5 December, 2019

Global indigenous peoples' climate change partnership aims for sustainability

Project development training and tapping resources for support
Global indigenous peoples' climate change partnership aims for sustainability




BONN, Germany – To sustain various climate change programs they have embarked since the last five years, representatives of the Indigenous Peoples' Global Partnership on Climate Change, Forests and Sustainable Development recently trained on how to develop projects and formulate appropriate proposals for support.

The training sought to help enhance capabilities of the partner organizations to effectively develop, manage and implement projects specifically designed with indigenous peoples’ organizations and communities for their “sustainable and self-determined development.”

Participants from 14 member-organizations of the Tebtebba-led Indigenous Peoples' Global Partnership on Climate Change, Forests and Sustainable Development from 11 countries met on July 12-13 in Bonn, Germany to share and learn about “project development.” Climate change adaptation and mitigation, sustainable livelihoods and capacity building within the framework of “Indigenous Peoples’ sustainable self-determined development” (IPSSDD) served as backdrop of the training.
The two-day training was timed during the UNFCCC Subsidiary Bodies’ official sessions from June 2 to 15, during which the members of the Indigenous Peoples’ Global Partnership participated and intervened. (UNFCCC is the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.)

Trainer-facilitator was the global project consultant, Rosario Sapienza of Impact Hub Siracusa and Impact Hub EU Cluster, who encouraged the participants to review the basic elements and requirements of project development. (Impact Hub is a network of people and spaces designed to meet the needs of all social innovators in Sicily.)

“(The first rule is) know thyself,” he said. “You must know your problems and be clear about it.”

Enjoining each participant to actively participate in the training, Sapienza ensured that the discussions was interactive and interesting, also integrating practical inputs aided by illustrated visuals.

And part of the “know thyself” rule, he said, was being clear about the objectives of the training and some assumptions. This, he said, would guide the discussions.

The strength of an organization, Sapienza said, depends on the interaction of three important elements – people, resources and the “how.” The how is the process of transforming these other elements into outcome.

“Any organization must have to position itself as it designs its own project and raise resources,” he said.

As discussion flowed from the basic steps for a good project design, Sapienza facilitated a review with the participants about the “logical framework approach,” which many funding agencies commonly require.

This approach draws a “logical connection” between programming and identified objectives of any project. “When implementing several projects, these should always be logically connected to the over-all program of the organization,” he said.

There are key steps in achieving a logical flow of a good proposal or project design. Sapienza said these include analyses of the problem, objectives and stakeholders; selecting strategy and logical framework matrix; and scheduling activities, input and costs.

After discussing the key elements of a project development proposal, the participants were asked to do a “problem tree analysis.” “Knowing the problem to address in every project from the onset is a very crucial step that guides the whole process in coming up with an effective proposal,”Sapienza pointed.

Divided into four groups, the participants reflected on key issues or concerns of indigenous peoples and later worked together to state these issues through a problem tree analysis.

After the exercise, which some participants described as mind-boggling but stimulating, each group presented its output. The simulated exercise and the problem analysis and realities of each respective community helped enrich the output of each team.

The outputs on the problem tree analysis workshop ranged from the “ambitious” to more focused problems. Among the common recurring and prevailing problems among communities participants identified included land or resource-related issues, poverty and how effective indigenous peoples are in engaging with various processes or programs.

Apart from learning the technical side of preparing a project design, Sapienza reiterated the importance of the problem tree analysis.

“This is the beginning of a journey that guides the development of the essential details of strategies, which address the problems identified,” he said. “These problems are later to be stated as objectives, hence, the logic must start right from identifying the problem.”

To make the project not a “mere conversation,” Sapienza stressed the need for indicators or some sort of parameters that measure the outcome of the project. “Indicators will serve as a way to see how the organization is moving toward achieving its vision,” he said.

Some 20 participants, eight of whom were from the global partnership, joined the training.

Members of the partnership who participated came from the Centre of Research and Development in Upland Areas (CERDA) of Vietnam; Mixe Peoples’ Services (SER-Mixe) of Oaxaca, Mexico; Mainyoito Pastoralist Integrated Development Organization (MPIDO), Kenya; Silingang Dapit sa Sidlakang Mindanao (Sildap), Philippines; Dignite Pygmee (DIPY), Democratic Republic of Congo; Conselho Indigena de Roraima (CIR), Brazil; Federación por la Autodeterminación de los Pueblos Indígenas (FAPI), Paraguay; Centro para la Autonomía y Desarollo de los Pueblos Indígenas (CADPI), Nicaragua; and Tebtebba, also of the Philippines.

Some partners were unable to join the training but other networks like the Asian Indigenous Peoples’ Pact (AIPP) and partners of IWGIA were also invited and participated. (JoAnn Guillao, Tebtebba Quarterly e-Bulletin)