<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?><rss xmlns:atom='http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom' xmlns:openSearch='http://a9.com/-/spec/opensearchrss/1.0/' version='2.0'><channel><atom:id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20023578</atom:id><lastBuildDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2008 20:16:58 +0000</lastBuildDate><title>Village Earth Blog</title><description/><link>http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/</link><managingEditor>Village Earth</managingEditor><generator>Blogger</generator><openSearch:totalResults>20</openSearch:totalResults><openSearch:startIndex>1</openSearch:startIndex><openSearch:itemsPerPage>25</openSearch:itemsPerPage><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20023578.post-7112618546897322581</guid><pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2008 23:11:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2008-03-04T12:16:58.095-08:00</atom:updated><category domain='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#'>india</category><category domain='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#'>sustainable development</category><category domain='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#'>appropriate technology</category><category domain='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#'>training</category><category domain='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#'>shipibo</category><category domain='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#'>indigenous</category><category domain='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#'>amazon</category><category domain='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#'>community-based development</category><title>Spring 2008 Online Newsletter</title><description>&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="color: rgb(40, 86, 133); font-family: trebuchet ms; font-size: 8pt;font-family:Verdana,Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:100%;color:#285685;"   &gt;Happy Spring 2008!  Village Earth continues to learn and grow as we expand our efforts as allies with indigenous communities and through our training programs.  Village Earth believes it pays to be small and non-bureaucratic.  This gives us the flexibility to be responsive to the grassroots and the ever-changing nature of the community empowerment process.  Furthermore, our staff is committed to the people and communities we work with and relate to them as partners and friends rather than as experts or managers. This solidarity encourages honest communication and dialog necessary to determine what is working and what is not.  Just look at what we're accomplishing...&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-weight: bold;"&gt;Oil Exploitation will NOT bring "Development"&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/uploaded_images/HoustonMeeting-725544.JPG"&gt;&lt;img style="cursor: pointer;" src="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/uploaded_images/HoustonMeeting-725538.JPG" alt="" border="0" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p class="MsoNormal"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;Besides working with indigenous organizations in the Peruvian Amazon to defend their&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt; territories oil exploitation, Village Earth is working with communities on micro-livelihood projects.&lt;span style=""&gt;  &lt;/span&gt;These projects such as small-scale communal fish farms, women's artisan cooperatives, and a micro-credit program will allow the indigenous communities to take their futures into their own hands.&lt;span style=""&gt;  &lt;/span&gt;For hundreds of years indigenous Amazonians have been at the mercy of large plantation owners, mining, and other extractive industries for any kind of income.&lt;span style=""&gt;  &lt;/span&gt;By working with indigenous communities to create their own business ventures they can be proactive and take control of their own livelihoods in a sustainable manner with the income&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt; and working conditions being controlled by the indigenous peoples themselves.&lt;span style=""&gt;  &lt;/span&gt;The Peruvian government&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt; uses poverty as the excuse to open up the Amazon to oil exploitation as if no sustainable alternative development opportunities exist.&lt;span style=""&gt;  &lt;/span&gt;Yet, oil exploitation will only further impoverish the people of the Amazon as it destroys the natural resources on which they depend.&lt;span style=""&gt;  &lt;/span&gt;By expanding Village Earth's efforts to include more indigenous communities in these micro-livelihood business ventures they can take a stand against the oil&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt; "development" proposed by the government.&lt;span style=""&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p class="MsoNormal"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;Village Earth recently supported and accompanied a Shipibo leader to attend an important oil meeting at the Houston Petroleum Club.&lt;span style=""&gt;  &lt;/span&gt;There, PeruPetro, the state-run oil licensing agency of Peru, was present to try to sell off the remaining 30% of the Amazon rainforest to oil companies.&lt;span style=""&gt;  &lt;/span&gt;Fortunately the presence of the Shipibo leader and the information he was able to give investors&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt; about the risks of investing in oil exploitation in the Amazon helped to turn potential investors away from this very risky investment.&lt;span style=""&gt;  &lt;/span&gt;However, the discourse of PeruPetro continues to be that oil exploitation will bring "development" to the Amazon region.&lt;span style=""&gt;  &lt;/span&gt;After a speech by the Shipibo leader asking the oil companies to stay off indigenous lands, Daniel Saba, President of PeruPetro, said to the group of potential investors to visit the Amazon and see the poverty. He says there is no way the people of the Amazon "want to live like they did in the past" with 66% of the&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt; population in poverty.&lt;span style=""&gt;  &lt;/span&gt;However, in the decades of oil exploitation throughout the Amazon in places like Northern Peru, Ecuador, and Colombia, oil exploitation has brought nothing but severe health problems, environmental devastation, and an influx of new migrants to the Amazon-all with severe consequences for the indigenous peoples who call this region home.&lt;span style=""&gt;  &lt;/span&gt;Children in Northern  Peru have toxic levels of lead and other carcinogens in their blood from an oil-contaminated environment.&lt;span style=""&gt;  &lt;/span&gt;The Camisea pipeline in Southern Peru has ruptured multiple times causing untold&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt; environmental damage.&lt;span style=""&gt;  &lt;/span&gt;As well, the roads and infrastructure built by the oil companies opens up&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt; the Amazon to colonists and logging companies.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p class="MsoNormal"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;&lt;span style=""&gt;Together we can offer alternatives to the unsustainable development offered by the government and corporations, and instead, the people of the Amazon can determine their own futures.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p class="MsoNormal"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;&lt;span style=""&gt;For more information, visit the &lt;a href="http://www.villageearth.org/pages/Projects/Peru/perublog/"&gt;Peru Project Blog&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;h3 style="text-align: left;"&gt;&lt;span&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;Advanced Training Program on Participatory Practices for Sustainable Development at Bidham Chandra Krishi Viswavidyala - Calcutta, India&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;h3 style="text-align: left;"&gt;&lt;a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/uploaded_images/IndiaPPSD-717860.png"&gt;&lt;img style="cursor: pointer;" src="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/uploaded_images/IndiaPPSD-717852.png" alt="" border="0" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;A team from Village Earth and the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) held our flagship course Participatory Practices for Sustainable Development at Bidham Chandra Krishi University in Calcutta, India. January 25th through February 1st, 2008 a group of approximately fifty graduate students attended the seminar jointly organized by IISD and Bidham Chandra Krishi University. The training was well received by the students who all plan to work to support village development across India after they complete their studies.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;&lt;br /&gt;For more information about organizing a specialized training courses for your group or organization, please visit &lt;a href="http://www.colostate.edu/Orgs/IISD/Specialized.html" linktype="undefined" track="on"&gt;International Institute for Sustainable Development&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: trebuchet ms;font-size:130%;" &gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);font-family:trebuchet ms;font-size:8;color:#285685;"   &gt;&lt;span style="font-size:10;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:130%;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-weight: bold;font-family:trebuchet ms;" &gt;Guatemala Scholarship Program&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;h3 style="text-align: left;"&gt;&lt;a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/uploaded_images/image002-732574.jpg"&gt;&lt;img style="cursor: pointer;" src="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/uploaded_images/image002-732554.jpg" alt="" border="0" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h3&gt; &lt;span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);font-family:trebuchet ms;font-size:8;color:#285685;"   &gt;&lt;span style="font-size:10;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;Providing annual $150 scholarships for Xucaneb, Guatemala students (as pictured above) has been a big success.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;            &lt;p  style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);font-family:trebuchet ms;" class="EC_MsoNormal"&gt;&lt;span style="color: rgb(40, 86, 133);font-family:Verdana,Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:8;"  &gt;&lt;span style="font-size:85%;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:10;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;For just $150 a year, a student can pursue a ninth-grade certificate, which hugely increases their opportunity for a job with a future. Book groups and others have each sponsored a student, so that we have been able to provide a total of 50 scholarships since 2003. With that success has come a tremendous word of mouth, such that this year we have double the number of students hoping to participate. Checks to sponsor a student ($150) or smaller checks toward a scholarship can be sent to Village Earth, P.O. Box 797, Fort Collins, CO 80522.&lt;br /&gt;For more information, contact MaryLou Smith at &lt;a href="mailto:mlsmith@aquaengr.com" target="_blank"&gt;mlsmith@aquaengr.com&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/span&gt; &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Verdana,Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14pt;font-family:Verdana,Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:130%;color:#000000;"   &gt;Cambodia Education Project Update&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;                                   &lt;span style="color: rgb(40, 86, 133); font-family: Verdana,Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 8pt;font-family:Verdana,Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:78%;color:#285685;"   &gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);font-size:100%;" &gt;&lt;span style="font-family: trebuchet ms;"&gt;The Cambodia Education Project has expanded, and moved to a new room not far away.  "The staff has increased their capacity, and we have some really dynamic students, who are taking on a lot of initiatves.  The best feeling is showing up and learning what is going on.  By giving them so much control it has a life far beyond what I could have ever provided," said Project Coordinator Drew McDowell. &lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: trebuchet ms;"&gt;To read more, visit the &lt;/span&gt;&lt;a style="font-family: trebuchet ms;" track="on" href="http://villageearth.org/pages/Projects/Cambodia/blog/index.html" linktype="undefined" target="_blank"&gt;Cambodia Project Blog&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-weight: bold;"&gt;Appropriate Technology Library Sale&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;SALE - $100 off March 2008 only!&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The Appropriate Technology (AT) Library is one of the most comprehensive technology resources for anyone working in the field.  The AT Library is full of thousands of small-scale, do-it-yourself technologies on everything from alternative energies to sanitation.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;To purchase your library today, visit the &lt;a href="http://www.villageearth.org/Publications/ATLibrary/index.html" linktype="undefined"&gt;AT Library webpage.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-weight: bold;"&gt;Participatory Practices for Sustainable Development Training Course&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;May 19-30, 2008&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;Colorado State University campus&lt;br /&gt;Fort Collins, CO USA&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;div style="text-align: left;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-style: italic;"&gt;Registration deadline May 2.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Join development practitioners, community leaders, activists, and academics from around the world in this important course.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;             &lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;&lt;br /&gt;For more information visit the &lt;a href="http://www.colostate.edu/Orgs/IISD/" linktype="undefined"&gt;International Institute for Sustainable Development &lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;or contact &lt;a href="mailto:nancy@villageearth.org" linktype="undefined"&gt;nancy@villageearth.org&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:85%;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-weight: bold;"&gt;Upcoming Online Courses&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;h3 style="text-align: left;"&gt;&lt;a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.colostate.edu/Orgs/IISD/Online.html"&gt;&lt;img style="cursor: pointer;" src="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/uploaded_images/IISD_FLOWER_POT_LOGO-712089.png" alt="" border="0" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h3&gt; &lt;span style="font-size:85%;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;Spring Online Courses begin March 21.  Registration ends March 17.