Human Rights, Corporate Responsibility
in Forest Programmes/Projects
EGM on Indigenous Peoples and Forests,
UNPFII, New York, 12-14 Jan. 2011
Victoria Tauli-Corpuz
Executive Director, Tebtebba
Outline
• History of indigenous peoples’ rights to
forests
• Forests and Climate Change (REDD Plus)
• Recommendations on the following
• Measures to incorporate human rights
based approach and compliance with
international human rights law
• Measures to strengthen corporate
accountability
• Enforcement of laws and policies
History of indigenous peoples’ rights
to forest/forest resources
• Customary rights as pre-existing order
• State appropriation of forests and introduction of
statutory tenure undermining customary tenure systems• Systematic undermining of indigenous knowledge
systems and forest management and governance (
contestation)
• Reasons for appropriation:
Forests as strategic frontier-timber/minerals/oil/gas
Privileged access to resources: patronage politics
Cultural hegemony (terra nullius, scientific forestry)
• Traditional uses and management of forests criminalized
History of Indigenous Peoples’ rights
to forests
• Centralized control of states over forests (20th and 21st
century)
• Highly unequal power relations
• Settlers brought into forests (transmigrants, colonists,etc.)
• Effects of exclusion/criminalization
 Trespassers in own home/squatters in own forests
 Threats to cultural survival
 Livelihoods & wellbeing undermined
• Forest tenure transition:
 Partial recognition of claims/usufruct rights, titling
 Latin America > Asia > Africa
 But ineffective rights of exclusion
History…
• Forest dwelling and forest dependent indigenous peoples found in
most remote and isolated areas
• Popular protests against centralization (l970s)- rubber tappers
(Acre) Chipkoandolan (India), Philippines,etc.
• Devolution of forest management to local governments,
communities, NGOs, Community Forests, Adaptive Collaborative
Management (ACM) – mixed results (good, bad, ugly),
• Some conclusions on work and studies of devolution, community
forests , ACM
– In some tropical forests the only element of sustainability in forest
management is the indigenous system.
– indigenous peoples/ local communities represent an underutilized
resource in forest management/have biggest stake in managing forests
well.
History…
– Government and industry have done badly managing
many forests
– Indigenous peoples have been managing forests for
millenia.
– Forests and forest resources treated as the domain of
“public interest” that fundamental rights of people living in
forests or using them have been traded in the name of the
greater social good.
– Poverty alleviation for forest peoples framed in terms of
meeting national objectives of economic development not
in protecting right to self-determination of peoples.
– Devolution processes were not IP nor gender-sensitive.
Forest tenure transition 2002-2008
in 25 of 30 most forested countries
Source: Sunderlin et al. 2008
Forest Tenure: Regional Differences
Source: Sunderlin, et al. 2008.
Where is Extensive Poverty and Slow or No Economic Growth?
• Extensive, chronic, poverty in
forest areas (highest “rates”,
across the world)
• “Growth” located in urban,
coastal areas
• “Forest rich” countries, and
forest regions doing
significantly worse
• ITTO producer countries doing
even worse (poverty too is a
function of privileged business
model)
Where Human Rights are violated and What
is the Status of Governance?
Forest areas: about 30% of global
land area, over 1 billion of world’s
poorest: socially and politically
disenfranchised

At least 15 million people lack citizenship
recognition – including hill tribes of SE Asia,
most Pygmies of Congo Basin

Lack of respect for property rights; when
governments claim 75% of world’s forests –
“myth of empty forests’ prevails resulting in
illegal conservation, concessions to nonowners, dispossession and refugees

Women disproportionately disadvantaged,
politically, legally, economically and culturally
– not a “boutique” or “luxury” issue

