Follow by Email

Wednesday, February 25, 2015

CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY TRAINING REPORT



TRAINNING WORKSHOP REPORT
CONVENTION ON BILOGICAL TRAINING FOR LOCAL COMMUNITY RESOURCE MANAGERS IN MADANG, PAPUA NEW GUINEA


SOME PARTICIPANTS POSING WITH mnd'S EDUCATION OFFICER MRS. ADOLPHINA LUVONGIT ( standing RIGHT FRONT ROW). SEE NAMES IN ANNEX II.  PHOTO: ADOLP LILAI




Report prepared by Adolphina Luvongit and Wenceslaus Magun for MAKATA Incorporated,
February 2015



MAS KAGIN TAPANI ASSOCIATION

POB 1312, Port Moresby, National Capital District, PNG
Ph. +(675) 3440591 or + (675) 71959665
magun.wences@gmail.com • maskagintapani.blogspot.com 



Acknowledgements
We thank The Nature Conservancy (TNC) for its funding support to Mas Kagin Tapani Inc. (MAKATA), which enabled us to conduct the first Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Training for 30 indigenous local community resource managers at Mur, in Madang, Papua New Guinea (PNG). This workshop would not have eventuated without the support from Mahonia Na Dari’s Education Officer. We therefore thank MND’s Education Officer, Mrs. Adolphina Luvongit in successfully assisting Mr. Wenceslaus Magun in delivering a three days training to our indigenous local community resource managers.
This will be the first CBD training in PNG for indigenous local community resource managers.  As such we thank the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) for supporting Adolphina Luvongit from Mahonia Na Dari, Edward Yamai, from Mt Hagen Archdiocese and Wenceslaus Magun from MAKATA, representing NGO’s in PNG in 26-28 August, 2014, to attend the Regional Capacity-Building Workshop for the Pacific Region on Traditional Knowledge and Customary Sustainable Use under the Convention on Biological Diversity.  With support from the World Indigenous and Local Community Land and Sea Managers Network (WIN), managed by the Equator Initiative (EI) United Nations Development agency (UNDP), we remained in Apia, Samoa and participated in the Small Island Developing States Summit (SIDS), as community ambassadors for biodiversity in the SIDS process from the 29 August to 5 September 2014. We therefore acknowledge the support from WIN, EI, and UNDP.
We extend our gratitude to the Community Based Organisations (CBO) of Kimadi and Magubem for releasing two of their executives, namely Peter Bunam, president of Gildipasi Planning Committee, and Peter Kes, executive secretary for Kimadi CBO.  We also thank the Karkum villagers for releasing their Duergo CBO executives namely, Mr. Mark Khonn, Mrs. Edna Khonn, Mr. Adolph Lilai (also MAKATA’s CF) and Mrs. Christine Ibilo to join the indigenous resource and local community managers from Mur, and the neighboring villages in this training.
The Mur villagers played a pivotal role in coordinating and assisting in this training.  We therefore thank them for their hospitality, generosity, and support throughout the days we ran this training at Dawang Primary School.
Finally, we thank God for His continued grace and blessings to us all!




Table of Contents

 

1.     Introduction

In 2014, 26-28 August, Adolphina Luvongit, Edward Yamai, and I representing NGO’s in PNG attended the Regional Capacity-Building Workshop for the Pacific Region on Traditional Knowledge and Customary Sustainable Use under the Convention on Biological Diversity.  With support from the World Indigenous and Local Community Land and Sea Managers Network (WIN), managed by the Equator Initiative (EI) United Nations Development agency (UNDP), we remained in Apia, Samoa and participated in the Small Island Developing States Summit (SIDS), as community ambassadors for biodiversity in the SIDS process from the 29 August to 5 September 2014.
The CBD Workshop’s and SIDS Summit’s, Outcomes calls us to implement the Samoa Pathway.  In order to do that, I planned a CBD workshop in Madang using TNC grant. 
One of the primary reason I chose to do that is because, I saw the need for indigenous local community resource managers especially in Madang where Mas Kagin Tapani (MAKATA) Inc. a local Community Based Organisation has been taking a very active role in turtle conservation efforts, to be better equipped with knowledge and skills on CBD and related topics. I believe that this information is relevant for them to manage their resource effectively. I am convinced that once they understand the bigger picture of what they do, they will appreciate their efforts in conserving, managing, and sustainably using their natural resources in ways that also help improve their lives, add economic value to their habitat and biodiversity and promote their cultural and traditional values and practices.  The training also hopes to build their capacity to realize that CBD does acknowledge and recommend the use of traditional knowledge to achieve CBD’s three objectives which are: Conservation of Biological Diversity; The Sustainable use of its components; and the fair and equitable sharing of its benefits arising from the utilization of genetic resources.
The CBD workshop was also conducted in parallel to the review of Mur Resource Management Plan.  Most of the sessions on Mur Resource Management Plan were conducted in the evenings by Mr. Magun and Adolph Lilai.  These sessions, touched a bit on their vision, and objectives but much of the time was spent on discussing their external and internal land boundary issues. We realized that their resource management plan covered both the land and sea resources.  In order to ensure that all their resources are mapped out well and thoroughly, it was necessary that land issue disputes needed to be dealt with first, before we move on with their vision, objectives, monitoring workshop and the finalization of their plan to be launched. Through these sessions we realized that there were eminent and ongoing land conflicts with certain individuals and clans which would definitely affect our plans to do a land boundary survey during this trip.  The plan to conduct a land boundary survey on this trip was therefore put on hold.  The session reached consensus that Mur villagers especially Marasoka, Maigomda, Baru, Kamdau, Baraninga and related clans need to iron out their land issue differences first, before we continue the land boundary survey.  This survey will help us develop their resource map which will then be incorporated into their Management Plan.  We therefore tasked these clan’s leaders to organize meetings, settle their land disputes and then call us back to continue our work with them.
This particular workshop is the first of its kind for indigenous local community resource managers in Madang.  The workshop was organised by the MAKATA Inc. and hosted by the Mur villagers at Dawang Primary School, Saidor Local Level Government, Rai Coast District, in Madang. The workshop ran from Monday 15th  to Thursday 18th  December,  2014.  Informal storytelling, interviewing and information gathering, or answering many questions from the community started on Sunday 14th of December and continued on till we left Mur for Madang town.  
The target audiences of the workshop were indigenous local community resource managers from coastal communities within MAKATA’s turtle conservation sites and neighboring communities.  There were 30 participants at this course. For a full list of workshop participants including their names and contact details, refer to participants list on Annex II.