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt; &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/div&gt;             &lt;div&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;The following courses will be offered:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;ul&gt;&lt;li style="text-align: left;"&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.colostate.edu/Orgs/IISD/courses/Approaches.html"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;&lt;a linktype="undefined"&gt;Approaches to Community-based Development&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li style="text-align: left;"&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.colostate.edu/Orgs/IISD/courses/Technology.html"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;&lt;a linktype="undefined"&gt;Technology &amp;amp; Community-based Development&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li style="text-align: left;"&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.colostate.edu/Orgs/IISD/courses/Participatory.html"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;&lt;a linktype="undefined"&gt;Participatory Monitoring &amp;amp; Evaluation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li style="text-align: left;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.colostate.edu/Orgs/IISD/courses/Capacity.html" linktype="undefined"&gt;Community Capacity Building&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li style="text-align: left;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.colostate.edu/Orgs/IISD/courses/Mapping.html"&gt;Community-based Mapping&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;div style="text-align: left;"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;For more information about the online certificate program, please visit the &lt;a href="http://www.colostate.edu/Orgs/IISD/Online.html" linktype="undefined"&gt;International Institute for Sustainable Development&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="blogger-post-footer"&gt;News and updates from Village Earth&lt;/div&gt;</description><link>http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/2008/02/spring-2008-online-newsletter.html</link><author>Village Earth2</author></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20023578.post-3255352241848470627</guid><pubDate>Thu, 13 Dec 2007 17:42:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2007-12-13T11:32:57.002-08:00</atom:updated><title>Village Earth Efficiency Indicators</title><description>Why should you donate to Village Earth? With all the different appeals you get from charities throughout the year and especially during the holiday season, it makes it difficult to choose how to make the most impact with your donation. Here's some reasons why we think you should choose Village Earth.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;ol&gt;&lt;li&gt;Rather than simply treating the symptoms of poverty and powerlessness, we engage in a long-term dialog with communities to reveal and transform the underlying, and often inter-generational causes poverty. For Pine Ridge that means helping Lakota families claim more control over their land base. In Peru that has meant helping to create a regional organization of indigenous Shipibo communities to unify their struggle against illegal logging and the contamination of their rivers.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;Rather than focusing on problems impacting communities, we start with a community's long-term vision for the future. If communities only focus on "fixing" problems, they may not actually be transforming the underlying structural contradictions afflicting them. By first clarifying a long-term and shared vision for the future, communities are free to imagine an entirely different future and begin working to create it.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;Village Earth is small and un-bureaucratic. This allows us to be responsive to the bottom-up and flexible to the ever-changing nature of a genuine community development process. Furthermore, our staff is committed to the people and communities they work with and relate to them as partners or allies rather than as experts or managers. This solidarity encourages honest communication and dialog necessary to determine what is working and what is not.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;Because we are small and un-bureaucratic we are able to focus our energy on what's important - our mission. We use our resources efficiently. According to our most recent 990 Report to the IRS, our total income was $164,081.&lt;span style="font-weight: bold;"&gt; Over 87% of that income went directly to support projects&lt;/span&gt;, &lt;span style="font-weight: bold;"&gt;only 10% went to support administration of the organization, and only 4% on fundraising.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Our fundraising efficiency for 2006 &lt;span style="font-size:85%;"&gt;(total dollars raised / total dollars spend on fundraising)&lt;/span&gt; was also high at 92%. That means we spent only 8 cents for every dollar raised. (see graph below)&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div style="text-align: left;"&gt; &lt;a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/uploaded_images/FUnctionalExpenses2006-727320.png"&gt;&lt;img style="cursor: pointer;" src="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/uploaded_images/FUnctionalExpenses2006-727309.png" alt="" border="0" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;&lt;div style="text-align: left;"&gt;Because of what we have accomplished! In 2006 we:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;(Click on the links to see pictures and read more about each accomplishment.)&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&lt;/ol&gt;&lt;ol&gt;&lt;ol&gt;&lt;li&gt;Village Earth’s Adopt-a-Buffalo program expanded with the release of &lt;a href="http://villageearth.org/pages/Projects/Pine_Ridge/pineridgeblog/2007/10/more-bison-delivered-to-pine-ridge.html"&gt;19 more buffalo onto Lakota lands&lt;/a&gt;, which too increased by &lt;a href="http://villageearth.org/pages/Projects/Pine_Ridge/pineridgeblog/2007/03/2120-more-acres-recovered-for-bison-on.html"&gt;1800 and 320&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href="http://villageearth.org/pages/Projects/Pine_Ridge/pineridgeblog/2007/03/2120-more-acres-recovered-for-bison-on.html"&gt; acres&lt;/a&gt;,  not to mention the dozens of  &lt;a href="http://www.villageearth.org/pages/Projects/Pine_Ridge/pineridgeblog/2006/06/adopt-buffalo-campaign-first-bison.html"&gt;off-spring&lt;/a&gt; from previously released herds. To-date this program has helped to restore the plains ecology through sustainable bison restoration— impacting over 7000 acres of reservation lands and returning an important cultural symbol to the Lakota.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;Facilitated the first ever &lt;a href="http://www.villageearth.org/pages/Projects/Peru/perublog/2007/03/first-indigenous-tribunal-of-ucayali.html"&gt;Indigenous Tribunal&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;(regional gathering of indigenous leaders) in the Ucayali Region of the Peruvian Amazon.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;Established a &lt;a href="http://www.villageearth.org/pages/Projects/Guatemala/"&gt;community center&lt;/a&gt; run by local women in Cobán, Guatemala. As well ten Mayan students received scholarships to continue studying, and the Guatemalan project coordinator attended Village Earth’s yearly training course &lt;i&gt;Participatory Practices for  Sustainable Development&lt;/i&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;Helped form the &lt;a href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=ozcakhcab.0.0.zku8c9n6.0&amp;amp;p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.villageearth.org%2Fpages%2FProjects%2FPeru%2Fperublog%2F2007%2F09%2Fnew-indigenous-organization-oddpiap.html&amp;amp;id=preview" target="_blank"&gt;Organization for the Defense and the Development of the Indigenous Peoples of the Peruvian Amazon (ODDPIAP) &lt;/a&gt;and get legal status so they can begin accessing much needed resources and start working for the people;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"&gt;Expanded the  &lt;a href="http://www.villageearth.org/pages/Projects/Purulia/puruliablog/2007/09/india-financing-dreams.html"&gt;women’s microfinance project in Purulia, India&lt;/a&gt; –  more than doubling the amount of women participating to over 160  women!  The women have stopped migrating to the city in search of  work and now have economically-viable ventures within their own  communities.  These women’s micro-finance groups have also now  formed&lt;span style="color: rgb(51, 0, 51);"&gt; Forest Protection Committees that work on creating  eco-friendly livelihood strategies.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;&lt;span style="color: rgb(51, 0, 51);"&gt;We supported a &lt;a href="http://www.villageearth.org/pages/Projects/Peru/perublog/2006/10/organization-of-mothers-craft.html"&gt;Shipibo women's craft cooperatives&lt;/a&gt; with funding from Aid to Artisans and by connecting them with international markets;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;&lt;p class="western" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"&gt;&lt;span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"&gt;&lt;span style="color: rgb(51, 0, 51);"&gt;Trained &lt;a href="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/2007/11/ve-sri-lanka-collaboration.html"&gt;Sri  Lankan governmen&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;a href="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/2007/11/ve-sri-lanka-collaboration.html"&gt;t officers&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/span&gt;to better engage local farmers in  participatory practices as they work to empower local farmer  organizations to take ownership over rural infrastructure  maintenance in an effort to reduce poverty.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;Supported a Shipibo leader, &lt;a href="http://www.villageearth.org/pages/Projects/Peru/perublog/2007/09/shipibo-leader-visits-fort-collins.html"&gt;Limber Gomez&lt;/a&gt;, to attend Village Earth's training course in the states - which he then returned to Peru and replicated the course with community leaders and in local universities.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;Helped launch the new Shipibo website: &lt;a href="http://www.shipibonation.org/"&gt;www.shipibonation.org&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;so they can represent themselves and for ease of communication between the region and the world.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;And using &lt;a href="http://www.villageearth.org/pages/Projects/Peru/perublog/2007/09/community-based-geographic-tech.html"&gt;Geographic Positioning System (GPS) and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) technology, we have worked closely with several communities&lt;/a&gt; to teach them this technology, create maps, use satellite imagery to detect illegal deforestation and cattle ranching on indigenous lands, and assisted in the legal process of demarcating territorial borders.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;Facilitated &lt;a href="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/2007/11/northern-colorado-weekly-writes-expos.html"&gt;community-based film workshops&lt;/a&gt; for Zapara, Kicwa, and &lt;a href="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/2006/02/community-based-planning-with-bora.html"&gt;Bora &lt;/a&gt;communities along Peru's remote Rio Tigre.&lt;/li&gt;&lt;/ol&gt;&lt;/ol&gt;If you would like to support the continuation of this work please contribute today!&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Use our secure Online Payment System.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;form action="https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr" method="post"&gt;&lt;input name="bn" value="PP-DonationsBF" type="hidden"&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;input src="https://www.paypal.com/en_US/i/btn/btn_donateCC_LG.gif" name="submit" alt="Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure!" border="0" type="image"&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;img alt="" src="https://www.paypal.com/en_US/i/scr/pixel.gif" border="0" height="1" width="1" /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/form&gt;Or, Send a Check or Money Order&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Village Earth&lt;br /&gt;PO Box 797&lt;br /&gt;Fort Collins, Co 80522&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Or, pay by credit card over the phone by calling 970-491-5754.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;For international payments we accept Bank Wire Transfers and PayPal. For more information please contact &lt;a href="mailto:info@villageearth.org"&gt;info@villageearth.org&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;div class="blogger-post-footer"&gt;News and updates from Village Earth&lt;/div&gt;</description><link>http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/2007/12/village-earth-efficiency-indicators.html</link><author>Village Earth</author></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20023578.post-944205395555097409</guid><pubDate>Thu, 08 Nov 2007 15:58:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2007-11-08T14:15:43.934-08:00</atom:updated><title>Northern Colorado Weekly Writes Exposé on Village Earth's Work Along Peru's Rio Tigre</title><description>&lt;a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/uploaded_images/coverpict-778902.jpg"&gt;&lt;img style="cursor: pointer;" src="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/uploaded_images/coverpict-778893.jpg" alt="" border="0" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This week's edition of the "&lt;a href="http://www.rmchronicle.com/index.php?option=com_content&amp;amp;task=view&amp;amp;id=1632"&gt;Rocky Mountain Chronicle&lt;/a&gt;" features an exposé on oil exploitation in the remote region of Northern Peru along the Rio Tigre where Village Earth facilitated a &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participatory_video"&gt;community-based film&lt;/a&gt; workshop with Kichwa, Zapara, and Bora communities in the region. The expedition took place over 5 weeks, November through December of 2006. The community-based film workshops, developed by Village Earth, allow entire communities to work together link past, present, and possible futures into a  shared &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narrative"&gt;narrative &lt;/a&gt;with the express purpose of communicating with outsiders to raise awareness and support for their situation while attempting to mitigate the distortion or &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framing_%28social_sciences%29"&gt;framing &lt;/a&gt;of issues by outsiders. The workshop is also designed to allow communities to preserve a degree of opacity that they decide is appropriate. According to &lt;a href="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/Stetson.George.pdf"&gt;Stetson (2007)&lt;/a&gt; "opacity permits a shift in the Western ethno-colonial gaze from a concern for authentic representation of indigeneity to a concern for collective expression and transformation.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The roots of this approach stem from the &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cin%C3%A9ma_v%C3%A9rit%C3%A9"&gt;cinéma-vérité&lt;/a&gt; approach Village Earth utilized in earlier films such as &lt;a href="http://www.villageearth.org/Publications/"&gt;Pine Ridge Session One&lt;/a&gt; (2004) and &lt;a href="http://www.villageearth.org/Publications/"&gt;REZONOMICS&lt;/a&gt; (2005). In these films we attempted to limit our influence on the subject and topic by avoiding elaborate staging, lighting, large-intimidating cameras, and even narration. However, even with these precautions it was difficult to avoid framing the issues from the outside through the selection of subjects and especially while in the editing room. Yet, despite these limitations the power that these films had to giving form to an emerging narrative for issues on the Reservation, especially the growing movement to &lt;a href="http://www.villageearth.org/pages/Projects/Pine_Ridge/index.php"&gt;recover and utilize lands&lt;/a&gt;, was readily apparent. It became clear that film would be a powerful tool, not only to educate outsiders about complex issues but also to &lt;a href="http://www.colostate.edu/Orgs/IISD/mobilization.html"&gt;mobilize communities&lt;/a&gt; for collective action.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Village Earth's believes that western values are not determinative and that all communities have the right to self-determination. This core belief has guided our work with indigenous communities around the world and has allowed us to be allies despite our position as 'outsiders' and with our less than complete understanding of their world-view.  