analyses of national level legal provisions for ICCAs
5. Facilitation of community member participation in CBD SBSTTA (May 2010).

6. Preparation of final project report
7. If possible a national level consultation on ICCAs in India (which could not be organized because of various factors).

8. Finalisation and publication of a report on ICCAs in South Asia (with additional support from SwedBio) (currently in press).