IPP264

Paraguay Community Development Project Indigenous Peoples Development Framework

Introduction

Public Disclosure Authorized 1. Indigenous Peoples (IP) in represent only 1.7% of the total population (about 87,100) people, according to the most recent Indigenous Peoples Census (2002). Notwithstanding, IP, show a higher population growth rate (3.9%) than the average for the national population (2.7%). Therefore, it is possible to expect that the proportion of IP will continue to grow for some time, even though they will continue to be a small proportion of the total population.

2. There are 19 different ethnic groups1 belonging to five linguistic families2, being the most numerous those belonging to the Guarari linguistic family3 (46,000 or 53%), followed by the Maskoy linguistic family groups4 (21,000 or 24%). The four largest IP groups are the Ava-Guarani (13,400 or 15.5%), Mbyá (14,300 or 16.7%), Pâí Tavyterâ (13,100 or 15.2%), and the Nivacle (12,000 or 13.9%). Most indigenous peoples speak

Public Disclosure Authorized their own language and have a limited command of Spanish.

Table 1: Distribution of Indigenous Population by Department Department Indigenous Population Absolute % of total 90 0.1 Asunción Concepción 2,670 3.09 San Pedro 2,736 3.16 Cordillera Guairá 1,056 1.22 Caaguazú 6,884 7.95 Caazapá 2,528 2.92

Public Disclosure Authorized Itapúa 2,102 2.43 Misiones Paraguarí Alto Paraná 4,697 5.43 Central 1,038 1.20 Ñeembucú Amambay 10,519 12.16 Canindeyú 9,529 11.01 Pte. Hayes 19,751 22.82 Boquerón 19,754 22.83 Alto Paraguay 3,186 3.68

1 According to the II Indigenous Census, there are 19 ethnic groups: Guaraní Occidental, Aché, Ava- Guaraní, Mbya, Pai-Tavytera, Ñandeva, Maskoy, Enlhet norte, sur, , Toba, Angaité, Guaná, Nivaclé, Maká, Manjui, , (Yvytoso & Tomaraho), Toba-Qom. Public Disclosure Authorized 2 Guaraní, Maskoy, Matako, Guaicurú, and Zamuco 3 Guarani-occidental, Guarani-Ñandeva, Ava-guarani, Aché, Mbya, Pai Tavyterá 4 Enlhet norte, Enxet sur, Sanapaná, Toba, Toba-Maskoy, Angaité, Guaná, 2

Nación 86,540 100 Source: II Censo Indígena de Población y Viviendas DGEEC

3. The great majority of the IP (91.5%) are in rural areas, distributed almost evenly between the region (49.3%) and the Oriental region (50.7%). The current distribution represents a significant change from the situation in the early 1980s when about 67% of the indigenous peoples were in the Chaco region. This change reflects population movements in search of more resources in the Oriental region as well as a better counting of indigenous peoples in areas previously not included in the census in the Oriental region.

4. Indigenous Peoples in Paraguay are the most excluded social group, experiencing extreme poverty and serious social problems. IP have little access to health services. Only 26% of communities have access to a health post or center. Child mortality totals 93.9 per thousand. Fertility rates among IP women is extremely high, reaching 6.3, compared with 3.9 for the average fertility rate and 5.1 for rural women. While there are differences between the fertility rates of various ethnic groups, most of them are above the national average. The five largest groups present fertility rates ranging from 5.5 in the case of the Nivacle to 8.4 among the Aché women. Only the Tobas and the Enlhet Norte have lower fertility rates than the national average.

5. Illiteracy among IP (15 years and older) is 51%, compared with 7.1% for the total population. The average years of schooling for IP 10 years and older are 2.2 years, while the national average is 7 years.

6. Poverty among IP is extremely high. While there are no nation-wide representative household survey data regarding poverty among indigenous peoples, existing data from various projects (PRODECO, PARN, JSDF, and other donors, as well as local NGOs working with IP in Paraguay), suggest that the poverty rate among IP would be above 95%. It is important to note that IP’s survival strategies include a combination of economic activities (subsistence farming, hunting, fishing, gathering, occasional paid labor, and handicrafts). However, the precarious state of these different activities results in persistent poverty and extreme vulnerability to shocks.

