GUIDELINES FOR APPLYING

FREE, PRIOR AND
INFORMED CONSENTA MANUAL FOR CONSERVATION INTERNATIONALMission: Building upon a strong foundation of science, partnership and field demonstration, CI
empowers societies to responsibly and sustainably care for nature, our global biodiversity, for thewell-being of humanity.
Vision: We imagine a healthy, prosperous world in which societies are forever committed to caring forand valuing nature, for the long-term benefit of people and all life on Earth.

Published: December 2013
Conservation International
2011 Crystal Drive, Suite 500
Arlington, VA 22202
Phone: 703-341-2400
Website: www.conservation.org

Suggested Citation: Theresa Buppert and Adrienne McKeehan. Guidelines for Applying Free, Priorand Informed Consent: A Manual for Conservation International. Arlington, VA: Conservation
International, 2013.
Authors: Theresa Buppert and Adrienne McKeehanContributors: Ramiro Batzin, Paulo Celso de Oliveira, David James, Kanyinke Sena, Mina Setra,
Rogeliano Solis
Designer: Emily Love
Cover image: (c) Bruce M Beehler

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
These guidelines draw on case studies prepared by Conservation International’s (CI) Indigenous
Advisory Group (IAG) and CI’s Conservation Stewards Program (CSP), including the following
authors:
IAG: Ramiro Batzin, Paulo Celso de Oliveira, David James, Kanyinke Sena, Mina Setra, Rogeliano
Solis
CSP: Tian Feng, Eduard T. Niesten, Margarita Mora

Special thanks to the following reviewers from Conservation International:
Luis Barquin, Johnson Cerda, Joanna Durbin, Janet Edmond, Regina Harlig, David Mitchell,
Mónica Morales, Priti Narasimhan, Eduard Niesten, Serge Omba, Cándido Pastor, Renata Pinheiro,
Milagros Sandoval, Susan Stone, Kristen Walker, Zachary Wells, Kame Westerman

CI welcomes feedback on how to improve this living document.
socialpolicypractice@conservation.org .

iii

Please send comments toiv

Consent is the manifestation of a clear andconvincing pact, in accordance with the decision-making structuresof the indigenous peoples, which includes traditional processes fordeliberation. These agreements must rely on the full participationof authorized leaders, representatives or institutions responsible formaking decisions, who have been elected by the same indigenous
peoples.

1-Ramiro Batzin, Executive Director of Sotz’il and member of Conservation International’s
Indigenous Advisory Group

1 Ramiro Batzin, Applying Free, Prior and Informed Consent in the Implementation of REDD+ on Indigenous Lands and Territories in
Guatemala, (Arlington, VA: Conservation International, 2013), 8, accessed October 4, 2013, http://www.conservation.org/about/centers_programs/itpp/Documents/FPIC-Documents/CI_FPIC-Case-Study_Guatemala.pdf.

v

NOTES TO THE READERFirst and foremost, the authors hope that these guidelines will be a useful, living document toConservation International (CI) staff. To best apply these guidelines, it is important to read them intheir entirety first, before delving into the individual steps. As each section builds on the previous
one, a more complete understanding of free, prior and informed consent will emerge after reading the
document in full.
Secondly, these guidelines were created as a companion tool to CI’s Indigenous Peoples and CI Policy
and developed in collaboration with the CI Indigenous Advisory Group (IAG). Therefore, and at therecommendation of the IAG, they refer specifically to indigenous peoples throughout. However, CI
fully recognizes that these guidelines hold lessons for working with communities that do not define
themselves as indigenous, and respects full and effective participation for all communities in its
endeavors.

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements ……………...……………...……………...……………...…… iii
Notes to the Reader ……………...……………...……………...……………...…… vi
Acronyms ……………...……………...……………...……………...……………... 2
Key Terms ……………...……………...……………...……………...…………….. 3
Introduction ……………...……………...……………...……………...…………….. 7
Background ……………...……………...……………...……………...…………….. 9
Benefits of Guidelines ……………...……………...……………...……………...… 12
How to Use These Guidelines ……………...……………...……………...…………… 13
Steps to Creating a Successful FPIC Process ……………...……………...…………….. 15
Gather Information ……………...……………...……………...……………... 15
Understand the Current Local Context……………...……………...…… 15

Understand Legal and Customary Rights ……………...……………...…… 16
Identify and Respect Traditional Decision-making Structures ……………... 17
Collaborate on Design and Implementation ……………...……………...……… 19
Develop Culturally Sensitive Approach……………...……………...…… 20

Ensure Full and Effective Participation……………...……………...…… 21

Ensure Information Exchange ……………...……………...……………... 22
Reach Consent on Course of Action……………...……………...…………… 24
Ensure Accountability ……………...……………...……………...…………….. 25
Incorporate FPIC into Grievance Mechanism ……………...……………... 25
Monitor and Adapt Commitments……………...……………...……………. 25
FPIC Flowchart: A Visual Guide ……………...……………...……………...……… 27
Conclusion ……………...……………...……………...……………...…………….. 29
Additional FPIC Resources ……………...……………...……………...…………….. 30
References……………...……………...……………...……………...…………….. 31

1

ACRONYMS
CBD: Convention on Biological Diversity
CI: Conservation International
CSP: Conservation Stewards Program
FPIC: Free, Prior and Informed Consent
IAG: Indigenous Advisory GroupILO 169: International Labour Organization Convention 169
RBA: Rights-based Approach
REDD+: Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation, plus the role ofConservation, Sustainable Management of Forests and Enhancement of Forest Carbon Stocks
TK: Traditional Knowledge
UNFCCC: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
UNDRIP: United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

2

KEY TERMS
Community: A group of people bound together by geography, interests, and/or culture. Within the“Steps” portion of these guidelines, community refers specifically to indigenous communities that
may be impacted by any decision that CI is seeking their input on, recognizing that the community
may or may not be homogenous in their beliefs, desires, and needs, among other things.
Customary Rights: De facto rights established through a long tradition of customary practice; theserights are widely exercised and accepted, though not necessarily written into legislation.
Free, Prior and Informed Consent: A framework for ensuring that the rights of indigenous peoples
are guaranteed in any decision that may affect their lands, territories or livelihoods. Composed of four
separate components:•

Free—Without coercion, intimidation, manipulation, threat or bribery.

•

Prior—indicates that consent has been sought sufficiently in advance, before any project
activities have been authorized or commenced, and that the time requirements of theindigenous community’s consultation/consensus processes have been respected.

•

Informed—Information is provided in a language and form that are easily understood by
the community, covering the nature, scope, purpose, duration and locality of the project or
activity as well as information about areas that will be affected; economic, social, culturaland environmental impacts, all involved actors, and the procedures that the project or activity
may entail.

