 Great. Hello, everybody. Good morning, good afternoon, or good evening, depending on where you're logging in from. Welcome to the Land Dialogue webinar series, which is organized in partnership with the Ford Foundation, the Land Portal Foundation, the Tenure Facility and the Thomson Reuters Foundation. Thank you for joining us. My name is Thin and I'm a journalist specializing in food systems and climate change, and I'm delighted to be moderating today's session on climate funding in COP28, Turning Pledgeous Interaction. Now the idea behind this webinar series is to raise awareness on the Len rights of indigenous peoples and local communities. Now these rights, we believe, are a prerequisite to achieve national and international goals around forest governance, food security, climate mitigation, economic development, and human rights. Now this is our fourth and final Len dialogue for this year. But first, before we start our discussion, I'm just going to go through some housekeeping rules. Now this webinar is mainly going to be conducted in English, Portuguese, and Spanish, but we also have simultaneous translations in French, as well as the other languages that I just mentioned. To access the translation, all you have to do is go to the globe icon at the bottom of your Zoom window, click on it, and select the language that you want. Now this webinar is going to be 60 minutes. We've set aside about 10 to 15 minutes for Q&A. So if you have any questions, please post them in the Q&A box and not the chat box. But do use the chat box as I see others are already using to introduce yourselves. Also feel free to tweet using the hashtag Len dialogues, which is just one word Len dialogues. And you can also follow the live tweeting from the Len portal and tenure facility Twitter accounts. And finally, we are also recording today's session, and we will share the link with you later. Now that we've gotten that out of the way, let's turn to today's topic. Now the past two UN climate summits have been big on promises for indigenous peoples. At COP 26 in 2021, governments and private philanthropies pledged nearly $2 billion for indigenous peoples and local communities to fight deforestation. Last year, at COP 27, there was a creation of a new loss and damage fund to help vulnerable communities respond to the climate disasters. Leaders are again preparing for another round of climate talks at COP 28, which is going to start later this week in Dubai. And this time, the vowing to enhance the participation and visibility of indigenous peoples during the negotiations. But as we all know, having the funds or just being able to participate is not enough. The funds need to reach the right people and at scale. But is that happening? And if not, then why is that not happening? Can the newly established indigenous led funds lead the way forward? Well, we have a fantastic group of speakers who are going to answer these questions. And in the interest of fairness, I am going to introduce them in alphabetical order. So first, we have Casey Box, who is the director of global strategy at the Christensen Fund. Casey is committed to supporting indigenous rights, participatory grantmaking, and grassroots network building. We also have Deborah Sanchez from the Hondura Miskita Group, who is a longtime indigenous leader, and she recently took on the role of director with Community Land Rights and Conservation Finance Initiative, or Clarify, for short. We also have Jenny Lopez, who is a land governance advisor, responsible for land tenure rights programming and policy work at the UK's Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office. And we have Valeria Baye from the Terrio and Castriana people of the Parque do Tomocumarque indigenous land in the states of Para and Amapá in Brazil. Valeria, I am so sorry if I mispronounce those names. Now Valeria is the head of the Executive Board of the Podali, which is an indigenous fund of the Brazilian Amazon. And last, but definitely not the least, we have Josimara Meguario, who is from the Parque people, and she is the coordinator of the Rio indigenous fund. This is an initiative from a federation that actually represents 23 indigenous peoples living in the Rio Negro in the Amazonas. So it's great to have this group of donors, as well as indigenous leaders present to have this discussion. So I think the first question I would like to ask to all of our speakers is to sort of reflect a little bit back on the discussion that we had last year on the donor promises to indigenous communities. Can we perhaps talk about where, you know, whether those promises have been fulfilled? So I'd like to ask our speakers to sort of briefly talk about perhaps one key win, as well as one major challenge or obstacle that have, you know, emerged since last year's climate summit. Deborah, perhaps I can start with you for the discussion. Yes, thank you, team, for the opportunity. And I want to reflect on that we probably have already reached like this key milestone where we all have a common understanding of the importance of the flexible that the funds needs to be, like a fewer administrative burdens, and then how we need to be in the center of the design of these funds. So now we're talking about effective participation, flexibility, and how that can look like and how can we implement. So I think that we are going from that phase to the implementation