7. The extreme poverty of IP is exacerbated by the lack of land and land titles. According to the IP census, there are 412 IP communities, of which 185 do not have legal tenure of / access to land. Considering that most indigenous peoples base their livelihood strategies on access to land, it is not surprising that most IP are poor. Furthermore, the lands currently occupied by these communities are many times encroach by non- indigenous occupants and the resource base has been severely eroded given aggressive extractive practices and poor natural resources management practices, thus IP cannot survive only based on their lands, as they no longer provide an appropriate natural resource base to sustain the communities’ economic-productive survival.

8. Lands occupied by IP could be under four different situations: (i) indigenous lands demarcated; indigenous lands demarcated and titled; (iii) private lands claimed by indigenous groups and (iv) indigenous lands (demarcated or titled) encroached by non- 3 indigenous settlers. Regularization and titling of IP lands has made slow progress. Similarly, land acquisitions (through IBR) have benefited only a few communities. Estimates by the II Indigenous Census and INDI suggest that about 23% of the indigenous families currently do not have land and 22% has access to land without proper titling.

Table 2: Indigenous Communities by Land Titling Situation (%) Indigenous Communities with Land 55.0% Indigenous Communities without Land 45.0% • Fiscal Lands (INDI/IBR/Other) 20.1% • NGO/Foundation 0.7% • Private Owner 14% • Church 3.1% • Other 6.1% Source: Based on the II Censo Indígena de Población y Viviendas DGEEC

9. The social organization of the IP communities is based on kinship and co- residence. While Caciques have great deal of authority and decision making power, indigenous groups do not necessarily take those decisions as binding. This has important consequences for the establishment of contractual relationships among members of a community and conflict resolution since, if there is no strong agreement, the dissenting part will walk away from community commitments.

10. At the national level there are various indigenous organizations that claim either regional and/or national representativeness. These organizations do not have independent funding and have to rely on INDI, church organizations or other civil society groups, for support. This situation has generated generates clientelism. In some cases, organizations supporting indigenous groups have sought from the communities exclusive legal powers to represent the community. This pattern of relationships has generated conflict among the various organizations and make more difficult for them to coordinate activities across different IP organizations.

Legal Framework for Indigenous Peoples in Paraguay

11. Chapter V of the Paraguayan National Constitution (1992) consecrates indigenous peoples’ rights and guarantees. In 1993, Paraguay adhered to the International Labour Organization’s Convention 169, recognizing the right of indigenous peoples to their traditional lands and to the development of their own cultures and forms of organization.

12. The articles under Chapter V (62 to 67) of the Constitution recognizes and guarantees Indigenous peoples rights to preserve and develop their ethnic identity, have their own social, cultural, religious and political organizations, own land in sufficient quantity and quality for the conservation and development of their unique ways of life. The constitution also guarantees the right of indigenous peoples to participate in the political, social, economic and cultural live of the country.

4

13. Prior laws (904/81; 43/89), regulate land tenure to indigenous communities; Article 14 specifies that the settlement must be on land traditionally occupied by indigenous peoples; Article 20 specifies that the land title shall be communal; and Article 18 stipulates a minimum of 20 hectares per family in the Eastern Region and a minimum of 100 hectares per family in the Western Region. Law 904/81 establishes the mechanisms for titling lands in the name of indigenous communities and creates the Paraguayan Institute for Indigenous Peoples (INDI) as the institution in charge of ensuring compliance. Although years have passed since this law was enacted, INDI and INDERT still hold in their name a good number of property titles that have not yet been transferred to the communities, even though the Law obliges them to do so once the communities have been legally recognized.

Indigenous Peoples in the Project Area

14. Out of the eight departments included in the Additional Financing, only Caaguazú (Aché, Ava Guaraní, Mbya, and Paí Tavyterâ), Central (Maká, Aché, Ava Guaraní, Mbya, Nivaclé, Chamacoco, Ybytoso), Guairá (Mbya), e Itapúa (Mbya and Maká) have indigenous communities. While all these communities speak their own language, they also also speak Paraguayan Guaraní.

Table 3: Indigenous Peoples and Communities in the Selected Departments (and priority Districts) Department Indigenous Population Communities Caaguazú 6,884 (5,330) 47 (33) Central 1,038 (99) 3 (2) Guairá 1,056 (1,056) 8 (8) Itapúa 2,102 (1,429) 32 (25)

15. While most of these groups were nomadic hunters and gatherers they have been forced to settle in reservation-style communities where they combine multiple economic activities, including farming, hunting, gathering. The groups from the Chaco who migrated to the Eastern Region, especially the Maka have adapted to (peri)urban life5.

