Building the evidence base

Setting the stage for future evidence-based discussions, two recent companion reports published in 2021 explored the global spatial extent and conservation values of the territories and areas governed by such custodians, as well as the pressures they face. These were:

• A technical report combining both Indigenous peoples’ and local communities’ lands [1], through developing a dataset of the best available spatial data on the lands under their ownership and/or governance.
  
• The Territories of Life report [2], which modified the above dataset to focus on lands positively contributing to the conservation of nature, in order to identify and estimate the extent of “potential” ICCAs (Territories of Life) with the following defining characteristics:
  • There is a close and deep connection between a territory or area and its custodian Indigenous people or local community.
  • The custodian people or community makes and enforces (alone or together with other actors) decisions or rules about the territory or area
  • The governance decisions and rules and the management efforts of the concerned people or community overall positively contribute to the conservation of nature and to community livelihoods and wellbeing.

Indigenous peoples and local communities have varied ambitions for their lands and diverse ways of managing them; not all of which will contribute to the conservation of nature. This means only a subset are considered potential ICCAs. In the report, they are referred to as “potential” because the vast majority of the data layer was not self-reported by the custodian Indigenous peoples and local communities. They could be considered ICCAs in reality if self-identified as such by their custodians.

The two reports distinguish between the broader lands, and those that are potential (or known) ICCAs (Figure 1), but importantly demonstrate the extensive role both are playing in conservation and sustainable land use.

Figure 1: The global extent of Indigenous peoples’ and local communities’ lands in light blue (technical report [1]), overlaid with potential ICCAs in blue, with grid lines (Territories of Life report [2]). The small number of known (self-reported) ICCAs are shown as red dots.

The global findings

Globally, it was found that Indigenous peoples and local communities own and/or govern (through legal or customarily-held means) at least one-third of the earth’s terrestrial surface. Notably, almost two-thirds of this area remains in good ecological condition with little to no intensive human impacts, suggesting one-fifth of the world’s land is already conserved within potential ICCAs (Figure 2). In addition to existing protected and conserved areas, this could roughly double the global coverage of protected and conserved landscapes to around 31%. However, accounting for these areas towards global targets, whether 30% by 2030 or otherwise, importantly requires the custodian’s consent, alongside appropriate forms of recognition and support. In short, the contributions of these areas cannot be taken for granted and proposed coverage targets remain ambitious as a result.

Figure 2: The percentage of total global land area covered by Indigenous peoples’ and local communities’ (IPLC) lands, and those lands which are in good ecological condition and hence considered potential ICCAs [1].

In addition to overall coverage, the two reports also highlighted the importance of these lands in sustaining a healthy planet for both nature and people. Specifically, demonstrating the extent to which Indigenous peoples’ and local communities’ lands overlap with areas important for biodiversity, ecological representation, climate resilience, cultural and spiritual values:

• 36% of the extent of key biodiversity areas were covered, with 22% of the extent within potential ICCAs
• 75% of the world’s 847 ecoregions were covered, 14 in their entirety, and 66% covered to some extent by ICCAs
• 25% showed high levels of provisioning ecosystem services (e.g. fresh drinking water)
• 33% of Intact Forest Landscapes were covered by potential ICCAs
• 32% of terrestrial UNESCO World Heritage sites (natural and mixed) were covered by potential ICCAs.

Image: Pueblo Originario Kichwa de Sarayaku, Ecuador

Pressures and concerns

As custodians of these landscapes Indigenous peoples and local communities offer vital protection of distinct species assemblages and environments, ultimately providing benefits to people living far beyond their borders. Worryingly however, future development pressures from commodity-based and extractive industries could impact over one-quarter of these lands, and at least 16% of potential ICCAs.

Furthermore, at least one-quarter of the world’s state and privately governed protected and conserved area on land overlaps with potential ICCAs. Therefore, Indigenous peoples and local communities are likely the de facto custodians of many existing protected and conserved areas, without being formally recognised as such. In many cases, it is precisely because of Indigenous peoples’ and local communities’ actions and contributions to biodiversity that these sites have been deemed ‘suitable’ for formal protection.

This overlap raises concerns with both the historical and continuing human rights implications of protected and conserved areas for Indigenous peoples and local communities, including potential forced displacement, undermining of customary and local governance and management systems and criminalisation of cultural practices. This analysis illustrates both the opportunity and need to explicitly incorporate human rights, governance diversity and equity into the post-2020 targets, and ensure that its implementation respects Indigenous peoples and local communities as rights-holders.

Image: Froxán Common Woodlands, Spain