phase. And where are we moving towards that? I think that one of the very important key issues is that we are being reimagining the funding ecosystem, right? We are being creating like these less funds by indigenous peoples, local community, or for the descendant peoples. And how we govern these funds and how we put these funds together and how we start moving forward and working with them. And the most important thing is for me that we are creating actual lesson learns, we are creating experiences, we are doing it, and then that will bring us a lot of the knowledge that we need to move forward. But of course, in the obstacles we are facing that is hard to really implement and recreate things where the system is already set up, right? So we really need to start looking at the more systematic approach and how we can make flexibility, how we can actually demonstrate on the ground. And we've seen that the tendency that a lot of the philanthropists are moving a lot faster on that part, on that way. But then we still see a lot of the people from the from the bilaterals that are also working on that and looking at how we can have effective participation and how the flexibility can look like. From our side, I think we've been like working hard in developing these funds. And now we have established in global level funds, regional funds, national funds that are working. So I think this is the greatest approach or takeaway that I can have from our side. Thank you so much, Deborah. That's actually very encouraging to hear. Valeria and Josie Mara, can I ask you to also briefly talk about one key win and a challenge? Valeria, could I perhaps start with you and then we'll go to Josie Mara? We need to build a process that seems to me to be a long way of trust. The financials, in fact, trust in instruments created and managed by us. And this makes with what, in our perception, this support is also not reaching the way it should be reaching. It still continues, we continue to talk a lot about and not about action, the concrete action of action. I think these are the first messages that we share, reflecting on the process. Thank you. Hello. I think Valeria brought our position very similar. I think something positive that I can say is exactly this opening, these occupations that we indigenous are doing in these spaces of discussion, of international dialogues, mainly. So this listening process is very important to us. It's very positive over the last years, especially the last copy for this copy 28. So this listening process is very important to us. And it's something that I bring a little, not negative, but a challenge that we really need support in practice, not just in the talk, of a partnership, in fact, and also establish this process of trust, of partnership, I think it's also this initial message that I would like to leave. Great. Thank you so much. Casey and Jenny, I'm coming to you. You've heard from the indigenous groups and leaders. What about you? What would you reflect on? Casey, can I start with you first? Sure. Thank you, Ethan. I think last year, I spoke to Toya from Komeab about the issue of capacity building being on the indigenous people side. And the good thing is that indigenous peoples have definitely addressed that. You have the leadership of Pudali under Valeria as now executing grants, receiving more funding and more complex funding. You have Debra Sanchez now leading clarify here on the call today. Indigenous peoples across Asia have founded the indigenous peoples of Asia solidarity fund that will distribute small grants all across Asia. The first ever women's forum in the Congo basin has called for the first ever indigenous and local community-led fund for the Congo basin. And finally, Shandia convened stakeholders at the OECD in Paris to talk about better tracking accountability and transparency when it comes to funding for indigenous peoples. The challenge unfortunately still exists on the donor side. We know that in 2021, only 7% of that pledge out of Glasgow went directly to indigenous peoples and local communities. And when we dig deeper into those numbers, I'm concerned that it's even less than 7%. So really the challenge still exists on the donor side. And there's more that needs to be done to create more flexible funding. And we need to allow indigenous peoples and local communities to define themselves what they view as direct funding and financing. Thanks, Casey. That's a striking number. Jenny, I'd like to come to you for your thoughts. Thank you very much. And I agree with all the comments that have been said. I think the thing I, I'm feeling optimistic though that some progress is being made. I mean, from what I've seen over the last three years really since we launched that, the pledging Glasgow is, I have seen progress being made. I think that, I mean, what we're showing is more IP and LC led organisations are being directly funded than we've ever seen before. I really believe it's not just about the 1.7 billion. It's not just about the money in itself. It's about how we're working together as donors, as IP and LC organisations, other partners, civil society organisations. And we've seen a level of dialogue and collaboration and discussions between all of those stakeholders in ways that really had not happened before. It's been really exciting in Montreal, in New York, at COPs to have leaders from government alongside