Yet, this longstanding relationship is increasingly under pressure. In several parts of southern and eastern Cameroon, forest territories are affected by logging, agricultural expansion, extractive activities, infrastructure development, and the expansion of conservation areas. The consequences go beyond the disappearance or degradation of trees. As the forest deteriorates, the Baka have to travel longer distances to find certain fruits, medicinal plants and other non-timber forest products. Fish and game are becoming increasingly scarce, while access to certain traditionally used areas is becoming more difficult.

In southern and eastern Cameroon, restrictions on access to forest resources and difficulties related to securing land directly affect the livelihoods of Baka communities. Recent studies show, in particular, that the Baka depend more heavily on non-timber forest products than other communities. Additionally, these studies show that the decline of these resources, particularly when resulting from restrictions on access to the forest, can profoundly alter their patterns of production and consumption. These situations demonstrate that forest protection cannot be separated from securing the land rights of Indigenous Peoples that depend on them.

When Conservation Becomes a Matter of Justice

The challenge is particularly visible in certain protected areas. Biodiversity conservation is essential to preserving the forests of the Congo Basin, but conservation models that exclude populations from their Indigenous territories can have adverse effects on human rights. Research conducted in southern and eastern Cameroon has documented the socio-economic consequences of “fortress” conservation models, under which Baka communities have limited opportunities to negotiate their access to forest areas.

The question, therefore, is not whether to choose between forests and Indigenous communities, but how to protect the forest together with these Indigenous communities. The Baka possess detailed Indigenous knowledge of species, seasonal cycles, water sources, medicinal plants, and hunting and gathering areas. This knowledge constitutes an ecological heritage that can contribute to conservation objectives. At the same time, Indigenous communities must be regarded as rights-holders and not merely as beneficiaries of environmental projects.

This approach requires, in particular, ensuring the effective and meaningful participation of the Baka in decisions concerning their territories and respecting their right to Free, Prior and Informed Consent where measures or projects are likely to affect their lands and resources or ways of life.

Rights-Based Conservation

The experience of the African Indigenous Women Organization Central African Network (AIWO-CAN) shows that such participation can take very concrete forms. One particularly revealing example dates back to 2010, when Baka and Bagyeli Indigenous women leaders, accompanied by AIWO-CAN, participated in the creation of a rainforest garden presented at the Chelsea Flower Show in London. The women presented their traditions, as well as the challenges facing their Indigenous communities, including deforestation, industrial expansion, discrimination and loss of access to forest biodiversity. Maps produced by the Baka to represent their traditional use of the forest were also incorporated into the project.

This example is important because it shows that Indigenous Peoples can document their own relationship with their territories and convey their own messages in international spaces. A map is therefore not merely a technical tool: it becomes a means of making visible a territory and patterns of forest use that may be absent from administrative maps or management plans.

A conservation project cannot be sustainable if affected communities have no means of raising their concerns, challenging a decision or seeking redress when they believe that their rights have been affected.

A conservation project cannot be sustainable if affected communities have no means of raising their concerns.

More recently, the Dja landscape provides a particularly interesting example of this shift towards more inclusive governance. Within the framework of the GEF-8 programme dedicated to the Dja landscape, AIWO-CAN was tasked with contributing to the establishment of a Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM) designed to enable Indigenous Peoples, as well as local communities to voice their concerns and have access to a grievance mechanism. The mechanism is designed to complement the right of Indigenous Peoples to Free, Prior and Informed Consent process.

This experience is particularly important for the conservation of the Congo Basin. A conservation project cannot be sustainable if affected communities have no means of raising their concerns, challenging a decision or seeking redress when they believe that their rights have been affected. The establishment of culturally appropriate dialogue and grievance mechanisms can therefore transform conservation: from a model in which Indigenous communities are merely informed, towards a model in which they can participate, question, propose and demand accountability.

Indigenous Women at the Heart of Conservation

The participation of women is also essential. Indigenous women in Cameroon play an important role in transmitting knowledge relating to plants, food, traditional healthcare, and the use of natural resources. They are also directly affected by the economic and social consequences of resource degradation.

AIWO-CAN’s experience demonstrates the importance of strengthening their capacities so that Indigenous women can participate in decision-making processes, defend their land rights and contribute to climate and environmental policies. This approach is particularly relevant in the context of the Congo Basin, where conservation and climate change adaptation must be grounded in the realities of communities.

The 17th Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity therefore provides an opportunity to recall that conservation of the Congo Basin cannot be separated from the rights of the peoples who live there.

The conservation of the Congo Basin cannot be separated from the rights of the peoples who live there.

The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework provides an important opportunity to rethink conservation policies through a rights-based approach. Its implementation in Cameroon should not be assessed solely through the number of protected areas or species conserved, but also through the extent to which the rights and participation of Indigenous Peoples are guaranteed.

Achieving global conservation objectives should therefore not result in the further exclusion of Indigenous forest communities. On the contrary, biodiversity policies should recognize their knowledge, guarantee their effective and meaningful participation, protect their territories and ensure their involvement in decisions affecting their lands and resources. The 17th Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity therefore provides an opportunity to recall that conservation of the Congo Basin cannot be separated from the rights of the peoples who live there.

Towards Conservation with Indigenous Peoples

This situation reveals a fundamental of human rights issue. The loss of, or restrictions on, access to forest territories affect the rights to culture, food, health, livelihoods of Indigenous Peoples of the Congo Basin, as well as participation in decisions concerning land and natural resources. Finally, it may also undermine the transmission of Indigenous knowledge.

The future of the Congo Basin forests will depend not only on forest policies, international investments or the expansion of protected areas. It will also depend on the ability of States and conservation actors to recognize Indigenous Peoples as equal partners and rights-holders. In Cameroon, the experience of the Baka shows that the forest can simultaneously be a space for subsistence, culture, knowledge transmission and biodiversity conservation. The initiatives to which AIWO-CAN has contributed also demonstrate that Indigenous participation can be organized in concrete ways: community mapping, participation in forest policies, grievance mechanisms, Free, Prior and Informed Consent and strengthening the role of Indigenous women.

The question is therefore no longer simply how to protect the forests of the Congo Basin, but also who decides their future and what guarantees are provided for those who have lived there for generations. Sustainable conservation of the Congo Basin must be rights-based conservation: conservation that protects ecosystems without displacing the Indigenous Peoples who have traditionally protected them, that values Indigenous knowledge without exploiting it, and that transforms Indigenous forest communities into genuine partners in biodiversity governance.

The post The Forests of the Congo Basin in Cameroon and the Rights of the Baka People appeared first on Debates Indígenas.

Bulari Lolki from Sesia in Northern Kenya

One community leader’s sentiments in Northern Kenya echo questions we have heard from hundreds of Indigenous and grassroots communities around the world. Carbon markets are intensifying pressure on land, particularly in places where collective tenure rights are weak or not formally recognized. This raises widespread concerns that carbon credit projects will lead to land grabs or will sideline communities in decision-making about what happens on their land. 

At the same time, many of the communities we work with welcome the revenue carbon projects can generate to support local livelihoods and conservation efforts — if they can set the terms under which projects move forward.

In practice, this remains difficult. Common challenges include:

• Highly technical language: Carbon projects often involve complex legal, financial, and scientific concepts (e.g., carbon accounting, the process of measuring and tracking how much carbon is stored or reduced by a project, and legal rights to emissions removals and reductions from project activities). This makes it difficult for communities to fully understand project terms, risks, and benefits and limits their ability to make informed decisions.

• Lack of transparency: Communities frequently have limited access to clear, timely, and complete information about project agreements, revenue flows, and safeguards. The lack of full disclosure during the project design and implementation creates uncertainty and can lead to mistrust or uninformed consent.

• Power imbalances in negotiations: Project developers and investors often have significantly greater resources, technical expertise, and legal support than the communities they engage with. Many of these communities are located in remote, underserved areas and have historically been marginalized by governments, with limited access to basic services. This makes it extremely difficult for communities to engage with developers on equal footing.  