1.1 Aims and objectives

Aim:       Empower indigenous local community resource managers on the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)/traditional knowledge, so they appreciate their efforts in operationalizing the three (3) CBD’s objectives in their efforts to establish new turtle conservation sites in Madang, through the establishment of their Resource Management Areas.
Objective:           To provide environmental education training on the Convention on Biological Diversity/Traditional Knowledge to indigenous local community resource managers on the 3 CBD Objectives:
(1)    Conservation of biological diversity.
(2)    Sustainable use of its components; and
(3)    Fair and equitable sharing of benefits from the use of genetic resources

1.2 Expected Outcomes

Expected outcomes of the workshop are as listed below.
·         Thirty (30) indigenous local community resource managers gained knowledge on CBD/PNG Protected Area Policy/Traditional Knowledge/World Intellectual Property/Nagoya Protocol
·         These participants learn that the CBD under Article 8, paragraph (j) respect, preserve and maintain traditional knowledge of Indigenous Local Communities’ relevant to the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity; promote its wider application with the approval and involvement of the holders of such knowledge; and encourage the equitable sharing of the benefits.
·         These participants gain knowledge on Aichi Biodiversity Targets, Nagoya Protocol, the PNG Protected Area Policy, World Intellectual Property Rights, and the PAPAPAPAITAI Declaration.
·         These participants are encouraged to continue to work with experts to adapt ‘Other Effective Area-base Conservation Measures’ that can be effectively used to achieve Aichi Biodiversity Target 11.
·         Mur indigenous local community resource managers revise their resource management plan.
·          Identify land issues and encourage individuals and clans involved in their land conflicts to find amicable solutions to them so as to enable us to do a land boundary survey and complete their resource map.

2.     Course Contents.


The training workshop program is outlined in Annex I.

3.     Workshop outcome.


It took a week for Wenceslaus Magun to visit local communities in Madang to inform and invite indigenous local community resource managers from each community within our program sites to send their representatives to attend a first Convention on Biological Diversity workshop.  The initial plan was to run the CBD workshop at the St. Theresa’s Conference Centre at Alexishafen, Madang.  This did not eventuate, as representatives from Mur village had transport problems and requested that we take the training to Mur.  This prompted Wenceslaus and Adolphina Luvongit to change plans and adhere to the Mur call.  The change of plan meant, only a few representatives from Kimadi, Magubem and Karkum along the north coast road in the Sumkar District, could join Adolphina and Wenceslaus on a boat trip to Mur village, which is about 4 hours by a 40 hp boat, south of Madang town.  This prompted us to apologize to the many keen indigenous local resource managers who had expressed interest to participate in this training. We also assured them that if funds are available; we will find time to run a similar training in Madang and will invite them to attend.

This report is written in English but the actual presentation of the content of the workshop was done in Tok Pidgin, the commonly used and understood language in Papua New Guinea.

On Sunday 14th December 2014, Mr. Magun drove to Dibor (Kimadi and Magubem) to pick up Joe Sumbia Kes  and Peter Bunam.  This is to ensure that at least a couple of key role models and executives of the local community based organsations from Kimadi, Magubem and Karkum attended this training.  At Karkum village, we picked up Mark Khonn and his wife Edna, Adolph Lilai and Christine Ibilo before driving back to town.  In town, the indigenous local community resource managers met with Mrs. Luvongit and Mr. Magun at the Dinek Pain Guest House, for a briefing. At the briefing Mrs. Luvongit and Mr. Magun gave a quick rundown of the overview of the workshop, its aims and objective and invited these ambassadors from Kimadi, Magubem and Karkum villages to share their stories and experiences with the indigenous local community resource managers for Mur and the neighboring villages in Rai Coast at the workshop.  Mr. Magun and Mrs. Luvongit stressed that this is a golden opportunity for these ILC representatives to share their stories of the process they went through to establish their resource management plans and to establish a network amongst Mur villagers and Kimadi, Magubem and Karkum villagers.  This initiative if successful will be a first of its kind in Madang, where local communities involved in resource management areas, using “Other Effective Area-based Conservation Measures”, come together to build network and strengthen alliances to support each other in their endeavor to manage and sustainably use their natural resources. 

On Monday, 15th of December, we left for Mur village on a 40hp dinghy.  It was raining heavily in the morning and so the skipper from Yamai village could not make it to town at 8am as anticipated. He had to wait for the rain to stop before coming into town.  While waiting for him, we did our shopping and got all our stuff to the Rai Coast boat area.  By noon we left for Mur. The sea was calm but the journey took us to Mur at night.  On our way, to Mur we called in at Yamai village, and picked up a torch.  By the time we arrived at Mur village, it was about 7pm.  The community was also surprised to see us, as the news of our visit was not relayed to the community by the community leader who was in direct communication with Mr. Magun in the preparations leading up to the actual workshop date.  He later gave excuses that he did not receive any text messages or miscalls from Mr. Magun nor from Mrs. Luvongit or Mrs. Annisah Sapul, our trainers.  Given the fact that communication service in Rai Coast can be extremely difficult, we accepted the situation and arranged for our stay at the Dawang Primary School.  By then most of the teachers had gone home for their holidays and their houses were vacant.  This made it possible for us to find refuge at the vacant teacher’s houses.  The ladies, Mr. Khonn and Mr. Lilai were sent to stay in one house whilst Mr. Kes and Mr. Bunam took shelter in another teacher’s kitchen house.  Mr. Magun also found himself accommodated in the head masters kitchen house.  Mur village at this stage have not yet built a visitors house. 

Staying at Dawang Primary School also meant  we would conduct the workshop in one of the classrooms.  This is not the first time for us to run trainings for Mur at Dawang Primary School and so we did not find this to be of any inconvenience.  As we settled in at our resting places, the clan leaders visited us and arranged for our meal while they sent their messengers to visit each community on foot and spread the message of our arrival and our plan to conduct a three (3) days workshop on CBD.  Fortunately, for a village like Mur, far from Madang town, and also about two hours by foot to Saidor, the nearest government station, it was not difficult to relay the message to the villagers.  Most of the local resource managers were in their respective clans and communities.  This made it much easier for us to gather a good number of participants to attend the training the following day. That evening Mr. Magun ran through the overview of the workshop with the key community leaders.  He emphasized the need to do the land boundary survey in order to complete their resource map and incorporate it into their Resource Management Plan.   It was brought to Mr. Magun and Mr. Lilai’s attention then that there were some challenging land conflicts on hand.  The community leaders indicated that they will invite parties involved in their land disputes to attend this workshop and share their stories with us.  This did not happen as expected as not all the conflicting parties attended evening sessions on Mur Resource Management Plan review.

On Tuesday 16th of December we began the formal workshop.  The sessions were held both during the day and also at night, to make up for the five days sessions.  This was followed by an evaluation exercise. No formal evaluation questions or tests were done with the participants. However, nearly all the participants expressed appreciation for the topics learn.  They also asked us to conduct another CBD workshop again for their women folk and other leaders who could not make it to this training. The feedback from the evaluation also indicated that all the participants did not have any knowledge at all about CBD, PNG Protected Area Policy, Nagoya Protocol and related topics prior to attending this training.  They now have a fair idea on these topics as well as of the Intellectually Property Rights, and Aichi Targets. The participants also appreciated how their traditional Knowledge, ethics and customary practices of conservation play a significant part in sustainable resource use.  They learn that CBD acknowledges traditional conservation practice as it contributes towards achieving the Conventions Objectives.  The participants also learn that Mrs. Luvongit, Mr. Yamai and Mr. Magun are also members of the Pacific Caucus that presented its ‘PAPAPAPAITAI Declaration’ (see attached Annex III) to the United Nations, at the Small Islands Developing States Summit in Apia, Samoa which was held from the 1st to 5th of September 2014.