Corruption, limited rule of law, limited
accountability, judicial redress

Lack of basic public services, forests as
“hinterland”, exploited by distant elite
Where is Conflict Taking Place?
In the past twenty years 30 countries in the tropical regions of the world have experienced
significant conflict between armed groups in forest areas.
53% of African forest area, 22% of Asian forest: over 127 million
people directly affected – “land” key driver in 40-70%
Source: D.Kaimowitz ETFRN NEWS 43/44
Status of Governance: Is it a Function of
Development/Industry Models
World Bank governance indexes
Governance indicators for ITTO producer countries vs.
other developing countries
1.5
1
0.5
ITTO Producer Countries
0
Other developing countries
(non ITTO producer)
-0.5
-1
-1.5
Rule of Law
Control of
Corruption
Political Stability
• The ITTO producer countries score lower in all categories, and for the 3 represented above,
this difference is statistically significant (.05 double tailed t-test).
• This tends to show that it is not merely the presence of forest, but of a large forest
industry correlated to poor governance performances.
Forests and Climate Change
•
Deforestation and forest degradation account for
13-17% of annual global greenhouse gas emissions
•
Deforestation not addressed by the Kyoto Protocol;
only afforestation and reforestation in CDM (tedious
procedures, so very few projects.)
•
Deforestation is occurring mainly in tropical forest
countries which are all non-Annex I countries
•
Drivers are multiple and diverse
14
http://blog.conservation.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/400_Global_GHG_Emissions.gif
• The UN Food and Agriculture Organization
tables on changes in forested land by country:
www.fao.org/forestry/site/32033/en/
The UN Food and Agriculture Organization tables on changes in forested land by country:
www.fao.org/forestry/site/32033/en/
REDD Plus
REDD
• Reducing Emissions from Deforestation
and Forest Degradation
Plus:
- Enhancement of Carbon Stocks
- Conservation
- Sustainable Management of Forests
16
Objective of REDD Plus
OBJECTIVE OF REDD PLUS
• Develop and promote policy approaches
and positive measures including
compensation to tropical forest countries
to stop deforestation,reduce forest
degradation, enhance forest carbon
stocks, sustainably manage forests,
conserve forests and to contribute to
reduction of CO2 emissions and removals
or sequestration of CO2.
17
What are the risks?
• If we do not settle the questions of rights and tenure
of indigenous peoples in REDD Plus
•
Potential Risks of:
• Expanded civil conflicts,
• Further social and political marginalization of indigenous
and forest peoples
• Continued deforestation and increased carbon emission
• Undoing of governments and “development
•
Forest sector: Haven’t dealt with past, not yet equipped for
the future – what needs to be done?
18
What are the risks?
• REDD+ can constrain forest-based livelihoods
•REDD+ compensates high deforesters (perverse
incentives) and not those who have protected forests.
• Elite capture of benefits
•Not just an ethical problem, but threat to effectiveness of
REDD+
• Rich industrialized countries will not cut emissions at
domestic level but buy forest carbon credits from
tropical forest countriesto comply with their
obligations.
19
What are the risks?
• Indigenous peoples often lose out when new resource
exploited
• Forest carbon is a major new commodity – using the
market as the main source of funding for REDD+ , instead
of public funds.
• If no knowledge and awareness raising, no rights
improvement, and no power, indigenous peopleswill lose
out again
20
Opportunities: Where is the hope?
• engagement with REDD Plus processes to influence the
design and architecture at global/ national/local levels.
• Push for needed policy, tenure and institutional reforms
on indigenous peoples’ rights (Indonesia,Kenya,etc.)
forests, good forest governance
(transparency/accountability) , rationalizing the “public
domain”
• Develop tools to Monitor,Report, Verify (MRV)
• Design of mechanisms for equitable sharing of benefits
• Integration of indigenous peoples' knowledge systems
21
and practices on forest management.
Opportunities: Where is the hope?
• Agreement reached in Cancun on REDD Plus contains
language on the following:
• A system for providing information on how the
safeguards are being addressed and respected
throughout the implementation of the activities
• A robust and transparent national forest monitoring
system for the monitoring and reporting REDD Plus,
if appropriate, subnational monitoring and reporting
as an interim measure.
22
REDD Plus Language adopted in Cancun
• Need to respect the rights of indigenous peoples and
local communities, noted the adoption of UNDRIP
• Address the drivers of deforestation and forest
degradation, land tenure issues, forest governance
issues, gender considerations and the safeguards
• Ensuring the full and effective participation of
indigenous peoples and local communities;
• Be consistent with the objective of environmental
integrity and take into account the multiple functions of
forests and other ecosystems
23
REDD Plus Language adopted in Cancun
• Actions are consistent with the conservation of natural
forests and biological diversity, ensure non-conversion
of natural forests,
• Actions to incentivize the protection and conservation