As a result, communities find themselves at a crossroads: they seek the financial benefits that carbon projects promise to improve their livelihoods, while also striving to retain autonomy over their land and resources. In the context of uneven legal protections for their rights, communities struggle to negotiate fair agreements and often face pressure to accept unfavorable terms.

Organizing Collectively to Overcome Power Asymmetries

In the Northern Kenya Rangelands Carbon Project — the world’s largest soil carbon project encompassing Sesia, a Samburu pastoralist community in Northern Kenya — communities initially struggled to engage with the project proponent as equal partners. The first decade of the project brought many benefits, including improvements to grazing lands and more than 14 million USD in revenue for participating communities. But community members had concerns about how the project operated day to day. For example, they wanted full transparency about how much revenue the project generated. They also wanted greater autonomy to decide how the community share is used.  

In 2023, Maasai, Samburu, Turkana, Rendile, and Borana pastoralist communities began organizing collectively across the entire 2 million hectare project area. For the first time, community land management committees gained access to the project implementation agreement that defined grazing management, structures for project governance, and arrangements for revenue sharing. Together, they drafted a set of shared demands for a new agreement with the project proponent. 

Their demands included access to financial records and contracts with marketers of carbon credits; a dedicated project bank account with communities as signatories into which all revenue from carbon credit sales would be deposited; and a new revenue-sharing arrangement that gives communities the majority of the revenue from the project. They also proposed a new governance structure that would include representatives from all of the community land management committees and community conservancies involved in the project. 

Communities putting forward their demands catalyzed a renegotiation of the project implementation agreement. It also kick-started a process for renewing free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) with wide participation among all residents in deciding whether to approve the terms of the new agreement. Sesia and its neighboring communities believe carbon projects present an opportunity, but only if their rights are fully protected and the project is aligned with their vision for the future.

Practical Strategies for Protecting Community Rights

The strategies that pastoralist communities in northern Kenya used to overcome common challenges reflect key lessons we’ve learned alongside frontline communities across dozens of countries: 

1- Demystify the law. Before communities engage with a project developer, they should learn about their rights under national land laws. Conservation policies and legal frameworks for carbon trading may also include protections for community rights. If the community’s land rights are not formally recognized, carbon projects can pose significant risks and it may be harder to negotiate a fair agreement. 

In addition to national laws, there are also safeguards required by carbon certification standards that communities can use to protect themselves. These often include rights to access information, to give or refuse consent for the project to operate on community land, and the right to benefit from outside investment on the community’s land.

2- Conduct fact-finding. There are several key pieces of information that communities need to consider when determining if they want to engage in carbon credit projects. They include the type of project proposed; the track record of the project proponent; the impacts on land use, local ecosystems, and communities’ livelihoods and locations with cultural or spiritual significance; and the potential revenue from credit sales.

The project proponent is obligated to share much of this information with communities as part of FPIC. Still, communities often struggle to access the information they need to make decisions. To get the information communities need, they can:

• Request information, in as specific terms as possible, directly from the proponent in writing.
• Check national and global registries, like this one from Verra — one of the global standards that sets rules for carbon projects and issues carbon credits. Two particularly important documents to look for are (a) the project design document (PDD) and (b) monitoring and verification reports. 
• File right to information requests with the government agency responsible for approving and monitoring carbon projects. 

3- Use collective bargaining. Most carbon projects affect multiple communities. This creates an opportunity to build collective power. Communities are in a stronger position if they negotiate together as a united front. We have found two practices to be particularly powerful for collective bargaining:

• Form a negotiating team to represent the community’s (or communities’) collective interests. A negotiating team can maintain collective action across the community (or communities) and push for better terms that represent the interests of the community as a whole. The negotiating team can also be tasked with regularly updating the wider community, gathering input, and ensuring collective agreement on key decisions. 
• Identify the communities’ most important demands and use them to propose the terms for an agreement. Communities often wait for project developers to make an offer, but whoever makes the first offer tends to have an advantage because the initial proposal acts as a point of reference or “anchor” that shapes how both sides approach the negotiations. When communities put forward a proposal proactively, they have more power to shape the negotiations. 

4- Get legal support. Communities can successfully negotiate on their own, but it can be helpful to get support from community paralegals or lawyers at key steps, particularly during fact-finding, when evaluating an offer, and for a final review of the draft contract to ensure it is enforceable and aligns with existing laws. Community paralegals or grassroots justice defenders can also walk with the community through the full process, from understanding the community’s rights to fact-finding to negotiations to monitoring and enforcing any agreement that is reached.  

Together, these strategies can help communities engage from a position of power while reinforcing broader ongoing struggles for self-determination, land rights, and climate justice.

Building a Global Movement for Carbon Justice

Drawing on experience supporting communities to respond to carbon projects in more than 20 countries, members of the Grassroots Justice Network have launched a global campaign to put community rights and leadership at the center of carbon markets. Together, we identified six principles necessary to make carbon projects fair. 

The first principle is that carbon credits cannot be a substitute for companies reducing their own greenhouse gas emissions. The other five principles focus on the people who live where projects take place: respecting land and water rights; ensuring the right to FPIC, including the right to say no to proposed projects; advocating for the majority of revenue from carbon sales to go to communities for any projects on community land; recognizing and honoring communities’ leadership as land stewards; and ensuring that safeguards are effectively enforced.

We are actively working to bring the Carbon Justice Principles to life at the community, national, and global levels through peer learning and collective action. First, we are creating practical tools and resources that Indigenous Peoples and frontline communities can use to overcome power imbalances with project developers. Members of our network distilled lessons from negotiations with carbon project developers through a nine-month series of learning circles. We recently compiled those insights in “How to Negotiate with Carbon Project Developers”, a practical toolkit that offers strategies communities can use to find key information about a project, negotiate from a place of power, and monitor and enforce the terms if an agreement is reached. It also includes case studies from Kenya, Liberia, Zambia, Brazil, Colombia, and the Philippines. 

We also developed Carbon Justice 101, an online course that provides a practical orientation to how carbon markets work and the risks and opportunities for communities. The course will be offered on a regular basis, with updates on how to enroll posted on the course webpage.

Second, we are advocating collectively to shape the rules that govern carbon markets. National laws on carbon trading can set crucial norms securing communities’ land rights, right to FPIC, and revenue sharing. We distilled practical guidance for civil society groups engaged in shaping national policy in a second toolkit: “How National Legislation Can Advance Carbon Justice”.

Global frameworks define standards for the wider carbon market. Guided by the carbon justice principles, Network members have advocated collectively for stricter rules under Verra and Article 6.4 of the Paris Agreement, the UN mechanism that will govern how countries and companies can trade international carbon credits while meeting their climate commitments. 

Join us in calling for stronger recognition of community leadership and protections for community rights. You can get involved in the carbon justice campaign by joining our WhatsApp community, signing up for our newsletter, or letting us know if you are planning to participate in key policy forums this year.

For more information on Carbon Justice 101.

Join our WhatsApp community.

Subscribe to our newsletter.

The post Putting the Leadership of Indigenous Peoples at the Center of Carbon Markets appeared first on Debates Indígenas.

For Indigenous Samburu, Borana, Rendille, Ogiek, Turkana, Elmolo, Pokot, and Sengwer women –many living hundreds of kilometers from courts, police posts, or health facilities– justice is rarely found in formal institutions. Instead, it is often negotiated under a tree, where elders prioritize clan harmony over a survivor’s dignity, healing, or rights. In these informal systems, women’s testimonies are minimized, violence is normalized, and perpetrators walk free. For Indigenous women and girls, silence is not a choice: it is enforced.

When Violence Meets Silence

In many pastoralist communities, survivors of rape or sexual abuse are still forced into so-called “compensation marriages”, where a girl is handed to the perpetrator’s family as settlement. Others are pressured to withdraw cases in the name of family honor or clan unity. Reporting violence is further complicated by geography: the nearest police station may be 70 to 120 kilometers away, with no transport, no fuel, and no guarantee of being heard. At times, local authorities intervene to suppress reporting, arguing that formal justice “destroys families”. What is destroyed instead is trust, safety, and the futures of girls.

