Document Library

Indigenous and Tribal Peoples: An Ethnic Audit of Selected Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers

Author: M Tomei
Date: 2005
Size: 78 pages (430 KB)

Access full text: available online

Summary

How effectively have Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs) addressed the needs of indigenous and tribal peoples (ITPs)? This paper from the International Labour Office surveys 14 PRSPs from countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America to evaluate the extent to which they address the varieties of economic, social and political exclusion faced by these communities. It argues that improved targeting, data-collection and ITP participation in PRSPs are required if they are to tackle poverty more successfully.

Although precise definitions of ITPs vary, these groups are characterised by a shared social, cultural and legal heritage distinguishing them from the rest of society. Groups self-identifying as indigenous or tribal are disproportionately among the poorest in society owing to discrimination, under-investment in education and healthcare, loss of land rights and their invisibility in national statistics.

PRSPs provide the framework for the lending, debt relief and development activities of the World Bank and IMF. National governments, in cooperation with international partners, produce PRSPs in consultation with local stakeholders. Although PRSP guidelines advocate a participatory approach, there is no explicit reference to involving indigenous and tribal populations.

While significant differences exist in individual PRSPs’ responses to ITP poverty both within and between the three continents, various over-riding themes emerge:

• PRSPs vary in their rationale for targeting ITP poverty. Reasons given include: to strengthen democracy and good governance (Bolivia), to counter insurgency (Nepal), or to recognise land and cultural rights in countries where legal frameworks protect indigenous rights.
• Disaggregated data-collection and poverty indicators which disregard indigenous populations’ own perceptions of exclusion hamper poverty analysis in all PRSPs, except Vietnam’s.
• Some PRSPs view political under-representation among ITPs as central to their economic exclusion. Bolivia’s governance system promotes indigenous representation, while decentralisation in Asian countries could enhance ITP representation, but is insufficiently accommodating to the specific needs of ITPs.
• ITPs have not largely been consulted during the formulation of PRSPs. Logistical, linguistic and political barriers have excluded indigenous groups, except in Bolivia and Guyana where consultation mechanisms encouraged their participation.
• Although Bolivia and Vietnam advocate ethnic mainstreaming, most PRSPs envisage a targeted response to poverty, aimed either at poor areas inhabited by ITPs or directly at the ITPs themselves. These interventions are directed at improving services, productiveness and land tenure among indigenous groups.

In order to improve the incorporation of ITP needs into future PRSPs, local, national and international groups must enhance the participation of indigenous groups in PRSPs, which must also show greater sensitivity to the specific concerns of these groups:

• Decentralisation has potential for improving indigenous political representation, but it must be responsive to their specific linguistic, cultural and logistical needs.
• Socio-economic indicators which accord with indigenous groups’ perception of poverty must be identified and tested.
• Indigenous groups and international actors must develop consultation methods which promote greater participation of ITPs in PRSPs.
• Indigenous and local government organisations must build their capacity to plan, implement and monitor development policies which are responsive to indigenous aspirations and rights.

Access full text: available online

Source: Tomei, M., 2005, ‘Indigenous and Tribal Peoples: An Ethnic Audit of Selected Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers’, International Labour Office, Geneva
Author: Manuela Tomei , tomei@ilo.org