Press Release: Peoples’ Conservation Summit 2026: Road to COP-17 CBD, Armenia, Public Dialogue "People's Conservation for Indonesia: Building a Fair Biodiversity Governance Paradigm"

Conservation is often imagined as an effort to protect flora, fauna, and areas that are sterile from human intervention. Conservation areas are imagined as empty spaces, even having to be empty of humans. This perspective divides the relationship between humans and nature. In fact, Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities have lived, maintained, built knowledge, and passed on relationships with their territories for several generations, without having to label these practices as "conservation."

For Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities, protecting nature is not a standalone activity. It lives as a way of life that encompasses relationships with fellow humans, territories, spirituality, knowledge, and livelihoods. This perspective emerged in the Public Dialogue "People's Conservation for Indonesia: Building a Fair Biodiversity Governance Paradigm" at the Peoples' Conservation Summit (PCS) 2026.

The dialogue, moderated by Eko Cahyono (PSP3-IPB University/Sajogyo Institute), featured Erasmus Cahyadi (Indigenous Peoples Alliance of the Archipelago/AMAN), Devi Anggraini (Indigenous Women's Alliance of the Archipelago AMAN/PEREMPUAN AMAN), Cindy Julianty (Working Group ICCAs), Putu Ardana (Indigenous Peoples of Dalem Tamblingan in Catur Desa, Bali), Filo Gratiadeo Karundeng (BPAN), and Budin Purnomo Sidi (Indigenous Peoples of Dayak Simpakng Banua Sajatn). The discussion highlighted the need to break through the paradigmatic boundaries of conservation by re-understanding the human-nature relationship more holistically.

According to Putu Ardana, Indigenous Peoples already have their own systems, rules, and knowledge in maintaining their territories. However, these systems have not become references in the conservation governance built by the state. "Indigenous Peoples have a way of conservation. But the state never refers to it, so it is not compatible with the situation on the ground. The most fundamental is the paradigm," said Putu.

A similar perspective was conveyed by Filo Gratiadeo Karundeng, a young person from Minahasa. In his community's experience, the human-nature relationship cannot be separated from the spiritual dimension. "The way of thinking in my village, Minahasa, is that humans, nature, and the Creator are connected. Why should we fence off areas by excluding humans? In fact, Indigenous Peoples live there. Why should they be excluded?" said Filo.

For Filo, the knowledge to maintain territories has been passed down by the elders and continues to live through community practices. However, communities that maintain their territories can be placed as partners, beneficiaries, or even threats in conservation. "(Conservation) knowledge comes from the elders. But, sadly, the people who maintain this become partners, beneficiaries, or even threats," he said.

This holistic relationship between communities and nature faces laws and policies that still operate through the logic of control. Erasmus Cahyadi highlighted various cases of eviction and criminalization of Indigenous Peoples when their living spaces are designated as conservation areas. According to him, these issues are inseparable from the colonial perspective that places the state as the party that determines how territories are managed and who is deemed worthy of controlling their resources.

"Our laws are indeed designed for that. Indigenous Peoples are made to appear ignorant, poor, and backward. Therefore, all resources entrusted by their ancestors are considered unworthy of being controlled by Indigenous Peoples," said Erasmus.

Separation also occurs in the way knowledge about conservation is produced and recognized. Cindy Julianty highlighted the separation between natural sciences, social sciences, and the knowledge that lives in society. According to her, decolonizing conservation needs to reopen space to understand the human-nature relationship based on community experiences, especially when ecological damage occurs faster than the ability to restore it.

This relationship also has a gender dimension. Devi Anggraini emphasized that for indigenous women, nature is not just a resource or commodity, but a living space connected with knowledge, livelihoods, identity, and community sustainability.

"For indigenous women, conservation is a fundamental issue. Nature is not a commodity, but a living space. Indigenous women have ecological knowledge connected with their traditional knowledge. Therefore, conservation is also important to discuss the voices and leadership of indigenous women," said Devi.

Maintaining the community-nature relationship, according to Devi, also means ensuring the power to determine how the territory is managed. The presence of communities in various conservation spaces is not necessarily accompanied by authority in decision-making. "Conservation now places representation without power in it," emphasized Devi.

The sustainability of this relationship also depends on the transmission of knowledge to the next generation. Filo shared how communities maintain water sources, conduct traditional education, and sustain practices that connect young generations with their territories. One of them is through the lumales tradition, which involves retracing ancestral paths based on stories passed down by parents.

"It is difficult if we ask young people to maintain territories they do not recognize. We maintain water sources, traditional education, and we know that conservation is connected with traditional education. In the village, there are young generations who are the only hope for knowledge to continue," said Filo.

Through the Back to Village Movement, BPAN also encourages young Indigenous Peoples who are outside the community to reconnect with the village, history, territory, and knowledge that lives within it. Thus, conservation regeneration cannot be separated from knowledge regeneration and the sustainability of community relationships with their territories.

The PCS 2026 Public Dialogue revealed the persistent paradigm gap between state conservation policies and Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities' conservation practices. The state tends to place conservation as a standalone program, policy, and area protection effort. Conversely, for Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities, conservation is a holistic way of life, uniting humans with nature, spirituality, knowledge, livelihoods, and the history of their territories.

In this perspective, nature is not treated merely as a commodity or inanimate object, but as part of a living space within the unity of ecosystem relations formed and passed down across generations. Therefore, biodiversity protection cannot be separated from the recognition of communities, their living territories, knowledge, and authority in determining the governance of their territories.

This dialogue formulated several prerequisites for realizing fair conservation, namely:

• Dismantling colonial legacies in conservation governance;
• Decolonizing knowledge and culture;
• Ensuring the transmission of knowledge and intergenerational sustainability;
• Correcting conservation measures and standards that disregard community practices; and
• Respecting local diversity along with its social, cultural, and ecological complexities.

This paradigm shift is necessary so that Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities are not only present as participants or beneficiaries but are recognized as rights holders, knowledge owners, and main actors in conservation.