Furthermore, we recognize that leading up the end of the 20th century there emerged a growing crisis for the Western world-view. The crisis of scientific &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positivism"&gt;positivism&lt;/a&gt; brought about scholars such as &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Samuel_Kuhn"&gt;Kuhn &lt;/a&gt;and &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feyerabend"&gt;Feyerabend&lt;/a&gt;, the delegitimazation of &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_imperialism"&gt;cultural imperialism&lt;/a&gt;, the rise of &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_relativism"&gt;cultural relativism&lt;/a&gt;, and the acceptance of the environmental crisis caused by &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globalization"&gt;capitalist globalization&lt;/a&gt; created a paradigm shift for the totalizing &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_narrative"&gt;meta-narratives&lt;/a&gt; of the Western worldview. According to the French Philosopher &lt;a href="http://www.california.com/%7Erathbone/lyopmc.htm"&gt;Jean François Lyotard&lt;/a&gt;, these meta-narratives were the basis of the &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_control_theory"&gt;social bond&lt;/a&gt; for western society, in their absence society is faced with a crisis of &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimation"&gt;legitimacy &lt;/a&gt;especially in how it defines "development". According to the &lt;a href="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/AEscobar2004.pdf"&gt;Arturo Escobar&lt;/a&gt;, "First, &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modernity"&gt;modernity’s &lt;/a&gt;ability to provide solutions to modern problems has been increasingly compromised. In fact, it can be argued that there are no modern solutions to many of today’s problems. This is clearly the case, for instance, with massive displacement and ecological destruction, but also with development’s inability to fulfill its promise of a minimum of well-being for the world’s people... Second, if we accept that what is at stake is the recognition that there are no modern solutions to many of today’s modern problems where are we to look for new insights?"&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In the absence of the meta-narratives of the West (summarized by Escobar by the concept of modernity) we must create new narratives that become the raw material of a new society and a renewed social bond. But for this new society is to be based on equality, reciprocity, and compassion we must exchange the totalizing meta-narratives  of the modern era, based on the on a notion of "Truth" and exchanged and monopolized for past several centuries by the Western States for a more relativistic notion of "truths" and the acceptance of differing world-views. Thus, this is a two part processes for individuals and communities. The first is rejecting the legitimacy of western knowledge as being implicit because of its reference to the Western meta-narrative of &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_positivism"&gt;logical positivism&lt;/a&gt;. The second is creating new, more localized narratives where legitimacy comes from &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflexivity_%28social_theory%29"&gt;self-reflexive&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialogue"&gt;dialogue &lt;/a&gt;and community consensus. According to Lyotard "&lt;span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"&gt;A collectivity that takes narrative as its key form of competence has no need to remember its past. It finds the raw material for its social bond not only in the meaning of the narratives it recounts, but also in the act of reciting them." While this may be a paradigm shift in&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"&gt; western world-view its the basis of the social bond for many indigenous communities who have been able to avoid, for whatever reason, the assimilation and acceptance of western meta-narratives.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"&gt;Another principle that guides our work is the right that communities have to opacity. "For &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89douard_Glissant"&gt;Glissant&lt;/a&gt;,  "opacity boils down to the “irreducible density of the Other,” suggesting that it is not possible to ever fully know, understand, or be the Other. More importantly, Glissant recognizes the inherent violence in appropriations of the Other and warns against the types of&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"&gt; appropriations that are evident in the social sciences and that tend to dominate the Western way of thinking. Western understanding, in this context, is based on transparency, measurement, and reduction. Glissant argues that in the West, “In order to understand you and thus accept you, I have to measure your solidity with the ideal scale of providing me with the grounds to make comparisons and, perhaps, judgments. I have to reduce” (Glissant 1997, 190). Moreover, the seemingly benign act of understanding, from an etymological perspective, constitutes an aggressive act."&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"&gt;(&lt;a href="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/Stetson.George.pdf"&gt;Stetson, 2007&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"&gt;[A] “right to opacity,” which is a right not to appropriated, not to be objectified, not to be essentialized, and not to be understood (too deeply), arguing that is time to give up the “old obsession with discovering what lies at the bottom of natures”. [Glissant] develops a theory of difference that rejects pure... In this sense, opacity acts as an ethic that encourages a shifting of the gaze away from objectifying the other. However, while it leads us away from essentialization or objectification, (&lt;a href="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/Stetson.George.pdf"&gt;Stetson, 2007&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In 2006 Village Earth was invited to facilitate a community-strategic planning session with the Shipibo-Konibo of Peru's Amazon Basin. After a discussion with community members it was agreed to structure the planning around the creation of a shared narrative of drawing from the past, present, and possible futures. &lt;span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;The reasons for this decision were multiple: For one, it was thought that this approach would be more practical since at the end of the workshop they would not only have a plan but a compelling way to share that plan with other's in the community who were not present at the workshop but also to outsiders and potential funding agencies. The other reason was that it was thought this would engage the participants more as they saw their story take shape. We also decided to venture further away from creating films of people to facilitating communities to create their own films and thus have greater control over the framing of the issues, the level of opacity, and the creation of their own narrative.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;The central idea was to create a cohesive narrative of the community, what it was, what it is, and what it could be. By participating in the creation of the community's story, workshop participants take an active role in framing and re-framing a shared narrative of the community and archetypal images. While also framing their own representation(s) for people outside of their community. Simultaneously creating a narrative that is empowering internally to your own community – addressing the role of individual/community agency but also analyzing the structural changes that has limited&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt; personal/community agency and self determination.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;  &lt;p style="margin-bottom: 0in;" align="left" lang="en-US"&gt;&lt;span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;The process of the film workshop has four steps: 1. Identify important defining images/stories from the past, answering the question “who were we and how did we live?” this is accomplished by writing or drawing pictures o&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;n pieces of paper. 2. Identifying important defining images/stories form the present answering the question “who are we and how do we live today?,” 3. Identifying important defining images/stories for the future “how would we like to live and who do we want to become?” The final stage of the workshop is tying together past, present, and future by identifying narrative “threads.” An example might look/sound like this: “In the past our rivers were clean and full of fish (past). Today, because of the oil companies drilling upstream, our rivers our contaminated and there are no more fish (present). However, we plan to organize with other communities along the river to make our voices be heard and let the world know about what these companies are doing (future).” (See below)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p style="margin-bottom: 0in;" align="left" lang="en-US"&gt;&lt;a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/uploaded_images/Film_Workshop_Methods-779327.png"&gt;&lt;img style="cursor: pointer;" src="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/uploaded_images/Film_Workshop_Methods-779318.png" alt="" border="0" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:85%;"&gt;(Above: The Creation of Narrative Threads)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;p style="margin-bottom: 0in;" align="left" lang="en-US"&gt;&lt;span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;Once the group has come to consensus on the most important threads, the next step is creating a storyboard. We accomplish this by having the workshop participants break into groups, one for each thread. We then give a brief exp&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;lanation of “shots” and “scenes.” Scenes are collections of individual shots that tell a story. A particular thread might contain several scenes. For example, to tell the story of river contamination you might want to have a scene explaining how children get sick from swimming in the river. This scene might have several shots – children swimming, a sick child, an interview with a doctor, or whatever the participants believe will tell the story best. Once they are satisfied with their scenes they create a “shot list,&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:100%;"&gt;” basically a list of of their shots, where they will do them, and who will be responsible to get it done. Finally we give a brief explanation of how to use the cameras and then let them go out with their teams to start working on their lists. Each night we would collect the footage, digitize it and work with each team to edit together their scenes (below).&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p style="margin-bottom: 0in;" align="left" lang="en-US"&gt;&lt;a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.villageearth.org/pages/Projects/Peru/perublog/uploaded_images/DSC_1368-777609.JPG"&gt;&lt;img style="cursor: pointer; width: 400px;" src="http://www.villageearth.org/pages/Projects/Peru/perublog/uploaded_images/DSC_1368-777609.JPG" alt="" border="0" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-size:85%;"&gt;Photo: Ralf Kracke-Berndorff&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p style="margin-bottom: 0in;" align="left" lang="en-US"&gt;The final evening of the workshop was the film premiere of the Shipibo's new, completely participatory, documentary which they decided to title &lt;span style="font-style: italic;"&gt;Paromea Ronin Bakebo, &lt;/span&gt;which is Shipibo for &lt;span style="font-style: italic;"&gt;The Children of the Anaconda&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="font-style: italic;"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;. Many people from the community showed up and there was quite a buzz throughout the village about Village Earth and the film. This was very exciting for everybody involved. The film premiere was amazing. As one American observer remarked, "It was like the Shipibo Academy Awards." After many long speeches, songs, and special recognitions, the film was projected onto a make-shift screen in the community hall for all the people to see. Everyone was very happy with the film and the children were so excited to see themselves on the big screen.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p style="margin-bottom: 0in;" align="left" lang="en-US"&gt;The impact of the film was readily apparent. According to one participant, "Working on our Cosmovision has brought us together and gave us an opportunity to keep the dreams of all the particpants' families with us." Stetson writes, "in the video the Shipibo express themselves in terms of the possibility of re-living or re-making Shipibo culture (via language, traditional medicine, pottery, dress, reciprocity, sharing, and community integration). The film also reveals practical and material needs such that the interests in getting micro-projects funded&lt;br /&gt;reflects the reality of being indigenous in a modern world. As mentioned, the video deals with the real structural constraints that both individuals and communities face. However, to look at the Shipibo only in these terms would be a mistake. The workshop participants, in Children of the Anaconda, framed Shipibo culture in terms of the past, present, and future. The past is dignified, beautiful, and even romantic; the present is a crisis, economically, environmentally, and culturally; but the future is potentially bright, given the potential to re-live and re-new Shipibo culture, of course, with the help from, and relation, to the world."&lt;/p&gt;&lt;br /&gt;For more information about Village Earth's community film projects, facilitation or training in this approach contact &lt;a href="mailto:ralf@villageearth.org"&gt;Ralf Kracke-Berndorff&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;div class="blogger-post-footer"&gt;News and updates from Village Earth&lt;/div&gt;</description><link>http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/2007/11/northern-colorado-weekly-writes-expos.html</link><author>Village Earth</author></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20023578.post-7796772533694679206</guid><pubDate>Fri, 02 Nov 2007 23:30:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2007-11-03T15:45:09.900-07:00</atom:updated><category domain='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#'>training</category><category domain='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#'>Sri Lanka</category><category domain='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#'>common property resource</category><title>VE - Sri Lanka Collaboration</title><description>Village Earth recently concluded a two-week training/consultation with key officers from the Supporting Infrastructure Maintenance to Reduce Rural Poverty (SIMRRP) project team of the Government of Sri Lanka. The SIMRRP project team came to Village Earth with the request to learn techniques to better engage the local farmer organizations with whom they work.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;a href="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/uploaded_images/DSCN0446-727452.JPG"&gt;&lt;img style="CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/uploaded_images/DSCN0446-727026.JPG" border="0" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;"We want to go to the villages and discuss what we have learned with the farmers. This training is very useful for how we can engage with the farmers."&lt;br /&gt;- Technical Officer, SIMRRP&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;Village Earth facilitated workshops on Community Mobilization, Common Property Resource Organizations, etc. as a way for the farmer organizations to take ownership over the rural infrastructure and sustainably maintain it. Village Earth also took the SIMRRP project team on a site visit of the North Poudre Irrigation Co. to see the world-class irrigation organization in Northern Colorado, so SIMRRP could take what they learned here and apply it to their system in Sri Lanka. &lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;a href="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/uploaded_images/DSCN0452-717431.JPG"&gt;&lt;img style="CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/uploaded_images/DSCN0452-717017.JPG" border="0" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;Above: Key Village Earth training staff and SIMRRP project team.