Home / SE Asia and Pacific

Working with Indigenous Peoples and local communities: 8 Lessons from GCBC Research

Published 29 Jan 2026

GCBC

Tags

Governance and Policy Improving livelihoods Indigenous Peoples Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Partnership Social Inclusion

Share

Research conducted in partnership with Indigenous Peoples and local communities (IPLCs) is increasingly shown to develop stronger, more inclusive understanding of our shared environment¹. By grounding evidence in local realities and lived experience, such approaches improve the relevance, impact, and resilience of interventions.

At GCBC, we place strong emphasis on incorporating local and Indigenous knowledge into the development of scalable and policy-relevant solutions. However, the role of IPLCs in research partnerships is complicated. In many projects, they may simultaneously be the subjects of research, the implementers of research, and the expected beneficiaries of the solutions developed.

At the same time, the relationship between researchers and IPLCs may be characterised by very distinct priorities, significant power imbalances, and different ways of interpreting the world.

Recognising this complexity, GCBC invited grant recipients to share their reflections on conducting research with Indigenous Peoples and local communities, in particular highlighting the insights they were gaining in the process. Specifically, we asked:

What has the project learned about the necessary conditions to secure the engagement of local and Indigenous communities in the research?

The responses touch on a number of interconnected issues. Eight main insights emerged and are summarised below.

1. Early and Continued Engagement
Our projects emphasise that partnerships with Indigenous Peoples and local communities should begin early and continue throughout the research process.

Engagement should go beyond simple consultation.

For our project in Panama, for example, the proposed research emerged from a year-long consultation process, grounded in a much longer-standing relationship between one project partner and an Indigenous council².

In Ethiopia, ongoing dialogue between researchers and communities strengthened mutual understanding and helped reduced the risk of misconceptions³. A similar approach was taken by our researchers in Madagascar, where Indigenous Peoples and local communities were regularly updated on research progress and invited to evaluate the successes and challenges⁴.

2. Community-Led Research Framing

Much social and natural science research starts with a tightly defined set of research questions, the framing of which is usually led solely by researchers. Our projects demonstrate how this approach must be reconfigured to accommodate IPLCs perspectives and needs.

Experiences from Colombia highlight that meaningful engagement in research needs to be about more than just involving IPLCs in data collection – it begins with co-creating meaningful research questions that matter to the communities themselves⁵. This is supported by work in Indonesia which suggests that engagement with IPLCs is dependent on research questions being informed and shaped by them from the outset⁶.

The process of defining research questions can potentially be complex, as research in Peru and Ecuador reveals. Farmer-led research often follows its own logic and pace in ways that differ from formal institutional projects⁷.

Yet, experience from Ecuador and Viet Nam suggests that ultimately communities are more willing to engage in research activities when research agendas and research questions align with their needs.

3. Informed Consent

In our work with IPLCs, consent, often expressed as Free, Prior, Informed Consent (FPIC), is a fundamental principle – and sometimes legal requirement. For example, for a project working in Malaysia, engagement is based on a voluntary agreement made with full knowledge of the project’s scope, purpose, risks, and benefits⁹.

Gaining consent is not always a quick process. In Cambodia, trust and flexibility were required to gain consent and community support for the project. As a result, communities valued the opportunity to determine the project’s focus and to highlight the importance of their own knowledge¹⁰.

In some cases, FPIC is not just as an ethical necessity but also of practical importance too. For instance, a project in Ecuador found it fundamental for reinforcing community confidence and fostering long-term collaboration¹¹.

4. Communications and Transparency

Good communication with IPLCs emerged as a key attribute of project implementation. Our project in Guatemala detailed communication’s importance for a range of project needs including how information is to be used, how impartiality in data collection is assured, and how communities retain decision-making power over research that affects them¹².

The importance of communications tailored to specific groups was highlighted by one of our projects in Ethiopia that used communication approaches specifically designed for different groups to ensure gender and social inclusivity¹³.

However, good communication goes beyond the flow of information between researchers and IPLCs. Experiences in Colombia and the Dominican Republic suggest that projects can also act as a communication channel between members of the community¹⁴. 

5. Power Dynamics

Attention to power dynamics was important across various contexts. In Malaysia this required awareness of researchers’ own effect on those dynamics and the need to continually reflect on their power and impact on IPLCs¹⁵.

In Malawi and Uganda, power was a consideration in the implementation of fieldwork, where workshops required taking language and social dynamics into account to encourage the engagement of community members¹⁶.

Understanding power dynamics was also critical in relation to outcomes and ownership with our project in Peru. This highlighted the important role of good facilitators in ensuring that project participants, including women, whose involvement may be constrained by household power dynamics, can take ownership of the research and engage with confidence¹⁷.

‘One aspect of the project is to examine local governance structures and their power dynamics to support the effectiveness and equity of forest restoration in relation to local communities’¹⁸.

6. Traditional Knowledge

One of the core delivery principles of all GCBC projects is the requirement to consider and integrate local and Indigenous knowledge into research. It is therefore unsurprising that this was prominent in the approaches of our projects. A few selected responses variously show how Indigenous and local knowledge has made fundamental contributions.

In Ethiopia it was found that community members were more willing to collaborate when their knowledge was treated as important and central¹⁹. Whilst for a project in Colombia, the belief that IPLCs hold valuable knowledge was considered the starting point for the project²⁰.

From another project in Colombia, there is recognition that Indigenous and local knowledge has transformed the way the project is conceptualised and supported²¹. In Indonesia it was noted that understanding food and land management practices led to a better appreciation of how food security is currently addressed²².

7. Shared Benefits

The production of knowledge through research alone does not guarantee that Indigenous Peoples and local communities will benefit. Ensuring that communities gain from the process is therefore a key challenge for GCBC projects. For example, a project in Ecuador found that community engagement deepens when they perceive direct, equitable benefits, such as training and technical assistance²³. 

In the Cham Islands in Viet Nam the project has learnt that engagement requires continuous consultation, mutual trust, and tangible local benefits²⁴. Training was also noted from Kenya as one of various tangible short-term benefits that could strengthen participation whilst longer term project outcomes were yet to be delivered²⁵.

“We believe that IPLCs should benefit tangibly and intangibly from our research”²⁶.

8. Trust

Beyond the specific points noted above, a particular issue permeates and unites the responses. That issue is trust. Many of the responses were, explicitly or implicitly, about how trust is built between researchers and communities and how trust leads to better research outcomes.

      • Building trust is essential; this means recognising community knowledge systems, ensuring transparent communication and co-developing research goals²⁷.
      • An emerging insight from the first stakeholder workshop is that successful integration of traditional and scientific knowledge depends on long-term dialogue andtrust-building²⁸.
      • Securing the genuine engagement of local and Indigenous communities requires creating relationships grounded in mutualtrust, cultural respect, and continuous communication²⁹.
      • Field visits and workshops, where researchers listen before proposing solutions, have also been essential to build trust and gain a better understanding of real-world challenges farmers are faced with³⁰.
      • Trust has been built through regular consultations with local fishers and community representatives on seagrass habitats, ensuring their knowledge informs research design and monitoring³¹.

