Mane Yun is the executive director of Cambodia's Indigenous Peoples Organization, the leading organisation of the REDAA-funded project 'Strengthening Indigenous land management for improved agroecology and wetland governance in Cambodia'. The project uses participatory action research to generate evidence to advocate for better land governance for Indigenous Peoples.
- What is the mainstream attitude towards Indigenous Peoples and Indigenous People's knowledge?
Actually, now, the government is starting to recognise it. This is a great opportunity – they are beginning to realise that Indigenous knowledge is very important. And they are willing to integrate this knowledge into their frameworks, to support what you call the retribalisation of Indigenous knowledge.
They want to see our research so they can discuss how it could be integrated into policy and national frameworks. Especially, with the Ministry of Agriculture. They said ‘show us the evidence and best practices that can improve agriculture and agroecology in a sustainable way.’
- So the government and institutions are just starting to recognise Indigenous rights and knowledge. Your project seems to be about changing attitudes and behaviours. How are you achieving that shift in mindset?
Sometimes we meet in small technical groups, like legal teams meet with the Ministry of Land or Ministry of Interior. We’re also part of a working group on collective land registration for Indigenous Peoples. In that process, we talk about best practices and why protecting Indigenous land and forests through collective land registration is important.
Some laws recognise our rights and some ministries are motivated to learn more and integrate best practices, like the Ministry of Environment. But at the same time, recognition is limited. This can restrict our access to forests and resources.
We are still engaging closely with different departments. But the most important thing is to prepare ourselves, to build our capacity, understand how to engage and have the documents and evidence to push for support. Without that, we are left behind in the process.
- Is Cambodia ahead of other countries in recognising Indigenous Peoples’ rights?
Cambodia is one of the countries that recognises Indigenous People's rights to land and natural resources. You can see it in the Constitution.
So there is specifically a clear definition of Indigenous Peoples, their role and rights. In the Land Law 2001, Article 23 states that Indigenous Peoples are residents in Cambodia – we are Indigenous who have a distinct social, cultural and economic identity. They recognise that we are Khmer but we are Indigenous of the Khmer.
They also recognise we have the right to practise our traditional occupation – that means farming, rotational farming, collecting non-timber products, having spiritual places, burial grounds and so on. And it states that while waiting for legal registration, we can continue to practise our rights.
However, that’s going backwards now – especially in the Protected Area Law. First, they tried to revise the law, but unexpectedly, they said no more amendment. They just adopted the Environmental Code. But when we analysed it, we found they had replaced the term "Indigenous Peoples" with "local community" – that’s a big problem. Second, the Environmental Code stated that we can only continue traditional farming if we are legally registered. That’s different from the Land Law – the Land Law allows us to continue while waiting for legal recognition.
There are around 455–458 Indigenous communities in Cambodia. Only 42 have collective land titles. That means the rest are now considered illegal if they practise traditional occupation. And when we do, we are criminalised. Based on my data, almost 100 Indigenous people now are criminalised in court, accused of violating protected areas.
The government has made commitments with global leaders for forest protection – to protect 60% of the forest. So they zone the remaining forest as protected areas. And those areas are inside Indigenous communities. At the same time, they’re trying to move Cambodia from LDC to middle-income, and engaging more of the private sector. The economic concession areas are also inside Indigenous communities.
The process is not proper. When they zone – this is protected area, this is economic development – they don’t consult Indigenous communities. That’s why there’s conflict.
Actually, they do engage, but for us it just fulfils the image. For example, with the Protected Area Law, they called us for a workshop in 2023 after 11 years of drafting. We had two hours for a presentation and one and a half hour for feedback. It was impossible to provide meaningful input in that time, right? They invite Indigenous participants, but the methodology and agenda are not set up for real consultation.
The CBD, the Global Biodiversity Framework, talks about Indigenous rights and natural rights. We want to see that happen on the ground – both rights respected. We also want to protect the forest, nature, biodiversity. We can’t live without those.
- Is this lack of inclusion of Indigenous Peoples in consultation – for example, around protected areas – contributing to forest and biodiversity loss?
Yes. Any project, without the involvement of Indigenous Peoples in decision making, it creates a problem. Take the private sector, for example.
Often, companies and the government don’t consult communities. So when they arrive, they destroy wildlife areas, spiritual forests, burial grounds. It’s because we weren’t included in the consultation process.
So when these companies come to develop, they treat everything as state land. But in reality, we live there and we know the land. We know where the monkeys play, where to collect vegetables, where the animals rest, where our buffalo graze.
Even with farming, governments accuse us of destroying the forest through rotational farming – but it’s not true. We have our knowledge and our practices. The deforestation you see now is not caused by Indigenous communities. It’s mostly from companies, from people with tractors and bulldozers. We just use our hands, our knives.
That’s why we’re working to document all of this. To show what’s happening and advocate for better land and forest management that includes Indigenous perspectives.
- How is local science being implemented to support the project’s goals?
The current research is building the ownership of communities, building the process with the Indigenous communities themselves. We have been starting to do capacity building with Indigenous focal people. We call them ICF – Indigenous community facilitators. They go to the villages, do the research, identify the topics, fill the questionnaires, finding together with the community.
And this is how we empower Indigenous communities to do their own work. And with the community also, we think that it's very important they need to do their own planning. So when they have the planning, they have the idea, they have the budget, they can start to do it by themselves, and they start owning their leadership and decision-making.
- How do you expect the implementation of this process will impact the goals of the project?
Our expectation is that the communities will have their own documented evidence, which they can use for their own development, land use management and advocacy.
This documentation will support their rights to their land and help mobilise resources for their needs. For CIPO, we’ll use the evidence to engage with the government. We want the communities to present their knowledge directly to the ministry, not through CIPO.
On a global scale, we hope the project will raise awareness about the role of Indigenous people in forest guardianship.
- The goal is to show that Indigenous Peoples contribute to conservation, so their rights are recognised.
Yes, exactly.