To confront this reality, the Samburu Women Trust (SWT) established a Women’s Digital Centre, a modest but transformative space equipped with computers, internet access, phones, and documentation tools. For the first time in their lives, women and girls in remote villages can report cases promptly, document violations, and produce evidence required by the justice system without travelling for days. The center has become a lifeline for survivors trapped in cycles of violence.

The road to justice remains long and fragile. Survivors often walk for days across difficult terrain, carrying the trauma they have endured and facing intimidation from the perpetrators’ families.

The road to justice is long and fragile. Survivors walk for days, carrying the trauma they have endured and the intimidation of the perpetrators’ families.

SWT also created the Naramat Indigenous Women Arboretum, a sacred healing space rooted in land, culture, and collective care. Under the shade of indigenous trees, women gather for trauma healing, reflection, and solidarity. Here, stories once whispered in fear are spoken aloud with courage and the support of other women who have suffered similar experiences.

Still, the path to justice remains long and fragile. Survivors often walk for days through harsh terrain, carrying trauma and facing intimidation from perpetrators’ families. By the time they reach a police post, evidence may be compromised, files may disappear, and cases collapse. It is important to note that these are not isolated stories: they are the daily realities of Indigenous women across Kenya.

Bringing Justice Closer to the Villages

For over a decade, the Samburu Women Trust and the Indigenous Women Council (IWC) have walked alongside women and girls, crossing dry riverbeds, hills, and dusty roads, to close a justice gap that continues to widen. Our work is not only about awareness; it is about transforming power, restoring confidence in institutions, and ensuring women can speak without fear. Our approach is grounded in five interconnected pillars:

1. Community Legal Empowerment. We train Indigenous women paralegals who accompany survivors through every step of the justice process: reporting cases, understanding their rights, gathering evidence, and navigating police and court systems. As trusted daughters of their communities, these paralegals make justice more accessible and culturally grounded.

2. Challenging Harmful Elders’ Justice Systems. We engage male elders in order to confront mediation practices that treat rape or sexual abuse as negotiable family matters resolved through the transfer of livestock. Through sustained dialogue and training, more elders are now referring criminal cases to the formal authorities.

3. Safe Spaces for Girls. Under acacia trees and in village circles, SWT organizes girls’ leadership forums where girls learn about bodily autonomy, self-confidence, and their right to say no to female genital mutilation and forced marriage. These spaces nurture informed and courageous girls who know their rights.

4. Survivor-Centered Response. We collaborate with health facilities, police, local chiefs, and gender desks to ensure survivors receive medical care, psychosocial support, and legal follow-up. Our team accompanies girls from filing police statements to standing before magistrates, advocating for timely and child-sensitive justice.

5. National and Global Advocacy. Through the Indigenous Women Council, we elevate village realities to national, regional, and international platforms, advocating for gender-responsive justice systems, mobile courts, accountable policing, and recognition of Indigenous land and resource rights that shape women’s safety.

The Long Journey toward Justice

A mother from Narasha village told us sadly, “My daughter’s justice is 75 kilometers away.”Her words capture a painful truth: justice is shaped by geography, poverty, gender, power, and survival. Through sustained community engagement and survivor accompaniment, Samburu Women Trust has reopened stalled investigations, prevented forced marriages, supported girls through trials, and secured convictions in cases once silenced. Each case sets a precedent. Each voice breaks the silence for many others.

Change is emerging. Elders are increasingly referring cases to the police. Girls are refusing female genital mutilation and reporting threats. Women are organizing and demanding accountability. Chiefs and police officers are becoming more responsive as awareness grows. But the journey is far from over. Access to justice for Indigenous women and girls requires investment in mobile courts, functioning police posts, safe shelters, and culturally responsive, gender-sensitive services. Community actors, paralegals, women leaders, and traditional authorities must be recognized as equal partners.

Most importantly, Indigenous women and girls must remain at the center of all solutions. They are not only survivors; they are leaders, advocates, and architects of a more just future. For us at Samburu Women Trust and Indigenous Women Council, this work is more than advocacy – it is a lifelong commitment. We carry their stories. We push their cases. We stand with those who survive. And, in the territories, we walk long distances so that justice can finally reach the last woman in the last village.

The post Voices from remote villages in Kenya: access to justice for Indigenous women and girls appeared first on Debates Indígenas.

This daily reality unfolds where traditional gender roles intersect with the unique circumstances of pastoralist life. Pastoralist communities care for vast rangelands and sustain food systems built on generations of knowledge about livestock, mobility, and communal land use. Their contributions to food security and the environment are significant, albeit under-documented, yet opportunities to participate fully in economic and political life are often limited.

For women in these communities, the challenges are even greater: expectations around household and family responsibilities, limited access to education, remote locations, and minimal representation in decision-making all make it harder to have their voices heard. Together, these factors create a gap in access to justice that is shaped by culture and tradition as well as by structural obstacles.

External Pressures and Land Insecurity

Although it might not seem relevant, distance is a major barrier, as courts and administrative offices are far from rural pastoralist communities and costly to access. Legal systems are complex, operate in unfamiliar languages, and exclude women with limited literacy. Even when these barriers are overcome, patriarchal norms restrict women’s ability to assert claims. Harmful practices including early and forced marriage, widow disinheritance, and gender-based violence further limit access to justice. While dispute resolution prioritises social harmony, it often leaves women vulnerable and reinforces existing power imbalances rather than providing impartial protection.

These barriers are compounded by external pressures. Climate change, expanding conservation areas, commercial agriculture, and infrastructure development increasingly encroach on pastoralist grazing lands. As competition over land intensifies, disputes multiply. Despite their central role in managing households, food security, and livestock-related labour, women are rarely consulted (or compensated) in negotiations when land is lost. Their exclusion from land governance deepens economic insecurity and weakens their ability to claim their rights, reinforcing cycles of vulnerability.

Rights enshrined in global instruments or national laws have little meaning if women do not understand them, have limited access to them, or cannot safely exercise them in their own communities.

Rights enshrined in global instruments or national laws have little meaning if women do not understand them or cannot safely exercise them in their own communities.

For pastoralist women themselves, justice is understood far more broadly than legal redress alone. It is about being respected within the family, listened to by elders, and recognised by state authorities regardless of gender, ethnicity, literacy, or mobility. For them, justice means protection from violence, secure access to land and livestock, and the ability to participate in decisions that shape community futures. It also means accountability and knowing that harm will not be dismissed as a private matter or absorbed quietly in the name of tradition.

International norms support this vision. The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples affirms Indigenous Peoples’ rights to self-determination, land, and participation in decision-making, and explicitly recognises Indigenous women’s rights to equality and freedom from violence and discrimination. Yet the distance between international commitments and lived reality remains vast. Rights enshrined in global instruments or national laws have little meaning if women do not understand them, have limited access to them, or cannot safely exercise them in their own communities.

Grassroots Holistic Solutions: Pastoral Women’s Council

Bridging the justice gap requires approaches that are culturally grounded, locally led, gender-balanced, and attentive to the everyday realities of pastoralist life. This is where grassroots organisations play a critical role. The Pastoral Women’s Council (PWC) is an organisation representing more than 8,000 pastoralist women in northern Tanzania that demonstrates how access to justice can be strengthened from the ground up. Rather than treating women as passive beneficiaries, PWC operates on the premise that pastoralist women are rights-holders and agents of change. This initiative for access to justice, with a gender equity approach aimed at Indigenous Peoples, promotes:

Developing Voice and Agency: Through locally rooted dialogue and leadership training, women gain the confidence and skills to speak publicly, negotiate within households, and engage traditional leaders and government officials. This agency is evident in community-based action on land rights, where women facing displacement from tourism-related investments have helped shape more equitable outcomes through direct participation in multi-stakeholder dialogue. The women leaders have successfully challenged land dispossession, asserted inheritance rights, and intervened in cases of domestic violence, contributing to shifts in community perceptions about who has the authority to speak and to decide.