Reflections on Inclusive Research

The eight key points above represent a snapshot of current thinking and practice across GCBC projects. Whilst the responses touch on many interrelated issues, they highlight that our projects strive to be participatory in their approach to working with IPLCs and use a variety of participatory tools to guide their research.

Although these insights do not capture the entirety of the understanding gained, nor are they a complete guide to doing research with IPLCs, they offer valuable lessons and guidance.

More detailed and specific guidance for research with IPLCs is provided by Newing et al (2024)³². Their work is derived from interactions with a wider set of researchers and projects than informs our survey and consequently covers a wider range of issues. Whilst there are areas of notable similarity between their fourteen principles, and the experiences emerging from our survey, both deserve consideration when planning research with IPLCs.

Finally, ensuring that rights holders such as IPLCs are fully engaged in conservation action is not just a research issue, but relevant to all aspects of the planning and implementation of environmental conservation.

Recognising this, Principles for Inclusive Nature Action have been developed by Defra to place equitable, rights-based inclusion at the centre of all biodiversity action. GCBC supports the implementation of those principles.

 

 

Endnotes

1. Contributions of Indigenous Knowledge to ecological and evolutionary understanding. Jessen et al 2021 https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.2435
2. Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute: Forest Restoration on Indigenous Lands: Restoring Biodiversity for Multiple Ecosystem Services, Community Resilience and Financial Sustainability through Locally Informed Strategies and Incentives
3. Bioversity International: Deploying Diversity for Resilience and Livelihoods
4. The Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust (WWT) Following the Water: Participatory Research to Understand Drivers and Nature-based Solutions to Wetland Degradation in Madagascar
5. Fundación Tropenbos Colombia: Creation of an Intercultural Biodiverse Seed Bank with the Indigenous “Resguardo Puerto Naranjo” for Enhancing Restoration and Conservation Efforts in Degraded Areas in the Colombian Amazon
6. International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED): Nature Nuture
7. International Potato Center (CIP): Andean Crop Diversity for Climate Change
8. Oxford University: The Flourishing Landscapes Programme
9. The Scottish Association for Marine Science (SAMS): GlobalSeaweed-SUPERSTAR: Supporting livelihoods by Protecting, Enhancing and Restoring biodiversity by Securing the future of the seaweed Aquaculture industry in developing countries
10. Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), USA: SARIKA: Scientific Action Research for Indigenous Knowledge Advancement: Recognising and Rewarding the Contribution of Indigenous Knowledge for the Sustainable Management of Biodiversity
11. UTPL: BIOAMAZ: Realising the potential of plant bioresources as new economic opportunities for the Ecuadorian Amazon: developing climate resilient sustainable bioindustry
12. University of Greenwich: Nature based solutions for climate resilience of local and indigenous communities in Guatemala
13. University of Aberdeen: Cataloguing and Rating of Opportunities for Side-lined Species in Restoration of Agriculturally Degraded Soils in Sub-Saharan Africa (CROSSROADS)
14. University of Lincoln: NATIVE: Sustainable Riverscape Management for Resilient Riverine Communities
15. The Scottish Association for Marine Science (SAMS): GlobalSeaweed-SUPERSTAR: Supporting livelihoods by Protecting, Enhancing and Restoring biodiversity by Securing the future of the seaweed Aquaculture industry in developing countries
16. University of Birmingham: Building adaptive fisheries governance capacity
17. International Potato Center (CIP): Andean Crop Diversity for Climate Change
18. Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute: Forest Restoration on Indigenous Lands: Restoring Biodiversity for Multiple Ecosystem Services, Community Resilience and Financial Sustainability through Locally Informed Strategies and Incentives
19. University of Leeds: Biodiversity potential for resilient livelihoods in the Lower Omo, Ethiopia
20. Fundación Tropenbos Colombia: Creation of an Intercultural Biodiverse Seed Bank with the Indigenous “Resguardo Puerto Naranjo” for Enhancing Restoration and Conservation Efforts in Degraded Areas in the Colombian Amazon
21. Corporación de Investigación y Acción Social y Económica (CIASE): Gran Tescual Indigenous Reservation Climate Plan
22. University of Sussex: Exploring sustainable land use pathways for ecosystems, food security and poverty alleviation: opportunities for Indonesia’s food estate program
23. Escuela Superior Politécnica del Litoral (ESPOL): Empowerment of coastal communities in sustainable production practices in Ecuador
24. The World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF): Translating Research into Action for Livelihoods and Seagrass (TRIALS) – Establishing scientific foundation for seagrass restoration and blue carbon potential, with sustainable livelihood development for coastal communities in Central Vietnam
25. CSIR-CRI, EMBRACE: Engaging Local Communities in Endangered Trees and Minor Crops Utilization for Biodiversity Conservation and Livelihood Enrichment
26. The Scottish Association for Marine Science (SAMS): GlobalSeaweed-SUPERSTAR: Supporting livelihoods by Protecting, Enhancing and Restoring biodiversity by Securing the future of the seaweed Aquaculture industry in developing countries
27. University of Aberdeen: Cataloguing and Rating of Opportunities for Side-lined Species in Restoration of Agriculturally Degraded Soils in Sub-Saharan Africa (CROSSROADS)
28. Lancaster University: Enabling large-scale and climate-resilient forest restoration in the Eastern Amazon
29. UTPL: Realizing the potential of plant bioresources as new economic opportunities for the Ecuadorian Amazon: developing climate resilient sustainable bioindustry
30. Oxford University: The Flourishing Landscapes Programme
31. The World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF): Translating Research into Action for Livelihoods and Seagrass (TRIALS) – Establishing scientific foundation for seagrass restoration and blue carbon potential, with sustainable livelihood development for coastal communities in Central Vietnam
32. ‘Participatory’ conservation research involving indigenous peoples and local communities: Fourteen principles for good practice. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2024.110708

 

Photo Credits
  • Header image and Photo 1: Fisherman on Lake Sofia, Madagascar. Used with permission from the Wildlife and Wetlands Trust.
  • Photo 2: Sam At Rachana and Pin Plil, members of the CIPO research team, with Mr Treub Thaeum, Chief of the Bunong Indigenous community at Pu Kong, in the Brey Ngak sacred forest of the Bunong people, Cambodia. Photographer: Tong Len.
  • Photo 3: Women from the Pasto community outside their restaurant initiative in the resguardo, Colombia, with Daniela Torres, Mama Genith Quitiaquez, Taita Vicente Obando, Ricardo Ibarguen, Wendy Toro and Rosa Emilia Salamanca (Corporación de Investigación y Acción Social y Económica – CIASE).
  • Photo 4: Researchers and local community members from the Bioamaz project during a workshop on safeguards and plant socialisation in the Shuar San Antonio Community, Ecuador.