Day 1. monday 15TH DECEMBER 2014

Session 1: Orientation and briefings with key indigenous local community resource owners 


We had initially planned to do the introductory session, gauge the participants’ workshop expectations, and point out the aims, objectives and the overview of this workshop on Monday evening. 

Arriving at 7pm and seeing that not everyone was well informed of our arrival caused a bit of hindrance to fulfill this plan.  This however, did not dampen our spirit.  After settling in, resting, and having had our dinner we went straight into discussing the plans of the workshop with key leaders who had assembled at Dawang Primary School to meet us.

We introduced ourselves and asked the ILC resource managers from Kimadi, Magubem and Karkum to introduce themselves to the ILC resource owners, managers and clan leaders from Mur.  Our team was then formally welcomed to Mur by Dawang Chief, Bill Dabaliga.

After completing all the formal welcome formalities at Dawang, Mr. Magun, got straight into the purpose of our trip.  He said this workshop is part of an ongoing process to help Mur ILC resource managers and community members establish their Resource Management Plan. He pointed out that the Draft Mur Resource Management Plan had some outstanding issues, or steps that needed to be addressed. 

“In this trip, if all goes well we would finalize their vision, mission, and objectives and complete the Mur land boundary survey,” he said.  He further elaborated that this workshop will also discuss further processes that needed to be completed in order to complete Mur Resource Management Plan.  He reiterated that there was a need to complete the land boundary survey.  This activity will enable us to incorporate the map into Mur Resource Management Plan.

As he touched on this topic, he was reminded by some of the indigenous local community resource owners that there were some outstanding land conflicts in Mur that needed to be dealt with.  This was the first challenge we noted.  Adolph Lilai our community facilitator and GIS specialist, who was brought in to survey the land boundary with his team of Mur resource owners was then asked not to pursue this task in the coming days as planned. 

Mr. Magun further emphasized that the other key objective of this training is to conduct a Convention on Biological Diversity Workshop.  He stressed that, it was necessary to conduct the Convention on Biological Diversity training as it will enable indigenous local community resource owners both at Mur and from Karkum, Kimadi, Magubem and neighboring villages in Rai Coast to grasp a bigger picture of why biological conservation is necessary and how their work at the grassroots level meets the CBD objectives, and the PNG Protected Area Policy. He told them that this will also help them value and appreciate their intellectual property rights, traditional conservation knowledge, traditional cultural expressions, innovations and practices.  He added that they will also learn about Prior Informed Consent, Access to Benefit Sharing from their genetic resources, and the importance of establishing a Mutually Agreed Terms and Conditions with scientists or ‘outsiders’ who come into their communities to collect plant or animal species for scientific experiments which can result in the development of products that can make big profits for the companies, universities or scientists, while they lose out in big time because of their ignorance.  He reiterated that these topics will be discussed further in details during the coming days in the sessions.

We ended the first days evening session by asking the leaders to invite other indigenous local community resource managers, clan leaders who had land dispute issues as well as other ILC resource managers to attend this workshop.  This will help us move on with their activities to complete the Mur Resource Management Plan.

We ended the session at about 11pm tired and exhausted but satisfied with the day’s outcome. 

Day 2. tuesday 16th December, 2014

Session 2: Introduction and workshop overview on the Convention on Biological Diversity and the PAPAPAPAITAI Declaration- Facilitator: Mr. Magun


Our workshop started on Tuesday at Dawang Primary School.  Present at the workshop were ILC resource managers from Kimadi, Magubem, Karkum, Dawang, Mur, and the representatives of the other six clans of Mur village.

Our two facilitors, Mrs. Luvongit and Mr. Magun set the projector, their computers, and the white cotton screen on the wall, and prepared other lessons on the black board and flip charts. 

The session started at about 9 am in the morning as the participants had to walk to Dawang PS for at least two to three hours.  Those sharing the land boundaries with Baru and Kasu villages came at about 9:30am but it was not too late.  The sessions began with an opening prayer led by Mr. Khonn.

After the opening prayer, Mr. Magun welcomed all the participants and introduced himself.  He then asked Mrs. Luvongit to introduce herself before each participant had the turn to do the same.  After all the participants had introduced themselves, Mr. Magun went on to share the overview of the workshop. 


Before deliberating on the topics, he paused a couple of questions to the participants to gauge their views on how much they knew about the Convention on Biological Diversity, PNG Protected Area Policy and related topics.  Nearly all the participants responded that they knew nothing about CBD, PNG Protected Area Policy and related topics.  Asked if they wanted to learn more about these topics, they said “Yes,” overwhelmingly.  The enthusiasm of the participants and their keen interest to learn more about these topics paved way for Mrs. Luvongit and Mr. Magun to find it more exciting and interesting to share the little knowledge they gained from the CBD training in Apia, Samoa from the 26-28 August.

At this juncture, Mr. Magun informed the participants that Mrs. Luvongit, Mr. Edward Yamai from the Mt. Hagen Archdiocese, and himself representing NGO’s in PNG had attended the Regional Capacity-Building Workshop for the Pacific Region on Traditional Knowledge and Customary Sustainable Use under the Convention on Biological Diversity.  He added that with support from the World Indigenous and Local Community Land and Sea Managers Network (WIN), managed by the Equator Initiative (EI) United Nations Development agency (UNDP), they remained in Apia, Samoa and participated in the Small Island Developing States Summit (SIDS), as community ambassadors for biodiversity in the SIDS process from the 29 August to 5 September 2014.

He pointed out further that it was at the SIDS that they were very fortunate to participate in the formation of the Pacific Islands Caucus and to present the PAPAPAPAITAI Declaration (PD) (See Annex III) to the United Nations.  The PD summed up concerns ILC had over their resources in the Pacific and wanted the UN to address them.  See details of the PD as attached in Annex III. He informed the participants that all the resource materials, that Mrs. Luvongit and he presented and related materials will be burnt onto CDs and given to them.  Mr. Magun urged the participants to use the exercise books and the pen issued to them to take note of the sessions and not to be embarrassed to ask questions on anything they may not understand.

He said the main objective of this workshop is to build the capacity of the participants to understand what the Convention on Biological Diversity is, its Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 of Aichi Targets; the PNG Protected Area Policy, World Intellectual Property Rights; the Nagoya Protocol/Traditional Knowledge; PAPAPAPAITAI Declaration; CBO’s ILC resource managers empowering themselves; and the Review of Mur Resource Management Plan.  He also highlighted some of the expected outcomes of the workshop as indicated above.

