Daily report for 28 October 2025

The Subsidiary Body on Article 8(j) and Other Provisions of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Related to Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLCs) (SB8j) continued its deliberation focusing, in a morning plenary, on: the process to review and update the Voluntary Glossary of Key Terms and Concepts; the provision of advice on traditional knowledge (TK) for the global progress report on implementation of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF); and the recommendations of the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (UNPFII).

Delegates met in contact groups in the afternoon and evening to discuss elements for guidelines related to tasks of the programme of work (PoW) of SB8j. Informal consultations on the modus operandi of SB8j took place in the afternoon.

Process to Review and Update the Voluntary Glossary of Key Terms and Concepts Within the Context of Article 8(j) and Related Provisions of the Convention

The Secretariat introduced the relevant document (CBD/SB8J/1/5).

The INTERNATIONAL INDIGENOUS FORUM ON BIODIVERSITY (IIFB), supported by GUATEMALA, PANAMA, the SOLOMON ISLANDS, SWITZERLAND, CANADA, and others, urged a transparent and participatory process, expressing support for the proposal on the way forward annexed to the document. 

Regarding the composition of the suggested Ad Hoc Technical Expert Group (AHTEG), IIFB requested equal representation of Parties and IPLC representatives and, supported by CANADA, respecting the internal regional nomination processes of the seven sociocultural regions.

IIFB further suggested that, in revising the glossary, the AHTEG take into account the 2023 joint statement by the three UN mechanisms on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the report “Recognition of Indigenous Peoples” of the UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, to ensure a clear distinction between Indigenous Peoples and local communities is reflected in the glossary.

Many Parties, including Zimbabwe for the AFRICAN GROUP, Denmark for the EU, COLOMBIA, AUSTRALIA, MALAYSIA, CANADA, MEXICO, CHILE, the RUSSIAN FEDERATION, and others, supported the glossary’s update and review. The DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO (DRC) said that currently “there is no need, necessity, or urgency” to review and update the glossary given competing priorities. CANADA reminded Parties that the current glossary took 14 years to be adopted. INDONESIA, MALAYSIA, CHINA, EGYPT, and others welcomed the update process, underscoring it must remain Party-led, voluntary, non-prescriptive, and non-binding.

The EU, SWITZERLAND, and NORWAY, agreed to the proposed way forward. BRAZIL and COLOMBIA emphasized the need to recognize the contributions of Afrodescendants as part of the process to revise and update the glossary, in line with Decision 16/6. INDONESIA and CHILE underscored that definitions should use broad and inclusive language, ensuring relevance to various cultural and legislative contexts.

The AFRICAN GROUP noted that convening an AHTEG is unnecessary, as sufficient expertise exists within the Secretariat, and emphasized that the term “IPLCs” should be retained “as one unit,” reminding delegates that the original language in the Convention refers to “Indigenous and local communities.”

The EU stressed that the AHTEG should be able to call upon additional experts if needed and suggested work by electronic means, with one in-person meeting subject to resource availability. Pointing to financial considerations, NORWAY suggested reducing the number of AHTEG members, based on the practice of the Facilitative Working Group of the Local Communities and Indigenous Peoples Platform of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. The RUSSIAN FEDERATION emphasized that the number of observers should not exceed that of Parties and selection should be based on the five UN regions rather than the seven sociocultural ones.

BRAZIL and EGYPT proposed including a peer-review process for the material produced by the AHTEG, before the text is submitted to SB8j 2, ensuring a “truly Party-led process.” The DRC and NAMIBIA requested further clarification on the proposed role, scope, and composition of the AHTEG, particularly on how equitable regional representation, IPLC participation, and gender balance will be ensured.

The CBD WOMEN’S CAUCUS stressed that a glossary that fully integrates gender and human-rights considerations is key to ensuring definitions reflect equity, respect, and the interconnectedness of biological and cultural diversity. The FUND FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES OF LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN suggested convening an AHTEG that is as inclusive as possible.

Acting Co-Chair Daniela Durán González, Colombia, announced that a conference room paper (CRP) will be prepared for consideration by plenary.

Provision of Advice on TK for the Global Report on Collective Progress in the Implementation of the GBF

The Secretariat introduced the relevant documents (CBD/SB8J/1/6 and CBD/SB8J/1/INF2).

IIFB informed delegates that a third edition of the Local Biodiversity Outlooks is under preparation. They stressed that IPLCs have encountered difficulties using the provided templates for case studies and the online reporting tool. They proposed additions to address challenges and barriers on inclusion of TK in the global report of collective progress, including on: facilitating submissions on IPLCs’ TK with their free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) to enhance national biodiversity strategies and action plans (NBSAPs); recognizing other sources of information on TK, innovations, practices, and technologies; and developing and using relevant indicators and including them in the global report.

Denmark, for the EU, supported the draft recommendation and proposed “urging” rather than “encouraging” Parties to enable the full and effective participation of IPLCs in developing NBSAPs and including TK in national reports, and, with the UK, to “welcome” rather than “take note of” the case studies and other information on relevant TK. 

Zimbabwe, for the AFRICAN GROUP, BRAZIL, and others supported the integration of TK into NBSAPs and national policies. The RUSSIAN FEDERATION, INDIA, MALAYSIA, the DRC, and others noted their efforts to include IPLCs in the preparation of NBSAPs and national reports. MALAYSIA and INDONESIA stressed that national monitoring and reporting must continue to be Party-led to ensure effective coordination, data consistency, and coherent implementation.

