'Indigenous Peoples and Protected Areas: A Collaborative Management Learning Network in Southeast Asia: Project Inception Phase Report Dec 1 2005 - June 30 2006', by Jeremy Ironside and Nang Noon, CMLN Project Coordinators.

Executive Summary

This report traces the development of the Co-Management Learning Network (CMLN) Project during the first 7 months of its existence. The real story is the way the foundations for co-management activities have been laid in each of the seven countries which make up this network. Through 2 regional meetings during this Inception Phase and through ongoing communication the foundation of a network for exchanging experiences and information has also been established.

This report therefore seeks to look at the potential for co-management in each of the seven countries. Through this network the possibility exists to take experiences from other countries for speeding up the learning process and for avoiding mistakes which have already been made and resolved elsewhere. This is an opportune time for this network and for co-management in general. National governments and national park authorities which have traditionally been resistant and suspicious are now piloting co-management approaches. Recent greater acceptance of these approaches at the international policy level are also being felt with several conservation organisations in the region looking at what does conservation mean in the South East Asian context. This report tries to describe the overall environment for implementing co-management in each of the seven pilot sites that make up this network, to understand this potential for change.

The development of this CMLN Project has not been without its problems, largely because it has not had secure funding. This kind of project is obviously a little bit different and doesn’t fit well into conventional funding criteria. However despite this, a large amount of discussion has already taken place about the possibility for implementing co-management with indigenous peoples whose traditional lands are now protected areas. One of the key lessons from the regional exchanges which have taken place during the past 7 months is the similarity of both peoples and issues across the region. The possibilities and processes for resolving grievances and implementing co-management however varies from country to country.

This project therefore has the potential to greatly assist indigenous peoples to find a voice to both safeguard their interests and to productively contribute to the management and protection of their traditional areas. So while this project represents a start in this process of dialogue and exchange, this potential needs to translate into practical examples where both local communities and biodiversity conservation benefit. This report therefore talks about the where, the what and the who will be engaged in this co-management dialogue, but it is the how that really needs to be answered.

These answers will only come from the learning by doing and by exchanging these lessons which is the basis of this learning network. As several examples in this report show, the answer lies in building mutual dialogue between the different actors, but this is not without considerable challenges. So this report describes dealing with the first hurdles in what is likely to be a reasonably long process. The challenge is worth it if we can reach this project’s stated aim of achieving mutually agreeable arrangements where indigenous peoples’ issues are being addressed and overall biodiversity is being sustainably managed and conserved.