Leadership and Decision-Making: When women occupy decision-making positions, locally or nationally, issues affecting women and families are more likely to be raised, debated, and addressed. PWC’s work becomes particularly visible when women enter formal leadership spaces. Fifteen years ago, only three pastoralist women were elected as Village Chairs. Now that number is 18, with a further 1,400 such pastoralist women in decision making positions in village governing bodies. Alongside individual achievement, this increase in leadership equity signals a transformation in social norms and political inclusion.

Gender-Based Violence Prevention and Norms Change: Addressing gender-based violence requires both prevention and comprehensive responses. PWC works with women and men to challenge harmful norms that normalise abuse, while also strengthening referral pathways to health, legal, and protection services. Engaging men as allies is a deliberate strategy, recognising that lasting change depends on transforming collective attitudes, not simply supporting individual survivors.

Legal Literacy and Paralegal Support: Many pastoralist women are unaware of the rights afforded to them by law or how these intersect with customary practices. PWC’s Women’s Rights and Leadership Forums (WRLFs) translate legal concepts into local languages and real-life scenarios, enabling women to understand land laws, marriage regulations, and protections against gender-based violence. Knowledge thus becomes a tool of empowerment, reducing reliance on male intermediaries and increasing women’s confidence in asserting their claims. To further decentralise access to justice, PWC trains community-based paralegals, often women from the communities themselves, who provide basic legal guidance, mediate disputes, and connect survivors of violence to formal institutions. In areas where lawyers and courts are distant, these paralegals serve as trusted entry points into the justice system. Their presence helps demystify legal processes and ensures that women are not navigating them alone.

Land Rights and Economic Empowerment: Land and economic security are essential to women’s access to justice. Without secure land rights, women’s bargaining power remains limited. PWC thus supports marginalised women to obtain Certificates of Customary Rights of Occupancy, formalising land claims while addressing gender-based exclusion. Via Village Community Banks (VICOBA), women build savings, access loans, and develop financial literacy, later progressing to formal microfinance through partners such as Engishon Microfinance Ltd. Economic independence thus reduces vulnerability to exploitation and strengthens women’s capacity to challenge injustice.

Justice as Collective Transformation

By way of example, in 2025, Vaileth Elias and Sarah Oltetia were elected as councillors, roles traditionally dominated by men. In a recent PWC “Local to Local Dialog” training session, Vaileth shared her experience: “I received training at a very early stage [in my leadership journey] and have seen great benefits from it. This gave me the courage to run for leadership alongside four men. It was a tense time and even the men seemed confused. Eventually, I was announced the winner by a large margin.”  This gaining of confidence and agency was confirmed by Sarah: “I now know how to call a meeting, whom to invite, and how to train people so that they clearly understand what I am communicating”. She continued, “Where I am today, serving as a Councillor, is truly because of the education I received through PWC.”

Despite their proven impact and scalable models, organisations such as Pastoral Women’s Council face significant structural barriers, particularly in mobilising financial and technical resources. Global climate, conservation, and land-rights funding rarely reaches Indigenous and local women-led organisations directly, undermining sustainability and limiting institutional growth. If equitable access to justice for Indigenous pastoralist women is a genuine priority, funding architectures must change. Direct, long-term, gender-responsive financing is not charity: it is a strategic investment in effective, sustainable, locally legitimate justice systems.

In conclusion, the experience of pastoralist women in Tanzania challenges narrow definitions of justice. Laws and courts matter but they are insufficient without cultural legitimacy, economic security, and women’s leadership. Justice emerges when women can speak, communities recognise their authority, and institutions respond to lived realities. The work of PWC, and the solidarity expressed by its members and allies, demonstrates that integrated approaches, combining legal literacy, leadership development, economic empowerment, and community advocacy, can address the root causes of injustice. Equitable access to justice is ultimately about power: who holds it, who shares it, and who can claim it.

The post Cultural Barriers in Indigenous Pastoralist Women and Girls’ Access to Justice in Tanzania appeared first on Debates Indígenas.

Hunter-gatherer communities include the Ogiek, Sengwer, Yiaku, Waata and Awer (Boni) peoples, while pastoralist groups include the Turkana, Rendille, Borana, Maasai, Samburu, Ilchamus, Somalis, Gabra, Pokot and Endorois. Despite their diversity, these communities share common challenges: insecurity of land tenure and resources, limited access to basic services, poor political representation, and persistent discrimination and exclusion. These problems have intensified in recent years as pressure for land, water, and natural resources has increased.

Kenya is a largely patriarchal society and Indigenous women are therefore affected both by their status as members of historically marginalized communities and by social norms entrenched within their own societies. These dynamics have limited their access to education, economic opportunities and leadership spaces, while constraining their ability to meaningfully influence cultural governance, decision-making and development processes.

Historical Context of Kenya

The roots of the peace and conflict dynamics affecting Indigenous Peoples in northern Kenya are deeply embedded in colonial and post-colonial legacies. These are mostly pastoralist communities, along with minority groups of hunter-gatherers and traditional blacksmiths. Their presence in the region dates back to the 17^th century when they developed sustainable livelihood systems, governance structures and cultural traditions that fostered peaceful coexistence, shared responsibility and communal resource sharing.

British colonial rule disrupted these systems, however, systematically dispossessing them of their most fertile lands through policies such as the establishment of so-called “White Highlands”, the imposition of alien colonial governance systems, the introduction of fixed colonial boundaries and the criminalization of mobile ways of life. These interventions fractured seasonal resource-sharing arrangements and weakened the institutions that had historically regulated access, mitigated conflicts, and maintained ecological balance.

Following independence, the Kenyan state retained these colonial models of governance and development. National policies prioritized sedentary agriculture, extractive economic development, and centralized state control while pastoralist regions remained marginalized and under-resourced. Northern Kenya was viewed as a peripheral and insecure “frontier” and as economically unproductive “wastelands” that required military control rather than rights-based inclusion. This framing entrenched patterns of chronic underdevelopment, structural violence, and recurrent conflicts that persist to this day..

Global Protection Tools

International human rights mechanisms have drawn attention to the situation of Indigenous pastoralist communities in northern Kenya, particularly in relation to land dispossession, development-induced displacement, and inadequate consultation on large-scale development, conservation and extraction projects. Pastoral communities have produced reports, held community consultations, strengthened movements, engaged in advocacy and worked with the media to ensure that local realities are taken into account in international scrutiny.

UN Special Rapporteurs on the rights of Indigenous Peoples have emphasized that communal land tenure, self-determination and Indigenous governance are central to conflict prevention and climate resilience. At the regional level, standards developed by the African Commission and the African Court on collective land rights have further strengthened pastoralists’ claims. These international and regional commitments have together reinforced reform efforts in Kenya and have positioned Indigenous Peoples-led and rights-based approaches as fundamental to peace and sustainable development.

Pastoralist communities have suffered processes of marginalization and social exclusion. This has resulted in limited access to development and political representation, various forms of exploitation, and displacement.

Pastoralist communities have been exposed to multidimensional poverty in a context marked by the effects of climate change.

At the local level, Indigenous communities have historically relied on complex systems of traditional governance, rooted in customary law, elders’ councils, spiritual authority, and reciprocal agreements for shared land use. These systems included carefully regulated access to pasture and water, such as restricting grazing in certain areas during wet seasons to ensure availability during periods of drought. This governance was well-suited to arid and semi-arid grasslands characterized by scarce and unpredictable rainfall, and contributed to the protection of biodiversity and vital ecosystems.

These communities have nevertheless long suffered processes of marginalization and social exclusion. This has resulted in limited access to development and political representation, various forms of exploitation, and forced displacement. As a consequence, they have been exposed to situations of multidimensional poverty in a context marked by the effects of climate change. Over time, conflict resolution systems have been further weakened by land alienation, environmental stress, a proliferation of firearms, and externally-imposed administrative boundaries that have fragmented Indigenous territories.