Tags

Governance and Policy Improving livelihoods Indigenous Peoples Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Partnership Social Inclusion

Share

Related

Learning from Indonesia: Local Wisdom for Sustainable and Inclusive Land Use

Published 27 Nov 2025

GCBC

Tags

Agroforestry Food Systems Governance and Policy Improving livelihoods Natural Resource Management

Share

 

Indonesia’s growing population and exposure to severe climate events has focussed national attention on the need to ensure its future food security and sufficiency.

Since 2020, the country has vastly expanded its Food Estates Programme with the aim of converting four million hectares of land for food production by 2029. For such a large and varied country, home to megadiverse ecosystems and a complex patchwork of local agricultural practices, this programme will inevitably involve trade-offs.

In this blog, Cosmo Rana-Iozzi, Senior Project Officer for LEAF Indonesia at the University of Sussex, shares insights from the project’s work on land-use interventions that enhance food security, biodiversity, climate resilience, and livelihoods, while remaining rooted in local knowledge and realities.

Sustainable and Inclusive Land-Use Rooted in Local Wisdom

From longstanding indigenous traditions of communal forest farming to more recent initiatives in multifunctional land use, communities across rural Indonesia balance a range of ecological and socioeconomic needs. National initiatives to increase food production can and should engage with these local contexts.

In villages across Gorontalo, East Kalimantan and West Papua provinces, distinct and longstanding systems of forest farming and traditional rules are still practiced. These systems exist alongside and interact with varied and shifting climate and market contexts. Local knowledge of the land offers valuable insights into how integrated, multifunctional land use might balance food security with ecosystem conservation and socioeconomic need.

Harvests of tree products have long been integrated with that of annual crops to ensure the sustainability of the food supply in rural Indonesian villages. In Gorontalo the Ilengi system of land management ensures that traditional leaders of local, and otherwise marginalised, communities continue to have a say on the planning and planting of sites.

In Papua, Sasi still lays down customary law underpinning traditional signs and markings keeping certain forest areas and products off-limits. Both agroforestry systems ultimately manage a landscape resembling a natural forest, but one geared to sustainably contribute to local food security and incomes.

Indonesia’s dipterocarp forests, home to some of the country’s most biodiverse and resource-rich ecosystems, are largest in Kalimantan, but recent changes in cultivation have threatened their survival. This has also impacted the traditional local Dayak system of gardening, Lembo. Grown outside households, by roadsides and in the forests themselves, Lembo gardens are typically made up of fruit trees, and they also exist at larger and income-generating scales alongside seasonal crops.

As these communities navigate changing circumstances with mixed success, innovations are also taking place. Universitas Negeri Gorontalo’s Living Lab, established under the LEAF Indonesia project, is now adapting these approaches to demonstrate the climate resilience and economic viability of integrated crops on a rural food estate.

The Lab is being developed and run with around 200 students, many of whom have personal or professional connections to monocrop farmers affected by changing priorities and conditions in Indonesian agriculture. Students are developing low-cost techniques of contour farming, soil and soil nutrient conservation, and nature-based forms of pest control, and exploring production and marketing channels for diverse crops.

Food Variety, Food Security

The candlenut, mahogany and sugar palm trees grown in Ilengi community forests support a vibrant habitat for birds, insects and microorganisms, and contribute to soil health and emission-mitigating carbon reserves. They also provide economic opportunities for the women who traditionally undertake the processing of palm sugar sap and candlenuts. Mahogany timber is another source of income helping to keep households afloat amidst changeable climate and market conditions.

In Kalimantan, Lembo gardens complement a minimal intervention approach allowing local plants to grow naturally and organic litter to be left on the land as nutrient input, underpinning a balanced agroecosystem. Here value is placed on the gains of certain compositions of the ecosystem rather than single commodities. Natural predators rule out the need for chemical forms of pest control. In fact, some gardens are used to grow natural forms of insecticide.

In West Papua, national plans to convert 250,000 hectares of land will impact a complex patchwork of communities who may differently favour the status quo. Transmigrant communities here often depend on growing hybrid rice using government-subsidised fertiliser. Meanwhile, indigenous groups use Sasi-managed forest land to grow upland rice.

 

From Local Practices to Scalable Solutions

Agroforestry systems, with their focus on product diversity, can simultaneously support biodiversity, climate resilience, livelihoods, and food security—even in contexts shaped by transmigrant populations and monocrop cultivation.

Expanding food estates must engage with these varied local realities. Innovative initiatives like the LEAF Indonesia-supported Living Lab demonstrate how local knowledge from one area can be adapted and scaled collaboratively to benefit another.

 

Learn more about Leaf Indonesia

 

Photo captions and credits:
Image 1:  Forest farmer tapping palm sugar sap, used for making brown sugar, in Dulamayo, Gorontalo. Credit: Iswan Dunggio.
Image 2: Women farmers harvesting corn in South Dulamayo, Gorontalo. Credit: Iswan Dunggio.
Image 3-4: The LEAF Indonesia team and students at Universitas Negeri Gorontalo’s Living Lab. Credit: Jonathan Dolley.
Image 5: Universitas Negeri Gorontalo students at the university’s Living Lab. Credit: Jonathan Dolley.
Image 6: Food security, biodiversity, climate resilience and local livelihoods in a village in Papua visualised through a rich picture, one of the participatory methodologies LEAF Indonesia is using to map these interactions.

 

Tags

Agroforestry Food Systems Governance and Policy Improving livelihoods Natural Resource Management

Share

Related

Turning Biodiversity into Livelihoods: Lessons from West Kalimantan’s Peatlands 

Published 11 Nov 2025

GCBC

Tags

Conservation and Restoration Financing Improving livelihoods

Share

In Indonesia’s West Kalimantan province, the peatland forest around Pematang Gadung village holds the memory of fire, logging, and mining—but also the promise of renewal. Once scarred by extraction, this landscape is now at the center of a growing effort to make biodiversity itself a source of income and pride for local communities. 

During her October visit, GCBC’s Anna Adamczyk observed both the promise and the practical challenges of turning biodiversity into a measurable and tradable community asset.

 

A New Currency for Nature 

Unlike extractive commodities such as timber or palm oil, biodiversity credits place ecological health at the core of the economy. Each credit represents a verified improvement or sustained enhancement in species diversity or habitat quality, measured over time through transparent, science-based methods.

As Harry Tittensor from Plan Vivo describes, they provide a “certified positive contribution to nature.”