Project Activities

16. As under the Original Project, the Additional Financing will support the following three components:

5 For further detailed analysis see the Project Appraisal Document for the Paraguay “Sustainable Agriculture And Rural Development Project” (World Bank 2007)

5

(a) Community Development Sub-Projects. Grants for small-scale demand-driven sub-Projects prepared and submitted by groups of eligible beneficiaries. Sub- Projects would include income generating sub-Projects (e.g. agricultural diversification, small enterprises, artisan workshops, etc), as well as community development sub-Projects for activities that would complement productive investments

(b) Capacity-Building and Institutional Development. Strengthen local communities’ capacity to design, implement and monitor community development activities and to facilitate their participation in overall Project implementation This component would support services, training and organizational development, and the implementation of a participatory monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system.

(c) Project Management, Monitoring and Evaluation. Support the Project Coordination Unit (PCU) to coordinate the technical and administrative aspects, oversee implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the Project, and to carry out specialized studies. These studies would include at least the following: (i) social and economic inclusion; (ii) base line studies; (iii) preparatory work for potential follow-up operation.

17. Currently, the Pilot Community Development Project has supported 28 subprojects with IP communities, for a total of US$ 395,000, benefiting 28 communities, approximately 351 families (2,100 individuals).

18. The strategy followed by PRODECO to work with IP has been based on an existing agreement with INDI and consultation with indigenous peoples, and specialists working with IP. PRODECO appointed a qualified professional to work with IP communities. This professional had prior experience working with IP and received additional training to ensure that the work program was responsive to the cultural characteristics of the IP communities. INDI appointed a focal point that coordinated with PRODECO to ensure that project activities were consistent with the guidelines and current work program of INDI in the selected communities. This professional also provided technical advice to PRODECO to ensure that the proposed project activities and procedures were mindful of the social and cultural characteristics of the IP communities.

19. To work in the IP communities, Technical Assistance Providers, mostly NGOs (and individual professionals) already working with indigenous communities were contacted and asked to collaborate with the IP communities in the identification and preparation of subprojects.

20. The subproject preparation process started with a participatory community diagnostic, which was followed by the prioritization of alternatives and the identification of an investment. In most cases, IP communities decided to have subprojects supporting agricultural diversification, bee-keeping, small animals, and other productive activities mostly oriented to strengthen their food security and to generate a small surplus for income generating purposes. 6

21. During implementation, IP communities received training (in their own language and/or Guarani) on topics related to the productive activities they were developing, as well as on administrative and organizational skills that would increase their capacity to manage their subprojects and to strengthen their participation at different levels. More than 100 training events with indigenous communities took place. In addition, participatory planning workshops with the Itapúa Indigenous Peoples Association (Asociación de Comunidades Indígenas de Itapúa, ACIDI) were organized. In total, more that 500 indigenous peoples have participated in these events.

22. Participatory monitoring of the activities under implementation allowed indigenous communities to provide permanent feedback to the Project Coordination Unit (PCU), highlighting the issues that needed attention and alternatives to resolve them. A key issues that emerged from the experience of the Pilot Project was that in most cases, given the power structure within the IP communities in which the Cacique holds power and do not necessarily consult with all the community, it becomes essential to have open and clear channels of communication with all members and participation of all interested people in the decision making.

Framework

23. Indigenous Peoples will be eligible for all project supported activities. All indigenous communities in the priority districts will be eligible. The principles and strategy that inform this framework has been developed based on the experience gained by the Pilot Community Development Project working with indigenous communities in Itapúa and in consultation with INDI and representatives from indigenous groups and civil society organizations working with indigenous peoples.

24. Informed Participation. Communities will be dully informed through culturally appropriate means (in their own language) of the types of project activities that would be supported. Given the level of illiteracy among IP and their cultural practices, most of the dissemination and consultations will be carried out through oral means in their own language.