Land, Governance and Climate Resilience

A central driver of conflict in northern Kenya is insecure land tenure and the erosion of Indigenous governance systems and structures. Securing communal land rights is therefore foundational to peacebuilding. In more than two decades of work in the territory, the Indigenous Movement for Peace Advancement & Conflict Transformation (IMPACT) has been guided by the vision of “secure land tenure rights as a foundation for thriving communities”. For pastoralists and hunter-gatherers alike, land is not merely an economic asset but the foundation of identity, culture, livelihoods and social cohesion.

This urgency has shaped IMPACT’s interventions towards building programmes and models that help to protect land tenure, ensure sustainable resource management, strengthen inclusive governance frameworks, revitalize Indigenous decision-making institutions, and promote inclusion and peaceful coexistence. Our work is grounded in building the capacity of communities to defend their rights and on enabling national policy frameworks, strengthened by more than 30 years of trust-building between communities and their traditional institutions, as well as sustained partnerships across the landscape.

By anchoring peacebuilding in territorial rights and self-determination, the structural roots of conflict are addressed and dependence on conventional conflict resolution mechanisms is reduced.

By anchoring peacebuilding in territorial rights and self-determination, the structural roots of conflict are addressed.

Through these efforts, a community land protection programme has been established that has supported more than 30 community territories to obtain formal legal recognition under the 2016 Community Land Law. By anchoring peacebuilding in land rights and self-determination, these interventions address the structural roots of conflict, reducing reliance on conventional conflict resolution mechanisms and securitized responses. Indigenous communities are thus able to govern their territories and resources more equitably and peacefully.

Climate change is another factor that has altered the dynamics of conflict in northern Kenya by intensifying competition for land, water and pasture. Over the past century, Kenya has experienced more than 28 droughts, four of them in the last decade, thus exacerbating vulnerability in the north of the country. Sustainable peace in this context therefore depends on building climate-resilient livelihoods grounded in Indigenous knowledge and adapted to rangeland ecosystems. IMPACT is thus supporting pastoralism as a viable livelihood, promoting rangeland restoration and sustainable grazing practices, and strengthening Indigenous Peoples-led conservation and natural resource governance.

Towards Inclusive Peacebuilding

Peacebuilding in Indigenous contexts must be intergenerational and culturally grounded. Women and young people experience conflict differently and are excluded from formal peace processes, despite bearing the highest costs of violence and displacement. IMPACT is promoting inclusive peacebuilding by facilitating community peace committees, supporting women-led advocacy through bootcamps, and nurturing youth peace ambassadors to promote dialogue between ethnic groups.

IMPACT Kenya has also supported cross-border initiatives and regional pastoral movements aimed at strengthening sustainable pastoralism and addressing the systemic drivers of conflict that transcend administrative and national boundaries. Together, these approaches draw on Indigenous justice systems, collective memory, and restorative practices, prioritizing healing, reciprocity, and coexistence over punitive or militarized responses, thereby reinforcing locally legitimate pathways to peace.

The experience in northern Kenya demonstrates that sustainable peace is not achieved through militarized or top-down approaches but instead emerges from secure communities, robust community institutions and respect for self-determination.

The experience in northern Kenya shows that sustainable peace emerges from safe communities, robust community institutions, and respect for self-determination.

Looking ahead, peace and conflict dynamics in northern Kenya will continue to be shaped by climate stress, land tenure security, political influences, and pressures on land use, with ongoing risks of militarization, extractive expansion, and climate displacement. At the same time, there are significant opportunities for transformation: progress in community land registration, strengthening Indigenous Peoples-led governance systems, recognition of Free, Prior and Informed Consent, and greater participation and recognition of women and youth in peacebuilding.

The experience of Indigenous Peoples in northern Kenya demonstrates that sustainable peace is not achieved through militarized or top-down approaches but instead emerges from secure and strengthened communities, robust community institutions, and respect for Indigenous knowledge and self-determination. As conflicts intensify under climate and political pressures, Indigenous Peoples-led, rights-based peacebuilding offers viable pathways rooted in justice, autonomy, and coexistence. These approaches are not only essential in Kenya but also in global debates on Indigenous rights, conflict resolution, and decolonial paths to peace.

The post The Challenges of Peaceful Coexistence among Pastoralist Communities in Kenya appeared first on Debates Indígenas.

PINGO’s Forum conducted field research using a mixed-methods approach, including Key Informant Interviews with community leaders, Focus Group Discussions to gather collective perspectives, and Direct Community Engagement through open dialogues with affected individuals. Special emphasis was placed on inclusivity, ensuring the participation of women, youth, and marginalised groups in order to capture diverse voices and experiences.

The study captured responses from three principal regions: Manyara (35%), Dodoma (33%) and Tanga (31%), reflecting a broadly balanced participation across the surveyed areas. Variations in regional representation may reflect differing levels of access during data collection. In some communities, EACOP’s reportedly strong local engagement may have influenced cooperation with external researchers, while security constraints linked to the project limited our ability to reach certain zones. These dynamics highlight the challenges of ensuring fully inclusive participation in high-stakes development contexts.

Community Consultation and Participation in EACOP

The study recorded a notable gender disparity: 69% male and 27% female respondents. The remaining respondents either did not specify their gender or identified differently. This imbalance may reflect broader societal and cultural barriers to women’s participation in consultations, and occupational biases in project-affected roles (for example, land negotiations are often male-dominated).

Our fact-finding study found that only 23% of respondents were consulted during EACOP’s planning or implementation, while 30% explicitly stated that they were excluded. Engagement was largely limited to community meetings (18%), with minimal individual or household-level participation (household surveys 4%; interviews 1%). 

These findings reveal systemic flaws in the consultation process that fail to meet FPIC standards—especially for marginalised groups with low literacy and limited project awareness.

These findings reveal systemic flaws in the consultation process that fail to meet FPIC standards—especially for marginalised groups with low literacy and limited project awareness.

The quality of inclusion was rated poorly: 22% described consultations as “not inclusive at all” and only 1% rated them “very inclusive”. Critically, just 4% believed their feedback influenced project decisions, 25% said their views were ignored, and 30% remained uncertain. Major barriers to meaningful participation included language difficulties (25%), a lack of access to information (18%), and limited community representation (6%); some respondents described consultations as performative, characterising them as “collective gatherings that were not inclusive”. 

These findings reveal systemic flaws in the consultation process that fail to meet FPIC standards—especially for marginalised groups with low literacy (52% with no formal education) and limited project awareness (32% initially unaware of EACOP). Community members reported that they felt they had no power to decide whether the project should proceed.

Impact of EACOP on Livelihoods

Our study reveals that 43% of participants experienced negative livelihood impacts from EACOP, predominantly through loss of grazing land (34%) and displacement (13%). Exhumations of graves have caused profound cultural disruption: “We were shocked — this has never happened on Maasai land!” said Lukas Sonyo, whose father’s grave was dug up for the pipeline. Promised funds for proper reburial rituals were not forthcoming, leaving families to mourn with diminished, culturally inappropriate ceremonies. The severity of impact was notable: 29% described the effects as significant, 5% as moderate and 1% as severe — impacts that disproportionately affected pastoralist households.

Compensation systems have failed to match these impacts, with only 23% receiving any redress and 27% confirming they had received none. Among the few who were compensated, satisfaction was deeply divided: a mere 9% considered compensation adequate, whilst 5% deemed it inadequate and another 9% were uncertain — a division that underscores the confusion and dissatisfaction among even those who reported payments. High non-response rates likely conceal additional uncompensated cases thus weakening the transparency of redress processes.

When combined with the 38% non-responses, these figures paint a picture of systemic redress failures, particularly for land-dependent groups (69% of respondents) whose cultural-economic ties to territory defy conventional valuation methods. 43% of families lost grazing land, whilst only 9% feel they received fair compensation. Crucially, all surveyed communities reported that EACOP’s promised social programmes had not materialised.

Lack of Compensation and Poor Working Conditions

The study reveals significant shortcomings in EACOP’s local employment initiatives, with 34% of respondents confirming no job opportunities had been created for community members, whilst 36% stated that no one in their household had been employed by the project or its contractors. Accessibility remains a major concern, as 21% reported exclusionary hiring practices, and 12% were unsure if opportunities were equally available. Furthermore, 21% viewed local employment benefits as unfair, and 14% remained uncertain. The absence of capacity-building programmes (34% confirmed no training initiatives) only exacerbates these issues.