•

Consent—The right of indigenous peoples to give or withhold their consent to any decisionthat will impact their lands, territories, resources, and livelihoods.2

Full and Effective Participation: Full and effective participation has several main components, andis based upon transparent, good faith interactions, so that everyone in the community is empowered
to join fully in the decision-making process. It includes providing information in a language andmanner the community understands and in a timeframe compatible with the community’s cultural
norms.
Gender: The economic, social, political, and cultural attributes and opportunities associated withbeing women or men. Gender-defined roles, for example fuelwood harvesting for women, can provide
an opportunity to engage women in forest conservation and reforestation since they have firsthandknowledge of the amount of available fuelwood.

2 United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (UNPFII), Report of the International Workshop on Methodologies Regarding Free
Prior and Informed Consent, Document E/C.19/2005/3, endorsed by the UNPFII at its Fourth Session.

3

Human Rights: Rights inherent to all human beings without discrimination, whatever nationality,
place of residence, sex, national or ethnic origin, color, religion, language, or any other status. Humanrights are universal, inalienable, indivisible, interrelated and interdependent. Examples of universal
human rights include, but are not limited to, right to life, right to equality before the law, right todevelopment, and right to self-determination.3 Universal human rights are often legally guaranteedby treaties, customary international law, general principles and other international legal frameworks.
Indigenous Peoples: Although there are many words that reflect what is meant by indigenous,
national definitions vary from country to country, and may not fully coincide with self-identificationof indigenous peoples, which is the only fundamental criterion recognized at the international level.
For the purpose of our work, CI identifies indigenous peoples in specific geographic areas by thepresence, in varying degrees, of:•Close attachment to ancestral and traditional or customary territories and the natural
resources in them;•

Customary social and political institutions;•

Economic systems oriented to subsistence production;•

An indigenous language, often different from the predominant language; and•Self-identification and identification by others as members of a distinct cultural group.4

Individual vs. Collective rights: Most human rights treaties reflect an individualistic concept ofrights and rights-holders; for example, the right to education or the right to life is the right of every
individual. For many indigenous peoples their identity as an individual is inseparably connected tothe community to which that individual belongs. For them, collective rights, such as the right to selfdetermination or the right to collective lands, are therefore essential, and require protection.5
Rights-based Approach: An approach to conservation that promotes and integrates human rights
into conservation policy and practice by emphasizing the positive connections between conservationand the rights of people to secure their livelihoods, enjoy healthy and productive environments, andlive with dignity.
Sacred Site: A natural historic, religious or traditional place with cultural significance.
Self-determination: In this context, it is the right of indigenous peoples to determine their own
development path. It is one of the basic rights upon which FPIC is founded.

3 “United Nations Human Rights,” United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, accessed September 13, 2013,
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Pages/WhatareHumanRights.aspx.
4 Conservation International, Rights-based Approach: Indigenous Peoples and CI Policy (Arlington, VA: Conservation International, 2012),
1-2.
5 “Frequently Asked Questions on a Human Rights-based Approach to Development Cooperation,” United Nations Office of the HighCommissioner on Human Rights, accessed October 4, 2013, http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/FAQen.pdf.

4

Traditional Knowledge: Knowledge, innovations and practices that are developed, sustained andpassed on from generation to generation within a community or particular population within acommunity. Traditional knowledge (TK) is frequently collective owned and can be found in a wide
variety of contexts, including agriculture, ecology, medicine, and biodiversity.6

6 “Traditional Knowledge and the Convention on Biological Diversity,” Convention on Biological Diversity, accessed October 4, 2013,
http://www.cbd.int/traditional/intro.shtml.

56INTRODUCTIONThe journey Conservation International (CI) has taken toward creating these guidelines toimplement Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) follows in the footsteps of the developmentof the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). The Declaration wasdeveloped in direct response to the need for an internationally recognized human rights instrumentthat respects indigenous peoples right to self-determination, with FPIC as a means of ensuring thisright. In 1987, just two years after efforts to draft UNDRIP began, CI emerged as a newly foundedorganization working in partnership with communities to protect terrestrial and marine ecosystems,
foster good governance, and build a future in which people live in harmony with nature.7 Consistent
with the UN Declaration, CI was founded on the understanding that successful conservation requires
respect for human rights and the full and effective participation of indigenous peoples and local
communities whose livelihoods depend upon natural resources.
To further its commitment to incorporating the input of indigenous peoples into its programs andpolicies, CI invited six indigenous experts from around the world to form an Indigenous Advisory
Group (IAG) in 2009. The IAG’s purpose is threefold: To strengthen existing collaborations
between indigenous peoples and NGOs on REDD+ 8 ; to bring direct advice and feedback fromindigenous experts into the strategies of CI; and to promote understanding of the needs, priorities
and concerns of indigenous peoples related to REDD+ and other forest-related activities.
In 2010, as part of this ongoing collaboration, CI and the IAG embarked on a process to create
guidelines that ensure respect for Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) in all CI strategies andprograms. Even though CI’s institutional policies, including the recently updated Indigenous Peoples
and CI Policy, uphold respect for indigenous peoples’ rights and processes that respect FPIC, theorganization recognized that policies alone are insufficient for creating lasting change. The first stepin this process to create institutional guidelines was the development of nine case studies examining
how elements of FPIC were or were not being incorporated into different projects around the world.
Six of the case studies were created by IAG members, while three were based on the experiences ofCI’s Conservation Stewards Program.9

7 Work on UNDRIP began in 1985; please see link for more details: http://untreaty.un.org/cod/avl/ha/ga_61-295/ga_61-295.html.
8 REDD+ refers to Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation, plus the role of conservation, sustainable
management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks.
9 The Conservation Stewards Program (CSP) uses conservation agreements to offer concrete incentives for stewardship of biodiversity
and natural resources. These agreements deliver social benefits prioritized by local resource users in return for demonstrated commitment
to maintaining biodiversity and ecosystem services.

7

These guidelines are based on the completed FPIC case studies and provide a complementary tool
to CI’s institutional policies, including the recently updated Indigenous Peoples and CI Policy. They
provide introductory and background information on FPIC, as well as actual steps for ensuring
FPIC. Each component of these guidelines, from start to finish, is designed to assist CI staff in
implementing a fair and effective FPIC process.
CI recognizes that its work is conducted within the context of different countries with their own
laws, and sovereign rights, as well as commitments under international laws they have signed andratified. At the same time, countries are called to respect universal human rights norms and laws thatthey may or may not have endorsed. UNDRIP is one of these international instruments. Though
not binding, it is a universally recognized declaration, and CI’s own policies and FPIC guidelines
are consistent with its language and intent. CI will follow these institutional guidelines to ensure
processes that respect FPIC in all of its work, and will encourage the application of these guidelines
by all its partners, recognizing that not all countries have implemented UNDRIP.
FPIC gives indigenous peoples the freedom
to determine their own development path.
This freedom, when recognized, supports
CI’s mission of empowering societies
to responsibly and sustainably care fornature. By following these guidelines, CI
respects indigenous peoples’ right to FPIC
as well as UNDRIP. CI also recognizes
the strong cultural and spiritual ties many
indigenous peoples have to their lands
and territories and how these ties canstrengthen global conservation efforts.
CI shares the goal of strengthening
conservation efforts with indigenous
peoples around the world, and hopes thatthese guidelines will make the journey a

Indigenous Advisory Group members areexperts on climate change and indigenous
rights from around the world who provide
strategic guidance on these issues to CI.
Their names, indigenous communities, andcountries of origin are as follows: Ramiro
Batzin, Maya Kaqchikel from Guatemala;Paulo Celso de Oliveira, Pankararu from Brazil;David James, Arawak from Guyana; Kanyinke
Sena, Ogiek from Kenya; Mina Setra, Dayakfrom Indonesia, and Rogeliano Solis, Gunafrom Panama.

little easier.