the stage, alongside discussions, alongside events with IP and LC leaders with civil society organisations in a way that was not happening before, to really have visibility of this issue area by prime ministers, by presidents on stage, in a way, again, we had not seen before. I mean, particularly in New York last month, to have, you know, the ministers from Norway alongside ministers from Brazil, which we didn't even have that minister for IPLC before. I mean, I do see this visibility that the pledge has brought, which again has brought attention to this and now means there's an accountability commitment from donors, which again, we did not have before on this issue. So I do see positive change, but I really do agree with other comments that it is slow. It is a journey, but at least we are on that journey now together. And there is that accountability and commitment, which again, three years ago was not there. So I would like to say I agree it's slow, but I am really feeling positive that at least we're having this conversation. Great. Thank you, Jenny. I mean, what I'm hearing from everybody, I think it's optimism, right? And I guess the fact that it is happening, the fact that there are openings that didn't exist before, but of course, there's always room for improvement, right? But like you said, you know, we are at least on that road now. And the question now, there's no question anymore about whether, you know, the IPLCs need funding and that there should be funds. It is now about, okay, how do we make sure that, you know, we can fund them at scale and that well targeted. Deborah, can I just come back to you again? I mean, Casey did a very quick, but super useful rundown of, you know, multiple indigenous led funds that have started appearing. Could you just give a brief overview in addition to what Casey have said and whether there are any other funds that have come up that are, you know, really interesting and exciting? Thank you. I will say that we've been seeing like a this system of global, regional, and national financial mechanism that is being built, led, and governed by indigenous peoples, local community, and after the seminar. And I think there is a few of them and we can see, for example, at the global level, we are talking about the community land rights and conservation finance initiative that is being incubated on in rights and resource initiative coalition and with the technical support of campaign for nature. And basically what we're saying is we are this global mechanism and we are giving grants in all lands and territories. And we are having, for example, grants up to one million and then we have this fiscal sponsor mandate also, two grants that are over 50 million. So we are seeing like a scaling up, right? This issue of capacity, this issue of how we scale funds that goes to the ground. And then we have the regional and national funds. I mean, Valeria, my sister here can talk more about Podali and how it's governed, how it's led, but we see in Pawanka, we see in the IPAS, the Solidarity Fund for the Asia, we see the Mesoamerica Territorial Fund, Nusantara Fund, also a man has a national funds already. And for example, we've been collaborating with the man's national funds and with the Mesoamerican Territorial Funds and Clarify is giving grants to them so they can actually build their capacity. For example, in Indonesia with a man, these grants will go to strengthen the capacity of some of the chapters of some of the members of the organization, the communities that are part of the man network. And then in the Mesoamerican, we'll go approximately to 15 projects and the call for proposal was already launched and finished this month. And they will go, for example, across five, six countries and will go from territorial governance to conservation to community entrepreneurship. So we are seeing that this collaboration and this funds and the system that we are building, this network of funds led by indigenous peoples in local communities, we are actually working together. We are complementing, we are supporting each other to get that skill to bring that funds directly to the ground. Great, Deborah, thank you so much. Could I just also ask the audience, if you have any questions, please use the Q&A box and not the chat box. I see a lot of comments coming in and we just want to make sure that we could get to your questions. So please use the Q&A box. Deborah, my question, I was going to have a follow-up question around what can be done to make sure that the funds complement each other. But you did actually just now already sort of answer that question on what you are doing to make sure that there's complementarity. And I just actually wanted to ask, perhaps, to Valeria and Josimara, whether they have any thoughts or anything they want to talk about on this particular aspect as well, to make sure that all these funds sort of work well together and collaborate and complement each other. Thank you, Deborah, for this link. We can also talk a little about this process, about the construction of the network, more on a global level. We are part, our organizations are part of a great alliance that is represented by our great organizations, as Deborah mentioned, the MPB, in Brazil, the PIB, the COIAB, in the country of Congo, as Keisi already mentioned, the REPALIAC, Indonesia, the other partners. So we are here in a great block, mobilizing