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;If you are interested in Village Earth's specialized training programs or consultations, contact: &lt;a href="mailto:info@villageearth.org"&gt;info@villageearth.org&lt;/a&gt; or +1-970-491-5754&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;For more information about our training programs, visit our training partner: &lt;a href="http://www.colostate.edu/Orgs/IISD/"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#3366ff;"&gt;International Institute for Sustainable Development&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt; at Colorado State University.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="blogger-post-footer"&gt;News and updates from Village Earth&lt;/div&gt;</description><link>http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/2007/11/ve-sri-lanka-collaboration.html</link><author>Village Earth2</author></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20023578.post-7331842011628978173</guid><pubDate>Fri, 28 Sep 2007 20:28:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2007-09-28T14:26:07.756-07:00</atom:updated><title>State of the Village Report</title><description>&lt;a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/uploaded_images/popvillage-748214.jpg"&gt;&lt;img style="cursor: pointer;" src="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/uploaded_images/popvillage-748205.jpg" alt="" border="0" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;div class="blogger-post-footer"&gt;News and updates from Village Earth&lt;/div&gt;</description><link>http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/2007/09/state-of-village-report.html</link><author>Village Earth2</author></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20023578.post-988969309589848114</guid><pubDate>Fri, 21 Sep 2007 20:02:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2007-10-14T13:22:31.866-07:00</atom:updated><category domain='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#'>india</category><category domain='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#'>sustainable development</category><category domain='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#'>appropriate technology</category><category domain='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#'>training</category><category domain='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#'>shipibo</category><category domain='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#'>indigenous</category><category domain='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#'>guatemala</category><category domain='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#'>amazon</category><category domain='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#'>community-based development</category><category domain='http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#'>pine ridge reservation</category><title>Fall 2007 Online Newsletter</title><description>We are pleased to inform you of this summer's accomplishments, which were only possible with your support. Thank you! &lt;div&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;strong&gt;New Indigenous Organization&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;During the Indigenous Tribunal this past June, Shipibo leaders from throughout the Ucayali region of the Peruvian Amazon decided to form a grassroots development organization. The new Organization for the Defense and Development of the Indigenous Peoples of the Peruvian Amazon, or ODDPIAP (as they call it), will work to bridge the gap between the poorly represented indigenous peoples and the government as they work to defend their territories and provide development assistance.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;a href="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/uploaded_images/Juan-766223-714424.jpg"&gt;&lt;img style="WIDTH: 243px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 302px" height="320" alt="" src="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/uploaded_images/Juan-766223-714420.jpg" width="247" border="0" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div&gt;Above: The newly elected President of ODDPIAP.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Village Earth is currently working with the democratically-elected leadership to build the capacity of and support for ODDPIAP. We are also working together to raise the funds necessary to legalize ODDPIAP so that it can be officially recognized by the Peruvian government. The leaders of ODDPIAP are busy planning workshops throughout the region to mobilize students and community leaders to work together, and they are already preparing for the next Indigenous Tribunal to be held January 2008. Village Earth will continue to ally with ODDPIAP in their struggle for the self-determination of the indigenous peoples of the Peruvian Amazon. &lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;For more information, visit the &lt;a href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=rdgflecab.0.0.zku8c9n6.0&amp;amp;ts=S0276&amp;amp;p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.villageearth.org%2Fpages%2FProjects%2FPeru%2Fperublog%2F2007%2F09%2Fnew-indigenous-organization-oddpiap.html&amp;amp;id=preview"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#3366ff;"&gt;Project Blog&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt; or contact the project coordinator, &lt;a href="mailto:kristina@villageearth.org"&gt;Kristina Pearson&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="mailto:kristina@villageearth.org"&gt;kristina@villageearth.org&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Appropriate Technology Grants Program &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;a href="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/uploaded_images/97-755266.jpg"&gt;&lt;img style="CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/uploaded_images/97-755263.jpg" border="0" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The &lt;a href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=rdgflecab.0.0.zku8c9n6.0&amp;amp;ts=S0276&amp;amp;p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.villageearth.org%2Fpages%2FAppropriate_Technology%2Findex.php&amp;amp;id=preview"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#3366ff;"&gt;Appropriate Technology Library&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt; now has a new discount pricing scale for low-income organizations. For more information, check out the new &lt;a href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=rdgflecab.0.0.zku8c9n6.0&amp;amp;ts=S0276&amp;amp;p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.villageearth.org%2FPublications%2FATLibrary%2FGrants.html&amp;amp;id=preview"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#3366ff;"&gt;Appropriate Technology Grants Program&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;strong&gt;VE Training Empowers Global Leadership&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div&gt;Village Earth and the &lt;a href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=rdgflecab.0.0.zku8c9n6.0&amp;amp;ts=S0276&amp;amp;p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.colostate.edu%2FOrgs%2FIISD%2Fhome.html&amp;amp;id=preview"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#3366ff;"&gt;International Institute for Sustainable Development&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt; recently pulled off another successful &lt;a href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=rdgflecab.0.0.zku8c9n6.0&amp;amp;ts=S0276&amp;amp;p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.colostate.edu%2FOrgs%2FIISD%2Foncampus.html&amp;amp;id=preview"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#3366ff;"&gt;Participatory Practices for Sustainable Development training&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt; course, August 6-17, 2007. Participants came from all around the world including Sudan, USA, UK, Kenya, Guatemala, Peru and Americans working in Southeast Asia and Africa - in all their diversity to contribute to a dialogue about participatory community-based development.&lt;a href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=rdgflecab.0.0.zku8c9n6.0&amp;amp;ts=S0276&amp;amp;p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.villageearth.org%2F&amp;amp;id=preview"&gt; &lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;a href="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/uploaded_images/101-767692.jpg"&gt;&lt;img style="WIDTH: 277px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 137px" height="150" alt="" src="http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/uploaded_images/101-767689.jpg" width="290" border="0" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div&gt;Above: Training participants on tour at a local organic farm.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div&gt;Participants learned the theory behind the &lt;a href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=rdgflecab.0.0.zku8c9n6.0&amp;amp;ts=S0276&amp;amp;p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.villageearth.org%2Fpages%2FAbout_Us%2Fphilosophy.htm&amp;amp;id=preview"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#3366ff;"&gt;Village Earth Approach&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt; and how it is constantly refined through action and reflection as the Approach is put into practice in the field. One highlight of the training included the participation of &lt;a href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=rdgflecab.0.0.zku8c9n6.0&amp;amp;ts=S0276&amp;amp;p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.villageearth.org%2Fpages%2FProjects%2FPeru%2Fperublog%2F2007%2F09%2Fshipibo-leader-visits-fort-collins.html&amp;amp;id=preview"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#3366ff;"&gt;Limber Gomez from Peru&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=rdgflecab.0.0.zku8c9n6.0&amp;amp;ts=S0276&amp;amp;p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.villageearth.org%2Fpages%2FProjects%2FGuatemala%2Fblog%2F2007%2F09%2Fheres-photo-of-us-adriana-lazaro-and.html&amp;amp;id=preview"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#3366ff;"&gt;Adriana Lazaro from Guatemala&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt;, two Village Earth project partners, who contributed their perspectives and experiences as "internal activators" within Village Earth-sponsored activities and illustrated the effectiveness of the Approach as applied in their communities. The two-week workshop also included lively discussions about the importance of &lt;a href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=rdgflecab.0.0.zku8c9n6.0&amp;amp;ts=S0276&amp;amp;p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.villageearth.org%2Fpages%2FAppropriate_Technology%2F&amp;amp;id=preview"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#3366ff;"&gt;Appropriate Technology&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt; to building sustainable communities, the role of Monitoring and Evaluation, and a new section of the course focusing on non-governmental organization (NGO)-Community dynamics. &lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div&gt;The group also decided to form a global network of development practitioners as the focus of the strategic planning session part of the workshop. Far from seeing themselves as competing NGOs, participants saw the need to pool their resources in a common task of building a dynamic network where expertise could be shared globally.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;We are very grateful for the level of wisdom and experience that each participant brought to the training that helped to make this course a truly consciousness-raising experience. &lt;a href="https://www.paypal.com/cgibin/webscr?first_name=Diane&amp;amp;last_name=Carr&amp;amp;undefined_quantity=1&amp;amp;business=csvbd@villageearth.org&amp;amp;image_url=&amp;amp;return=&amp;amp;cancel_return=&amp;amp;item_name=Training%20Sponsorship&amp;amp;amount=0&amp;amp;shipping=0&amp;amp;currency_code=USD&amp;amp;item_number=&amp;amp;cmd=_xclick"&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div&gt;For more information, please contact: &lt;a href="mailto:info@villageearth.org"&gt;info@villageearth.org&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Village Earth Partners with the Indian Land Tenure Foundation to do Strategic Land Planning on the Pine Ridge Reservation&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;Village Earth is now accepting applications from allottees who own undivided interests on the same allotment(s) on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation to do land planning workshops. For more information, visit the &lt;a href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=rdgflecab.0.0.zku8c9n6.0&amp;amp;ts=S0276&amp;amp;p=http%3A%2F%2Fvillageearth.org%2Fpages%2FProjects%2FPine_Ridge%2Fpineridgeblog%2F2007%2F09%2Fvillage-earth-partners-with-indian-land.html&amp;amp;id=preview"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#3366ff;"&gt;Pine Ridge Project Blog&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt; Contact: &lt;a href="mailto:david@villageearth.org"&gt;David Bartecchi&lt;/a&gt; - david@villageearth.org, 970-491-5754 &lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Village Earth Founders Recently Returned from West Bengal, India&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;Drs. Maurice Albertson and Ed Shinn visited Milan Dinda and the Purulia project team on their way home from teaching at Trisakti University in Indonesia. They hope to return soon and hold a Village Earth training program with students from the agricultural university in Calcutta. For more information, visit the &lt;a href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=rdgflecab.0.0.zku8c9n6.0&amp;amp;ts=S0276&amp;amp;p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.villageearth.org%2Fpages%2FProjects%2FPurulia%2Fpuruliablog%2F&amp;amp;id=preview"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#3366ff;"&gt;Purulia Project Blog&lt;/span&gt;.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;strong&gt;New Guatemala Project Website and Blog&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;Adriana Lazaro, coordinator for the Village Earth Guatemala project, recently attended the &lt;a href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=rdgflecab.0.0.zku8c9n6.0&amp;amp;ts=S0276&amp;amp;p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.colostate.edu%2FOrgs%2FIISD%2Foncampus.html&amp;amp;id=preview"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#3366ff;"&gt;Participatory Practices for Sustainable Development Training&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt; Course in Fort Collins, CO. Check out the new &lt;a href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=rdgflecab.0.0.zku8c9n6.0&amp;amp;ts=S0276&amp;amp;p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.villageearth.org%2Fpages%2FProjects%2FGuatemala%2F&amp;amp;id=preview"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#3366ff;"&gt;website&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?t=rdgflecab.0.0.zku8c9n6.0&amp;amp;ts=S0276&amp;amp;p=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.villageearth.org%2Fpages%2FProjects%2FGuatemala%2Fblog%2Fblog.html&amp;amp;id=preview"&gt;&lt;span style="color:#3366ff;"&gt;Guatemala Project Blog&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt;. We look forward to keeping you updated as our projects progress. &lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div&gt;And we would love to hear from you - we welcome comments, questions, and feedback to our newsletter editorial board. You can reach us at: &lt;a href="mailto:editor@villageearth.org"&gt;editor@villageearth.org&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;Sincerely,&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;The Village Earth Team&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="blogger-post-footer"&gt;News and updates from Village Earth&lt;/div&gt;</description><link>http://villageearth.org/VE_BLOG/2007/10/fall-2007-online-newsletter.html</link><author>Village Earth2</author></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20023578.post-7442794303509697985</guid><pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2007 03:19:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2007-09-13T20:22:50.138-07:00</atom:updated><title>UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY ADOPTS DECLARATION ON RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES;</title><description>&lt;span&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;‘MAJOR STEP FORWARD’ TOWARDS HUMAN RIGHTS FOR ALL, SAYS PRESIDENT&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Vote:  143 – 4 ( Australia, Canada, New Zealand, United States) -– 11;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;The General Assembly today overwhelmingly backed protections for the human rights of indigenous peoples, adopting a landmark declaration that brought to an end nearly 25 years of contentious negotiations over the rights of native people to protect their lands and resources, and to maintain their unique cultures and traditions.