In Gorimba village, a youth representative involved in EACOP issues reported that overtime wages agreed in contracts were not being honoured. He stated: “Before starting work, we agreed on a specific amount of money for a set time, for example, from 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM. However, at the end of the agreed time, if there is leftover work, they tell us to finish it and promise to compensate us for overtime. But they never pay us for the extra time.”

The study reveals significant shortcomings in EACOP’s local employment initiatives, with 34% of respondents confirming no job opportunities had been created for community members, whilst 36% stated that no one in their household had been employed by the project or its contractors.

The study reveals significant shortcomings in EACOP’s local employment initiatives, with 34% of respondents confirming no job opportunities had been created for community members.

Othman, a 25-year-old from Kitwai B village, discovered an online training opportunity advertised by EACOP. Due to poor network connectivity, he travelled approximately 20km to climb a baobab tree to access the courses, later travelling 75km to Orkesumet to continue his studies safely.

Despite completing all nine modules with an impressive 98% average and being announced as selected for a three-month course at VETA Moshi during an EACOP quarterly engagement workshop in Arusha, Othman was ultimately not selected for unknown and seemingly biased reasons. This decision contradicted EACOP’s signed plan, which prioritises employment opportunities for affected Indigenous communities.

Grave Injustice: Cultural Desecration in Sendeni Village

Lukas Sonyo, a 52-year-old man from Sendeni village in Handeni, experienced one of EACOP’s most profound cultural violations. When the pipeline route was planned in 2021, it was discovered that it would pass through the grave of his father, who had passed away in January 2013. The family, unwilling to accept the exhumation—a practice unheard of in Maasai culture—requested that the route be diverted. EACOP refused, insisting instead on traditional reburial rituals. Lukas expressed their shock: “We were shocked because we have never experienced, witnessed, or heard of anything like this on Maasai land.””

EACOP compensated the extended family with 1.8 million Tanzanian shillings—grossly inadequate for a household that included two surviving wives and four married sons with their families, totalling over 20 members. The company’s support has been limited to 10kg of rice, 10kg of maize, and 3 litres of cooking oil per month, ignoring the family’s size and cultural needs.

Although EACOP pledged to cover the costs of proper reburial ceremonies, involving slaughtering a bull and anointing the deceased with its oil, they defaulted, forcing the family to use a goat instead—a profound cultural compromise.

Unfulfilled Promises

Kitwai B was recognised as the only village affected in Simanjiro District and participated in the signing of an agreement on 28 October 2021. However, after the village chairperson filed a complaint on 25 June 2024 regarding compensation issues and the loss of 6km of grazing land, EACOP’s response on 11 November 2024 stated: “There is currently no verified basis for recognising Kitwai B as being affected by the project”, even whilst continuing to invite their representatives to engagement workshops. Another case involves a church in Tanga that was affected by EACOP’s activities. Compensation was provided but it was unfairly awarded to a single individual rather than the church community. Similarly, compensation for Aulo Oo Nkishu—a shared communal space (100m to 200m compound next to a boma, used as an animal holding area and shared among families within the boma)—also went to only one person. These actions highlight unclear and unfair compensation practices by EACOP.

The pipeline passes just 351 steps from Sandawe ancestral land—a site of profound cultural and historical significance near a sacred rock inscribed in 1914 with the Sandawe phrase “Mokolo wa nkwe” (“Greet them”). Despite this proximity to their heritage, the Sandawe people have been systematically excluded from project consultations. This exclusion underscores a broader pattern of neglect in which Indigenous voices and ancestral traditions are erased in the name of progress.

“We see all the project plans and activities happening but we are not aware of what is going on with the Social Investment Programme. Will they implement it after the project is done? How can we be sure they will follow through?”

“We are not aware of what is going on with the Social Investment Programme. Will they implement it after the project is done? How can we be sure they will follow through?”

In a signed plan dated 16 September 2023, EACOP outlined its commitment to implement a Social Investment Programme for vulnerable ethnic groups. And yet 100% of the communities that PINGO’s Forum engaged with have raised concerns about unfulfilled promises under this programme. The study found severely limited community awareness and benefit from EACOP’s social investment programmes, with only 12% of respondents aware of any initiatives and 36% confirming that no benefits had reached their communities. Critically, 34% stated that these programmes had failed to address their most pressing needs such as schools, healthcare, and water access. One community member from Gisambalang village in Hanang District stated: “We see all the project plans and activities happening but we are not aware of what is going on with the Social Investment Programme. Will they implement it after the project is done? How can we be sure they will follow through?”

Conclusions and Recommendations

This research demonstrates EACOP’s systematic failure to respect Indigenous rights, to implement meaningful consultation processes, and to deliver the promised benefits to affected communities. The project’s approach contravenes international standards for Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) and has caused—and continues to cause—irreparable harm to Indigenous cultures and livelihoods.

These findings call for an immediate suspension of pipeline operations until proper FPIC has been secured from all affected Indigenous communities, together with an independent compensation review conducted with full Indigenous participation that audits past payments and identifies equitable remedies. 

The voices of Tanzania’s Indigenous Peoples must be heard and their rights respected; continuing on the current trajectory risks not progress but the systematic erasure of cultures that have stewarded these lands for generations.

Continuing on the current trajectory risks not progress, but the systematic erasure of cultures that have stewarded these lands for generations.

All EACOP staff and contractors must undertake mandatory Indigenous rights training, and transparent government oversight mechanisms should be established with Indigenous representation to ensure accountability. Finally, the commitments set out in the Social Investment Programme must be honoured with clear, time-bound implementation plans and independent monitoring.

The voices of Tanzania’s Indigenous Peoples must be heard and their rights respected; continuing on the current trajectory risks not progress but the systematic erasure of cultures that have stewarded these lands for generations.

The post The Social, Economic and Cultural Impact of EACOP on Indigenous Peoples in Tanzania appeared first on Debates Indígenas.

In recent years, Mainyoito Pastoralists Integrated Development Organization (MPIDO) has facilitated data collection through surveys in Maasai communities in Kajiado County. MPIDO is an Indigenous organization based in Kenya that works with communities and other stakeholders to promote the rights of Indigenous Peoples and marginalized communities. The data collection process took place within the framework of the Indigenous Navigator, an initiative that seeks to empower Indigenous Peoples by systematically monitoring the level of recognition and implementation of their rights.

Building Trust through Community Data Collection

The data collection process began by identifying young people from the community itself, who were then trained by MPIDO as interviewers. During the training, they became familiar with the questionnaires and they shared strategies for approaching their communities. To facilitate the process, MPIDO translated the surveys into the Maa language, thus enabling the communities to better understand the consultation and provide more accurate responses. This was noted by Ole Sirere, a community elder who valued the use of his own language: “Nena taa taata enkilikwanare ang” (“Now these are our questions, we can make them our own”).

The Indigenous Navigator community survey included all sectors: women, elders, youth and leaders. Information was collected through focus groups (women and youth), key informant interviews (opinion leaders, traditional and administrative chiefs) and community assemblies with representatives from different villages. The communities had already participated in many studies and so they were initially suspicious and spoke of “research fatigue”, feeling overburdened by external questionnaires. However, they enthusiastically accepted the project because of its different nature: the involvement of local interviewers and the possibility of implementing small community projects.

Following analysis, the results were returned to the community for validation. The data revealed serious development gaps, human rights violations and clear political marginalization. Among the main shortcomings were a lack of community participation in development initiatives, the absence of basic services such as schools, health centres and drinking water, and land dispossession due to insecurity of tenure.

Food Insecurity in the Face of Climate Change

The Indigenous Navigator Initiative offers small grants for communities to develop solutions to the most pressing problems identified in the surveys. One such initiative was the Oltepesi Women’s Irrigation Project, implemented by MPIDO. Based on the data and community validation, food insecurity was determined to be the highest priority. The irrigation project was thus developed as a direct response to this need, reflecting a community-driven approach.

