Regional Network for Indigenous Peoples (RNIP)
http://www.rnip.org

The central objective of RNIP is to safeguard, restore and protect natural livelihood resources for the sake of poverty alleviation for indigenous people in South East Asia .

This will be pursued through the development and strengthening of a network in South East Asia and the establishment of a Trustfund for direct poverty reduction activities in the livelihood system, support to and development of civil society organizations (CSOs) and activities to influence policies, including policy dialogues.

RNIP will have a main focus on indigenous communities living in moist tropical forest ecosystems, but other ecosystems will be addressed as well.

The following main results are foreseen from RNIP:

• Local communities of indigenous peoples able to support their cultural identity.

• Improved planning and management (sustainable use) of natural livelihood resources (ecosystem management).

• Enhanced property and user rights for indigenous communities.

• Additional cash and in-kind income for local indigenous communities from enhanced productive functions of natural livelihood resources, e.g. from sustainable logging, tourism and fisheries.

• Additional benefits for local indigenous communities in terms of services and products from enhanced functioning natural livelihood resources, e.g. secure supply of clean water, improved soil fertility, protection against flooding and coastal abrasion and breeding grounds for species.

RNIP will build on existing networks in the region of Southeast Asia through CVPED. There are various initiatives in this respect where the two organizations cooperate already. While poverty alleviation is addressed in the joint program, it is not the principal objective. This is a feature of most conservation and environmental management programs worldwide: the potential of using equitable and sustainable resource access and management as a means to directly address poverty in the rural areas has hardly been explored to date. Seen from an opposite angle, the picture also applies to most of the world's leading development organizations. Sincere efforts are undertaken to integrate biodiversity and environmental considerations in development initiatives. But in most cases the visions, policies, knowledge and means fall short to adequately tackle these considerations and thus fail to stop or reverse the degradation of the natural livelihood resources base, which is of paramount importance to effectively alleviate poverty.

It is widely acknowledged that a bridge between sustainable management of natural livelihood resources and poverty alleviation still needs to be built, both in terms of practical and effective intervention strategies and in terms of critical mass of organizations explicitly active in this field. The international networks and partners of the two executing partner organizations submitting this proposal also meet the ever-increasing need to address the poverty conditions in their respective areas of intervention. These observations formed the starting point of the three executing partner organizations to discuss possibilities for collaboration specifically on poverty alleviation from an angle of environment and natural resources.

This intervention strategy aims at safeguarding and restoring the quality of the ecosystems and at improving the availability of products and services derived thereof on a sustainable basis, especially for the benefit of poor indigenous populations in Southeast Asia . Interventions should have a lasting impact on development and poverty alleviation, hence lead to higher income, better health, more food, improved access and benefit sharing, increased security, autonomy and equity, at the same time serving the objective of resource conservation and sustainable use.

From a combined ecosystem and economic point of view, this entails the following type of interventions, or a combination thereof:

• Implementation of the principles of the ecosystem approach with direct benefits for local indigenous communities and maintaining or increasing biodiversity values, especially through improved management of natural livelihood resources. In addition and in view of the future, there will be a need to develop alternative natural resource uses or to develop alternatives that reduce the dependency on natural resources.

• Restoring or improving the quality of degraded ecosystems if this will lead to improved availability of products and services with benefits for poor social groups in the near future. Sometimes, this might require a period of non-intervention, with benefits to be expected only after some time. At these occasions compensation measures need to be installed for poor social groups dependent on these ecosystems, and/or the development of alternatives.

• Improving the efficiency of utilization of natural resources, i.e. more benefits for the same or less pressure.

• Developing alternatives (sources of income, food, etc.), thus reducing the dependency on natural resources.

• Compensating for reduced use of natural resources, i.e. influx of capital or goods from external sources.

• Developing uses of natural resources that are sustainable and yet highly profitable.

• Increasing the proportion of benefits from the use of natural resources for poor social groups (equity aspect).

CSOs have a crucial role to play in direct poverty reduction of indigenous people in Southeast Asia and in influencing policies in relation to indigenous peoples' rights. They often have restricted competencies and means in terms of implementing above mentioned types of interventions. Also, they have a limited say about natural livelihood resources policies, management practices and access to products and goods. Furthermore, Southern CSOs often have a weak access to and voice in international debates and forums.

This intervention strategy aims at capacity strengthening and empowerment of civil society in relation to indigenous people organizations in Southeast Asia , including the international networks of the executing partner organizations, in order to enable them to:

• Adequately tackle the opportunities and causes of environmental problems for more sustainable resource management and improved provision of and access to goods and services derived thereof, and

• To effectively participate in influencing local, national and international policies.

From an analysis of the field situation, of in and external factors influencing the quality of ecosystems and of the availability of products and services derived thereof, CSOs in Southeast Asia have identified, and will continue to identify, policy intervention areas which need to be addressed through the strategy of influencing policies and policy dialogue.

In 2005, the Program Coordinating Unit of RNIP was established: a project director (Mr. Rolando Modina), a research coordinator (Dr. Dante Aquino) and a financial assistant (Ms. Wilda Calapoto) were hired. The first intervision workshop was organized at ISU Cabagan from 18 to 22 April 2005. The steering committee met for the first time in October 2005. A training session, focused on community organizing, was held in Pontianak (West Kalimantan) in November. Eight project proposals were approved in 2005 and funded from the Trustfund.

Official RNIP website: http://www.rnip.org