Introduction to TNFD’s guidance on engagement

The guidance provides a structured framework for organisations to engage meaningfully with Indigenous Peoples, Local Communities (IPLCs), and affected stakeholders. It aims to address nature-related dependencies, impacts, risks, and opportunities while aligning with international standards. Benefits include more effective nature management, compliance with legal frameworks, and building trust through inclusive engagement. The LEAP approach (Locate, Evaluate, Assess, Prepare) integrates engagement as a cross-cutting component.

Who to engage

• Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities: Indigenous Peoples, who manage 80% of global biodiversity, are vital stewards of nature. Engagement must respect their rights, integrate their traditional knowledge, and uphold their self-determination.
• Affected stakeholders: Groups affected by organisational activities, including local communities, workers, and marginalised populations, must be identified and engaged. Prioritisation should focus on those most at risk, such as women, migrant workers, and other vulnerable groups.

Engagement and due diligence standards

• International standards: Organisations must adhere to frameworks like the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises.
• Relevant legislation: Compliance with laws such as the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) and ILO Convention 169 is essential. Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) must be obtained from Indigenous communities for activities impacting their lands or resources.
• Guidelines on engagement with IPLCs: Voluntary frameworks such as the Nagoya Protocol ensure ethical benefit-sharing from genetic resources and traditional knowledge. FPIC processes should include full disclosure, respect customary decision-making, and be free from coercion.

Preparedness for engagement

• Governance of engagement: Boards play a pivotal role in embedding engagement within organisational policies. This includes fostering a culture that values stakeholder perspectives and training staff to navigate local contexts effectively.
• Resource allocation: Sufficient financial, human, and technical resources must be allocated to ensure meaningful engagement. Project timelines should account for the time IPLCs and stakeholders need to prepare and participate.
• Embedding into organisational strategy: Engagement must be an integral part of broader business strategies to address nature-related risks and opportunities effectively.
• Mapping IPLCs and affected stakeholders: Comprehensive mapping should account for roles, dependencies on ecosystems, and differentiated impacts, particularly for marginalised groups.

Designing and conducting engagement

• Understanding values of nature and its contributions to People: Recognising the diverse cultural, spiritual, and ecological values of nature is critical to fostering inclusive dialogue. Using pluralistic lenses avoids marginalisation and promotes equitable outcomes.
• General principles of meaningful engagement: Processes should be transparent, inclusive, culturally sensitive, and gender-responsive. Specific strategies, such as same-gender facilitators for women and equitable data collection, enhance inclusivity.
• Modes of engagement: Engagement ranges from information sharing to shared decision-making. Collaborative partnerships, such as co-managing water resources or negotiating sustainable farming practices, are recommended.
• Multi-stakeholder processes and collaborations: Integrated landscape approaches, involving various stakeholders with shared ecosystem dependencies, promote collective action and long-term sustainability.
• Management of trade-offs: Balancing biodiversity conservation with community needs often requires evidence-based decision-making. Trade-offs should be agreed upon with IPLCs and stakeholders during the planning stages.

Engagement in systems for action and feedback

• Engaging IPLCs and affected stakeholders in monitoring and evaluation: Co-developing monitoring metrics with IPLCs ensures that cultural values and local priorities are integrated. Metrics should include both qualitative and quantitative measures for comprehensive evaluation.
• Systems for feedback: Continuous updates on project progress, changes, and outcomes foster trust. Transparent feedback loops also ensure stakeholders’ voices are reflected in organisational actions, reducing grievances and promoting positive relationships.

This framework highlights the importance of aligning organisational goals with sustainable practices and community welfare, ensuring that nature-related dependencies, risks, and opportunities are managed inclusively and effectively.