8

BACKGROUND

F

ree, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) has been evolving and gaining momentum for several
decades. In essence, it is a framework for ensuring that the rights of indigenous peoples areguaranteed in any decision that may affect their lands, territories or livelihoods. It ensures that they
have the right to give or withhold their consent to these activities without fear of reprisal or coercion,in a timeframe suited to their own culture, and with the resources to make informed decisions.
Community is a critical component of FPIC, as FPIC is a collective process, rather than an individual
decision.
It is important to understand that FPIC is not simply a decision-making process or a vetomechanism for the community, but a tool to ensure that outside people and organizations engage
indigenous communities in a culturally appropriate way, so that their development priorities,
needs and desires can be met. A true FPIC process includes not only consultation but also thespace for a community to give or withhold their consent to a project. Some existing policies andguidelines, whether from governments, the private sector, development banks or others, are limited
to consultation, as opposed to consultation and full consent. Conservation International, however,recognizes consent for indigenous peoples.
As stated in CI’s Indigenous Peoples and CI Policy, “The national context and the rights conferredwith the term indigenous vary significantly among countries. Indigenous peoples often are ethnicallydifferent from the dominant national culture, and frequently their traditional territories, whether
terrestrial or marine, are not recognized by national governments. While indigenous peoples have
similar characteristics with other disadvantaged or marginalized rural population groups, . . . manyof the causes of their poverty differ greatly from other marginalized sectors, and are often related totheir limited access to or loss of traditional lands and resources, disintegration of their traditional
economies, and from discrimination and marginalization that result from their unique language,
culture and social organization.”10

Although there are many words that reflect what is meant by indigenous, national definitions varyfrom country to country, and may not fully coincide with self-identification of indigenous peoples,
which is the only fundamental criterion recognized at the international level. For the purpose of
its work, CI identifies indigenous peoples in specific geographic areas by the presence, in varying
degrees, of the following five qualities:•

Close attachment to ancestral and traditional or customary territories and the natural
resources in them;•

Customary social and political institutions;

10 Conservation International, Rights-based Approach: Indigenous Peoples and CI Policy, p 1.

9•Economic systems oriented to subsistence production;•

An indigenous language, often different from the predominant language; and•Self-identification and identification by others as members of a distinct cultural group.

Over the years, FPIC has been included in several important international conventions and instruments
and is recognized as a legal norm with obligations for States.11 These conventions and instruments,
which focus primarily on indigenous peoples, recognize the direct connections between FPIC and its
underlying rights, such as the rights to selfdetermination and property. Given these
Basic Timeline of Free, Prior
direct links to legal rights, FPIC itself isand Informed Consent
sometimes referred to as a right, sometimes
a principle, or sometimes as both a right1957
The International
and a principle.12 This connection between
Labour Organization
1982
FPIC and the protection of rights is evident(ILO) developed the
The United Nations Subfirst international treaty
in the international conventions andCommission on Prevention
concerning indigenousof Discrimination andinstruments highlighted below.
peoples, Convention
No. 107

The International Labour Organization(ILO) developed the first international
convention concerning indigenous peoples
in 1957. However, this convention was
heavily criticized for its focus on integrating
indigenous peoples into the larger society.
As a result, it was revised through the
adoption of Convention 169 in 1989.13
Convention 169 requires governments to
consult with indigenous peoples about
legislation that may directly affect them, toensure that their participation and right todecide is upheld in regards to any projectthat affects them, and to ensure thatnecessary relocation occurs only with their
free and informed consent.14

1985
The Working Group of
independent experts began
drafting a declaration on
the rights of indigenous
peoples

1992
United Nations Convention
on Biological Diversity(CBD) was created

2004
The Akwe: Kon Guidelines
were adopted

2010
The Nagoya Protocol
on Access to Genetic
Resources and the Fair
and Equitable Sharing ofBenefits Arising from their
Utilization was adopted

Protection of Minorities(‘the Sub-Commission’)appointed a Working Groupon Indigenous Populations

1989
The International Labour
Organization (ILO)
developed a revised treaty
concerning indigenous
peoples, Convention
No. 169

2002
The Bonn Guidelines wereadopted2007
United Nations Declarationon the Rights of Indigenous
Peoples was adopted by the
UN General Assembly

11 Guidelines on Free, Prior and Informed Consent, UN-REDD Programme, accessed September, 20, 2013, http://www.unredd.net/
index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=8717&Itemid=53.
12 Guidelines on Free, Prior and Informed Consent.
13 Birgitte Feiring, Indigenous & Tribal People’s Rights in Practice—A Guide to ILO Convention No. 169 (International Labour Standards
Department, 2009), accessed September 20, 2013, http://www.ilo.org/indigenous/Resources/Guidelinesandmanuals/WCMS_106474/
lang--en/index.htm.
14 “Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention 1989 (No. 169),” International Labour Organization, accessed September 20, 2013,
http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_norm/---normes/documents/publication/wcms_100897.pdf.

10

The 1992 United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) reinforces indigenous and local
community rights in regards to biological resources, benefit-sharing and the protection of cultural
knowledge. Subject to its national legislation and as far as possible and appropriate, State parties
must obtain the “approval and involvement” of persons with traditional knowledge, innovations
and practices when this knowledge is used outside of the indigenous or local community.15 This
convention is supplemented by the 2002 Bonn Guidelines, which emphasize indigenous and local
community rights and provide guidance on implementing certain provisions of the CBD.16 The CBD
is also supplemented by the Akwe: Kon Guidelines, a set of voluntary guidelines for conducting
cultural, environmental and social impact assessment procedures on indigenous and local community
lands, sacred sites, and waters.17 Finally, the CBD’s Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing
requires countries to take measures to ensure the prior, informed consent of indigenous and local
communities.18
The 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) explicitly
recognizes FPIC in multiple articles and serves as a foundation for many FPIC guidelines, criteria,
and standards implemented by other organizations, including these guidelines developed by CI.
As the examples above demonstrate, some international conventions and instruments explicitly uphold
FPIC for indigenous peoples. Even when not legally binding, rendering enforcement difficult, many
legal cases have nevertheless been built upon, and won because of, these conventions and instruments.
Recognition of the right to FPIC is ever evolving, and some countries have adopted these conventions
into their own national laws, both voluntarily and via court rulings. Still others, however, have notyet recognized FPIC at all.
Although FPIC is recognized primarily for indigenous peoples in international laws and conventions,
local communities often face some of the same problems of access to land and lack of input into theirown development path. Conservation International recognizes that all projects should involve thefull and effective participation of everyone involved, whether they are indigenous or not.
Although these guidelines have been created to assist CI staff in incorporating FPIC into projectplanning, design, implementation and monitoring, every resource and voice that advocates for FPIC
brings the conversation one step closer to universal acceptance.