These credits can be traded on voluntary markets, channelling funds to those who restore and protect natural ecosystems. Under the Plan Vivo Nature Standard (standard for biodiversity credits), at least 60 percent of the revenue from credit sales must go directly to local communities.  

In West Kalimantan, biodiversity credits are moving from theory to practice. Supported by GCBC through the BREL-Borneo project led by the Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh, the October workshops brought together the Plan Vivo Foundation, Biometrio Earth, YIARI, and local communities. Together, they’re helping Pematang Gadung villagers certify biodiversity credits for their 7,000-hectare Village Forest – a peatland ecosystem protected for nearly a decade and home to endangered orangutans, proboscis monkeys, and rare wetland flora.

 

Learning by Doing in the Peatlands 

At the YIARI Learning Center, participants explored how robust data collection underpins the verification of biodiversity credits. Led and organised by Plan Vivo, the workshop provided technical demonstrations on monitoring methods. As part of the pre-deployment phase, participants set up camera traps and acoustic sensors in the nearby forest. Each project collects species and habitat data annually, tracking indicators such as species richness, diversity, and overall habitat health.

Community members were active participants, contributing thoughtful reflections to discussions. Ilyas, Head of Koperasi Mandiri Pematang Gadung Sejahtera, the cooperative co-developing the project together with the Pematang Gadung Village Forest Management Unit (LPHD Pematang Gadung), emphasised that “It’s important for us to clearly understand the process so we can explain the tangible benefits of biodiversity credits back to our community.” 

Later, participants travelled by boat to the Pematang Gadung conservation station, accessible only through the waterways – to test their new skills in a real ecosystem and meet members of the local forest patrols. The long-term goal is for more and more members of the local community to take on forest restoration, wildlife monitoring and patrolling roles, thereby shifting the local economy from an extractive to a regenerative model.

Bridging the Finance Gap 

One of the clearest messages from the workshop was that, from the perspective of small community projects, biodiversity credit certification can be seen as complex and expensive. Costs include expert validation, field data collection, equipment, and baseline surveys. Once the baseline is established, projects enter a two-year monitoring period before the first biodiversity credits can be issued and sold. During this time, communities must maintain operations and collect data without guarantee of income. 

As YIARI’s NBS Senior Lead, Dr. Dorothea Pio, explained, the financial gap between early action and the eventual issuance of biodiversity credits remains one of the biggest challenges. Sustaining field activities throughout this period also requires genuine leadership and commitment from the village. 

Even after credits are obtained, uncertainty persists – long-term financial viability depends on the maturity and strength of the emerging biodiversity credit market. As Dorothea reflected, “The long-term success of the project will in large part, depend on how highly the global community values these critical ecosystems and their biodiversity and whether that value can compete with other market forces.” 

The solution emerging in Kalimantan is partnership. These collaborations show that lasting conservation grows from relationships of trust and shared learning, not just funding streams or policy frameworks.

From Challenge to Opportunity 

The solution emerging in Kalimantan is partnership. Organisations like YIARI act as technical advisors – helping communities navigate the process of obtaining biodiversity credits, secure early-stage funding, and manage transparent reporting. These collaborations show that lasting conservation grows from relationships of trust and shared learning, not just funding streams or policy frameworks. 

Plan Vivo, as the certifying organisation, also seeks to address these earlier-mentioned challenges by prioritising accessibility, participatory approaches, and community empowerment within its standards to ensure communities can access finance and take ownership of implementation. 

The experience in Pematang Gadung highlights that, while bridging the gap between early action, credit issuance, and the eventual sale of credits is challenging, it also opens the door to a more sustainable future.

Ultimately, the lessons from Kalimantan point toward replication and scaling—informing best practices for other community forests, peatlands, and marine ecosystems. Encouragingly, other organisations from the region have also joined the workshops to explore how biodiversity credits could support conservation in their own ecosystems.

……………………………………………………………………………

This report was written by GCBC’s Anna Adamczyk and published with the kind permission of Royal Botanic Gardens, Edinburgh, Plan Vivo and YIARI.

Follow the link for more on our BREL-Borneo project: BREL-Borneo: Benefits of Biodiverse Restoration for Ecosystems and Livelihoods in Borneo

 

 

Image credits: All photos were taken by Anna Adamczyk, GCBC, and Pahjar Riudha and Indrawan from YIARI. 

Image 1: Busran and Pak Ilyas from Koperasi Mandiri Pematang Gadung Sejahtera (KMPGS) are placing camera trap on a tree for biodiversity monitoring. 

Image 2: Analysis of biodiversity data with Biometrio Earth and the local community. 

Image 3: Testing deployment of biodiversity monitoring tool before going to the field.

Image 4: Group picture of workshop participants, representatives of Plan Vivo, Biometrio Earth, Koperasi Mandiri Pematang Gadung Sejahtera (KMPGS), Village Forest Management Unit (LPHD), GCBC, Konservasi Indonesia, WeBe and GCBC.

Image 5: Pandi and Jaka after successfully installing audiorecorder in peatland forest.

Image 6: Jaka and Icha from Koperasi Mandiri Pematang Gadung Sejahtera (KMPGS) installing audiorecorder in the peatland forest.

Image 7: Participants arriving in Pematang Gadung Conservation Station.

Image 8: Katus, Camp coordinator is introducing project area to participants.

Image 9: Local community with Plan Vivo and GCBC after successfully installing camera traps and audiorecorders in peatland forest

Image 10: Biodiversity credits workshops participants in Pematang Gadung Conservation Station. 

 

 

Tags

Conservation and Restoration Financing Improving livelihoods

Share

Related

Recognising Indigenous Knowledge in Cambodia’s Biodiversity Management

Published 24 Jul 2025

GCBC

Tags

Conservation and Restoration Governance and Policy Indigenous Peoples Natural Resource Management

Share

Inclusion of Indigenous Peoples is essential to safeguarding global biodiversity and is central to GCBC’s mission of leveraging biodiversity for climate resilience.

With a global population of over 476 million, Indigenous Peoples play a vital role in sustainability, managing or holding tenure rights to roughly a quarter of the Earth’s surface – regions that contain a significant share of the planet’s biodiversity. While disproportionately impacted by climate change, Indigenous Communities possess deep, place-based ecological knowledge that complements and enhances scientific research.

Recognising their critical role, the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) includes a dedicated Target 22 to ensure the full and effective participation of Indigenous Peoples. In alignment with this global recognition, GCBC upholds the rights and voices of Indigenous Peoples as a core principle, and as a prerequisite for awarding research grants

The following report has been written by Sam At Rachana, Research Lead, Cambodia Indigenous Peoples Organization (CIPO)

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

During June and July 2025, Cambodia hosted two significant events to launch the GCBC funded project, “Recognizing and Rewarding the Contribution of Indigenous Knowledge for the Sustainable Management of Biodiversity.” These powerful gatherings connected Indigenous communities, researchers, youth, elders, conservationists, and government representatives in collaborative shared spaces.