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;By a vote of 143 in favour to 4 against (Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States), with 11 abstentions, the Assembly adopted the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which sets out the individual and collective rights of the world’s 370 million native peoples, calls for the maintenance and strengthening of their cultural identities, and emphasizes their right to pursue development in keeping with their own needs and aspirations.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;A non-binding text, the Declaration states that native peoples have the right “to the recognition, observance and enforcement of treaties” concluded with States or their successors.  It also prohibits discrimination against indigenous peoples and promotes their full and effective participation in all matters that concern them.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;The Human Rights Council adopted the Declaration in June 2006, over the objections of some Member States with sizeable indigenous populations.  The Assembly deferred consideration of the text late last year at the behest of African countries, which raised objections about language on self-determination and the definition of “indigenous” people.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;“The importance of this document for indigenous peoples and, more broadly, for the human rights agenda, cannot be underestimated,” said General Assembly President Sheikha Haya Rashed Al Khalifa in a statement delivered by Assembly Vice-President, Aminu Bashir Wali of Nigeria.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;She warned that, even with the progress achieved by events such as the 1995 first United Nations International Decade of the World’s Indigenous Peoples and the beginning of the Second International Decade last year, native peoples still faced marginalisation, extreme poverty and other human rights violations.  They were often dragged into conflicts and land disputes that threatened their way of life and very survival; and, suffered from a lack of access to health care and education.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;“I am acutely aware that the Declaration is the product of over two decades of negotiations,” she said, and stressed that, by adopting the Declaration, the Assembly was also taking another major step forward towards the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all.  It was also actively demonstrating the General Assembly’s important role in setting international standards.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Countries voting against the Declaration said they could not support it because of concerns over provisions on self-determination, land and resources rights and, among others, language giving indigenous peoples a right of veto over national legislation and State management of resources.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Speaking in explanation of vote before the text was adopted, Canada's representative said that, unfortunately, the provisions in the Declaration on lands, territories and resources were overly broad, unclear, and capable of a wide variety of interpretations, discounting the need to recognize a range of rights over land and possibly putting into question matters that have been settled by treaty.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;The representative of the United States said that it was disappointing that the Human Rights Council had not responded to his country’s calls, in partnership with Council members, for States to undertake further work to generate a consensus text.  The Declaration had been adopted by the Council in a splintered vote “…and risked endless conflicting interpretations and debate about its application, as already evidenced by the numerous complex interpretive statements issued by States at its adoption at the Human Rights Council, and the United States could not lend its support to such a text”.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Australia’s representative said his Government had long expressed its dissatisfaction with the references to self-determination in the text.  Self-determination applied to situations of decolonization and the break-up of States into smaller states with clearly defined population groups.  It also applied where a particular group with a defined territory was disenfranchised and was denied political or civil rights.  Australia supported and encouraged the full engagement of indigenous peoples in the democratic decision-making process, but did not support a concept that could be construed as encouraging action that would impair, even in part, the territorial and political integrity of a State with a system of democratic representative Government.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;In an informal meeting following adoption of the text, Victoria Tauli-Corpuz, Chair of the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, said:  “This day will forever be etched in our memories as a significant gain in our peoples’ long struggle for our rights as distinct peoples and cultures.”  While she respected the interpretive statements made by Member States, indigenous people believed the significance and implications of the Declaration should not be minimized in any way.  That would amount to discrimination.  “For us, the correct way to interpret the Declaration is to read it in its entirety or in a holistic manner and to relate it with existing international law,” she said.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;She said that effective implementation of the Declaration would test the commitment of States and the whole international community to protect, respect and fulfil indigenous peoples’ collective and individual human rights.  “I call on Governments, the UN system, indigenous peoples and civil society at large to rise to the historic task before us and make the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples a living document for the common future of humanity,” she concluded.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Les Malezer, Chairperson of the Global Indigenous Caucus, said that, with the adoption of the Declaration, the United Nations and indigenous people had found common ground.  The text did not represent the sole viewpoint of the United Nations, nor did it represent the viewpoint of all the world’s indigenous people.  It was based on mutual respect.  It contained no new provisions of human rights.  It was based on rights that had been approved by the United Nations system but which had somehow, over the years, been denied to indigenous peoples.  It was a framework for States to protect and promote the rights of indigenous people without exclusion or discrimination.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;In other business today, the Assembly adopted without a vote, a resolution on the zone of peace and cooperation in the South Atlantic.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;It also adopted a text by which it would include an item on the agenda of its upcoming sixty-second session on “the prevention of armed conflict”.  It also decided to defer consideration of the first annual report of the Pecebuilding Commission and include it on the draft agenda of the sixty-second session.  In a related decision, the Assembly, acting on the recommendations of the Secretary-General, deferred to its sixty-second session consideration of the report of the Peacebuilding Fund.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;The Assembly also approved a draft decision contained in paragraph 14 of the report of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Assistance and Support to Victims of Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (document A/61/1044).  By that action, the Assembly decided to defer the convening of a substantive session of the Ad Hoc Open-Ended Working Group to its sixty-second session.  It also requested the Working Group to meet from 3 to 7 December to submit a report on its work to the Assembly at the sixty-second session.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;The Assembly began its work today on a sombre note, holding a moment of silence in tribute to the memory of Angie Elisabeth Brooks, President of the Assembly’s twenty-fourth session, and Gaston Thorn, President of the Assembly’s thirteenth session, both recently deceased.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Assembly President Sheika Haya said that Ms. Brooks-Randolph had been the first Associate Justice of Liberia and had a distinguished career in Government administration, legal education and the promotion of gender equality.  In 1969, she became the first African woman to be elected President of the Assembly.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;She said that Mr. Gaston had a long and prominent career as a politician and businessman of Luxembourg and had also served as Chairman of the European Commission from 1981 to 1985.  “Ms. Brooks-Randolph and Mr. Thorn played an outstanding role in this Organization and made a major contribution towards the achievement of the objectives of the Charter of the United Nations,” she said.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Paying tribute were the representatives of Zimbabwe (on behalf of the African Group), Philippines (on behalf of the Asian States Group), Montenegro (on behalf of the Eastern European States Group), Paraguay (on behalf of the Group of Latin American and Caribbean States), Switzerland (on behalf of the Western European and Other States Group), Liberia and Luxembourg.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;The representatives of Peru introduced the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Speaking in explanation of vote before the vote were the representatives of New Zealand, Russian Federation, Benin and Colombia.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Speaking in explanation of position after the vote were the representatives of Argentina, Japan, Chile, Norway, Bangladesh, Jordan, Mexico, Liechtenstein, Republic of Korea, Sweden, Thailand, Brazil, Guyana, Suriname, Iran, India, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Indonesia, Pakistan, Paraguay, Slovakia, Turkey, Philippines, Nigeria, Cuba, Montenegro and Egypt.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Making a general statement after the vote was the Foreign Minster of Bolivia.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;The representatives of Portugal (on behalf of the European Union), Guatemala, Finland, Ecuador, Costa Rica and France also spoke.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;The representative of Angola introduced the resolution on the zone of peace and cooperation of the South Atlantic.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;The representative of the United States spoke in explanation of vote before action on that text, and the representative of the United Kingdom spoke after the vote.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;The Assembly will meet again at a time to be announced.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Background&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;The General Assembly met this morning to pay tribute to the memory of Angie Elisabeth Brooks, President of the Assembly’s twenty-fourth session, and Gaston Thorn, President of the Assembly’s thirteenth session, both recently deceased.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;The Assembly was also expected to take action on draft resolutions concerning the prevention of armed conflict (document A/61/L.68), zone of peace and cooperation of the South Atlantic (document A/61/L.66), and the report of the Human Rights Council, which included a draft resolution on a Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (document A/61/L.67).&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Also before the Assembly for action were the first report of the United Nations Peacebuilding Commission (document A/61/1035), the report of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Assistance and Support to Victims of Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (document A/61/1044), and the report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Peacebuilding Fund (document A/61/1042).&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Introduction and Action on Draft Resolutions&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;The Assembly adopted without a vote, the resolution on the prevention of armed conflict (document A/61/L.68).&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Following that action, ISMAEL GASPAR MARTINS (Angola), chair of the permanent committee on the zone, introduced the draft resolution on zone of peace and cooperation of the South Atlantic (document A/61/L.66), saying more than 20 years ago, the United Nations had declared the South Atlantic a zone of peace and cooperation among its members.  Today, the zone was an effective interregional mechanism for cooperation in the areas of development, peace and security among its 24 member States.  Among others, in the area of crime prevention and combating drug trafficking and the illicit trade in small arms, including piracy, the members of the zone were committed to cooperate, among others, for the full implementation of the relevant United Nations programmes of action and ensuring the exchange of information, experiences and lessons learned related to the reinforcement of boarder security, arms control policies and systems.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Before action was taken ROBERT HAGEN ( United States) said that Angola’s efforts in sponsoring the resolution were to be commended.  Nevertheless, the United States would disassociate itself from the text, or abstain from a vote if there was a vote, because of the belief that internationally recognized zones of peace should be created through multilateral regional forums, rather than by United Nations resolutions.  It also had concerns about the texts’ reference to marine genetic resources in areas beyond national jurisdiction.  Further, the United States did not give legally binding non-use assurances to States within a zone unless its ships and aircraft may pass through the zone without having to declare whether or not they were carrying nuclear weapons.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;The Assembly adopted the text without vote.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;After action, KAREN PIERCE ( United Kingdom) said that her delegation welcomed continuing cooperation between States in the zone of peace and cooperation of the South Atlantic.  However, with reference to the Luanda Declaration issued by those States, the United Kingdom would reiterate its position on the issue of the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands.  