EGYPT, the COOK ISLANDS, COLOMBIA, BURKINA FASO, INDIA, INDONESIA, BRAZIL, MEXICO, the DRC, CANADA, and NORWAY supported the incorporation of TK in the global report with FPIC. EGYPT stressed that appropriate safeguards are necessary to prevent misappropriation or misuse of TK. INDIA emphasized community autonomy and data sovereignty.

PANAMA urged inclusion of TK in accordance with principles of self-determination and respect for collective rights. COLOMBIA emphasized the need to ensure the rights of Indigenous Peoples, including those in voluntary isolation and initial contact.

EGYPT, the COOK ISLANDS, the DRC, NORWAY, COLOMBIA, and others stressed that the inclusion of TK in the global report requires adequate financial, technical, and capacity-building support, including: translation and culturally appropriate reporting processes; respectful data-governance arrangements; and enhanced regional cooperation to exchange good practices.

BRAZIL and CANADA encouraged Parties and IPLC organizations to provide case studies to inform the global report through culturally appropriate formats. MALAWI called upon utilizing the National Outlook on Indigenous and Local knowledge of Biodiversity, led by the UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, as case studies for the global report.

SOUTH AFRICA called for coherence with work under the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice (SBSTTA), noting that section D of the annotated outline calls for information on provision of means of implementation to IPLCs, women, and youth (SBSTTA/27/L.4).

BRAZIL supported transmitting advice to SBSTTA and to the Subsidiary Body on Implementation to ensure coherence. The RUSSIAN FEDERATION called to clarify the process for transferring recommendations to other subsidiary bodies.

The REGIONAL COORDINATOR OF THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES OF SAN LORENZO urged capacity building, and technical and financial support to facilitate effective reporting and case studies.

The CBD WOMEN’S CAUCUS urged for an informal dialogue among Parties, IPLCs, women, and youth to collect inputs related to TK, including sharing of best practices, challenges, gaps, and solutions. The GLOBAL YOUTH BIODIVERSITY NETWORK called to encourage Parties to report on their actions and challenges in implementing the GBF. 

Acting Co-Chair Durán informed delegates that a CRP will be prepared for consideration by plenary.

Recommendations of the UNPFII

The Secretariat introduced the relevant document (CBD/SB8J/1/7).

On the draft recommendation, the IIFB, supported by GUATEMALA, NORWAY, MEXICO, CHILE, the SOLOMON ISLANDS, and others, suggested: including references to CBD Decisions 15/21 and 16/4; “welcoming” rather than “taking note of” the recommendations emanating from the 23rd and 24th UNPFII sessions; and requesting the Secretariat to convene an expert seminar in relation to Decision 15/21, in collaboration with the UNPFII, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the expert mechanism on the rights of Indigenous Peoples, and representatives of the seven sociocultural regions.

Discussions will continue Wednesday.

Contact Group on Proposed Elements for the Guidelines Related to Tasks 1.1 and 1.2 of the PoW on Article 8(j) and Other Provisions of the CBD Related to IPLCs to 2030

Co-chairs Jennifer Tauli Corpuz (IPLC representative, Asia region) and Sikeade Egbuwalo (Nigeria) based the contact group discussions on a non-paper,  focusing on the annex on the guidelines related to two tasks of the PoW of SB8j on: strengthening legal and policy implementation for GBF Targets 2 (restore 30% of all degraded ecosystems) and 3 (conserve 30% of land, waters, and seas); and the inclusion of traditional lands and resource use in spatial planning processes and environmental impact assessments.

Delegates discussed, among other things: the title of the annex; rationale; objectives; guiding principles; and the section adressing spacial planing processes.

Delegates were unable to agree on: 

• the title of the guidelines, with a set of proposals on whether to include, among others, the use of Indigenous and Traditional Territories and how to refer to area-based conservation;
• recognizing the need for a differentiated protection of Indigenous Peoples in isolation and initial contact;
• whether to list a set of guiding principles or only refer to Section C (considerations for implentation) of the GBF; and
• the title of a section on spatial planning, with bracketed alternative proposals for referring to spatial planning and effective management processes led by IPLCs, or IPLCs’ traditional lands and resource use in spatial planning processes.

Delegates provisionally approved paragraphs addressing the rationale and the objectives with minor amendments, deleting an objective referencing the Akwé: Kon Voluntary Guidelines.

Regarding a paragraph on national efforts to ensure “recognition of traditional lands and resource use in spatial planning and effective management processes, that address land and sea-use change, including those led by or jointly developed with IPLCs,” delegates supported deleting text calling to reflect such efforts in NBASPs. Discussions continued into the evening.

In the Corridors

We are here today to “witness a long-held dream come true,” said Lucy Mulenkei, Friend of the Bureau, African region IPLC representative, during Monday’s deliberations. On the journey toward realizing this dream, delegates spent the day wrestling with the procedural, technical, and occasionally tedious realities of a brand-new subsidiary body. SB8j delegates seemed determined to start on the right foot, with the first readings of the agenda items moving smoothly and steadily; the pace of progress experienced by many as a refreshingly positive atmosphere.

The wide support to proceed with the review and update of the Voluntary Glossary felt like a small but symbolic victory, as clarity and agreed language remain crucial for implementation. Still, a few delegates cautioned that the hardest work lies ahead, especially when a delegate reminded the room that “the current glossary took 14 years to be adopted.” Contact groups held in the afternoon and into the evening “snapped everyone back to political reality,” as significant disagreements over terminology emerged.