As a Bunong Indigenous person and lead researcher for this project, I found these events profoundly meaningful. They were not only a celebration of Indigenous knowledge but a practical step toward inclusive, co-designed biodiversity governance in Cambodia.

For context, the Bunong people are one of Cambodia’s largest Indigenous groups. We have a deep connection to the forest, land, and spiritual world, as reflected in our traditional ecological knowledge and cultural practices, which center on respect for nature and the spirits of the land.

Images show 1) Rachana Sam At, Lead Researcher, CIPO, at the national project launch in Phnom Penh 2) Rachana Sam At, Lead Researcher, with Indigenous elders and government officials during a panel discussion at the project launch event 3-5) His Excellency Chuop Paris, Secretary of State of the Ministry of Environment, greets Mrs Yun Mane, CIPO  Executive Director during the traditional opening ritual 6) Project researchers from CIPO, WCS, and the Royal University of Agriculture, with the Chief of the Indigenous community committee of Andong Kraleung village 7) Elders from Andong Kraleung village sharing their perspectives on the value of traditional knowledge.

This project aims to identify innovative approaches to enhance Indigenous stewardship of biodiversity within the Keo Seima Wildlife Sanctuary by exploring the knowledge and sustainable practices of the Bunong people. It is implemented by a consortium which includes the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), the Cambodia Indigenous Peoples Organization (CIPO), Monash University, the University of Oxford, the Royal University of Agriculture, and the Ministry of Environment.

 

Shared Beginnings

On June 16, 2025, the project launch took place at Phnom Penh’s Cambodiana Hotel. A traditional Bunong ritual, a symbolic act that grounded the project in Indigenous values and ways of being, showcased to all attendees, including officials and international partners, that Indigenous knowledge systems are living and deeply connected to nature.

A special performance by a young Indigenous man, blended traditional song with modern rap, demonstrating the innovative ways Indigenous youth are keeping their culture alive.

Featuring elders from the three participating communities, the panel discussion which followed marked a positive shift. Their direct address to officials, donors, researchers, and other stakeholders provided a crucial moment to address directly officials, donors, researchers, and other stakeholders. They shared stories, concerns, and ideas rooted in community, lived experiences, and ancestral knowledge, reminding everyone that Indigenous knowledge is a living, evolving spirit, passed down and actively practiced.

The active support of the Ministry of Environment added significant weight to the event. Their representatives not only attended but participated, listened, and expressed strong encouragement. One official even offered a three-day training on Participatory Action Research (PAR), that highlighted the potential for collaboration when understanding and respect are present.

 

Where Knowledge Lives

Following the national launch, a community event took place on July 2nd in Andong Kraleung village. Conducted in the traditional Bunong way, this event was an essential part of the Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) process, ensuring meaningful and culturally appropriate community engagement from the outset.

The Andong Kraleung launch was particularly special as it took place directly in the village, with the community leading. It began with a traditional Bunong dance performed by local students, a powerful display of cultural strength and identity. Mrs. Yun Mane, CIPO Executive Director, spoke about the importance of documenting Indigenous knowledge before it disappears, highlighting that for the Bunong, the forest is not merely a place but their market, bank, school, and sacred ground.

Dr Emiel de Lange, Wildlife Conservation Society, also shared insights, emphazing that Indigenous peoples have cared for the forest for centuries and possess unparalleled knowledge. He presented examples of documented traditional knowledge from Australia, encouraging the community to continue using their own voices to record their wisdom. This event felt like a strong, community-centered start.

 

Next Steps

The project will organize consultation meetings with Indigenous communities to identify research questions, clarify study objectives, and co-develop research questionnaires. These steps are crucial to ensure the research is grounded in Indigenous knowledge systems, supports self-determination, and addresses the communities’ real priorities.

Challenges lie ahead, including ensuring meaningful community participation throughout the research, as well as addressing power imbalances.

These recent events have left me feeling inspired, having witnessed elders, youth, researchers, and government genuinely engaging with one another. It reinforced my belief that efforts to amplify Indigenous voices are gaining traction and reminded me why I do this work: to see our knowledge recognized, respected, and rewarded in meaningful ways.

Tags

Conservation and Restoration Governance and Policy Indigenous Peoples Natural Resource Management

Share

Related

Pathways to Sustainable Agriculture: Insights from LEAF Indonesia in Gorontalo

Published 20 Jun 2025

GCBC

Tags

Agriculture Food Systems Governance Governance and Policy Natural Resource Management

Share

One of the things that excites me most about this project is the way it brings together local knowledge, based on lived experience of farming communities with formal scientific data and modelling, all in one innovative platform. It’s a rare opportunity to co-create solutions that are both grounded in community realities and speak the language of planning. The strong early engagement from such a diverse group of stakeholders reflects both the urgency of the challenge and the commitment of our brilliant local research team and partners to accelerate progress toward sustainable land use pathways.

Professor Fiona Marshall, Leaf Indonesia Project Lead, Professor of Environment and Development, University of Sussex

 

On March 13, 2025, Universitas Negeri Gorontalo (UNG) hosted a dynamic workshop as part of the LEAF Indonesia project — Land-Use, Ecosystem, Agriculture, Food Security in Indonesia. This collaborative initiative, involving UNG, Sussex University (UK), and Monash University Indonesia, is dedicated to exploring how land use changes related to Indonesia’s food estate program affect local ecosystems, food security, and rural livelihoods.

The participatory workshop, which brought together 86 participants, 46 in person and 40 online, included researchers, farmers, NGOs, government officials, and students. Together, they examined how Indonesia’s ambitious food estate program intersects with critical issues such as environmental sustainability, spatial planning, biodiversity, and agricultural livelihoods.

Images shows representative corn monoculture landscapes in Gorontalo, Indonesia and rice paddies in Kalimantan, Borneo –  subjects of research into sustainable and diversified agroecological practices by LEAF Indonesia. The other image depicts Professor Fiona Marshall introducing the project to workshop participants.

 

After words of welcome from the project lead, Professor Fiona Marshall from the University of Sussex, and Professor Iswan Dunggio from UNG, the day began with a keynote by Dr. Wahyudin A. Katili, Chief of BAPPEDA Gorontalo, who highlighted the promise of the food estate program to boost national food security and reduce import dependency through modern, mechanized farming. The presentation also acknowledged the challenges such as land conversion, spatial conflicts, and environmental degradation, and emphasized the need for stronger community engagement and sustainable policy frameworks.

Rina Tayeb, from Gorontalo’s Agriculture Agency, emphasized the province’s sustainable food zone approach, focusing on protecting agricultural land and empowering farmers and fishers. Her recommendations underscored the importance of infrastructure, education, and income diversification to ensure long-term agricultural resilience and rural welfare.