The United Kingdom’s position was well known and had last been set out by British Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry in a letter to the Secretary-General on 15 January.  The United Kingdom had no doubts about its sovereignty over the Falkland Islands.  There could be no negotiations on the sovereignty of those Islands unless and until the Islanders so wished.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Next, acting on the recommendation of the Acting Chair of the United Nations Peacebuilding Commission, the Assembly decided to defer consideration of the year-old body’s annual report, issued as document A/62/1035, and include it on the draft agenda of the Assembly’s upcoming sixty-second session.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Following that decision, the Assembly approved a draft decision contained in paragraph 14 of the report of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Assistance and Support to Victims of Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (document A/61/1044).&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;By that action, the Assembly decided to defer the convening of a substantive session of the Ad Hoc Open-Ended Working Group to its sixty-second session.  It also requested the Working Group to meet from 3 to 7 December to submit a report on its work to the Assembly at the sixty-second session.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Acting on the recommendations of the Secretary-General, the Assembly then decided to defer to its sixty-second session consideration of the report of the United Nations Peacebuilding Fund (document A/62/137).&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Introducing the text on the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (A/61/L.67), LUIS ENRIQUE CHAVEZ BASAGOITIA ( Peru), noting that indigenous peoples were among the most vulnerable, noted that the process had begun in 1982.  Thirteen years later, a preliminary text had been submitted to the former Human Rights Commission.  In 1995, the draft had been put to a group of the Commission.  For the first time, representatives of indigenous peoples had taken part in work on the text, giving legitimacy to the text.  During recent months, many efforts had been made to meet the concerns expressed by various Member States on the draft, which had been approved by the Human Rights Council.  As a result of such efforts, a revised version produced several changes to the text.  Those changes had been duly communicated to Member States and representatives of indigenous peoples.  The changes had not undermined the protection of indigenous peoples and should ensure the Declaration’s adoption.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;With the conclusion of a 25-year process, he thanked the President for her efforts in bringing the parties together.  The text would set the foundations for a new and sound relationship among indigenous peoples, States and societies, where and with whom they shared their lives.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;ROBERT HILL ( Australia), speaking in explanation of vote before the vote, said Australia had actively worked to ensure the adoption of a meaningful declaration.  Australia had worked hard to ensure that any declaration could become a tangible and ongoing standard of achievement that would be universally accepted, observed and upheld.  The text of the Declaration failed to reach that high standard and Australia continued to have many concerns with the text.  Australia had repeatedly called for a chance to participate in negotiations on the current text and was deeply disappointed that none had been convened.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Regarding the nature of the Declaration, he said it was the clear intention of all States that it be an aspirational Declaration with political and moral force, but not legal force.  The text contained recommendations regarding how States could promote the welfare of indigenous peoples, but was not in itself legally binding nor reflective of international law.  As the Declaration did not describe current State practice or actions that States considered themselves obliged to take as a matter of law, it could not be cited as evidence of the evolution of customary international law.  The Declaration did not provide a proper basis for legal actions complaints, or other claims in any international, domestic or other proceedings.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;The Australian Government had long expressed its dissatisfaction with the references to self-determination in the Declaration, he said.  Self-determination applied to situations of decolonization and the break-up of States into smaller states with clearly defined population groups.  It also applied where a particular group with a defined territory was disenfranchised and was denied political or civil rights.  The Government supported and encouraged the full engagement of indigenous peoples in the democratic decision-making process, but did not support a concept that could be construed as encouraging action that would impair, even in part, the territorial and political integrity of a State with a system of democratic representative Government.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;On lands and resources, he said the Declaration’s provisions could be read to require recognition of indigenous rights to lands without regard to other legal rights existing in land, both indigenous and non-indigenous.  Any right to traditional lands must be subject to national laws, or the provisions would be both arbitrary and impossible to implement, with no recognition being given to the fact that ownership of land might lawfully vest in others.  Australia would read the lands and resources provisions in line with its existing domestic laws, including the Native Title Act.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Australia had concerns that the Declaration expanded any right to free, prior and informed consent too far, as the scope of that proposed right was too broad.  It could mean that States were obliged to consult with indigenous peoples about every aspect of law that might affect them.  That would not only be unworkable, but would apply a standard for indigenous peoples that did not apply to others in the population.  Australia could not accept a right that allowed a particular sub-group of the population to be able to veto legitimate decisions of a democratic and representative Government.  Australia also did not support the inclusion of intellectual property rights for indigenous peoples.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;On third party rights, he noted that, in seeking to give indigenous people exclusive rights over property, both intellectual, real and cultural, the Declaration did not acknowledge the rights of third parties, in particular the rights of third parties to access indigenous land, heritage and cultural objects where appropriate under national law.  The Declaration also failed to consider the different types of ownership and use that could be accorded to indigenous people and failed to consider the rights of third parties to property.  Australia was also concerned that the Declaration placed indigenous customary law in a superior position to national law.  Customary law was not “law” in the sense that modern democracies used the term, but was based on culture and tradition.  Australia would read the whole of the Declaration in accordance with domestic laws, as well as international human rights standards.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Wile the Declaration would not be binding on Australia and other States as a matter of international law, he was aware that its aspirational contents would be relied on in setting standards by which States would be judged in their relations with indigenous peoples.  Accordingly, the Australian Government had been concerned throughout the negotiations to ensure that the Declaration was meaningful, was capable of implementation and enjoyed wide support in the international community.  The Declaration failed in all those respects and Australia could not support it.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;JOHN MCNEE ( Canada) said that his country had long-demonstrated its commitment to protecting and promoting indigenous rights at home and around the world.  It had strongly supported the work of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues and the relevant United Nations special rapporteurs.   Canada also had a constructive and far-reaching international development programme targeted specifically at improving the situation of indigenous peoples in many parts of the world, and it also continued to make further progress at home within its constitutional guarantees for aboriginal and treaty rights, and with its negotiated self-government and land claims agreements with several Canadian aboriginal groups.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Canada had been an active participant in the development of the Declaration over the past 20 years, he continued.  And while it had long been a proponent of a strong and effective text promoting indigenous peoples’ fundamental freedoms without discrimination, and a text that promoted harmonious agreements between indigenous peoples and the States in which they lived, the text presented to the Human Rights Council last year did not met those expectations.  Canada’s position had remained consistent and principled and the country had stated publicly that it had significant concerns with the wording of the current text, including provisions on lands and resources; free, prior and informed consent when used as a veto; intellectual property; military issues; and the need to achieve an appropriate balance between the rights and obligations on indigenous peoples, Member States and third parties.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;For example, the recognition of indigenous rights to lands, territories and resources was important to Canada.  He said that Canada was proud that land and treaty rights had been given strong recognition and protection in its Constitution.   Canada was equally proud of the processes that had been put in place to deal with aboriginal claims respecting those rights and was working actively to improve those processes to address claims more effectively.  Unfortunately, the provisions in the Declaration on lands and territories were overly broad, unclear and capable of a wide variety of interpretations, discounting the need to recognize a range of rights over land and possibly putting into question matters that had been settled by treaty.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Similarly, some of the provisions dealing with the concept of free, prior and informed consent were unduly restrictive, he said.  Provisions in the Declaration said that States could not act on any legislative or administrative matter that might affect indigenous peoples without obtaining their consent.  While Canada had a strong consultative process, reinforced by the Courts as a matter of law, the establishment of complete veto power over legislative action for a particular group would be fundamentally incompatible with Canada’s parliamentary system.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Overall, it was unfortunate that Canada, and a number of other States with large indigenous populations, could not support the adoption of the text as a “meaningful and effective” United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.  Regardless, Canada would continue to take effective action, at home and abroad, to promote the rights of indigenous people based on its existing human rights obligations and commitments.  By voting against the text, Canada put on record its disappointment with both the substance and the process.  The Government understood that the Declarations was not legally binding and had no legal effect in Canada.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;ROSEMARY BANKS (New Zealand), speaking in explanation of vote, noted that New Zealand was one of the few countries that from the start had supported the elaboration of a declaration that promoted and protected the rights of indigenous peoples.  In New Zealand, indigenous rights were of profound importance, and were integral to its identity as a nation State and as a people.  New Zealand was unique:  a treaty concluded at Waitangi between the Crown and New Zealand’s indigenous peoples in 1840 was a founding document of the country.  Today, New Zealand had one of the largest and most dynamic indigenous minorities in the world, and the Treaty of Waitangi had acquired great significance in the country’s constitutional arrangements, law and Government activity.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;The place of Maori in society, their grievances and disparities affecting them were central and enduring features of domestic debate and Government action, she said.  New Zealand also had an unparalleled system for redress, accepted by both indigenous and non-indigenous citizens alike.  Nearly 40 per cent of the New Zealand fishing quota was owned by Maori, as a result.  Claims to over half of New Zealand’s land area had been settled.  For that reason, New Zealand fully supported the principles and aspirations of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.  The country had been implementing most of the standards in the Declaration for many years.  She shared the view that the Declaration was long overdue, and the concern that indigenous peoples in many parts of the world continued to be deprived of basic human rights.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;New Zealand was proud of its role in improving the text over the past three years, turning the draft into one that States would be able to uphold and promote, she said.  It was, therefore, a matter of deep regret that it was unable to support the text before the Assembly today.  Unfortunately, New Zealand had difficulties with a number of provisions of the text.  In particular, four provisions in the Declaration were fundamentally incompatible with New Zealand’s constitutional and legal arrangements, the Treaty of Waitangi, and the principle of governing for the good of all its citizens, namely article 26 on lands and resources, article 28 on redress, articles 19 and 32 on a right of veto over the State.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;The provision on lands and resources could not be implemented in New Zealand, she said.  Article 26 stated that indigenous peoples had a right to own, use, develop or control lands and territories that they had traditionally owned, occupied or used.  For New Zealand, the entire country was potentially caught within the scope of the article, which appeared to require recognition of rights to lands now lawfully owned by other citizens, both indigenous and non-indigenous, and did not take into account the customs, traditions and land tenure systems of the indigenous peoples concerned.  The article, furthermore, implied that indigenous peoples had rights that others did not have.  The entire country would also appear to fall within the scope of article 28 on redress and compensation.  The text generally took no account of the fact that land might now be occupied or owned legitimately by others, or subject to numerous different or overlapping indigenous claims.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Finally, the Declaration implied that indigenous peoples had a right of veto over a democratic legislature and national resource management, she said.  She strongly supported the full and active engagement of indigenous peoples in democratic decision-making processes.  New Zealand also had some of the most extensive consultation mechanisms in the world.  But the articles in the Declaration implied different classes of citizenship, where indigenous had a right to veto that other groups or individuals did not have.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;While New Zealand took international human rights and its international human rights obligations seriously, it was unable to support a text that included provisions that were so fundamentally incompatible with its democratic processes, legislation and constitutional arrangements.  