Session 3: Convention on Biological Diversity – Facilitator: Mrs. Adolphina


In this session, Mrs. Luvongit empowered the participants about what the Convention on Biological Diversity is.  She touched on the Background of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the Objectives of the Convention (Article 1); Terms (Article 2); Institutional Framework; Secretariat of the CBD; the Thematic Programmes of Work and the Cross-Cutting Issues. 

She informed the participants that CBD was opened for signature in Rio in 1992 (the Rio “Earth Summit”). In 1992 – 193 countries signed the legally-binding treaty.  She added that 39 countries have ratified the Protocol and that PNG signed it in June 1992 and ratified it in March 1993. “That means that PNG has made a commitment to fulfill the objectives of the CBD which are: i) Conservation of Biological Diversity; ii) Sustainable use of its components; and iii) Fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources, ” she stressed.    She used couple of examples to demonstrate further the objectives of CBD.

Mrs. Luvongit also gave a brief history of the CBD, highlighting the establishment of the Cartagena Protocol in 2003; the Nagoya – Kuala Lumpur and Supplementary Protocol on Liability and Redress to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety in 2010; and the Nagoya Protocol on Access Benefit Sharing in 2010. She told the participants that the Convention (Article 1), “is an environmental treaty for sustainable development.”  She gave then gave the definition of Bioligical Diversity (Article 2) as, “the variability among living organisms from all sources including, inter alia, terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are part; this includes diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems.” 

She explained to them how the Institutional framework of the CBD functions.  She added further that, “the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity was established (Article 24) to support the goals of the Convention.  Its principal functions are to prepare for, and service, meetings of the Conferences of the Parties (COP) and other subsidiary bodies of the Convention, and to coordinate with other relevant international bodies.”

She said: “The Secretariat is institutionally lined to the United Nations Environment Programme, its host institution and, pursuant to decision 11/19, is located in Montreal, Canada since 1996.”

The participants learn that the Conference of the Parties (COP) is the governing body of the Convention, and advances implementation of the Convention through the decisions it takes at its biennial meetings  (the COP).  They learn that to date the COP has held 10 ordinary meetings, and one extraordinary meeting.  The recent COP 12, was held in October 2014, at the Republic of Korea of which a member of the Pacific Caucus, Te Tui had attended and is keeping us updated.

Mrs Luvongit informed the participants about the Seven (7) Thematic Programmes of Work established by COP which include: Agriculture Biodiversity, Dry and Sub-humid Lands Biodiversity, Forest Biodiversity, Inland Waters Biodiversity, Island Biodiversity, Marine and Coastal Biodiversity, and Mountain Biodiversity.  To test the attentiveness of the participants, She asked the participants where they fitted in this “Thematic Programmes of Work,” and most of them said: “Marine and Coastal Biodiversity.”  This was a clear indication that they understood the content of the topic and were not falling asleep.

She then summarized the Cross-Cutting Issues which corresponded to the issues addressed in the Convention’s substantive provisions in Articles 6-20, and provided bridges and links between the thematic programs.  These Cross-Cutting Issues included: Aichi Biodiversity Targets; Access to Genetic Resources and Benefit Sharing; Biodiversity for Development; Biological and Cultural Diversity; Climate Change and Biodiversity; Communication, Education and Public Awareness: CEPA; Economic, Trade and Incentive Measures; Ecosystem Approach; Gender and Biodiversity; Global Strategy for Plant Conservation; Global Taxonomy Initiative; Impact Assessment; Identification, Monitoring, Indicators and Assessments; Invasive Alien Species; Liability and Redress – Article 14(20; Protected Areas; Sustainable Use of Biodiversity; Tourism and Biodiversity; Traditional Knowledge, Innovations and Practices – Article 8(j) and related issues including 10(c); and Technology Transfer Cooperation . 

She stressed that what we were actually doing at this workshop and what the ILC’s are doing in their respective local communities was in fact fulfilling some of these “Cross-Cutting Issues.”  From time to time, she asked Mr. Magun to join her in her presentation by sharing practical local application examples so that the participants understood the subject better.

Note: Despite the breakdown of our computers and the projector, caused by the old unreliable genset we hired from a local person, we managed to deliver our presentations with ease using the flip charts, markers, pin tags, sticky tapes and the chalk and black board. 

The participants then went for a recess break before returning for the next session on Aichi Biodiversity Targets.

Session 4: Strategic Plan for Biodiversity Targets 2011-2020 and Aichi Targets.  10 year framework – Facilitator: Mrs. Adolphina


In this Session, Mrs Luvongit connected the CBD lessons with the Aichi Biodiversity Targets.

She reiterated the three (3) Objectives of the Conventions: i) Conservation of Biological Diversity; ii) The Sustainable use of its components; and iii) The fair and equitable sharing of its benefits arising from the untilization of genetic resources.

She then pointed out its Vision: “By 2050, Biodiversity is valued, conserved, restored and widely used, maintaining ecosystem services, sustaining a healthy planet and delivering benefits essential for all people.

She informed the participants that Strategic Goal A – addresses the underlying causes of biodiversity loss by mainstreaming biodiversity across government and society! She said Target 1 for this Strategy, demands that by 2020, at the latest, people are aware of the values of Biodiversity and the steps they can take to conserve and use it sustainably.

She pointed out that under Strategic Goal B –we must reduce direct pressures on biodiversity and promote sustainable use!  Target 5 of this Goal indicated that “by 2020, the rate of loss of all national habitats, including forests, is at least halved and where feasible, brought close to zero (0) and degradation and fragmentation is significantly reduced.” She continue with Target 6 elaborating that it calls for “All fish and invertebrates stocks and aquatic plants are managed and harvested sustainably, legally and applying ecosystems based approaches, so that overfishing is avoided, recovery plans and measures are in place for all depleted species.  In Target 10, she said: “By 2016, the multiple anthropogenic pressures on coral reefs and other vulnerable ecosystem impacted by climate change or ocean acidification are minimized so as to maintain their integrity and functioning.”

Mrs. Luvongit further stressed that Target Goal C – points out that: “By 2020, at least 17% of terrestrial and inland water and 10% of coastal and marine areas especially areas of particular importance of biodiversity and ecosystem services are conserved through effectively and equitably managed ecological representative and well connected systems of protected areas and other effective area based conservation measures and integrated into wider landscapes and seascapes.”

She said Target 12 says, “By 2020, the extinction of known threatened species has been prevented and their conservation status, particularly of those most in decline, has been improved and sustained.”

At this point she acknowledged MAKATA’s efforts in supporting ILCs under its sea turtle restoration project to save the critically endangered leatherback turtles.

Mrs. Luvongit than informed the participants about Strategic Goal E which calls for “Enhance implementation through participatory planning, knowledge management and capacity building.  Target 18 of this Goal aims to see that: “By 2020, the traditional knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities relevant for the conservation and sustainable use of biological resources are respected, subject to national legislation and relevant international obligations and fully integrated and reflected in the implementation of the Convention with the full and effective participation of indigenous and local communities at all levels.”