15 “Article 8(j),” Convention on Biological Diversity, accessed September 27, 2013, http://www.cbd.int/doc/legal/cbd-en.pdf.
16 Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Bonn Guidelines on Access to Genetic Resources and Fair and Equitable Sharing of
the Benefits Arising out of their Utilization (Montreal: Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, 2002), accessed September
20, 2013, http://www.cbd.int/doc/publications/cbd-bonn-gdls-en.pdf.
17 Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Akwé: Kon Voluntary Guidelines for the Conduct of Cultural, Environmental
and Social Impact Assessment regarding Developments Proposed to Take Place on, or which are Likely to Impact on, Sacred Sites and on Lands
and Waters Traditionally Occupied or Used by Indigenous and Local Communities (Montreal, Secretariat of the Convention on Biological
Diversity, CBD Guidelines Series, 2004), accessed September 20, 2013, http://www.cbd.int/traditional/guidelines.shtml.
18 Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharingof Benefits Arising from their Utilization to the Convention on Biological Diversity, (Montreal: Secretariat of the Convention on Biological
Diversity, 2011) accessed September 20, 2013, http://www.cbd.int/abs/doc/protocol/nagoya-protocol-en.pdf.

11

BENEFITS OF GUIDELINESC

onservation International developed these institutional FPIC guidelines to support its Indigenous
Peoples and CI Policy and its overarching Rights-based Approach (RBA) to conservation.
These guidelines can improve both conservation and human well-being outcomes in CI’s work withindigenous peoples, while also protecting the rights of these communities.
CI recognizes that FPIC is a fundamental building block for successful projects and community
partnerships. These guidelines create a standard of practice for all of CI’s work with indigenous
peoples across different countries, programs and projects. Because CI’s work and community partners
are varied and diverse, these guidelines are created to be flexible and can be adjusted and adapted forparticular countries, community structures and specific projects.
A key benefit of these guidelines is that they ensure that CI is transparent. By using these guidelines,
CI clearly states its approach to working with indigenous peoples and demonstrates to various
groups—including indigenous partners, governments, other stakeholders and the wider conservation
community—that it is committed to indigenous peoples and their rights. Although designed foruse by CI, these guidelines are available for other actors to use. They offer a standard, yet flexible,
approach to FPIC built on diverse experiences related to the creation of protected areas, REDD+,
national consultation policies, and conservation agreements. These guidelines, or any other effective
FPIC process, increase the success of conservation efforts worldwide.
Most importantly, CI’s use of these FPIC guidelines directly benefits not only CI, but also indigenous
peoples, since they benefit the most when their voices drive the conversation. These guidelines are
based on indigenous perspectives, built on examples of FPIC from Conservation International’s
Indigenous Advisory Group and complemented with lessons from CI programs. The recommended
steps provide for the full and effective participation of indigenous peoples in project development,
implementation and monitoring, while simultaneously protecting indigenous rights and increasing
the probability of project success for everyone involved.

12

HOW TO USE THESE GUIDELINES

T

hese guidelines are designed to balance the needs for broad principles, prescriptive standards,
and a flexible approach for ensuring FPIC with indigenous peoples. They are presented in adocument of moderate length to be user-friendly and encourage maximum use.
The guidelines consist of nine steps grouped into three stages that outline the elements required toachieve an effective FPIC process. The stages and steps are as follows:

GATHER INFORMATION•

Understand the current local context•

Understand legal and customary rights•

Identify and respect traditional decision-making structures

COLLABORATEON DESIGN AND
IMPLEMENTATION

Ensure full and effective
participation•

Ensure information exchange•

Reach consent on course ofaction

Ensu
re A
cco
un
t

•

y
ilit
b
a
• Incorporate FPIC
into grievancemechanism• Monitor and adapt
commitments

Incorporate
FPIC
grievance mechanism

into

•

Monitorandcommitments

adapt• Develop a culturally sensitive
approach• Ensure full and effective participation• Ensure information exchange• Reach consent on a course of action

on Design &
I
orate
m
ple
llab
m
Co
en
t

•

ion
at

ENSURE ACCOUNTABILITY• Understand thecurrent local
context• Understand legal
and customary
rights• Identify andrespect traditional
decision-making
structures

Each step contains recommended
actions that demonstrate how thestep may be achieved. These actions
are illustrative but not necessarily

13

ion
rmat
Info

Develop a culturally sensitive
approach

er
th
Ga

•

exhaustive. While the recommended actions guide the user in how to approach the step, the user
may also need to identify additional or different steps or actions relevant to a particular context
or place.
The guidelines should be applied with the participation of communities and key stakeholders toensure that the process is built on collaboration and to ensure that they are willing to work with CI
toward creating an acceptable FPIC process, using these guidelines as a tool. Governments, partners,
and all other stakeholders should also be aware of these guidelines and how they will be applied toachieve the goal of respecting FPIC.
FPIC and these guidelines should be considered throughout the life of a project, from start tofinish. Conservation International recommends that the user read this document in full, from theintroductory and background materials to the actual steps, before beginning to formulate a project.
Understanding the legal origin and evolution of FPIC over the years, for instance, lends insight intoplanning a participatory process today. The references provided at the end of this document offer
further reading about FPIC and specific issues.
Once the material in this document has been completely reviewed, CI recommends that the user
focus on the section entitled Steps to Creating a Successful FPIC Process and begin outlining initialactions to undertake an FPIC process with the impacted community. Finally, as a successful FPIC
process requires a considerable investment of time, finances and other resources, it is essential thatthese pieces are planned well in advance of initiating discussions with a community.
For projects that are already underway, however, these steps should be considered as soon as
possible throughout the remaining project stages. Under such circumstances, what follows may be
a variation on a true FPIC process, but it is still important and relevant for ensuring the community’s
full and effective participation, addressing issues, and avoiding conflicts.
Reviewing this document, developing a thorough understanding of the guidelines, and applying
them consistently and collaboratively will provide a strong foundation for a successful FPIC process.
The discussions and planning that the guidelines inspire and facilitate with each unique community
will build a lasting framework for respecting indigenous rights.

14

STEPS TO CREATING A
SUCCESSFUL FPIC PROCESS

T

he following FPIC “steps” are the most fundamental part of these guidelines, providing clear
direction to CI staff involved in a project. While presented in a certain sequence below, thesesteps often happen concurrently, so the existing order should be adapted as required. Potential overlap
between the steps also exists and should be taken into consideration. For instance, understanding acommunity’s legal and customary rights is a single step, but these rights also need to be consideredwhen addressing the local context and traditional decision-making structures. The user should keepthese overlaps in mind and assess when and how to apply the steps to meet to the needs of theparticular project. Of the nine steps, there is not a single one that can be designated as the step inwhich FPIC happens. In practice, all of the steps form an important part of the FPIC process andmust be considered both individually and as a whole.
As the context of each project is unique, users may need to interpret these steps and generate key
questions and additional or alternative actions in order to fulfill the spirit of each step.