The text was clearly unable to be implemented by many States, including most of those voting in favour.  The Declaration was explained by its supporters as being an aspirational document, intended to inspire rather than to have legal effect.  New Zealand did not, however, accept that a State could responsibly take such a stance towards a document that purported to declare on the contents of the rights of indigenous people.  The history of the negotiations on the Declaration and the divided manner in which it had been adopted demonstrated that the text did not state propositions that were reflected in State practice, or which would be recognized as general principles of law.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;ROBERT HAGEN ( United States) said the United States had to vote against the Declaration’s adoption.  While the United States had worked for 11 years in Geneva for a consensus declaration, the document before the Assembly had been prepared and submitted after the negotiations had concluded.  States had been given no opportunity to discuss it collectively.  It was disappointing that the Human Rights Council had not responded to his country’s calls, in partnership with Council members, for States to undertake further work to generate a consensus text.  The Declaration had been adopted by the Council in a splintered vote.  The process had been unfortunate and extraordinary for any multilateral negotiating exercise and set a poor precedent with respect to United Nations practice.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;The Declaration, if it were to encourage harmonious and constructive relations, should have been written in terms that were transparent and capable of implementation, he said.  Unfortunately, the text that had emerged from that failed process was confusing, and risked endless conflicting interpretations and debate about its application, as already evidenced by the numerous complex interpretive statements issued by States at is adoption at the Human Rights Council, and the United States could not lend its support to such a text.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;He said the United States views with respect to the text’s core provisions could be found in a separate document, which would be circulated as an official United Nations document.  The document discussed the core provisions of the Declaration, including but not limited to self-determination, lands and resources, redress and the Declaration’s nature.  Because the flaws in the text ran through its most significant provisions, the text as a whole was rendered unacceptable.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;While the United States was voting against the Declaration, his Government would continue its efforts to promote indigenous rights domestically, he said.  Under United States domestic law, the Government recognized Indian tribes as political entities with inherent powers of self-government as first peoples.  In its legal system, the federal Government had a government-to-government relationship with Indian tribes.  In that domestic context, that meant promoting tribal self-government over a broad range of internal and local affairs, including determination of membership, culture, language, religion, education, information, social welfare, economic activities, and land and resources management.  At the same time, the United States would continue its work to promote indigenous rights internationally.  In its diplomatic efforts, it would continue its opposition to racial discrimination against indigenous individuals and communities and continued to press for full indigenous participation in democratic electoral processes throughout the world.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;He said his delegation was deeply disappointed that, in seeking to make a practical difference in the lives of indigenous people around the globe, the international community had not been presented with a text that was clear, transparent or capable of implementation.  Those fundamental shortcomings meant that the document could not enjoy universal support and become a true standard of achievement.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;ILYA ROGACHEV ( Russian Federation) said that his delegation had supported the rights of indigenous people and the development of international standards in that regard.  Such an all-encompassing document should be balanced and its elements carefully weighed.  Unfortunately, the text being considered was not such a document.  It was not a truly balanced document, in particular regarding land and natural resources or the procedures for compensation and redress.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Further, the Declaration did not enjoy consensus support and had not been duly approved by all interested parties, he continued.  In addition, a non-transparent forum had been chosen to negotiate the text, which meant that, at a decisive stage in the process, some States with large numbers of indigenous people had been excluded from the talks.  His Government hoped that the way in which the Declaration was being adopted would not create a negative precedent at the United Nations.  The Russian Federation could not support the Declaration and would abstain in the vote.  Nevertheless, as ever, the Russian Federation would foster cooperation in order to protect and promote the rights of indigenous peoples.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;JEAN-MARIE EHOUZOU ( Benin) said his country was in favour of the text.  During the procedure, countries had raised legitimate concerns, and his delegation supported the African position to allow the Assembly to take into account the misgivings expressed by the continent.  Benin would vote in favour of the text, despite the flaws, which had been highlighted by some delegations.  He hoped the Declaration would fall on fertile ground.  While the text contained imperfections, it would be desirable if the text could be implemented for the time being and improvements introduced, in order for the text to receive approval by all delegations.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;JAIRO MONTOYA ( Colombia) said his country had incorporated a wide range of rights within its national system.  Under the framework of the 1991 Constitution, Colombia stood out as one of the most advanced with regard to recognizing the collective rights of indigenous peoples.  For the State, the recognition of traditional territories for the different communities was fundamental.  Colombia had some 710 reservations occupying about 32 million hectares.  By the end of 2007, the area should reach 29 per cent of the national territory.  Those properties could not be seized or transferred.  Reservations participated in the central government budget transfer system.  All members of the various communities were covered by health services that were subsidized by the State.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Colombia had also been a leader internationally, he said, noting that dialogue with indigenous people was a priority for the State.  In the long-term, the State was developing policy for indigenous communities, including in terms of human rights and self-government.  His delegation had supported the initiative to postpone a decision, as it was important to find agreement that would allow for the adoption of a Declaration acceptable to all States.  In spite of the fact that the Declaration was not legally binding for the State, some aspects of the Declaration were in direct contradiction with Colombia’s internal legal system, including provisions of articles 30, 19 and 32, forcing Colombia to abstain on the text.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Colombia remained committed to the protection of the rights of indigenous people, he said.  The decision to abstain from voting on the text, given its legal incompatibilities, did not affect Colombia’s commitment to carry out the constitutional provisions and internal norms and assumed obligations aimed at preserving Colombia’s multiethnic nature and diversity.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Before action on the text, the representative of Guatemala asked what delegation had asked for the vote.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;The General Assembly President noted that Australia, New Zealand and the United States had requested a vote on the text.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;The Assembly then adopted the Declaration by a recorded vote of 143 in favour to 4 against ( Australia, United States, New Zealand and Canada) with 11 abstentions.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Speaking after action on the text, Mr. ARGUELLO (Argentina) noted that, at the time of the draft’s adoption by the Human Rights Council, Argentina had regretted that it had had to abstain, despite its clear political will in support of the recognition of the rights of indigenous peoples.  Argentina had also expressed its disappointment at not having more time to work on making the references to self-determination compatible with the principle of territorial integrity, with national unity and the other organizational structure of each State.  Fortunately, the efforts undertaken to resolve the question without affecting the rights contained in the Declaration had been successful.  Thanks to those efforts, Argentina was pleased to join the voting in favour of the Declaration.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;TAKAHIRO SHINYO ( Japan) said that his delegation had voted in favour of the Declaration.  The revised version of article 46 correctly clarified that the right of self-determination did not give indigenous peoples the right to be separate and independent from their countries of residence, and that that right should not be invoked for the purpose of impairing the sovereignty of a State, its national and political unity, or territorial integrity.  The Japanese Government shared the understanding on the right and welcomed the revision.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Japan believed that the rights contained in the Declaration should not harm the human rights of others.  It was also aware that, regarding property rights, the contents of the rights of ownership or others relating to land and territory were firmly stipulated in the civil law and other laws of each State.  Therefore, Japan thought that the rights relating to land and territory in the Declaration, as well as the way those rights were exercised, were limited by due reason, in light of harmonization with the protection of the third party interests and other public interests.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;ARMIN ANDEREYA ( Chile) said that his delegation had also voted in favour of the Declaration, supporting the important role indigenous peoples played in the development of all societies.  The Declaration was a significant step.   Chile reaffirmed its internal legal system, which aimed to develop, promote and protect the rights of indigenous peoples, and supported their efforts to build their own communities.  The Declaration would serve to strengthen such national efforts.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;KAREN PIERCE ( United Kingdom ) welcomed the Declaration as an important tool in helping to enhance the promotion and protection of the rights of indigenous peoples.  The United Kingdom regretted that it had not been possible to reach wider consensus on the important text, and that some States with large indigenous populations had felt that they had no recourse but to call a vote on it.  Nevertheless, the United Kingdom recognized the efforts that had been made to reflect many concerns raised in negotiations.  The United Kingdom was pleased to be able to support its adoption.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;The United Kingdom fully supported the provisions in the Declaration which recognized that indigenous individuals were entitled to the full protection of their human rights and fundamental freedoms in international law, on an equal basis to all other individuals.  Human rights were universal and equal to all.  The United Kingdom did not accept that some groups in society should benefit from human rights that were not available to others.  With the exception of the right to self-determination, the United Kingdom did not accept the concept of collective human rights in international law.  That was without prejudice to the United Kingdom’s recognition of the fact that the Governments of many States with indigenous populations had granted them various collective rights in their constitutions, national laws and agreements.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;In that regard, the United Kingdom strongly endorsed preambular paragraph 22 in the Declaration, which it understood to distinguish between individual human rights in international law and other collective rights bestowed at the national level by governments to indigenous peoples.  Her delegation read all the provisions in the Declaration in the light of the understanding of human rights and collective rights.  The United Kingdom understood article 3 of the Declaration as promoting the development of a new and distinct right of self-determination, specific to indigenous peoples.  She understood the “right” set out in article 3 of the Declaration to be separate and different from the existing right of all peoples to self-determination in international law.  Subsequent articles of the Declaration sought to set out the content of that new “right” which was to be exercised, where it applied, within the territory of a State and was not intended to impact in any way on the political unity or territorial integrity of existing States.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Continuing, she said the United Kingdom understood the commitments of articles 12 and 13 on redress and repatriation as applying only in respect of such property or of such ceremonial objects and human remains that were in the ownership or possession of the State.  She emphasized that the Declaration was non-legally binding and did not propose to have any retroactive application on historical episodes.  National minority groups and other ethnic groups within the territory of the United Kingdom and its overseas territories did not fall within the scope of the indigenous peoples to which the Declaration applied.  The United Kingdom had, however, long provided political and financial support to the socio-economic and political development of indigenous peoples around the world.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;PATRICK RITTER ( Liechtenstein) said his country had been a long-standing supporter of innovative approaches to the right of peoples to self-determination, in order to fully explore the potential of the concept for the promotion and protection of human rights.  He was pleased, therefore, that the Declaration contained a number of provisions that marked an important new step in the way the United Nations was dealing with the concept of self-determination.  The introduction to the right to autonomy or self-government in matters relating to internal and local affairs, including their financial aspect, offered a promising new approach which would help to genuinely address the aspirations and needs of many peoples to create an enabling environment for the full protection and promotion of human rights, without resorting to violence and strife.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;It was his understanding, he added, that the reference to “political unity” in article 46 did not preclude a gradual granting of increasing levels of self-government to such peoples, which was based on a democratic process and the promotion and protection of minority rights.  It also did not exclude any democratic decision on the State structure.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;HEE-KWON PARK ( Republic of Korea) said the Republic of Korea had voted in favour of the Declaration given its belief that it would become an important milestone for the promotion, protection, and further enhancement of indigenous people’s rights.  