and building mechanisms. And our processes are the results of debates of our movements, of our organizations. The Podali Fund in Brazil is the result of a discussion of more than 10 years, led by the COIAB, as well as Josimara, who is here by my side, a local fund in the state of the Amazon, a process, a result of a discussion of the fund of the organization, which is the federation of indigenous organizations. And here we share with you a process of construction of the network, of the ground here for these other processes. The example of a local fund for the regional fund, which is the Podali Fund, and for the macro funds in the global area, the fund of the MPB. So it is a concrete example of how we are organizing and building these alliances. And I want to share with you, too, in addition to the indigenous network, we are talking about the indigenous network in a more general, global area, but in Brazil we are building, we are building the network of funds led by social movements. So they are not indigenous, but other relatives, who are traditional people and communities, who have balls, right? In the Brazilian area. Well, we continue the conversation, it's a lot of history. Thank you. I would only like to mention all of this that was said now, we can realize that there is a global movement of funds, of organizations, a global scale with a single goal, to save this planet, to save our people, to make this world better. So I think that, as our partner at the beginning said, there is a progress, no matter how slow it is, there is a progress and we need to strengthen this network more and more. Great, thank you very much. Thank you. Kacin, Jenny, the next question I have is for both of you, you know, from the donor perspective. Of course, like you said, the good news is that the funds are there now and the money is being dispersed, but KCSU yourself mentioned how they're being spent and targeted still needs to be improved. So what do you think needs to be done to change this, to speed this up? Jenny, maybe I can start with you this time. Thank you. And I think this is really at the heart of what we're trying to work on as donors with other stakeholders is trying to understand what are the most effective ways of getting that funding dispersed, first of all, more quickly, and then second of all, in a way that we can really build a more effective longer-term mechanism. So I think what we're realizing, and KCSU, I hope you'll also agree, is there's ways we need to be working perhaps with intermediaries and trusted partners to make sure that that can happen at scale more quickly, which means that IPNLC-led organizations can really receive that money, even if not directly, more directly in a way they can have influence and control over, but building towards actually being able to absorb that directly at scale over those years. I know there's different views on whether what we're talking about as capacity building is really fair, because obviously that's asking IPNLC-led organizations to adapt to donor requirements to some extent. And I think we're also accepting that for some donors, in particularly bilateral donors, there'll always be some red lines in terms of reporting and accountability that, unfortunately, we won't be able to shift. So understanding where those red lines are, but I think what we are looking to do, and I'll speak as a bilateral donor, is trying to dig deeper as to where there are also the yellow lines. Where can we shift? Where can we adapt as donors? And again, that will be a progression, but at least we can actually start to understand that better and see how we can work more effectively. So I think there's also recognition that given we have this collaboration now between philanthropic and bilateral donors, where can we actually collaborate together to understand those opportunities for philanthropic organizations to fund things at different stages to bilateral donors? And there's also work that bilaterals will be funding that perhaps philanthropic organizations may not. So I think we're also realizing that as governments, we also fund some of the broader systemic reform. We also support work for government capacity building. How can that better complement some of the support directly to IPLCs to be an enabling structure? So I think it's really understanding how we can better have that collaboration coordination, but also challenge ourselves, particularly where donors have those restrictions to actually put in place other mechanisms, even if it may be working through trusted intermediaries and partners, to actually make sure that that's as effective as it can be. So I think it's the shorter, more immediate wins, but making sure that's part of a more structured journey towards actually change at a greater scale. Thanks, Jenny. Casey, what are your thoughts? Do you agree with Jenny? Do you have anything that you want to add? Feel free to disagree, Casey. It is a dialogue, you know, as donors we come from different angles. So feel free to disagree, Casey. I completely agree with Jenny. I think there's completely a lot of room for private public partnership. At the same time, I think going into COP28, unfortunately, I still think that some donors don't think that by supporting Indigenous peoples directly, we can achieve climate and biodiversity targets at scale. And I respectfully disagree on all fronts on that regard