25. Access. All indigenous peoples from the communities in the priority districts will be eligible. While IP beneficiaries will be registered using the same instruments, these will not be used to determine their eligibility. The beneficiary records and screening instruments will be used solely with the purpose of having comparative data that will be part of the baseline of the project. The criteria for group eligibility will not be used for IP communities. However, special attention will be given to ensure that gender balance is achieved and that youth have a fair participation in project activities. Specific indicators to track indigenous women and youth participation will be added to monitor their performance.

26. IP beneficiary groups / communities will be eligible for all project supported activities (including subprojects, training, capacity building, and organizational strengthening). In the case of indigenous communities, beneficiaries will be able to 7 organize following their traditional social structures. Therefore, beneficiary groups could go beyond the limit established of 20 members for non-indigenous groups. Leadership within the groups will also follow the traditional leadership structure of the IP communities.

27. Operational Procedures. SAS and INDI have a signed inter-institutional cooperation agreement. Under that agreement the responsibilities of SAS and INDI regarding the implementation of project activities (technical assistance, monitoring) have been defined. SAS will incorporate a full time Indigenous Peoples Consultant to work in the Project Coordination Unit (PCU). This specialist will be responsible for the implementation of project activities with IP communities. This consultant will work closely and with the assistance of INDI professionals to develop the appropriate dissemination, training, and working materials to be used with IP communities. The IP Specialist in the PCU will train an adequate number of Local Development Professionals who will work with indigenous communities.

28. Before starting work in any IP community, informed consultation will have to take place. Based on that consultation and the principles outlined in this framework, the IP communities with the technical assistance of the IP specialist and the Local Development Professionals (that will be trained to work with indigenous peoples), will prepare a specific project (plan) for IP community development.

29. The specific IP Community Development Plan will start with a community diagnostic, identification of potential activities to be supported and prioritization of the subproject. While the IP community subproject will follow the same format and will be subject to the same technical review process, the preparation and consultation process will be based on the existing social structures of the community. After the proposal has been approved by the community leadership, the subproject will have to be approved by the CDDs/CDLs with participation of indigenous peoples’ representatives.

30. In the event of IP communities living in lands under litigation, the Project will ensure coordination with PRODERS and the JSDF for indigenous land titling, to facilitate the resolution of the current situation. In the meantime, these IP communities will be able to prepare and submit subprojects that could be implemented under the current land tenure situation and that would not be negatively impacted in the event that the IP community does not receive the formal title over the land.

Resources.

31. The project will have a full time IP specialist (with qualifications acceptable to the Bank and selected through competitive process). In addition, one Local Development Professional in each department with IP communities will be trained to work indigenous communities.

32. INDI will provide technical assistance and guidance to the PCU in order to ensure that the project activities and the work with indigenous communities is appropriated. To 8 this end, INDI will designate a focal point that will coordinate with the Project staff to ensure the synergies between both agencies and to provide technical advice to the Project Team.

33. While there are specific funds set aside for supporting indigenous subprojects, training and capacity building activities, IP communities will have equal access to project funds. Based on the experience of the ongoing project, given the existence of dedicated project staff to work with indigenous communities, IP communities have comparatively received a larger share of project benefits.

Monitoring

34. In addition to the specific monitoring indicators and procedures for the project (baseline, periodic supervision of subprojects, and independent social monitoring), in the case of IP subprojects, communities will have quarterly meetings with the PCU to report back implementation progress, quality of the services received, results, and potential problems. Based on this monitoring, the IP specialist of the PCU working together with the Local Development Professionals and the IP communities will devise specific measures to strengthen the positive impacts and to correct possible problems.

Participation and Consultation

35. During the preparation of the additional financing, consultations with INDI, NGOs working with indigenous peoples in the project area (Itapua), and IP representatives from the existing subprojects. These consultations contributed to the design of the project and the preparation of this framework

36. During implementation, consultation with IP communities will be permanent. The first stage in the process of preparing a subproject with IP communities will be a community consultation, to explain the project objectives, activities, procedures, the rights of indigenous communities, and their mechanisms of participation in the project. After the initial consultation, through the monitoring mechanisms (described above) indigenous communities participating in the project will provide a permanent follow-up to project activities.

37. In addition to this subproject based participation, representatives from the IP communities participating in the project will have bi-annual meetings with the Departmental Development Committees (composed by Departmental authorities, Local Government Authorities, Representatives from Civil Society), and Project Management (PCU) to discuss issues of relevance for the indigenous communities. The recommendations emerging from those meetings will have to be implemented by the PCU.