GATHER INFORMATION
By the end of this stage, the user will•

Identify the external actors who influence the community•

Know the proper channels for seeking community decisions•

Know how the community relies on natural resources, especially those that may be impacted
by the project•

Know whether or not a community’s legal and customary rights align•Determine any capacity-building needs regarding rights and decision-making structures, or
any other topic identified

Understand the Current Local Context
Description: Just as cultural elements will influence an FPIC process, so, too, will the general local
context affect a community at any given time. To understand the current context of a community,
the user should consider all factors that may play a role, including past or current conflicts, gender
relations, perceptions and opinions of relevant matters or conservation-related issues, land use andnatural resource management, financial resources, and elements specifically mentioned in othersteps. To ensure a community-driven process, it is also important to identify the many different actors
and their various viewpoints that may play a role in an FPIC process, supporting or influencing the15

community in any way—positive or negative. These may include governments, international or local
NGOs, private sector companies, other communities, etc.
Note that some aspects of the current context are addressed in detail in other steps, such as UnderstandLegal and Customary Rights.
Actions:•

Conduct an analysis and mapping exercise together with the community and partners todetermine which communities are directly or indirectly impacted by the proposed project.

•

Identify any other stakeholders involved; determine their roles in the proposed project area,
and clarify any decision rights they may or may not have.

•

Establish a baseline understanding of the community’s cultural and spiritual beliefs aboutsacred sites, forests, and natural resources, while ensuring the protection of this informationin accordance with community desires and protocols.

•

Identify livelihood concerns and basic human needs that may impact the ability or willingnessof a community to engage in a project, clarifying what the likely tradeoffs might be. Keep inmind that these may be different for different groups within the community, such as men,
women, youth, or elders.

•

Determine the financial or other resources available to the community, including projectand non-project funds, which may positively or negatively influence the community’s use ofnatural resources.

•

Conduct a gender analysis of men’s and women’s roles that will impact implementation of the
project.

•

Understand the needs and concerns of women, recognizing that they have unique knowledge
and priorities, and that they are often left out of decision-making processes. Separate meetings
for men and women may be necessary.

•

Identify past, current, and potential conflicts that exist both within the community and withexternal actors.

•

Identify the community’s perceptions and opinions about the project, external actors, nature,
and all other relevant matters.

Understand Legal and Customary Rights
Description: Both legal and customary rights play an important role in determining interactions
with the community and individuals involved. It is important to understand if and how the nationallaw incorporates or enforces the many indigenous rights guaranteed at the international level. The
unique legal context of each country must be considered to understand the implications for FPIC andfor adhering to these guidelines. For a conservation organization, laws surrounding autonomy, land
tenure and resource ownership are particularly relevant and sensitive issues.
At the same time, it is vital to understand the customary rights of those you are working with,particularly any customary land management practices or other traditional management structures.

16

Customary rights, though not necessarily recognized by the government, are based upon wellestablished land ownership and use patterns that have existed for generations.
Actions:•

Identify the rights indigenous peoples have under national law, which may include suchrights as:•

Land tenure rights•

Rights to consultation and FPIC•Resource rights•

Carbon rights•

Sub-soil rights•

Identify if customary land management systems, practices, rules, and rights exist.

•

Determine if other traditional
management structures exist.

•

Identify any potential conflicts
between customary and legal
rights. This may include instanceswhere countries do not recognize
the right to consent. If conflicts
exist, identify a multi-stakeholder
group to work on mutuallyagreeable resolutions. Dialogue iskey.

What are legal and customary rights?
Legal rights are those rights written into
international, national or regional law, often
based on Western concepts and norms.
Customary rights are de facto rights that havebeen established through a long tradition ofcustomary practice. Although not necessarily
written into legislation, customary rights arewidely practiced and accepted. In general,
legal and customary rights often coexist,
especially in former colonial countries orcountries with recognized cultural or religious
minorities or indigenous peoples. This systemof dual recognition is called legal pluralism.
In other instances, legal and customary rights
may conflict.

•

Identify natural resources that
may be impacted by this project
and the legal and customary lawsthat govern these resources.

•

Assess whether all community
members understand their legal
and customary rights, especiallythose who may otherwise
be marginalized.
If lacking
knowledge about their rights,
community capacity in this area
must be built.

•

Ensure that other relevant stakeholders, such as governments and private sector actors, also
understand the legal and customary rights of the community. If lacking, capacity in this area
must be built.

17

“

Despite the efforts made by the Ministry of Government
and Justice and the Ministry of the Presidency, to establish bodies such as“Indigenous Affairs” and the “Indigenous and Anthropology Institute” to meetthe fundamental needs of indigenous peoples, everything indicates that the results
have not been able satisfy the indigenous peoples; essentially due to a lack of
FPIC when projects on indigenous territories are carried out.” Therefore, the sevenindigenous peoples of Panama created their own entity—the National Coordinator ofIndigenous Peoples in Panama (CONAPIP) in 1991. This strategic alliance helps thecommunities stand strong in the face of threats to their autonomy(Rogeliano Solís, Free, Prior and Informed Consent in Panama: The Guna Case,in the Context of its Autonomy, 2013)

Identify and Respect Traditional Decision-making Structures
Description: The FPIC process depends on seeking consent from the community in a manner that
follows its own customs and traditions. The community may have decision-making processes thatmirror the spirit of FPIC, even if its people are unfamiliar with the specific term. Understanding
how communities make decisions is
an important part of FPIC because it
strengthens partner interactions andhelps adapt the FPIC process to a specificcommunity. A community’s decisionIn many cases, traditional decision-making
making structure may actually extend
structures do not adequately allow for
women’s involvement, often resulting inbeyond the community itself because ofoutcomes that place additional burdens onlinks to indigenous federations, regional
them. Ensuring that women participate inbodies, or associations, so CI staff
decision making is fundamental to the longshould also consider these connections interm sustainability of conservation projects,
since women represent over 50 percent of thethis step.
world’s environmental stewards and in manycases use natural resources more frequently
than men. Whenever possible, it is advisable
to discuss this issue with the community,and devise culturally appropriate solutions
that give women a voice while still respecting
traditional norms.

It is important to recognize thattraditional decision-making structures
or processes may or may not be formallyrecognized by the government, but ifthey do exist, CI recognizes and respects
them. As demonstrated in several of thecase studies, decision-making structures18

may coexist at both the governmental and community level, both held to be equally valid and usefulfor different situations.
Actions:•

Identify the community-selected representative(s) or “point people” for this process.

•Inform the community about CI’s decision-making structure for the project at hand, as wellas the structure of any other relevant stakeholder’s decision-making process.

•Map the community decision-making structures together with community, paying close
attention to how women and men, as well as other groups within the community, participate
in decision making.