She concluded her session with Article 8 – In-Situ-Conservation, (8j):  “Subject to its national legislation, respect, preserve and maintain knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities embodying traditional lifestyles relevant for the conservation and sustainable use of Biological Diversity and promote their wider application with the approval and involvement of the holders of such knowledge, innovations and practices and encourage the equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the untilization of such knowledge, innovations and practices.”

She said Mr. Magun will elaborate further on this under the Nagoya Protocol.  With that the midday session ended and we all went for lunch.

Session 5: PNG Protected Area Policy – Facilitator: Mr. Magun


We resumed class at about 1:15pm after having a satisfying meal for lunch, thanks to the women folk for preparing our food and for cleaning up.  It was truly enriching for us to see participants sharing their experiences on the topics learn so far during lunch break.  We could tell they were learning something new theoretically, but practically for some of them, they are practicing their traditional conservation knowledge and cultural experiences.

In this session, Mr. Magun drew the participants’ attention to see how the “PNG Protected Area Policy,” falls in line or is linked to the Convention on Biological Diversity and the “Cross-Cutting Issues” as pointed out by Mrs. Luvongit.  He also pointed out how the ILC’s traditional knowledge and their efforts to establish or have established their marine resource management areas, fulfill the CBD objectives and the goals of the PNG Protected Area Policy as well as that of the PNG Constitution’s Goal 4.

He quoted the Guiding Principles of the Policy on ‘Protected Areas’ as, “A fair and thoughtful system of management area network.” He shared quote from Bruce Beehler et al in the Lessons Learn article for the YUS Conservation Program to stress that there is not one way of achieving conservation outcomes.  “Every conservation project in the field is an experiment so one should think carefully, adapt, refine, and innovate.”(Beehler et al, 2013).

He shared stories of how Karkum villagers have used Conservation Deed as a conservation tool to establish their marine resource management area as compared to Kimadi and Magubem who used the traditional management systems to bring home this point.  He also shared the journey of Mur villagers in their pursuit to establish their resource management plan and pointed out that the land issue conflicts at Mur, are some of the hindrances they need to address in their efforts to achieve their goal.  He invited the participants to share in details their own experiences and stories to each other in the coming session on Wednesday so as to build their own capacity and encourage each other to fulfill the CBD and the PNG Protected Area Policy.

Mr. Magun then went on to inform the participants that the ‘Protected area classes” of PNG include: i) National Parks, ii) National Heritage Site; iii) Special Management Area; iv) Community Conservation Area, Locally Managed Marine Areas; and v) the Marine Sanctuary.

The participants learn that the Vision of PNG’s area network is: “Our protected area network across land and sea safeguards our precious and outstanding natural and cultural heritage.  Customary landowners manage these areas effectively for current and future generations, with support from a capable central protected area agency, governments at all levels, and national and international partners.”

He then informed them of the definition of what ‘Protected Area’ is.   According to the PNG Protected Area Policy, the internationally accepted definition of a protected area developed by the International Union for Conservation Network after extensive consultation is: “A clearly defined geographical space, recognized, dedicated and managed through legal or other effective means, to achieve the long-term conservation of nature with associated ecosystem services and cultural values (Dudley 2008 p8).” 

At this point, Mr. Magun stressed that the Mur Resource Management Plan cannot be completed without the completion of their land boundary survey.  It is therefore very important that they settle their land disputes so that work can continue to complete their management plan.

Mr. Magun then gave the participants an opportunity to brain storm answers to the question: “Why are protected areas important for PNG?”  After the brain storming session they reported the following answers: i) Luksave olsem samting (risoses0 wok long pinis – lukautim blong jeneresen bihain; ii) Samting mas kamap gut gen; iii) kamapim sampela gutpela samting olsem moni na arapela (marasin, kalsa, na moa yet); iv) Samting grow gen na bai ol ausait lain kam lukim long komuniti blong yumi; v) Isi long kisim bilas blong singsing; vi) Source of my life blood; and vii) Mekim ples kamap helti na biutiful.

This exercise was actually to find out how much knowledge and experiences the participants have about conservation and to see if they really value it or not.  The outcome of this test shows that they are convinced and convicted in achieving conservation outcomes as it was beneficial to and for themselves and for their future generations.

Mr. Magun further informed the participants of the international obligations and agreements covered under the PNG Protected Area Policy of which PNG is a signatory to, which included: i) Convention on Biological Diversity; ii) United Nations Convention on Combating Desertification; iii) United Nations Framework Convention on Climated Change; and iv) International Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar) and the World Heritage Convention.

In addition, he briefed them on the Aichi Biodiversity Targets which Mrs. Luvongit covered earlier, placing more emphasis on Target 11 to draw to their attention to what they are doing, which is actually fulfilling this Target: “By 2020, at least 17 per cent of terrestrial and inland water areas and 10 per cent of coastal and marine areas especially areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystems services of protected areas and other effective area-based  conservation measures and integrated into the wider landscape and seascape;”and Target 12 which says, “By 2020, the extinction of known threatened species has been prevented and their conservation status, particularly of those most in decline, has been improved and sustained.”

Mr. Magun said, “there are only three (3) legal structures of Protected Areas in PNG and these are: i) National Parks; ii) Wildlife Management Areas; and iii) Conservation Areas.

He warned the participants that the dangers of these laws is that there is no provision in the Fauna (Protection and Control Act) 1966 that prevents or protects our resources from extractive industries.  The same is true for the Conservation Areas Act 1978, as the Minister for Environment and Conservation has the ultimate power over our resources.  He said, the minister decides whether any mining, logging, or petroleum activity will or can take place or not and that decision can override the ILC’s decision in achieving their conservation or resource management plans outcomes if ILCs resource managers do not make bold decision to stop such activities taking place on their land whilst promoting sustainable resource management practices. 

This brought us to the end of the days sessions.

Evening Session – Mur Resource Management Plan



We had initially planned to show a few videos and then review the Mur Resource Management Plan.  This did not eventuate because firstly, our computers’ adaptors were damaged and secondly the projector’s bulb blew off making it impossible to use our computers and the projector.  Secondly, after the first days evenings informal session, we discovered that there were outstanding land issues that needed to be settled first before we can proceed on with the next steps to complete Mur Resource Management Plan.  Mr. Magun spent time, instead storytelling and interviewing individual ILC resource managers to learn more about the situation on the ground at Mur, Karkum, Kimadi and Magubem.  This was the normal routine for the next evenings.  Mr. Magun found out from Mr. Ninga that his clan currently has land conflicts with the Salinga family from Kasu village.  The Maigomda Clan of Mur village also has land disputes with a clan from Baru and Kamdau Clan also has issues with the Baru Clan.  Asked if it was possible for this land issues to be resolved soon, Mr. Ninga said in Tok Pidgin: “Nau yet mi no ting wanbel bai kamap bikos hevi em stap yet. (At this time, I do not think this is possible as the problem still exists)” Mr. Magun informed the participants that unless these external land boundary issues are settled, MAKATA cannot proceed on with the next steps to complete the Mur Resource Management Plan.  Dawang Clan Chief, Bill Dabaliga and his younger brother Tilom Dabaliga said they will look into this matter and keep us informed of any positive developments.