Later that day, conservationist Bagus Tri Nugroho of the Ministry of Forestry addressed the delicate balance between food production and biodiversity. Speaking about the potential impacts on Bogani Nani Wartabone National Park, he warned against forest conversion and advocated for eco-tourism and community-based conservation as dual strategies for safeguarding biodiversity and supporting livelihoods.

Finally, Fery Novriyal from the Forest Gazettement Agency explored spatial planning policies under the Food, Water, and Energy Security program, particularly in managing the use of 20 million hectares of forest area. He presented both the risks of deforestation and the opportunities offered by agroforestry and social forestry initiatives that allow for sustainable development without compromising forest integrity.

Key discussion points emphasized that the Food Estate initiative must align with the Spatial Planning Act (Regulation No. 2 of 2024) and prioritize land use based on local wisdom and environmental sustainability. Participants stressed the need for irrigation infrastructure, strategic land identification, and alignment with sustainable agricultural and industrial development goals.

An integrated agricultural market, crop variety management, and the mitigation of critical land degradation were also discussed, alongside the importance of organic farming practices and reduced reliance on chemical inputs.

Next Steps

In summary, the workshop was a crucial step in fostering dialogue among stakeholders and informing more sustainable, inclusive agricultural policy. By engaging local voices and scientific insights, the LEAF project continues to pave the way for pathways that protect both people and the planet, reinforcing that future food security must go hand in hand with environmental stewardship.

Following this workshop, the project has focused on establishing a baseline of what the impact of Indonesia’s food estate programme has been, in Gorontalo and in the projects two other case study sites in West Papua and East Kalimantan.

They are doing this through further stakeholder engagement work, through careful policy analysis and historical research, and through gathering secondary data to feed into their bespoke mapping and modeling platform, LIMMMA. This will allow them to paint a picture of how land use has changed over the last 20 years, and what impact these changes have had on rural livelihoods, local ecosystems, and food security.

Once that baseline is established, the project will work closely with stakeholders to explore alternative land use practices that are realistic options for those communities. It will then investigate whether these alternatives could potentially provide a better path to the Indonesian government’s food security goals, while also alleviating rural poverty and improving climate resilience and biodiversity.

Find out more about this project on their website.

Tags

Agriculture Food Systems Governance Governance and Policy Natural Resource Management

Share

Related

GlobalSeaweed SUPERSTAR: New Landmark Report Outlines Threat to Global Seaweeds

Published 16 May 2025

Tracey Hearn

Tags

Coastal Ecosystems Conservation and Restoration Food Systems Improving livelihoods

Share

GlobalSeaweed-SUPERSTAR, funded by the Global Centre on Biodiversity for Climate (GCBC) and led by the Scottish Association for Marine Science (SAMS) in Oban has recently released a landmark report outlining the threats facing global seaweed habitats.

The report highlights how human-induced threats, including global climate change, overfishing, pollution and an increase in invasive non-native species, could result in dramatic changes in distribution and diversity of seaweed species and their habitats and what this could mean for both ocean and human health.

Read on to access the report, watch the new GlobalSeaweed-SUPERSTAR film, and learn more about their recent call for experts to help develop the UN Seaweed Breakthrough Targets.

The State of the World’s Seaweeds report combines the most up-to-date scientific evidence and emphasises that despite the importance of seaweeds, and the severity of the threats they face, they are afforded inadequate conservation measures. Authors of the report call for these major gaps to be addressed.

Lead author of the report, Dr Sophie Corrigan, from the Natural History Museum, London said: “Seaweeds are often the unsung heroes of the marine world. They form some of the largest marine habitats we have and underpin so many marine resources, as well as playing an important role in the function of other marine habitats such as cementing coral reefs together and protecting them from wave damage. Food, medicines and even the cosmetics industry rely on seaweed for the properties they can offer.

“While interest in kelp forests is rightfully building, other seaweeds have been left behind. This is something we want to change, and we’re hoping that all seaweeds will benefit from the Global Biodiversity Framework’s 30by30 initiative as more protected areas are created or expanded in the coming years.

“Safeguarding the future of seaweeds and realising the full potential of seaweeds and their uses will require a global movement to unite governments, researchers, industries, charities, Indigenous Peoples and local communities in protecting seaweeds. This report is an important step in that process.”

Seaweeds are red, green and brown macroalgae. The ancestors of the reds lived on the Earth over 1.6 billion years ago. Collectively seaweeds cover an area the size of Australia, making them the largest of the planet’s vegetated marine habitats which many other species depend on.

They play a significant role in cleaning up our world and absorb carbon dioxide at a far greater rate than many plants on land do and can help to absorb pollution from the oceans as well.

There are also millions of seaweed farmers in 56 countries worldwide who rely on seaweed for their livelihoods. The vast majority of farmers are in Asia, which accounts for more than 95% of global seaweed farming.

However, seaweeds face an uncertain future: they are threatened by many pressures but the necessary data to determine the rate at which seaweed habitats are being lost globally does not exist. It is predicted that the majority of seaweeds will experience a high degree of local extinction and poleward expansions by the end of the century, with overall global declines in coverage and diversity.

Prof. Juliet Brodie of the Natural History Museum, London, along with GlobalSeaweed-SUPERSTAR programme leader Prof. Elizabeth Cottier-Cook of SAMS and Prof. Lim Phaik Eem from the University of Malaya are co-authors on the State of the World’s Seaweeds report.

Prof. Cottier-Cook said: “The State of the World’s Seaweeds is a landmark report, providing a robust knowledge base for the development of a global conservation strategy. A strategy that will not only protect wild seaweeds, but sustain the future livelihoods of the millions of farmers dependent on this invaluable resource.”

GlobalSeaweed-SUPERSTAR have recently launched a call for experts to develop the UN Seaweed Breakthrough Targets. For more information on the project and the call, please visit the Global Seaweed Superstar website

Tags

Coastal Ecosystems Conservation and Restoration Food Systems Improving livelihoods

Share

Related

GlobalSeaweed SUPERSTAR: Developing new innovative cultivation methods for testing wild eucheumatoids for their climate resilience

Published 25 Mar 2025

GCBC

Tags

Coastal Ecosystems Improving livelihoods Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Natural Resource Management

Share

A research team from the University of Malaya, Malaysia, is developing climate-resilient seaweed strains in Semporna, Sabah under the GCBC-funded GlobalSeaweed SUPERSTAR project.

Eucheumatoids – a group of red seaweed species – account for over 90% of global production of carrageenan, a product widely used as a gelling, binding and thickening agent in various industries including food, pharmaceuticals and cosmetics. Euchematoid output has declined in recent years due to the low genetic diversity of aging cultivars. This challenge is further intensified by climate change, which has led to a rise in pests and diseases.