•Agree upon a process to strengthen the decision-making structure if the community identifies
this as a need and seeks CI support to do so.

•

Support a process to create a mutually respected decision-making structure in cases where
two or more communities claim rights over a project site.

•

If FPIC is not familiar to the community, engage in a dialogue to identify existing decisionmaking structures that support the principles underlying FPIC.

“

Despite the traditional authority
being seriously affected during the civil war in the 1980s,
currently they have begun a process of rebuilding the social
fabric based on rearticulating decision-making bodies
in indigenous communities.

”(Ramiro Batzin, Applying Free, Prior and Informed Consent in the
Implementation of REDD+ on Indigenous Lands and Territories in
Guatemala, 2013).

COLLABORATE ON DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION
By the end of this stage, the user will•

Integrate cultural norms into the FPIC process•

Determine if there are capacity-building needs surrounding women’s participation andhuman rights relevant to the proposed project•

Establish a process to ensure that all groups, including vulnerable populations, are able toparticipate in the dialogue and decision-making process19•

Determine how and in what form information should be shared and if outside assistance oradvice has been requested, provide funding for it•

Reach consent with the community on whether, and if so, how, to proceed with the project

Develop a Culturally Sensitive Approach
Description: Understanding and being sensitive to a community’s culture is essential to an FPIC
process. Cultural beliefs and norms inform a community’s customs and context, from its traditional
governance system and decision-making processes to its history, folk practices and relationship withnature. Similarly, cultural elements will influence how a community designs a FPIC process. Partners
and other actors involved in the process should respect these elements in a community.   
The FPIC process should also take into account that not all communities will be culturally
homogeneous. It is also important to recognize that cultural practices sometimes exclude certain
populations, such as women, people with disabilities or youth. When designing FPIC processes underthese circumstances, it may be necessary to educate communities about fundamental human rights
and the benefits gained from encouraging the full participation of all members of society.      Actions:•

Identify which cultural norms
will govern the proposed project,and how they can be integrated
into the design for a better end
project.

•

Identify how the community
views nature and makes decisions
regarding it.

•

Identify which cultural norms,
if any, inform the community’s
FPIC process.

•If communities are not culturally
homogenous, a single processintegrating the needs and normsof all groups should be developed.

•

What are fundamental human rights? They
“refer to norms that help to protect all people
from severe political, legal, social, or otherabuses. They are based on the understandingthat all people are, by virtue of being human,inherently entitled to minimum standards of
freedom and dignity”. 20 These rights include,
but are not limited to, life, freedom to practice
culture, freedom from discrimination, accessto justice, an adequate standard of living, andthe right to participate in decision-making.

20 Jessica Campese, “Rights-based Approaches toConservation: An overview of concepts and questions,” inRights-based Approaches: Exploring issues and opportunities
for conservation, ed. J. Campese et al. (Bogor, Indonesia:
CIFOR and IUCN, 2009), 2.

Create a timeline that is culturally
appropriate together with thecommunity.

20Ensure Full and Effective Participation
Description: Full and effective participation is a vital component of the FPIC process, as it addresses
both who is involved and to what extent they are engaged in the process. Robust participation ensures
a community-driven process that allows a community to determine its own development path anddedicate resources in accordance with its own decision-making structures.
This step addresses the need to ensure that all groups, if not all members, of a community are
represented in the process. It is important to recognize that vulnerable groups, including women,
people with disabilities, youth and elders, do not always have the same voice or authority within thecommunity as other members, so there is a need to ensure a consultation process takes these people
into account.
Actions:•••

Agree upon a code of conduct
among all involved, outlining avalid consultation process.

Ensuring women’s participation is a vital
component of project success. Strategies toensure women’s participation might include

Ensure a process that respects
local timeframes and accounts
for geographic limitations toparticipation.

• Addressing meeting invitations specificallyto women• Holding meetings with women only,
including a facilitator and translator if they
are necessary

Ensure that all sectors of thecommunity
participate
in
discussions about the projectin accordance with community
structures and norms, either
directly or through theirlegitimate representatives.

• Providing child care during meetings• Holding meetings at a time of the dayor year when women are most free toparticipate•

culturally
appropriate
Usetechniquesandmaterials
to engage members of thecommunity.

•

Ensure that all relevant stakeholders participate according to their roles and decision rights,
as identified in the stakeholder mapping exercise.

•

Where some parts of society (i.e. women, youth) are not traditionally allowed a voice indecision making, identify ways with community leaders to obtain their input, considering
informal channels (i.e., casual discussions or a women’s meeting) when formal channels
such as a community-wide meeting are not appropriate. Demonstrating to decision makers
the importance of all community opinions, whether gathered formally or informally, may
be required. If no alternatives are identified, initiate an ongoing dialogue and informationexchange on the value of participatory practices. Facilitate training and capacity building tosupport the marginalized group’s ability to participate, as necessary.

•

Ensure proper funding to cover all stages of pre-planning and FPIC implementation.

21

Kanyinke Sena’s case study, Operationalizing Free, Prior and Informed Consent
within REDD+ Projects in Kenya, raises many considerations for the full and effective
participation of women. Reflecting on his engagement with the community and a site visit,
Mr. Sena noted two obstacles that arose:• The interpreter was a man, inhibiting women to speak up• The site visit was on a market day, when many women were unavailable to participate
As a result, Mr. Sena shared the following observations on engaging women:• Women-only meetings give women more freedom to discuss the project• Women’s attendance at meetings does not necessarily equate to their participation in themeeting
These insights and others in Mr. Sena’s case study provide valuablelessons for ensuring that women participate fully and effectively
in FPIC processes.

Ensure Information Exchange
Description: A large part of information sharing is ensuring that it is presented in an understandable
manner. This means in a language the community can understand and in a culturally appropriate
timeframe and manner. Information sharing can also help build capacity within the community andamong all relevant stakeholders, including the government. If the government itself is not a main
partner, they are still the framework under which all projects fall.
Communities are a key source of important information, and their contributions are crucial to thesuccess of any project planning process. In addition to sharing information, this step also addresses
what is done with the information received from the community, government, or other stakeholders.
It is important to recognize and incorporate traditional knowledge, respect indigenous peoples’
intellectual property rights, and ensure the protection of sensitive information gathered during a FPIC
process. For instance, if a community provides CI with traditional knowledge on agricultural practices
for the organization’s use, CI must follow the community’s guidance for using the information, citing
the community, and sharing the benefits.
Actions:•

Identify the community’s preferred method of receiving and sharing information.
•

Clarify the preferred language of the community.

•

Clarify the level of literacy in the community, assessing whether it is the same for all
segments of the population.

22

•

Clarify whether the community prefers oral or written information transfer, or othermeans that they identify.

•

Identify community expectations related to the proposed project.

•

Conduct a capacity needs assessment for all involved in and affected by the proposed project
or initiative.
•

Assess the community’s familiarity with the concept of FPIC.

•

Identify the community’s needs relevant to an FPIC process.

•

Identify the capacity needs for the community and all other stakeholders relevant to
the proposed project or initiative.