Day 3. WEDNESDAY 17TH  december, 2014


Session 6: World Intellectual Property – Facilitator: Mrs. Adolphina

The session began at 8:30 am. By this time the participants had arrived early.  It must have been the content of topics covered so far that grabbed their interest and moved them to attend this workshop on time, an attitude that sometimes do not work that way for the village folks. 

After Mrs. Khonn had opened the session with an opening prayer, Mrs. Luvongit took over with her presentation on the World Intellectual Property Rights.

After welcoming the participants, she ran through with them the abbreviations of some of the words she used in the training.  WIPO for World Intellectual Property Organisation; IP for Intellectual Property; GR for Genetic Resources; TK for Traditional Knowledge; UN for United Nations; and TCE for Traditional Cultural Expression.

Mrs. Luvongit told the participants that the Intellectual Property or IP refers to the creation of mind such as invention, designs, literary and artistic works, performances, plant varieties and names and signs and symbols.

She informed the participants that the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) recognizes those traditional elements as protectable.  “IP would enable their holders to have a say over their use by others,” she said.

She added that in 2007, the United Nations (UN) General Assembly adopted the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.  The Declaration recognizes that: “Indigenous peoples and individuals are free and equal to all other peoples and individuals have the right to be free from any kind of discrimination, in exercise of their rights in particular based on their indigenous origin or identity (Article 2).”

In Article 31, Mrs. Luvongit emphasized that it: Provides that indigenous peoples “have the right to maintain control, protect and develop their intellectual Property (IP) over such  cultural heritage, traditional knowledge (TK) and traditional cultural expression (TCE).”

She said TK is a living body of knowledge that is developed, sustained, and passed on from generations to generation within a community often forming part of its cultural or spiritual identity. 

She added that TK is knowledge, know-how, skills, innovations or practices ared passed between generations in a traditional context that form part of the traditional lifestyles of indigenous and local communities who act as their guardians.

She gave examples of TK as: i) Knowledge about traditional medicine; ii) Traditional hunting and fishing technique; and iii) Knowledge about animal migration patterns or water management.

Furthermore, Mrs. Luvongit informed participants that TCE are forms in which traditional culture is expressed.  This can be in songs, dances, handicrafts, designs, ceremonies, tales, or artistic or cultural expressions.

She urged the participants to benefit from TK and TCE.  She said indigenous peoples and local communities that develop, maintain and identify culturally with them should gain from these TK or TCE and must not be exploited or be used by outsiders especially local tourist operators, scientists, industries, universities and others.

Both Mrs. Luvongit and Mr. Magun then took questions from the participants on this topic.  It was quite interesting to note that the topic actually generated a lot of discussions which led to the issue of Copy Rights, Patent, and how our local musicians are fighting to stop industries and pirates who are burning original music to CDs and selling them widely in PNG for quick bucks.

These are just some examples of what is happening in our society that ILCs must be aware of and take steps to protect themselves and at the same time gain from their TK and TCEs.

Session 7: Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits arising from their Utilization to the Convention on Biological Diversity – Facilitator: Mr. Magun

  

In this session Mr. Magun informed the participants that the Nagoya Protocol was done to operationalize one of the three (3) objectives of the CBD: i) Conservation of biological diversity; ii) Sustainable use of its components; and iii) Fair and equitable sharing of benefits from the use of the genetic resources.

In other words, the Nagoya Protocol was done to ensure that CBD’s Objective 3 is actually implemented by all parties including, governments and the ILCs.  He reiterated that the Protocol on Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) was done because the CBD provisions were not fully implemented and that there were cases of misappropriation of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge.

He pointed out the principles under Article 15 CBD on Fundamental ABS which included: “Sovereign rights over natural resources; Prior informed consent (by Parties and ILCs); Mutually agreed terms, including the sharing of benefits arising from the commercial and other utilization of genetic resources.”

Under Article 8 (j) CBD, Mr. Magun said: “Governments are to respect, preserve, maintain and promote the wider application of traditional knowledge with the approval and involvement of relevant indigenous and local communities.”  He pointed out that very little awareness is being carried out by legitimate government agencies or authorities and lined agencies to inform, educate and empower our people on their rights.

He said PNG needs laws, procedures and policies to ensure benefit-sharing once genetic resources leave the PNG.  He emphasized that there is a need in PNG for clear procedures when accessing genetic resources. 

Mr. Magun added that according to CBD, “Traditional Knowledge (TK) related to biological resources (ATK) can be an important source of information for identifying new uses of genetic resources.

He then went on to explain to the participants how Access Benefit Sharing (ABS) and TK works.  As ILC resource managers and resource owners he stressed that they must understand that prior to sharing their traditional knowledge, or for any outsider to enter into any Mutually Agreed Terms (MAT) and Conditions to access their genetic resources (GR)  they must first be informed, and educated about the deal they are trying to enter into.  Once they fully understand the processes and agree on the benefits to be obtained from their GR or traditional knowledge then they may enter into a MAT with the user to have access to their genetic resources or traditional knowledge.  This process is known as: “Prior Informed Consent (PIC), granted by a provider of GR and/ Associated Traditional Knowledge (ATK) holder to a user.”  Once they are satisfied with that step than they can move on to: “Negotiate between themselves (providers of GR eg. National Competent Authority, ILCs etc) and the ( user eg scientists/industry(ies)/ research universities etc) to develop mutually agreed terms (MAT) between the provider and the user that ensure that the benefits obtained from their GR and associated traditional knowledge are shared equitably.”   

Mr. Magun added that once that is in place, then the users can then go ahead and develop products either for non-commercial or commercial utilization using the GR (and associated TK): e.g. basic research, research and development, development of new pharmaceuticals, biotechnological products and etc.  He reiterated that benefits-sharing (monetary and non-monetary): eg. Royalties, technology transfer, training and etc can then be shared between the user and the provider equitably based on the MAT.

He said, according to the Objective of Nagoya Protocol, “the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the utilization of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge, thereby contributes to the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity.”

In PNG he said, there are still gray areas in our laws, policies and procedures in regards to Access to Genetic Resources and Access to TK associated with GR and laws on Benefit Sharing.  PNG being a signatory of this treaty needs to develop domestic laws for: Obtaining PIC or prior approval and involvement of indigenous and local communities (ILCs) for access to genetic resources where they have established rights to grant access to those resources; and Setting out criteria and/or processes for obtaining PIC or approval and involvement of ILC – related work in 8j. Once this law is in place it will ensure that TK held by indigenous and local communities is accessed with PIC or approval and involvement of ILC and MAT established.  It will also ensure that benefits are shared equally between the user and producer who had obtained the GR and/or TK.