The research aims to address this issue by developing new strains resistant to climate change, pests, and diseases. Wild eucheumatoids were collected from the Semporna waters (Sabah Province, north-east Borneo), under permission granted by the Sabah Biodiversity Centre. Specimens were hand-picked during snorkeling, selecting only large, healthy individuals.

As the size and morphology of the wild-collected eucheumatoids were smaller and less bushy compared to the commercial ones, the longline cultivation method, commonly used in commercial seaweed farming was not suitable for their on-growing. An innovative new net system therefore had to be developed as an alternative to the longline.

The new system was found to work most effectively based on a two-stage approach. Firstly, the newly collected eucheumatoids were on-grown in basket nets with a relatively small mesh size to prevent grazing by herbivorous fish and turtles. This was then followed after 40 days by a larger cage net system, which allowed greater water circulation, around the eucheumatoids once they had grown in size, but again deterred the grazers.

Transferring seedlings from basket net to cage net system (Pic: Nurulafifah Yahya)

The new two-stage netting system has successfully enabled not only the survival of wild-collected eucheumatoids, but their increase in size compared with the longline method. The growth rate of the wild-collected eucheumatoids is also comparable to commercially cultivated species, reaching a rate of 3.03 % day-1 when cultivated in the cage net over the typical 45-day cultivation period.

One downside of the system is that it does require frequent cleaning and maintenance, due to the netting becoming covered with biofouling which reduces the water flow. On the plus side, however, this new cultivation system has been so successful that the research team have now donated over 150 kg of wild-collected eucheumatoid seedlings to a local seaweed company for them to on-grow at their farm.

The farmers are also extremely interested in the larger cage design and the research team are working closely with the local stakeholders to further expand this innovative research in Malaysia.

Tags

Coastal Ecosystems Improving livelihoods Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Natural Resource Management

Share

Related

The GCBC community is growing: Reflections from the 2025 GCBC Research Symposium

Published 24 Mar 2025

GCBC

Share

By Samantha Morris

In March, the GCBC community came together in person and online to share big ideas, transformative practice, and stories of impact at the 2025 Research Symposium.

Support for research tackling the impacts of climate change, biodiversity loss, and poverty is essential. The GCBC is a programme that does this and more, bringing together researchers and practitioners from around the world to unlock the potential of nature to deliver climate solutions and improve livelihoods.

Each year the GCBC hosts a research symposium to share big ideas, transformative practice, and stories of impact. This year the research symposuim was bigger than ever with a full three-day programme, including the first ever GCBC Open Day on Tuesday 4 March.

This year’s symposium was a fully hybrid event, with online attendance supported throughout as part of the GCBC’s commitment to reduce barriers to global engagement within and beyond our growing community

Watch the GCBC Research Symposium Open Day here.

 

Prof. Gideon Henderson, Chief Scientific Adviser, UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.  

The GCBC Research Symposium Open Day shone a spotlight on results from across the programme highlighting important cross cutting issues for the programme including innovative research practice, working with the private sector, and connecting research and policy.

After a warm welcome from Kew’s Professor Monique Simmonds, OBE and Deputy Director of Science – Partnerships, the day officially began with opening addresses from Professor Alexandre Antonelli (Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew), Professor Gideon Henderson (Defra) and Kate Hargreaves (DAI) who all shared their reflections on why research at the intersection of biodiversity loss, climate change, and poverty alleviation is so critical right now.

Professor Tim Wheeler, Deputy Director of International Science at Defra, spoke next hosting the first panel of the day: Contributing to global goals, the science behind frameworks and targets. Joining him were Dr Constanza Gonzalez Parrao (3IE), Dr Aster Gebrekirstos Afwork (CIFOR-ICRAF), Wendy Toro (CIASE), and Rithiny Teng (WCS Cambodia).

The second panel of the day was hosted by research uptake expert Louise Shaxson, and tackled the important issue of influencing policy and decision makers with research evidence. Louise was joined by a panel of five GCBC research project representatives both in person and online: Professor Elizabeth Cottier-Cook (SAMS), Dr Euridice Honorio (RBG Kew), James Mutunga Joshua (Nature Kenya), Fiona Nunan (University of Birmingham), and Damian Sulumo (MVIWAARUSHA). Louise and the panellists drilled down into a variety of new ideas and creative approaches to using research evidence to influence policy and practice.

The final panel of the day took on the challenge of how to harness private sector investment for nature based solutions. Panel chair George Whalley was joined in person and online by six panellists from a variety of sectors and backgrounds to tackle the question: what are the practical steps to harnessing private sector investment, and how do we get money flowing into biodiversity projects? The panellists were: Susan Forester (FSD Africa), Alicia Gibson (Finance Earth), Drea Burbank (Savimbo), James Naughton (DAI), Julia Martin-Ortega (University of Leeds), and Scobie Mackay (Imperative).

On the remaining two days, the symposium programme focused on connection and collaboration within the current group of funded GCBC research projects. With over fifty representatives at Kew in person and more joining the programme online it was a productive and busy couple of days covering early results, best practice approaches and innovative methods.

Breakout session at the GCBC Research Symposium

Overall, the 2025 Symposium was a collaborative and inspiring event. An opportunity to deepen existing connections within the GCBC research community and to build new links with a wider network of partners and organisations committed to working at the intersection of climate change, biodiversity loss, and poverty alleviation.

Thank you so much to all members of our GCBC research community who joined us in person and online for the symposium, and to our wonderful speakers, panelists, and chairs for your insights, expertise, and for generously giving your time to be with us.

All funded projects are listed on the GCBC website here.

Share

Related

Blog: Balancing conservation and livelihoods – exploring local perspectives within the Indonesian seaweed industry

Published 05 Mar 2025

GCBC

Tags

Coastal Ecosystems Conservation and Restoration Improving livelihoods Natural Resource Management Nature based solutions

Share

By Shaun Beattie, Early Career Researcher, GlobalSeaweed SUPERSTAR

Indonesia is the world’s second-largest seaweed producer, and for more than 267,000 farming households, it’s more than just an industry – it’s a way of life. Nowhere is this more evident than in South Sulawesi, Indonesia’s largest seaweed-producing area, where vast coastal communities depend on seaweed farming for their livelihoods.

With low cultivation costs, short production cycles and minimal labour requirements, red seaweeds such as Kappapycus spp. and Eucheuma spp. have become extremely popular exports in the region. As global demand for seaweed-derived ingredients, such as carrageenan and agar continue to grow, Indonesian seaweed exports are set to rise. However, sustainable and lasting seaweed cultivation depends on healthy marine ecosystems and biodiversity-rich habitats, including those created by seaweeds themselves. Balancing conservation efforts with the industry’s rapid expansion presents a growing challenge, as this push for greater seaweed production risks putting pressure on these vital environments.