•

Once capacity needs have been assessed, take necessary steps to meet them.

•

Identify existing information-sharing structures for both communities and partners andensure that they are complementary.

•

Determine the most appropriate way to manage sensitive information with the community,
ensuring respect for internationally recognized standards and rights.

•

Provide third party support, including access to legal advice such as a legal consultant of thecommunity’s choosing, to ensure that the positive and negative implications of the proposed
project are shared and understood.

•

Together with the community, define how the FPIC process will be documented, keeping in
mind that a formal written document may not be appropriate for the community’s language
and needs.

“

Since the beginning of this study, it was clearly noticed that the Gunas
interviewed were unaware of the concept of Free, Prior and Informed Consent in theterms by which it is currently known. At first they claimed they had never heard of
it and then they pointed out that the concept was from the wagas [people who are](not Gunas). However, when the concept was translated into their language, they
automatically said with pride: “that is what our authorities in the local congress andthe Guna General Congress are for”. They added that the Gunas are willing to fightwhen the wagas want to impose a project in their communities, on which they have notbeen consulted.

”(Rogeliano Solís, Free, Prior and Informed Consent in Panama: The Guna Case,in the Context of its Autonomy, 2013)23

Reach Consent on Course of Action
Description: It is important to understand that agreement in this context indicates consent within
the community on whether and how they would like to proceed with a proposed project. It is notagreement to the proposed project itself, as it allows for both a way forward with the project and also
an agreement that the project will not move forward at all. Recognition that indigenous peoples havethe right to determine their own development path is critical in either instance. A community may
decide that a proposal meets their development needs, or it may decide that it does not. In either case,
it is their choice to make.
This step can be seen as an end to the FPIC process if the community decides not to move forwardwith any activities. If the community does choose to move forward, it becomes the potential beginningof the project planning phase and a continuation of the FPIC process.
Actions:•

Understand what constitutes consent within the community, including both the process aswell as the actual indicators that consent has been achieved (e.g. show of hands, ballots,
decision among elders, etc.).

•

Document the decision that was made regarding the project, so that all parties have a record.
•

Choose documentation methods that are relevant and useful to all parties. It may benecessary to document the decision in more than one way, for example in both a written
document and a recording of the representative speaking the decision.

•

If the project will be moving forward, work in partnership with the community to determine
the next steps, and move forward with the project planning phase.

•

Conduct periodic review of the agreement with the community throughout the lifecycleof CI’s engagement. The frequency of review should be determined with the community
and modified as needed with the agreement of the parties once the project or program isunderway.

One CI case study focusing on a conservation agreement(CA) in China examines a conservation project basedon mutually agreed terms between the Lizhiba community, theBaishuijiang National Nature Reserve (BNNR) and CI. One of the final
steps in their consent process included conducting “a community conference
attended by representatives from each hamlet. In this conference, therepresentatives from the various hamlets in Lizhiba expressed disagreement withthe terms that the Lizhiba leaders had developed with the BNNR. To resolve thisdifference, confidential votes were held to settle on the benefit package, suchthat the new terms of the agreement reflected the desires of the majority.”(Tian Feng, The Application of Free, Prior and Informed Consent Principles
in Conservation Agreements: Case Study of the Lizhiba Community inSouthwest China)

24

ENSURE ACCOUNTABILITY
By the end of this stage, the user will•

Create a grievance mechanism that incorporates how violations of FPIC will be addressed•

Agree with the community how the project will be monitored to determine when the FPIC
process will need to be re-negotiatedIncorporate FPIC into Grievance Mechanism
Grievance mechanisms are an important component of a project or activity, providing a neededchannel for resolving conflicts and concerns that may arise between the parties involved—in this case,specifically any violations of a community’s right to FPIC. Assuming that the community decides
to proceed with a project or activity, the project’s grievance mechanism must include a component
related to violations of the right to FPIC. For instance, if information is not provided in a language
understood by the community, the community needs a way to address the issue. Since FPIC is an
ongoing cycle that continues throughout the life of CI’s engagement with a community, it must be
incorporated into the project components themselves.
Defined timeframes should accompany each step of a grievance mechanism to ensure that issues are
addressed according to a schedule that suits the community. The overall process relies on accessible
channels, trusted processes and clear steps that the community and other parties understand how
to use. The grievance mechanism should allow for access to a third party mediator when the parties
cannot resolve the conflict themselves.
Actions:•

Identify traditional methods that the community uses to resolve conflicts.

•

Create a culturally appropriate timeline together with the community for addressing
unresolved issues.

•

Determine together with the community the steps needed to resolve a conflict with anoutside entity.

•

Identify together with the community a suitable third party who could mediate if needed.

Monitor and Adapt Commitments
Monitoring a FPIC process is just as important as developing it in the first place. Because both projects
and FPIC processes are dynamic—requiring adjustments as circumstances, opinions or outcomeschange over time—periodic evaluations from the indigenous communities and other stakeholders
ensure that FPIC is respected throughout the life of the project and not merely at one point in time.

25

These FPIC guidelines themselves could provide a solid foundation on which to build a monitoring
protocol together with the participating community.
Periodic feedback from monitoring provides communities and project proponents with the necessary
information to evaluate and adapt commitments at defined points. Such modifications are a naturalpart of an FPIC process, and the ability to adapt both the process and the project should be consideredin the planning phase.
Actions:
Together with the community•

Identify who will lead the evaluation.

•

Determine how often the project will be assessed.

•

Develop a process to address unforeseen changes in the project.

•

Review the monitoring protocol to ensure its validity at an agreed upon time.

In the CI case study focusing on a conservation agreement (CA) in China
between the Lizhiba community, the Baishuijiang National Nature Reserve andCI, monitoring “included annual biodiversity and socioeconomic assessments,
facilitated by Shanshui [a Chinese NGO]. Interviews of community members wereconducted by an independent specialist, and the Lanzhou University team led analysisof the resulting data. . . . The questionnaire used in the socioeconomic assessment
also included questions about what local persons know about the CA, and what they
think about it. This allowed analysis of local perspectives on the CA throughout thecommunity, and also on how perspectives on conservation and natural resourceschanged over time.”(Tian Feng, The Application of Free, Prior and Informed Consent Principles in Conservation
Agreements: Case Study of the Lizhiba Community in Southwest China)

26

Have any of the terms,
outcomes, or impacts of the
project changed?

Incorporate FPIC into
grievance mechanism

YES

Monitor and Adapt

Draft agreement withfull and effective
participation
What constitutes consent? What does
agreement look like?

Renegotiate. If no agreement
can be reached, there can be no
project—even at this stage

NO

YES

Are communities
satisfied with the termsof the project?

Any legal agreement must comply
with other CI policies and or thoseof donors or national governments.

Negotiate terms ofproject

YES

Facilitate outside
expertise forcommunity and build
capacity (as needed)

NO

Does the community
wish to continue?