To wind up here are some of the core elements: Traditional Knowledge and ILCs

“The Nagoya Protocol recognizes the value of community protocols of ILCs in the ABS process. 
·         Article 12 (1): “In implementing their obligations under this Protocol, Parties shall in accordance with domestic law take into consideration indigenous and local communities customary laws, community protocols and procedures, as applicable, with respect to traditional knowledge associated with genetic resources.”
·         Article 12 (3): “Parties shall endeavor to support, as appropriate, the development by ILCs, including women within these communities of: a) Community protocols in relation to access to traditional knowledge associate with genetic resources and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising out of untilization of such knowledge…”
·         “Obligation of Parties to establish mechanisms to inform potential users of TK associated with genetic resources about their obligations, including measures as made available through the ABS Clearing-House;
·         “Obligation to not restrict the customary use and exchange of genetic resources and associated TK within and amongst ILC (including across borders).”

In order for this to happen the Nagoya Protocol recommended the following tools and mechanisms to assist with implementation:
·         Capacity-building/Awareness raising (which we are currently doing and can do much more if funded);
·         Technology Transfer;
·         National Focal Points and Competent National Authorities – whose obligation among other things, will provide information to applicants seeking access to TK on: Information on procedures for obtaining PIC and MAT from ILCs, where possible and for i) granting access or issuing evidence that access requirements have been met, ii) advising on applicable procedures for obtaining PIC and entering into MAT;
·         ABS Clearing House;
·         Financial Mechanism;
·         Monitoring and Compliance with Protocol;
·         Complimentary work under 8 (j)

Note: Mr. Magun raised some of these issues on facebook and received a response that there is currently no law in PNG as yet on this matter. Another feedback he received from Dr. Eric Kwa was, Dr. Kwa could not respond to his queries on facebook as there are legitimate authorities responsible to do that but as a former university of PNG’s law lecturer and now chairman of the law reform commission, he is willing to give me some information once I make time to see him.  He has not done that yet when we compiled this report.

Session 8: ILC CBO’s empowering themselves – Facilitators: Mr. Khonn, Mr. Bunam, Mr. Kes, Mrs. Ibilo and Mr. Bill Dabaliga


After lunch, we invited the ILC resource managers to use the afternoon session to share their success, challenges and steps they are going through to establish or have established their conservation or resource management areas.

Both Karkum and Mur shared common experiences.  Traditionally these ILCs achieved conservation outcomes using their traditional management practices.  But when western ideologies, including foreign Christian religion influence and practice crept in and took control of their lives, belief systems, lifestyles, educational systems and cultural practices, many of their traditional customary management practices faded away.  Traditional chieftain structures, roles and responsibilities for control and management over their natural resources had less influence.  The younger generations had less respect for their elders.  Only certain clans managed to keep those cultural practices whilst the rest lost their grips of traditional resource management practices.

Adding fuel to that fire is the economic demands and challenges confronting individuals and families with pressures to meet their social needs.  The race to catch huge quantities, bigger sized marine products and to sell more for more money over the normal traditional fishing methods diminished.  Catching just enough protein to feed each family using traditional fishing gears and practices, were taken over by modern fishing gears.  Nylon fishing nets, nylon fishing lines, night diving, spear fishing using modern fishing guns, and even using fishing boats supplied by the National Fisheries Authority to fishing groups in the community with the objective of catching plenty to sell for more money is now the normal practice.  One traditional bad practice, they still maintained is the use of poison ropes (Derris roots).

These bad practices are now putting immense pressure on their marine resources.  Communities are now facing real dangers of depleting their resources.  They know that they themselves are causing this to happen.  They expressed great concern about this and are eager to find positive solutions to this eminent problem.  They want to restore the health and safety of their resources.

Although Mur ILC resource managers did not expand on their bad practices of the use of their Kunai grass resources, and other land based products, in this session, their Resource Management Plan points to these issues and addressed steps and penalties they intend to take to mitigate those risks.

For Mur, it seems the younger generation, don’t seem to listen and obey their elders.  Thus, imposing traditional management practice for Mur may not be a possible option.  They are now adapting the Resource Management Plan process with assistance from MAKATA.

Whilst Mur, and Karkum had similar challenges and did not find the use of traditional conservation management principles and practices viable, and relevant anymore, this was quite the opposite for the Kimadi, and Magubem clans.  The Kimadi and Magubem clans represented by Peter Bunam and Peter Kes shared their stories of how they finally opted to adapt traditional management practice.  In 2013 they official launched their traditional management area.  The occasion was witnessed by representatives of the Christensen Fund, sister NGOs, neighboring villages and the Gildipasi Planning Committee executives.  The process began in 2007 when they were invited to establish their resource management plans with the aim of restoring and protecting the critically endangered leatherback turtles which come to nest at their gray sandy beaches under the Turtle Island Restoration Network’s Sea Turtle Restoration Project (TIRN-STRP).  The project was initiated by Wenceslaus Magun, when he was serving as the Western Pacific Campaigner for the TIRN’s STRP.  When Mr. Magun’s Contract with TIRN ended in 2008, he established MAKATA to sustain this project.  The ongoing capacity building workshops sustained by MAKATA finally led them to choose traditional management system as the best possible method they believe will achieve this outcome.  The achievement has recently been documented by EMTV and was played on its Tok Piksa program on Sunday, 22 February, 2015.

Mark Khonn representing the Duergao CBO, gave a lengthy talk on how his ILC took steps to establish their group.  He said they have finally registered Duergo CBO with the Investment Promotion Authority.  Plans are now in place to establish North Coast Resource Owners Association.  These steps taken were all aimed at protecting, restoring and sustainably using their resources whilst accessing equitable benefits from their genetic resources, and improving their livelihoods.

Christine Ibilo representing Karkum women folk firstly raised concern about lack of female participants.  She said it was sad to see that no females had attended this workshop.  She said for any successful initiative to take place in the community or in a family, both the males and females must take part in and share in the work load.  Women must not be pushed to the kitchen to cook, or to do laundry and all the other dirty jobs but be invited to take active roles in the community.  She also shared her stories of being the lead chef for Karkum Village Guest House.  She said the village based eco-tourism project sprouted from the sea turtle restoration project initiated by Mr. Magun.  More and more tourists both local and international heard about the project and came to see Karkum’s leatherback turtle’s project.  They spent nights and days in their village guest house and brought money into the community.  The turtle project brought with it both positive and negative opportunities and challenges. Rivalries in the community over fair share of money obtained from the village guest house soon saw the booming village guest house enterprise crumbled. Leaders are now looking for ways and means to restore this initiative. 

Mr. Khonn added that with the good tourists, came the bad ones too.  He gave examples of a couple of tourists who visited Karkum in the name of doing biological research; collected different plant species and left without seeking both Prior Informed Consent (PIC) nor establishing any Mutually Agreed Terms (MAT) of Contract for any equitable Access Benefit Sharing (ABS) should there be any such benefits emanating from those genetic resources.  He said, another tourist came with his sailing boat and dived near shore and offshore to Karkum but never produced any documents of his research to the villagers. 

