PART II / CHAPTER 5
BIO-CULTURAL COMMUNITY PROTOCOLS AND PROTECTED AREAS
processes of free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) and
peoples and local communities – both sedentary and
community research agreements that establish mutually
mobile – through customary laws or other effective means”.
agreed terms (MAT). During the course of the study, there
Territories and lands occupied or used by ILCs encompass a
should be periodic participatory evaluations that assess the
considerable proportion of areas important for biodiversity
perspectives of a broad range of community members to
and wildlife conservation. They are found in both terrestrial
ensure there is general agreement about the research
and marine areas and range in size from sacred groves of less
approach, methods and results. A BCP can serve to establish
than 1 ha to over 30 000 km2 indigenous territories in Brazil.
the terms and conditions of any transfer of knowledge and
Many of these ICCAs encompass conservation knowledge
resources outside the community, which should cover
and practices intertwined with local strategies for livelihoods,
disclosure through internal reports, published materials
the spiritual and material values of ILCs and a variety
and web-based bioinformatics and mapping approaches
of customary and legal collective rights over land and
such as searchable ethno-biological databases and
natural resources.
13
14
online mapping.
ICCAs have until recently largely been ignored, if not
Bio-prospecting has yielded valuable commercial products in
undermined, by formal conservation policies and many are
recent history and protected areas are seen as reservoirs of
under severe threat. However, the recent recognition of
genetic materials that might serve important functions in
ICCAs at the international policy level is encouraging, and
agriculture or medicine. Bio-prospecting in protected areas is
in some countries ICCAs have been recognized and
bound to increase as they contain much of the world’s
incorporated into national protected area systems.
biodiversity and are likely to serve as increasingly important
For example, about 20% of Australia’s protected area consists
repositories of disappearing habitats, species and genetic
of 20 indigenous protected areas. Despite this, the interface
12
15
resources. As national ABS frameworks are developed, bio-
between state-based institutions and the customary
prospecting agreements with protected areas are also likely
institutions of ILCs remains a challenging and complex arena.
to increase because management authorities see them as
All too often, the official recognition of the conservation
a promising source of sustainable financing. In this context,
value of ICCAs and their incorporation into national protected
BCPs can be a crucial instrument to ensure that the rights
area systems is achieved through the imposition of new
of ILCs in and around protected areas over their resources
institutions that undermine the very customary governance
and knowledge are respected, that bio-prospecting activities
structures and bio-cultural values that conserve the ICCAs
take place only after FPIC is established, and that ILCs receive
in the first place. Additionally, under the influence of rapid
a fair share of the benefits arising out of such agreements.
economic, demographic and cultural changes, the traditional
BCPs can inform researchers about appropriate researcher
knowledge, values and practices linked to ICCAs are often
behavior, the community’s research priorities, local
being abandoned or lost.
requirements for obtaining FPIC, and the types of
benefits that should be shared.
At the same time, public recognition of ICCAs can be crucial
for some communities to be able to defend these areas against
2.3 Bio-cultural Community Protocols
and Indigenous and Community
Conserved Areas
external threats or to seek various forms of support for the
management of their natural resources. Indeed, the recognition
of ICCAs needs to be based on the respect of the communities’
strategies for conservation and sustainable use and their
ICCAs are defined as “natural and/or modified ecosystems
customary governance institutions. It should take into account
containing significant biodiversity values, ecological services
the range of bio-cultural values that help conserve the area
and cultural values, voluntarily conserved by indigenous
and the role these values play in the communities’ ways of life.
12. United Nations University Institute of Advanced Studies (UNU/IAS), Biodiversity Access and Benefit–Sharing Policies for Protected Areas, an Introduction. UNU/IAS, Tokyo, 2003.
13. Borrini-Feyerabend, Grazia, Recognizing and Supporting Indigenous and Community Conservation – Ideas and Experiences from the Grassroots, IUCN CEESP.
Briefing Note 9, September 2008.
14. See: Kothari, Ashish, Community Conserved Areas: Towards Ecological and Livelihood Security, in: PARKS 16, pp 14-20, 2006; and Berkes, Fikret, Community
Conserved Areas: Policy Issues in Historic and Contemporary Context, in: Conservation Letters 2, pp 19-24, 2009.
1 5 . Smyth, Dernoth, Indigenous Protected Areas in Australia, in: PARKS 16, pp 14-20, 2006.
55