Adopting the Declaration, which was the outcome of more than 20 years of work, constituted a solemn pledge and sent a clear message for the survival and well-being of indigenous peoples, especially in support of their dwindling culture, language and their rights to pursue their vision of economic, social and cultural development.  His Government hoped that Declaration’s adoption would contribute to further strengthening the international human rights system as a whole, by achieving equality and non-discrimination for all.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;JOHAN L. LOVALD ( Norway) said that the Declaration set the standard of achievement to be pursued in a spirit of cooperation.  Norway would work with the Sami people, recognized as indigenous by the Government.  Several articles in the Declaration dealt with the exercise of self-determination and stipulated that such rights should be exercised in the framework of international law.  The Norwegian Government had signed agreements with the Sami parliament setting out cooperation and legislative matters.  The question of land was a crucial issue to cultural identity and, in that regard, Norway referred to the relevant language of the International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention 169.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;ISHRAT JAHAN AHMED ( Bangladesh) said that her delegation supported the rights of any group that was disadvantaged.   Bangladesh adhered to all major international human rights instruments and supported the rights of indigenous peoples.  However, the Declaration, in its present form, contained some ambiguities, particularly that “indigenous people” had not been identified or explicitly defined in any way.  Further, the text did not enjoy consensus among Member States.  Under such circumstances, Bangladesh had abstained in the vote.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;SAMAR AL-ZIBDEH (Jordan) said that her delegation had voted in favour of the text, but would stress that the right of self-determination referred to therein should be exercised within the framework of the United Nations Charter and did not interfere with the territorial integrity and sovereignty of States.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Ms. ROVIROSA ( Mexico) welcomed the adoption of the Declaration and reaffirmed her Government’s pride in its multiethnic population.  With the anniversary of its independence, Mexico had enjoyed the recognition of its indigenous peoples, who supported the country’s national identity.  She also welcomed the provisions of the Declaration in accordance with the provisions of Mexico’s Constitution.  Article 2 of the Constitution recognized the rights of indigenous peoples to self-determination, granting them autonomy to determine their internal form and system of norms for conflict resolution.  She understood, however, that the rights of indigenous people to self-determination, autonomy and self-government shared be exercised in accordance with Mexico’s Constitution, so as to guarantee its national unity and territorial integrity.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;ULLA STROM ( Sweden) said that her Government was pleased that the Assembly had finally adopted the Declaration.   Sweden had supported the Declaration throughout the negotiation process, had voted in favour of the text and hoped that its implementation improved the situation of indigenous peoples.  At the same time, the Declaration included several references to collective rights.  While the Swedish Government had no difficulty in recognizing such rights outside the framework of international law, it was of the firm opinion that individual human rights prevailed over the collective rights mentioned in the Declaration.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;She went on to say that the Sami people were recognized as indigenous by the Swedish Parliament, and the Government had based its relations with the Sami on dialogue, partnership and self-determination, with respect and responsibility for cultural identity.  To that end, Sweden looked forward to discussing the implementation of the Declaration with Sami representatives.  She stressed that the political discussion on self-determination could not be separated from the question of land rights.  The Sami’s relationship to the land was at the heart of the matter and the Swedish Government must maintain a balance between competing interests of different groups living in the same areas of the north of the country.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;She said that some clarification of her country’s interpretation of the Declaration was necessary.  For instance, the text’s reference to self-determination should not be construed as authorizing or encouraging any action which would impair the territorial integrity or political unity of sovereign and independent States.  She noted that a large part of the realization of the right to self-determination could be ensured through article 19 of the Declaration, which dealt with the duty of States to consult and cooperate with indigenous peoples.  In fact, that article could be implemented in different ways, including through a consultative process between institutions representing indigenous peoples and Governments, and through participation in democratic systems, such as the current Swedish system.  It did not entail a collective right of veto, she added.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Among other examples, she said that her Government interpreted references in the Declaration to ownership and control of land to apply to the traditional rights of the Sami people.  In Sweden, those rights were called reindeer herding rights and included the right to land and water for the maintenance of reindeer herds by Sami herding communities, as well as the right to build fences and slaughterhouses for the reindeer and the right to hunt and fish in reindeer herd areas.  Article 28 did not give Sami people the right to redress for regular forestry by the forest owner.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Ms. PUNKRASIN ( Thailand) said that her delegation had voted in favour of the text and was in agreement with its intent, despite the fact that a number of paragraphs raised some concerns.  The draft just adopted was an improvement over the text that had been put before the Third Committee last year.   Thailand understood that the articles on self-determination would be interpreted within the framework of the principle set out in the Vienna Declaration.   Thailand also understood that the Declaration did not create any new rights and that any benefits that flowed from the Declaration would be based on the laws and Constitution of Thailand.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;PIRAGIBE DOS SANTOS TARRAGO ( Brazil) said that his delegation had voted in favour of the text.   Brazil had believed that the text adopted by the Human Rights Council, the body most able to deal with such issues, should not have been reopened.  Nevertheless, Brazil welcomed the text and appreciated the flexibility of delegations that had brought the Declaration before the Assembly today.  He said that his country’s indigenous peoples were crucial to the development of society at every level, including the development of spiritual and cultural life for all.   Brazil would underscore that the exercise of the rights of indigenous peoples was consistent with the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the States in which they resided.  At the same time, States should always bear in mind their duty to protect the rights and identity of their indigenous peoples, he added.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;GEORGE WILFRED TALBOT ( Guyana) said he had voted in favour of the text.  In supporting the Declaration’s adoption, his delegation was motivated by the commitment to preserving the dignity and well being of all peoples and to safeguarding the rights of all individuals, including Guyana’s original inhabitants.  It was further motivated by the consideration that the Declaration represented a good-faith effort to address the genuine concerns and special needs of indigenous people everywhere.  Today’s adoption marked a historical milestone in recognition of the rights of indigenous peoples.  It also took note of the fact that the Declaration was political in character as opposed to being a legally binding document, though not without potential legal implications.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Some of its provisions could give rise to expectations that could be out of consonance with its fundamental intent, he said.  He hoped that the Declaration would not become an instrument of division within States or societies.  At the national level, all citizens without distinction enjoyed equal status before the law.  It was a pity that the Declaration had become the object of division.  It was his hope that the international community would, in the future, be able to arrive at consensus and ensure respect for the rights of indigenous peoples.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Mr. MACDONALD ( Suriname) placed great importance on the promotion and protection of all human rights, including those of indigenous peoples.  Suriname had voted in favour of the text.  The amendments had addressed some concerns in the original text.  Indigenous people comprised a significant part of Suriname’s population and the Government had a responsibility to all its constituents to prevent discrimination and marginalisation of any group in society.  Granting special rights to one party might run contrary to the concept of equal treatment.  The Declaration could not be understood to initiate any activity that would jeopardize a State’s territorial integrity and political unity.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;He said his Government accepted the fact that the State’s should seek prior consultation to prevent a disregard for human rights.  The level of such consultations depended on the specific circumstances.  Consultation should not be viewed as an end in itself, but should serve the purpose of respecting the interest of those who used the land.  The nation had the inalienable right to take complete possession of its national resources to the country’s benefit.  He hoped all groups would be inspired by the Declaration and that the Declaration would be placed in its politically correct context.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;BAGHAEI-HAMANEH ( Iran) said his delegation had voted in favour of the resolution.  The protection of the rights of indigenous people around the world was a matter of principle for Iran, although Iran did not have any indigenous peoples, as such.  He hoped that the Declaration’s adoption by an overwhelming majority would further contribute to the protection of indigenous peoples’ rights, who had long been subjected to discrimination due to colonization.  The rights of indigenous peoples should be protected and enhanced within the context of national and international law, including the purposes of the Charter, namely respect for territorial integrity and political sovereignty.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;AJAI MALHOTRA ( India) said his country had consistently favoured the promotion and protection of indigenous peoples’ rights.  The fact that the working group had been unable to reach consensus was only reflective of the extreme complexity of the issues involved.  While the Declaration did not define what constituted indigenous peoples, the issue of indigenous rights pertained to peoples in independent countries who were regarded as indigenous on account of their descent from the populations which inhabited the country, or a geographical region which the country belonged, at the time of conquest or colonization or the establishment of present State boundaries and who, irrespective of their legal status, retained some or all of their socio-economic, cultural and political institutions.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Regarding references to the right to self-determination, it was his understanding that the right to self-determination applied only to peoples under foreign domination and that the concept did not apply to sovereign independent States or to a section of people or a nation, which was the essence of national integrity.  The Declaration clarified that the right to self-determination would be exercised by indigenous peoples in terms of their right to autonomy or self-government in matters relating to their internal and local affairs, as well as means and ways for financing their autonomous functions.  In addition, article 46 stated clearly that nothing in the Declaration might be interpreted as implying for any State, people, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act contrary to the Charter.  It was on that basis that India had voted in favour of the adoption of the Declaration.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;AYE THIDAR MYO ( Myanmar) said that her Government was pleased to see that the Declaration included reference to self-determination and understood that such rights referred to activities which did not impair the territorial integrity or political unity of States.  Her delegation had voted in favour of the Declaration and would seek to implement it with flexibility.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;KAIRE MBUENDE ( Namibia) said that his delegation had made clear from the outset of the negotiations that Namibia was not opposed to the idea of a Declaration on indigenous rights.  “We, as historical victims of deprivation of rights could not do anything that would be construed to deny other people human rights,” he said, adding that having experienced first-hand the pain of being treated as second class citizens in their own land, Namibians had traditionally been friends of human rights instruments.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;Namibia understood that nothing in the Declaration could be interpreted in any way to mean that measures adopted by States for securing equal enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous peoples and individuals created, as a consequence, any new, separate rights.  He said that Namibia also understood that the word “law” in article 46 (2) of the Declaration referred to the national laws of States.  Accordingly, Namibia understood that the exercise of the rights set out in the Declaration was subject to the constitutional frameworks and other national laws of States.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;MADHU RAMAN ACHARYA ( Nepal) said that his delegation had voted in favour of the long-negotiated text, as its Government had always protected and promoted the rights of indigenous people.  Indeed, the country’s interim-Constitution reflected the new Government’s commitment to supporting Nepal’s indigenous peoples.   Nepal understood that the Declaration represented the good intentions of the international community to protect and promote the rights of indigenous peoples, and did not create any new rights.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;MUHAMMAD ANSHOR ( Indonesia) noted that several aspects of the Declaration remained unresolved, in particular what constituted indigenous peoples.  The absence of that definition prevented a clear understanding of the peoples to whom the Declaration applied.  In that context, the Declaration used the definition contained in the International Labour Organization Convention, according to which indigenous people were distinct from tribal people.  Given the fact that Indonesia’s entire population at the time of colonization remained unchanged, the rights in the Declaration accorded exclusively to indigenous people and did not apply in the context of Indonesia.  Indonesia would continue to promote the collective rights of indigenous peoples.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: georgia;"&gt;BILAL HAYEE ( Pakistan) said his country had voted in favour of the Declaration both in the Human Rights Council and in the Assembly.  Although the Declaration did not define indigenous peoples, he hoped that its adoption would fulfil the aims of the International Decade for the rights of indigenous peoples and enable them to maintain their cultural identit