because we've been using the statistic for a long time that Indigenous peoples are 4 to 5% of the world's population and they've been protecting 80% of the world's biodiversity. So they've already done it at scale. Now it's the time for donors to really comprehend and understand that direct financing will only help to contribute to achieving those targets. Thank you. Thanks, Casey. Valeria and Josemara, can I come back to you again, right? Because both of you are leading Indigenous funds for the Amazon. What do you think we need to be doing practically to get funds where they are most needed? And also, you know, very briefly, if you could tell us what the next steps are in terms of, you know, the funds that you're leading. Again, Valeria, perhaps I could start with you. We need to be recognized as an effective financial mechanism that works, that also has a technical role at the same time and also has a political role within the territories that we work in conjunction with our movements. We specifically work in conjunction with the indigenous movement, right? In conjunction with our bases, with our communities, with our peoples, which is very important in this whole process, right? So we need to be strengthened, in fact, as Casey said, and I agree that these supports are more direct, right? Without intermediaries, that these research and analysis are made of how these funds already exist, they work, right? And that we start to strengthen this process of trust and direct dialogue with the financiers, right? That the donors can listen to us, right? They look for us first before looking for intermediaries, right? Before making the supports, the supports, they look for us, analyze us, right? And the next steps, a little, believe it to be this moment of consolidation of these funds already existing, right? With all our instruments, well-established internals and that we can achieve all the indigenous territory possible, right? All Brazilian territory. And that this alliance that was mentioned, right? By Valéria at the beginning, also strengthens, that all this ecosystem strengthens, right? That we, the indigenous funds, walk together on this great scale. Maybe a quick compliment in relation to that is, once again, we talk about what to do, right? In practice, so that this happens. In addition to presenting us, right? Keis is here. Keis is an important representative for the Podale Fund, supports, right? Detener and Facility is also believing in Podale, right? I think dialogue, presentations, recommendations between financiers, they are very important. It helps to build the trust processes, right? From the financiers, so that these actual resources come to us, right? And they are also part of this ecosystem, knowledge of our work, right? Of these important processes that we are conducting in our territories and that are making the resources that we are receiving, in fact, reach our territories in several ways, right? I think we have other processes to face in this challenge process, which is, in fact, a central issue that we have put a lot. It is how to make this resource reach respecting indigenous peoples, the traditional communities, kilomboleis, right? Without really being able to put the question of the rules as the general principle that we usually see as a limit of access, right? Of these resources arriving. But we are also important. Great, thank you so much for that, both Valeria and Trismara. Jenny, did you want to give a brief example as to why sometimes direct funding, bilateral direct funding can be a challenge? Thank you very much, then. I just wanted to illustrate perhaps where it is not even always a matter of trust or gatekeeping. Sometimes it is purely what we would call efficiency or effectiveness and value for money, which to fund any program for overseas development aid and taxpayer money, we have to respect, is say we had, for the sake of argument, 50 million that we could give to IP and LC organizations and support them. If we were to fund every single one of those organizations directly, that would then place reporting administrative requirements, which would mean it would really not be possible. We would never get the approval to have to work directly with every single one of those, let's say, 25, 50 organizations we could fund. That would require such a large team on a really practical basis to work directly with every single one of those organizations. It would mean we could not fund, we could only fund a very, very small handful. Whereas let's say we work through an intermediary who could manage that, let's say, 50 million fund for us, that would mean we can work with a much larger number of organizations and that intermediary could absorb a lot of the risk, the accountability and the reporting commitments, which would mean that that intermediary could work in a way with those organizations, which really suits those organizations much better. You would be able to develop those reporting requirements in a way that actually suits you as an organization. Whereas if you're reporting to us, the requirements for administration reporting would be so high, it would mean that realistically it would not work on a practical level. So sometimes it's purely a matter of being able to work more effectively and through an intermediary, it would mean that we're able to support IPNLC organizations and the intermediary, if it's a trusted