20
65
organisation, AFIMAD, and a company
engaged in sourcing biodiversity ethically,
Candela Peru. Developing a BCP was seen
as a way to support the indigenous
communities in advancing their social,
cultural and environmental expectations of
their commercial relationships. The
development of the BCP involved an
internal reflection process with
representatives from the community. They
considered how protocols could help them
to better respond to commercial proposals
concerning forest resources, increase the
government’s recognition of their rights as
indigenous communities, and
communicate their views to other
institutions and organisations. Beyond the
document itself, which is still being
discussed by the wider community, the
process helped AFIMAD reflect on its
goals and values, as well as its economic
activities, and reaffirmed its significance
within the communities. As a result, it was
able to communicate in subsequent
dialogue with Candela Peru much more
assertively on issues such as sustainable
resource use, negotiation processes, the
kind of relationship they wanted, and the
sharing of benefits. The communities and
Candela Peru are now better placed to
understand and address each other’s needs
and concerns in the context of their current
and future work.
15. How to implement free, prior
informed consent (FPIC)
Jerome Lewis
Negotiating FPIC is a process. Before
explicit consent can be negotiated,
information on planned activities and their
potential impact needs to be provided to
those affected, and action has to be taken
to verify that this information has been
understood. If people refuse to grant
consent, this decision must be respected.
FPIC focuses on harmonising and
equalising relationships between groups of
different power and means. This article
outlines the elements of FPIC and what
they imply for the process of negotiating
FPIC in practice. It discusses the eight key
stages of an FPIC process, noting the
requirements for each stage and the
potential pitfalls. It then considers the
advantages of FPIC processes for
communities and for external actors, as
well as the challenges faced in
implementing such processes.
16. Understanding and facilitating a
biocultural community protocol process
Holly Shrumm and Harry Jonas
This article looks at how to facilitate a
community protocol process in practice. It
discusses how to determine what a
‘community’ is, and the importance of
understanding its culture and internal
dynamics, as well as how it makes
important decisions. It emphasises the
importance of the participation of all parts
of the community, especially those who are
often excluded from decision-making,
such as women and youth. It then looks at
how to facilitate a CP process, including
seeking agreement from the community
about the process, identifying potential
‘community catalysts’, managing the
expectations of the community and the
importance of flexible timeframes.
17. Using stakeholder and power analysis
and BCPs in multi-stakeholder processes
Herman Brouwer, Wim Hiemstra and
Pilly Martin
Multi-stakeholder processes (MSPs)
advocates often argue that, because of the
interdependence of stakeholders in solving
complex issues, MSPs create trust-based
relations that enable the empowered and
active participation of all stakeholders.
However, the distribution of power,
capacity and resources is generally
imbalanced. Power differences are
embedded in the social fabric of society
and can be reproduced, or even reinforced,
in an MSP. Even if participants are willing
to engage in dialogue on an equal basis,
there are still differences in the level of