He therefore, thanked Mr. Magun and Mrs. Luvongit for this training as they now can take appropriate steps and measures to prevent such theft from happening again in their communities.

The discussions concluded that a mutually binding partnership agreement be established between Mur, Kimadi, Magubem and Karkum ILCs.  The day’s session ended with Dawang Clan Chief, Bill Dabaliga representing Mur announcing that they will tie knots with Kimadi, Magubem, and Karkum to ensure there is cooperation amongst them.  He then appealed to us not to leave early in the morning (Thursday 18th December) but to give them time to perform a traditional gesture to seal the deal between north coast ILC resource managers and them.

Day 4. THURSDAY 18TH   december, 2014


Session 9: Formal dialogue to establish network and partnership between Mur, Karkum, Kimadi and Magubem


On Thursday morning, the workshop was officially closed with a feast fitting for the kings.  Just before the food were brought to us, Chief Dabaliga and his wife and their 12 year old boy, presented to Mrs. Adolphina a robe of necklaces and dressed her with them from neck to ankles, as an informal initiation into their Dawang Clan.  They did the same to Peter Bunam, Joe Kes, Mark Khonn, Mrs. Ibilo and Mrs Khon for and on behalf of the Karkum ILCs.  After this adornment of chiefly gifts to our team, the other villagers brought us mighty big dishes filled to the brim with delicious cooked home grown organic food and fresh proteins.  The food was a mixer of yam, taro, banana, sweet potato, cassava, and vegetables with fish and roasted whole chicken placed in each dish for ILC representatives from Kimadi and Magubem, Karkum and Adolphina and me. 

Before eating, we listened to a few closing speeches.  Mr. Khonn, representing Karkum villagers and their Duergo CBO, thanked the Mur villagers and the neighboring villagers who attended the workshop and looked after us. He welcomed the initiative to partner with Mur and the neighboring villages to establish network and strengthen local communities’ resource management activities.  Mr. Bunam, president of the Gildipasi Planning Committee spoke on behalf of Gildipasi and expressed appreciation for this workshop. He also welcomed the invitation by Dawang Chief, Bill Dabaliga for partnership and network relationship to be established between Mur, Karkum, Kimadi and Magubem.  Mr. Kes acknowledged the traditional gesture of this expression of interest in an exchange of flowers.  The flowers were handed over to Mr. Kes, Mr. Bunam and Mr. Khonn by Chief Dabaliga. 

Chief Dabaliga asked Mr. Kes, Mr. Bunam and Mr. Khonn to plant those flowers in Karkum, Kimadi and Magubem to remind them of this dialogue they have just established.  He said, if the flowers don’t grow than it is a sign that we won’t create a network between our communities to sustain local resource management knowledge and practice and to share traditional and cultural biological knowledge on conservation.  If they grow than it is a positive sign that we will progress on with this plan.  These gestures were witnessed by all the participants.

The ceremony concluded with a feast.

It was again another positive outcome reached out of this workshop.  We will be monitoring this step closely to see how it progresses on.

After the feast, the participants helped carry our belongings to Mur village, which is about a half an hours walk from Dawang Primary School, where we boarded our 40hp Yamaha dinghy and sailed to Madang.  On our way to Madang, we called into Teterai village to refuel.  At Teterai, we collected some more local flowers and had a short chat with the villagers there.  Mr. Magun informed them of our activities at Mur village.  Teterai village is within our proposed project site communities.

We arrived at Simoi Shipping at about 2:30pm.  Waiting for us at the wharf was Meleki Hoss the owner of the Hire Car which we had hired for this trip.  Mr. Meleki and I drove to his work place to leave him before returning with the hire car to pick my team.  Mrs. Luvongit and I drove Mr. Khonn, Mrs. Khonn, Mr. Lilai, and Mrs, Ibilo to Karkum and then drove to Dibor to drop off Mr. Kes and Mr. Bunam.  We then returned to Madang.  I booked Mrs. Luvongit at Madang Resort.  After dinner with Mrs. Luvongit, I went home (Riwo village) to visit my mum.

Day 5. FRIDAY 19TH   DECEMBER, 2014



Debriefing: Mrs. Luvongit and I had a debriefing of the Workshop Program


Day 6. SATURDAY 20TH  DECEMBER, 2014


Departure:  Mrs. Luvongit left for Hoskins via Port Moresby/Meeting with Grace Dom at Riwo cancelled

After leaving Mrs. Luvongit at the airport, I returned to Riwo to meet with Grace Dom, Wildlife Conservation Societies’ Lawyer who was there to attend to my niece’s wedding.  I had engaged Mrs. Dom to edit the laws and penalties in the Mur Resource Management Plan. She expressed interest to do that job during her vacation.  It was on my way to Riwo to meet Mrs. Dom to discuss this engagement when I had a car accident.  The plan to meet with Mrs. Dom was therefore cancelled.  I later informed Mrs. Dom on phone however, that based on the outcome of our workshop at Mur, it was not likely for us to proceed on with the editing of the laws and penalties for Mur immediately as they have land issues to solve first.  She was satisfied with my explanations but felt sorry for me for the car accident I had encountered.  I further conveyed the same message to Mrs. Sapul as she was principally involved in the drafting of the Mur Resource Management Plan. 

 


1.     Follow-up

There were several activities that needed to be done as identified through the course and closing of the workshop. These are listed below:
(1)    Burn CBD course content and related topics onto CD and deliver to these participants
(2)    Liaise with CBD for more awareness materials on CBD
(3)    Carry out another CBD awareness workshop no later than the first week of April to other indigenous local community resource managers
(4)    Monitoring and Evaluation – MAKATA to visit Mur, Karkum and Kimadi and follow-up on how participants have utilized their knowledge on CBD in their respective communities.

These plans are to be implemented from February 2015 to December 2015.
v  Mobilizing of distribution of awareness materials
o   Wenceslaus to burn copies of the topics taught and other CBD resource materials onto CDs for these participants.  He will hand deliver these CDs to the participants when he next visit these communities.
o   Wenceslaus will continue to liaise with CBD for additional information.
o   Further Training Workshops on Convention on Biological Diversity
o   The training workshop was the first of its kind in Madang and has generated a lot of interest among the participants. Many participants from remote villages in parts of Rai Coast, Bogia, Madang and Sumkar Districts could not make it due to transport difficulties.  The participants who attended this workshop have requested that a similar training be conducted for others at the District level in the near future to continue raising awareness along the coastal communities.
o   MAKATA will look into this and develop proposals etc to mobilise funds to continue the training to other communities along the Madang coastal areas.

 NOTE: GO TO THE LINK AND SEE THE PDF COPY OF THIS STORY WITH THE ANNEXES.

No comments:

Post a Comment