Ensure exchange of
information

Ensure full andeffective participation

Including vulnerable &excluded groups, such as
women and youth
May require capacity
building and rights-related
education and outreachDevelop process forengagement

YES

No projectNO

In a culturally
appropriate way, in alanguage understood by
the community

Understand local
context

Will the community
consider the project?

Provide information on
project

Understand legal andcustomary rights

Identify and respecttraditional decisionmaking processes

Steps to Ensuring an Effective FPIC Process
27

FPIC FLOWCHART: A VISUAL GUIDENo project

28

CONCLUSION

T

hese guidelines are built upon respect for indigenous peoples’ right to determine their own
development path. They arise from the understanding that respect for these rights and recognitionof indigenous peoples’ traditional knowledge of natural resource management can achieve lasting
human well-being and conservation successes. These positive impacts extend beyond an individual
community to the wider global community. CI has worked in partnership with indigenous peoples
since its founding more than 25 years ago, understanding that the principles behind FPIC are thefoundation for mutually beneficial collaborations.
These guidelines are the next step in the journey to improve CI’s practice further and demonstrate
its commitment to indigenous peoples’ rights. They were developed with advice and feedback fromindigenous peoples and CI staff from around the world. Based on case studies that served as a window
into the diverse ways in which a FPIC process can take shape, these guidelines are specific enoughto offer practical advice, yet general enough so that users can mold them to their own circumstancesand needs. This is a living document that CI hopes will be frequently used and ever evolving as newinternational laws are developed and rights are substantiated.

29Additional FPIC Resources
Asia Indigenous Peoples Pact: Rights in Action: Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) for
Indigenous Peoples (Video), http://vimeo.com/66708050
Asia Indigenous Peoples Pact and International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs: Training manualon Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) in REDD+ for indigenous peoples, http://www.iwgia.
org/publications/search-pubs?publication_id=593
Cultural Survival and Rainforest Foundation: Turning Rights into Reality: Issues to Consider in
Implementing the Right to Free, Prior and Informed Consent, http://www.culturalsurvival.org/
consent
Forest Stewardship Council: Guidelines for the implementation of the right to free, prior and informed
consent (FPIC), https://ic.fsc.org/download.fsc-fpic-guidelines-version-1.a-1243.pdf
Forest Peoples Programme (Resources Page), http://www.forestpeoples.org/guiding-principles/freeprior-and-informed-consent-fpic
Oxfam: Guide to Free Prior and Informed Consent., http://resources.oxfam.org.au/pages/view.
php?ref=528&k=
RECOFTC: Putting Free, Prior, and Informed Consent into Practice in REDD+ Initiatives, http://
www.recoftc.org/site/resources/Putting-Free-Prior-and-Informed-Consent-into-Practice-in-REDDInitiatives.php
UN-REDD Programme: UN-REDD Programme Guidelines on Free, Prior and Informed
Consent (FPIC) (Working Final version), http://www.un-redd.org/Launch_of_FPIC_Guidlines/
tabid/105976/Default.aspx

30

REFERENCES
Batzin, Ramiro. Applying Free, Prior and Informed Consent in the Implementation of REDD+ on
Indigenous Lands and Territories in Guatemala. Arlington, VA: Conservation International,
2013, 1-37. Accessed October 4, 2013. http://www.conservation.org/about/centers_programs/
itpp/Documents/FPIC-Documents/CI_FPIC-Case-Study_Guatemala.pdf.
Campese, Jessica. “Rights-based Approaches to Conservation: An overview of concepts and questions.”
In Rights-based Approaches: Exploring issues and opportunities for conservation, edited by Jessica
Campese, Terry Sunderland, Thomas Greiber, and Gonzalo Oviedo, 2-45. Bogor, Indonesia:
CIFOR and IUCN, 2009.
Conservation International. Rights-based Approach: Indigenous Peoples and CI Policy. Arlington, VA:
Conservation International, 2012.
Convention on Biological Diversity. “Article 8(j).” Accessed September 27, 2013. http://www.cbd.int/
doc/legal/cbd-en.pdf.
Convention on Biological Diversity.“Traditional Knowledge and the Convention on Biological
Diversity.” Accessed October 4, 2013. http://www.cbd.int/traditional/intro.shtml.
Environmental Justice Organisations, Liabilities and Trade (EJOLT). “Customary Rights
and Legal Pluralism.” Accessed September 14, 2013. http://www.ejolt.org/2012/12/
customary-rights-and-legal-pluralism/.
Feiring, Birgitte. Indigenous & Tribal People’s Rights in Practice—A Guide to ILO Convention No.
169. International Labour Standards Department, 2009. Accessed September 20, 2013. http://
www.ilo.org/indigenous/Resources/Guidelinesandmanuals/WCMS_106474/lang--en/index.
htm.
International Labour Organization. “Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention 1989 (No. 169).”
Accessed September 20, 2013. http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_norm/--normes/documents/publication/wcms_100897.pdf.
Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity. Akwé: Kon Voluntary Guidelines for the
Conduct of Cultural, Environmental and Social Impact Assessment regarding Developments
Proposed to Take Place on, or which are Likely to Impact on, Sacred Sites and on Lands and Waters
Traditionally Occupied or Used by Indigenous and Local Communities. Montreal: Secretariat of
the Convention on Biological Diversity, CBD Guidelines Series, 2004. Accessed September 20,
2013. http://www.cbd.int/traditional/guidelines.shtml.

31

Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity. Bonn Guidelines on Access to Genetic Resources
and Fair and Equitable Sharing of the Benefits Arising out of their Utilization. Montreal:
Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, 2002. Accessed September 20, 2013.
http://www.cbd.int/doc/publications/cbd-bonn-gdls-en.pdf.
Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity. Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources
and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization to the Convention
on Biological Diversity. Montreal: Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, 2011.
Accessed September 20, 2013. http://www.cbd.int/abs/doc/protocol/nagoya-protocol-en.pdf.
United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. “United Nations Human Rights.”
Accessed September 13, 2013. http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Pages/WhatareHumanRights.
aspx.
United Nations Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights. ”Frequently Asked Questions
on a Human Rights-based Approach to Development Cooperation.” Accessed October 4, 2013.
http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/FAQen.pdf.
United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (UNPFII). Report of the International
Workshop on Methodologies Regarding Free Prior and Informed Consent. Document
E/C.19/2005/3, endorsed by the UNPFII at its Fourth Session, May 16-17, 2005.
UN-REDD Programme. Guidelines on Free, Prior and Informed Consent. Accessed
September 20, 2013, http://www.unredd.net/index.php?option=com_docman&task=
doc_download&gid=8717&Itemid=53.

32

33

OUR VISION
We imagine a healthy,
prosperous world in whichsocieties are forevercommitted to caring for andvaluing nature, our global
biodiversity, for the long-term
benefit of people and all lifeon Earth.
OUR MISSION
Building upon a strong
foundation of science,
partnership and fielddemonstration, CI empowers
societies to responsibly andsustainably care for nature,
our global biodiversity, for thewell-being of humanity.

conservation.org
2011 Crystal Drive
Suite 500
Arlington, VA 22202 USA+1.703.341-2400