Recently, I – along with Cicilia Kambey (University of Malaya) – have been in Makassar, South Sulawesi, as part of the GCBC funded Global SeaweedSUPERSTAR project. Our goal? To explore local perspectives on the ecological and community value of seaweeds and uncover the key barriers impacting its sustainable management.

Insights and Generous Hospitality

Our goal was ambitious: to speak with and interview 100 local stakeholders, including seaweed farmers, manufacturers, aquaculture organizations, industry professionals, government officials, academic institutions, and NGOs.

As a result, these three weeks absolutely flew by as we met a number of great people, sharing conversations and insights on the current state and future of Indonesia’s seaweed industry.

What really stood out was the overwhelming support we received. Everyone we met was eager to contribute, generously sharing their time and thoughts. We were welcomed with incredible kindness, along with a nice cup of tea or coffee, as we discussed the aims of our research. On occasion, we were even treated to some incredible seaweed-based snacks and beauty products from fantastic independent business owners!

The seaweed farming communities were also eager to share their knowledge and showcase their daily routines. As we toured their farms, we often arrived to find groups of (mostly) women carefully tying individual seaweed seedlings to long lines before transporting them out to sea for cultivation. It was fascinating to see just how fast they could tie each seedling to the line at perfect intervals.

Economic Stability vs the Call for Conservation

It quickly became clear that many farmers understood the important ecological role that seaweeds played in marine ecosystems. They frequently mentioned how seaweed supports local fish stocks and acts as a nursery for juvenile fish. However, this awareness was often followed by a candid admission: that the protection of natural seaweed stocks was largely overlooked because they held little to no economic value. With the price of seaweeds fluctuating significantly in recent years, farmers were predominantly focused on securing sustainable incomes from cultivated seaweed. As a result, the protection of cultivated seaweeds was considered important, but the conservation for natural seaweed stocks was often an afterthought.

The mood for economic assurance was echoed by many of the other stakeholders we spoke with. Local NGO groups and government officials in the Department of Fisheries strongly emphasised the need for international investment to support the expansion and sustainable management of the seaweed industry. Without incentives or clear guidance, it was feared conservation would remain a lower priority for many in the industry.

Shifting Attitudes

So how can seaweed protection be implemented whilst also ensuring the needs of local communities are met?

Despite their lack of immediate ‘economic value’, corals and seagrass conservation efforts have gained significant traction in recent years. Coastal communities have become champions of their restoration and protection, largely because they now better understand healthier ecosystems benefit their livelihoods, particularly in relation to fish farming. A similar shift in attitudes could occur for seaweeds through targeted educational awareness and capacity building programmes. Many community members we spoke to were open to conservation efforts, provided they could see tangible benefits to their own lives.

One promising approach would be preliminary financing for sustainable cultivation that nudges farmers away from overharvesting practices, whilst promoting long-term sustainability. If farmers could see the economic and environmental advantages of protecting both cultivated and natural seaweed stocks, attitudes and practices may begin to shift.

Looking Ahead

These are just a few of the early observations from our time in Makassar, but one thing was clear: the immense passion and energy people have for seaweeds in South Sulawesi. I look forward to diving deeper into the responses and perspectives gathered from our interviews.

I will be presenting the results of this research at the One Ocean Science Congress (OOSC) conference in Nice, France in June 2025. I hope to discuss how these local views and practices align or contrast with global priorities in seaweed conservation, and aim to provide actional insights for advancing the sustainable management of seaweeds, that both safeguard marine biodiversity and local livelihoods.

On a final note, this research trip has reaffirmed a crucial point: harmony between conservation and economic stability remains necessary for a sustainable and successful seaweed farming industry and with the right strategies in place, this balance can start to be achieved.

 

 

 

Tags

Coastal Ecosystems Conservation and Restoration Improving livelihoods Natural Resource Management Nature based solutions

Share

Related

The GCBC Research Grant Competition 3 (RGC3) Concept Note application has CLOSED

Published 04 Feb 2025

GCBC

Tags

Agriculture Agroforestry Coastal Ecosystems Conservation and Restoration Food Systems Improving livelihoods Indigenous Peoples Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Natural Resource Management Nature based solutions Partnership Small Island Developing States Social Inclusion

Share

The GCBC Opportunities Portal for Concept Note submissions for the Third Research Grant Competition (RGC3) CLOSED at 23:00 hrs UTC, on Sunday, 16 March, 2025. Any applications submitted after that time and date will not be accepted or considered for the full proposal stage. 

The GCBC extends grateful thanks to all applicants who made submissions through the Opportunities Portal. We have been delighted with the responses to this grant call, particularly from the Global South.

Over the next few weeks we will be working through the applications, carrying out eligibility checks, technical evaluations, moderation and scientific meetings to establish the most suitable Concept Notes to take forward to the next round. 

RGC3 Themes

The two research themes of this RGC3 are:  

  • Theme 1: Using biodiversity to improve the climate resilience of agricultural, food and bioeconomy value chains – Transforming agrifood systems at scale to incorporate nature-based solutions that build biodiversity back into production landscapes to boost climate resilience and reduce poverty (open to all GCBC focus regions). 
  • Theme 2: Biodiversity hotspots in Small Island Developing States (SIDS) – Building sustainable businesses from nature to adapt to climate change, protect biodiversity, and tackle poverty (focused in SIDS). 

The GCBC, a UK Official Development Assistance (ODA) programme funded by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), aims to fund a mixed portfolio of up to twenty grants in RGC3, covering a range of topics and geographies across both themes. Grants sums of between £100,000 and £1 million are offered for projects of 12-36 months duration. 

The GCBC will accept proposals for projects with activities in GCBC-eligible countries in Latin America (including Central America), the Caribbean, Sub-Saharan Africa, and South-east Asia and the Pacific and Small Island Developing States. A list of GCBC eligible countries is available here. To be accepted for funding under the GCBC programme projects must demonstrate: 

  • Fit to GCBC: All proposals need to address poverty alleviation and climate resilience, focusing on approaches that better value, protect, restore and sustainably manage biodiversity. 
  • Fit to theme: Proposals must address research questions within one of the themes set out above. 
  • GESI: All proposals must incorporate clear plans to factor in gender, equality and social inclusion from the outset. 
  • R&D: Proposed work must meet the definition of research and development: creative and systematic work undertaken to increase the stock of knowledge – including knowledge of humankind, culture and society – and to devise new applications of available knowledge (OECD, 2015). 

 

 

 

Tags

Agriculture Agroforestry Coastal Ecosystems Conservation and Restoration Food Systems Improving livelihoods Indigenous Peoples Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Natural Resource Management Nature based solutions Partnership Small Island Developing States Social Inclusion

Share

Related