of natural forests and their ecosystem services, and to
enhance other social and environmental benefits;
• Annex 111: SBSTA
Identify land use, land-use change and forestry activities in
developing countries, in particular those that are linked to
the drivers of deforestation and forest degradation,
24
CHALLENGES:
• Assert that rights to the forest carbon should not be
separated from indigenous peoples’ land and forest rights
• Attention to financial accountability and transparency
in benefit sharing systems
 Policy makers should better understand what is at stake
in rights and REDD+
 Be proactive, not reactive
 Make consultations truly inclusive and educational
 Anticipate where tenure-related problems are likely to
emerge and resolve ambiguities early
25
RECOMMENDATIONS
• Measures to incorporate human rights based
approach and ensure compliance with international
human rights law.
Massive awareness raising on international
standards on indigenous peoples’ rights and
forests: UNDRIP/ILO Convention No. 169, Nonlegally binding agreement on Forests, Forest Policy
of the World Bank, etc.
HR Conventions and UN Treaty Bodies – CERD,
Human Rights Committee, CESCR, Convention on
the Rights of the Child, CEDAW, etc.
Measures to incorporate human rights based
approach and ensure compliance with international
human rights law.
Massive awareness raising on international standards
on indigenous peoples’ rights and forests:
UNDRIP/ILO Convention No. 169, Non-legally binding
agreement on Forests, Forest Policy of the World
Bank, etc.
HR Conventions and UN Treaty Bodies – CERD, Human
Rights Committee, CESCR, Convention on the Rights of
the Child, CEDAW, etc.
Regional HR bodies: Africa Commission on Peoples
and Human Rights, IACHR, AseanCHR, etc.
Training-Workshops on how to use the Treaty Bodies
and development of reports for these bodies.
Measures to incorporate human rights based
approach and compliance with international human
rights law.
Awareness raising and training on other multilateral
and bilateral policies on indigenous peoples and
forests –e.g. WB policies on IPs, Forests; UNDP Policy
of Engagement with IPs, IFAD Policy, FAO Policy, etc.
Training on how to use grievance or complaints
mechanisms: e.g. WB Inspection Panel, IFC CAO
(Ombudsman), ADB Inspection Panel, IADB, etc.
Trainings on how to operationalize the HRBA in
planning, implementation, evaluation of development
policies and programmes for government officials,
indigenous peoples, NGOs,etc.
Measures to incorporate human rights based
approach and compliance with international human
rights law.
Understanding national laws and policies related to
indigenous peoples’ rights, forests, land, natural
resource management and analysing coherence of
these with international human rights law and
instruments (UNDRIP, etc.)
Monitoring and reporting on human rights situations
of IPs in forests
 Develop and use initiatives to promote transparency
and governance on forests including; FLEGT, Report
Card developed by Global Witness, Governance of
Forests Initiatives (WRI), PROFOR (WB), etc.
Issues to examine under transparency,accountability
and governance in forests
 Transparency norms: Official mechanisms, policies, laws,
etc. that permit public access to information: e.g. Freedom
of Information Act
 Legal standing of indigenous peoples: do they have legal
standing and laws recognizing their rights?
 Forest Legal Framework –existence or not of policies on
forest tenures, are forest lands under clear ownership
titles
 Access to decision making – IP Participation in public
decision making on forest issues; Forest Forums, etc.
 Allocation of permits / user rights: transparent
Measures to incorporate human rights based
approach and compliance with international human
rights law.
 Logging operations: When an area of forest is identified for
allocation to any sort of concessionaire, is this publicly
advertised so that the opportunity for new permits / user
rights is open to anyone?
 Is there transparent independent verification (due
diligence) of the eligibility of any applicants for forest
permits? Is information on locations for other forest
products given to the public?
 Do permits exist for all uses / services? In addition to
logging permits, are there any permits for conservationactivities, environmental services (e.g. water conservation,
or carbon storage), or eco-tourism services in forests?
Measures to incorporate human rights based
approach and compliance with international human
rights law.
 Is there a strategic process to assessing priorities between
development options?
 Is there a Strategic Environmental Assessment to identify
and resolve conflicting land uses between forests, mining,
large-scale agriculture and infrastructure development?
Does the National Forest Policy document seek to address
this? Do any policy documents from the other sectors?
 Fiscal regime: tax collection and redistribution To what
extent does the law provide for taxes, royalties, or any
other benefits to be collected from permit holders and
given to affected communities? Are any laws or regulations
regarding this implemented effectively?
Measures for corporate accountability
 If there are legal frameworks, FPIC policies and laws are
there well-defined and clear enforcement mechanisms?
 Corporations say their accountability depends a lot on
State laws and policies.