The Maasai community of Oltepesi lies 70 kilometres west of Nairobi, in the heart of the Great Rift Valley, and has a population of approximately 36,000. The arid landscape, with dormant volcanic formations, ashy soils and intermittent savannahs, is conducive to cattle ranching. Rising temperatures and erratic rainfall have, however, made this area extremely vulnerable to drought and famine, clear indicators of the climate crisis.

Recurrent droughts have been reducing the pastures and water sources, forcing men to migrate with their livestock. In the most severe cases, they may now migrate for nine months of the year. This leaves women and children without food and basic resources, forcing women to struggle to support their families. The project thus sought to support women in combatting food insecurity at the household level.

Food Security and Opportunities for Women

Although the Oltepesi community already had wells drilled thanks to a previous MPIDO project, the women did not have the means to utilize these beyond domestic consumption. During the surveys, they proposed incorporating simple irrigation systems that would channel water to their gardens, allowing them to grow food for their own consumption plus a surplus to sell. They would thus be able to feed their children, especially in dry periods when milk is scarce, and would have an alternative source of livelihood to livestock.

MPIDO established a partnership with Kajiado County Government and requested technical assistance from the Kenyan Ministry of Agriculture before starting the project. Agricultural experts conducted field visits to the community and provided guidance on proper irrigation methods, crop selection and sustainable agricultural practices adapted to the region. Analysis confirmed that the soil and climatic conditions were suitable for growing fruit and vegetables such as kale, tomatoes, squash, onions, cabbage and watermelon.

The change is especially noticeable for girls, who had not previously been a priority. Since Maa culture dictates that mothers must provide for the basic needs of their daughters, as family incomes improve, more girls are now able to go to school.

Since Maa culture dictates that mothers must provide for the basic needs of their daughters, as family incomes improve, more girls are now able to go to school.

Funded by a small grant from the Indigenous Navigator, the project was successfully implemented and is now in full production. The women are growing food for the household and selling the surplus, achieving economic stability. This allows them to send their children to school and ensure they remain there, laying the groundwork for breaking the cycle of poverty. The change is especially noticeable for girls, who had not previously been a priority due to cultural barriers. Since Maa culture dictates that mothers must provide for the basic needs of their daughters, as family incomes improve, more girls are now able to go to school.

In addition, women, who used to be burdened with unpaid domestic work (from caring for children and sick animals to collecting water and firewood) now have an income that allows them to hire help from within the community. They thus have more time for themselves and for other productive activities. With the profits they have made, they hope to expand the project and even replicate it in other villages.

Self-Determination and Advocacy through the Indigenous Navigator

Since its creation in 2000, MPIDO has implemented numerous projects. However, the Indigenous Navigator Initiative is particularly noteworthy for two reasons. The first is that this process offered Indigenous Peoples the opportunity to generate information for their own benefit. The interviewers were selected by the communities and trained by the Indigenous organizations. As Nayiari Oyie, an Indigenous woman from Oltepesi noted, “I am deeply moved to see our own children interviewing us because they belong here and really understand our problems.”

The second distinctive feature is that the Indigenous Navigator enabled communities to identify and prioritize their own problems, supporting them with small projects that respond to those needs. This has made a big difference because, often when data collected, it is not fed back to the communities, leaving them feeling used. Naboru Enole Kooshoi says: “We are very grateful because we have had surveys done in the past but, once the surveyors leave, we never see them again and we are left here with all our problems unresolved.”

Data from the Indigenous Navigator has already been incorporated into the county’s Integrated Development Plans, ensuring that some of the gaps identified are addressed with public funds.

The information generated at the community level is vital for developing policies, strengthening social participation and guiding governance strategies.

Beyond the projects financed, the information generated has become a key advocacy tool, feeding into development plans at the local level. Data from the Indigenous Navigator has already been incorporated into the county’s Integrated Development Plans, ensuring that some of the gaps identified are addressed with public funds. In this way, communities have information that enables them to demand accountability from the local and national authorities.

In short, the Indigenous Navigator Initiative empowers Indigenous communities to collect and use their own data on issues crucial to their rights and self-determined development. Information generated at the community level is vital for making appropriate decisions, developing policies, strengthening social participation and guiding governance and development strategies determined by Indigenous Peoples themselves.

The post From Data to Action: Community-Based Irrigation for Food Security among Maasai Women in Kenya appeared first on Debates Indígenas.

Many Indigenous communities have suffered from so-called “research fatigue”, i.e., the feeling generated by external studies that extract information from the territories without leaving any tangible benefit behind. Instead, the Indigenous Navigator empowers communities, ensuring that their voices are heard and their needs prioritized in a way that respects their autonomy and their own development. Their worldview, priorities and needs are thus reflected in the surveys.

This article emphasizes the experiences and outcomes of conducting surveys through the Indigenous Navigator in Narok County, southern Kenya. It highlights how the process has resulted in advocacy actions, improved access to water and the construction and implementation of healthcare facilities, strengthening the Maasai and Ogiek peoples to defend their rights, define their development priorities and improve their economic and social well-being.

Data Collection and Empowerment

A key element of the Indigenous Navigator Initiative is its emphasis on community-led data collection. The Indigenous rights organizations that work closely with local communities play a key role in this process. One such organization is Indigenous Livelihoods Enhancement Partners (ILEPA), a non-profit, community-based non-governmental organization in Kenya that promotes human rights, social justice, environmental protection, climate change advocacy and grassroots development, with a special focus on supporting the Maasai community in Narok County.

The data collection process begins with the translation of the Indigenous Navigator-developed questionnaire into local languages by ILEPA, which ensures accessibility and understanding. The next step is to identify data collectors in consultation with the community. These individuals, drawn from within the community, are trained in the main points of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) and in the proper administration of the survey.

Once the data is collected, it is presented in community assemblies for validation, ensuring that it reflects the needs and concerns of the population. This process encourages active participation and fosters a sense of ownership. The data collectors then review and comment on the information with the technical support of the ILEPA team. Quantitative data are then uploaded to the Indigenous Navigator online portal, while ILEPA conducts additional qualitative analyses in order to develop site-specific case studies. These findings are again shared with the community during assemblies, generating opportunities for feedback and discussion.

A Health Centre for Women in Labour

The initiative includes a small grants fund that enables participating communities to identify their most pressing issues based on the data collected and to design and implement their own solutions. The Keneti community was identified as most in need of support among the four that participated in the community survey process. With technical assistance from ILEPA, they developed a project to improve access to basic health services through the construction of a primary-level healthcare facility.

Through focus groups, key informant interviews and community discussions using the questionnaire, the different sectors of the population agreed that a lack of access to basic health services was the biggest problem facing them. They also agreed on the need to build a water reservoir in Enkutoto, to dredge the dam in Maji-moto for irrigation, to construct a maternity hospital in Maji-moto and another clinic in Ololoipang’i, and to document land claims in Maji-moto and Enkutoto.

In the absence of nearby health services, women in labour have to be transported on donkeys, while disabled or elderly people are often unable to travel long distances.

In the absence of nearby health services, women in labour have to be transported on donkeys.

From the data collected, it emerged that the nearest health facilities are located 10 to 12 kms outside of Keneti, which is further complicated by the poor state of the road infrastructure. Vulnerable groups such as women, people with disabilities and the elderly are disproportionately affected by this situation. In the absence of nearby health facilities, women in labour have to be transported by donkey, while disabled or elderly people are often unable to travel long distances.

These small grants are highly valuable because they are driven directly by Indigenous communities. The needs are identified from within, without external influence, ensuring that initiatives align with their most pressing concerns. Moreover, by involving the community in both data collection and project implementation, the initiative fosters a sense of ownership and responsibility, thus contributing to the sustainability of these actions.

Main Achievements and Positive Impacts

The Indigenous Navigator project has yielded a number of important achievements and positive impacts within the participating communities. These outcomes not only reflect the effectiveness of the initiative but also highlight the importance of community-driven development in improving the lives of Indigenous Peoples.

1. Availability of Indigenous data: the data revealed critical problems, such as the long distances (an average of 15 kms) that people must travel to access clinics, resulting in high maternal mortality rates. Water scarcity and sediment accumulation in the Maji-moto reservoir was also identified as a major challenge.

2. Improved access to health services: access to health care has improved significantly. The construction of a dispensary and maternity ward in Maji-moto and Ololoipang’i has reduced maternal deaths and improved healthcare services for mothers and children. The Maji-moto dispensary and maternity ward gained national attention when it was featured in the Kenya Broadcasting Corporation’s Saving Mothers documentary. In addition, Narok County government assigned three health professionals to these clinics and pledged to ensure a continuous supply of basic medicines.

3. Land rights advocacy: the surveys revealed cases of illegal land allocations and land grabbing. These findings were cited in a landmark court ruling that secured the land rights of the Maji-moto community. The ruling has led to the recovery of public and community lands, to the benefit of both individual households and the wider community.

4. Food security: the rehabilitation of a reservoir in Maji-moto has significantly improved the food security of more than 500 agro-pastoral households, demonstrating the vital link between access to water and sustainable livelihoods.

5. Access to water: one of the most important projects has been the construction of a large reservoir in Enkutoto. This work has reduced the distance women have to travel to collect water from 15-20 kms to just 1-3 kms. The project has also helped reduce human-wildlife conflicts by ensuring a stable source of water for both.

6. Advocacy and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): the data collected has been referenced in Kenya CSOs’ SDGs Forum Report and voluntary organizations’ national reports. In 2020, ILEPA received the National SDGs Kenya Award for localizing these goals at the community level. In addition, the information has been used in advocacy efforts at both the local and national levels, influencing public policy decisions such as reducing water access distances in Narok County.

7. National recognition: ILEPA’s work has received national recognition, including collaboration with the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics to validate and incorporate community-generated data into official reports. Information from the Indigenous Navigator has also been cited in Kenya’s Climate Action Plan and in REDD+ processes, highlighting its significance in shaping national development strategies. Internationally, ILEPA received the Equator Prize in 2024, in recognition of its efforts and interventions at the community level.

A Community-Driven Model for Sustainable Development

The long-term impact of the Indigenous Navigator Initiative is expected to be transformative for the communities involved. By empowering Indigenous Peoples to lead their own development, the project has laid the foundations for sustainable, rights-based progress. Communities are now better equipped to advocate for their needs and to monitor and influence policies at both the local and national levels.

For the Maji-moto community, the Indigenous Navigator has provided a model of sustainable, community-driven development. It has shown that when Indigenous Peoples have control over data collection and make their own decisions about their development, the outcomes are not only more relevant and effective but also more sustainable in the long term.

When communities lead the data generation process, the results are locally transformative and globally scalable, offering hope for a future in which Indigenous rights and development priorities are respected.

When communities lead the data generation process, the results are transformative, offering hope for a future that respects Indigenous rights.

The experiences of the Maasai and Ogiek communities in Narok County offer a powerful example of how the Indigenous Navigator can serve both as a legal tool and as a catalyst for development: advancing land justice, as demonstrated by the Maji-moto court ruling on land rights; improving access to water, health and food security for Indigenous communities; influencing national policies on SDGs and climate action; and pushing for the recognition and use of Indigenous-generated data in official reporting.

As the Indigenous Navigator Initiative expands to 30 countries, Kenya’s experience stands as a compelling model for rights-based monitoring. It demonstrates that when Indigenous communities lead the data generation process, the results are not only locally transformative but also globally scalable, offering hope for a future in which Indigenous Peoples’ rights are respected and their development priorities are addressed.

The post A Blueprint for Rights and Development in Kenya appeared first on Debates Indígenas.

The Ujamaa Community Resource Team (UCRT) addresses these challenges by supporting communities to secure Certificates of Village Land (CVLs) and communal Certificates of Customary Right of Occupancy (CCROs), which are crucial steps in land tenure security. CVLs are obtained once neighbouring villages have reached agreement on their respective outer boundaries and sometimes require the resolution of existing conflicts. After completing a land-use plan, areas for common use, such as grazing, hunting, and gathering, are titled with a CCRO.

These legal tools provide Indigenous communities with the means to control and manage their lands sustainably. By promoting connectivity and traditional land-use practices, such as rotational grazing, the Ujamaa Community Resource Team helps communities adapt to climate change impacts such as severe droughts, which are increasingly common in northern Tanzania’s arid regions.

Strengthening governance for sustainable resource management

Securing land rights is just the beginning. Effective resource management requires accountable governance institutions that integrate customary practices with formal legal frameworks. The Ujamaa Community Resource Team advocates for transparent and equitable governance structures that empower communities to make collective decisions about their land and resources. This approach not only ensures sustainable management of natural resources but also supports the preservation of cultural practices and traditional knowledge.

UCRT’s efforts include facilitating Participatory Village Land-Use Plans (PVLUPs) and Joint Village Land-Use Plans (JVLUPs) in order to promote coordinated management of shared resources. These plans enhance the connectivity of rangelands, enabling both livestock and wildlife to move freely across the landscape. This is crucial for maintaining ecological balance and resilience against climate impacts.

The capacity-building approach not only improves climate resilience but also increases food security and reduces poverty by diversifying income sources through entrepreneurship.

The capacity-building approach not only improves climate resilience but also increases food security and reduces poverty.

Furthermore, one of the Ujamaa Community Resource Team’s core objectives is to build community capacity for responsible environmental stewardship. By promoting practices such as sustainable rangeland management and integrating scientific knowledge with traditional approaches, UCRT helps communities create healthier ecosystems that are more resilient to climate change. For instance, in the Longido district, they are working with communities to improve the management of over 400,000 hectares of rangelands, benefiting both the environment and local livelihoods.

Through these initiatives, UCRT empowers communities to take proactive steps in adapting to climate variability, such as developing strategies for water conservation and soil erosion control. This capacity-building approach not only enhances climate resilience but also improves food security and reduces poverty by diversifying income sources through nature-based enterprises such as eco-tourism and carbon projects, which are developed in alliance with external actors.

Promoting Inclusive Governance and Social Equity

Equitable resource management is crucial for sustainable development. Accordingly, UCRT places a strong emphasis on empowering marginalized groups, women, and youth. Through the Women’s Rights and Leadership Forums (WRLFs), UCRT’s inclusive approach fosters social influence, economic empowerment, skills development opportunities, strengthened community institutions and fair governance of resources.

By ensuring that all community members have a voice in decision-making processes, UCRT aims to create governance systems that are not only effective but also just. This inclusive model supports the broader goal of achieving equitable land rights and resource management, which are essential for building resilient communities capable of withstanding the impacts of climate change.

By collaborating with national networks such as PINGOs Forum and Tanzania Land Alliance, UCRT amplifies the voices of Indigenous communities and lobbies for policy changes that reflect their needs and priorities.

By collaborating with national networks such as PINGOs Forum and Tanzania Land Alliance, UCRT amplifies the voices of Indigenous communities and lobbies for policy changes that reflect their needs and priorities.

UCRT’s work in securing land rights and promoting sustainable resource management is vital for the resilience of Indigenous communities in Tanzania. By linking land tenure security with climate resilience, UCRT provides a model of how Indigenous-led conservation can support both human and environmental well-being. As the challenges of climate change and land alienation intensify, the need for such community-driven approaches becomes ever more critical.

UCRT’s advocacy efforts are amplified at the national level through its collaboration with national organizations such as PINGOs Forum and Tanzania Land Alliance. They also extend beyond Tanzania’s borders: its members are engaged in international platforms such as the Local Communities and Indigenous Peoples Platform of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). These engagements aim to share best practices on community-based Indigenous climate resilience strategies, influence policy at multiple levels and ensure that Indigenous perspectives are included in global climate governance discussions.

The post A Pathway to Climate Resilience for Indigenous Communities in Tanzania appeared first on Debates Indígenas.