partner, which is really able, someone that we can ensure is working with IPNLC organizations very directly, it really just means that it's able to get that funding to IPLCs more directly, but in a way that removes a lot of that burden. So sometimes I would argue it's a very practical way of just meaning we can support IPNLC organizations in a way that otherwise our requirements mean we can't because of the risk, because of the reporting, and purely because the number of staff that we would require, unfortunately, it would just not be practically possible. So I would just also ask people to come back to let's how do we make practical solutions work. It's not always just about the trust side. Great. Thank you for adding that, Jenny. I appreciate that. I could see that we already have quite a lot of questions coming through. So I'm going to go through the final round of questions now. I mean, it's been a really interesting conversation and I could continue asking so many questions, but let's go to the final round. And Deborah, can I start with you again? I'd like all the speakers to actually very briefly, although slowly, so that our translators can do their job, talk about what do you think we need to achieve at COP28 based on the discussion that we have just had. Deborah? Yes. Thank you. I do want to have a few reactions also to the Jenny's and Casey's comment. We know that this is being this red flag for the bilateral cooperation. And I think that's what why Indigenous peoples of the community are responding with funds, right? So we're creating these bigger infrastructure funds that would also make the enabling conditions that we can reach more people and we can do it at scale. So I think the thing about Intermediary is the issue where Indigenous peoples and local communities are actually the decision makers of the processes. So we need to really think that in a very fine way. So the effective participation is the most important part of every system that we can put. So we can actually say that we are doing this direct funding to Indigenous peoples, even if through several mechanisms, right? So for us, as Clarify, we've been demonstrated progress. So we have 52 active projects, we have 23 in the pipeline. We're supporting a lot of things from advocacy, tenure, security, conservation, organizational capacity, but it's not enough. And you see a lot of the questions in the chat is about how we do get grants, how my organization can access to fund to the ground. So there is still a lot of demands that funding gap is huge as Casey mentioned at the very beginning. So I think that we've been demonstrating the re-iterate commitment to the goals of the pledges have demonstrated that there is a common understanding and that we are going to move forward. But now we need to ensure that Indigenous peoples, local community and after the send in are heard, understood and respect, and that we are actually in the center of the decision making process for all the initiatives that are coming. Thank you, Deborah. Casey, can I go to you next? And then we'll go to Jenny. And then just Valerian, I think you had a bit of a connection issue just now. We're just asking the final round of questions before we go to Q&A, asking what do we need to achieve at COP 28? Casey? Yeah, I think there's three things that we need to achieve at COP 28. One has been said loud and clear on this call that we need to let Indigenous peoples and local communities define what direct financing means for them, whether it be through an intermediary or not. I do understand the case of governments, it's much more complex. And I think Jenny is a shining example of someone who's really trying to think differently when it comes to funding Indigenous peoples and local communities. The second thing is we need to make sure that the just transition is just and that it respects the rights of Indigenous peoples and local communities. I think we're seeing the forced eviction of Indigenous peoples in particular places and the name of achieving the world's most pressing climate goals. And I don't think the eviction of peoples means to happen in order to do that. And then I think, finally, Indigenous peoples needed to be included very deeply and meaningfully in the loss and damage discussion. Great, thank you. And thanks for mentioning the loss and damage as well. It's a tricky issue, isn't it? Everybody seems interested in it, but then nobody seems to be really sure of what the parameters are. Jenny? I think it is critical to maintain the visibility and to maintain that dialogue. And I think we will certainly already be having that at COP. I'd also like to flag that the next donor annual report will be published at COP. If you haven't read the last one, please do look online. Land Portal actually hosts our webpage, so please do take a look. And at COP you will see the latest, I guess, figures, but also the latest narrative from donors on what we've been doing. And of course, I would encourage everybody to challenge, to critique us, but also to do that with the practical, constructive ideas of where you would like to see that moving forward now that we're halfway through the pledge. So yes, I think the critical things are visibility, ongoing constructive challenge and using that platform and those opportunities. Great. Josemara and Valeria, your thoughts on what to achieve at COP28 before we open up for Q&A? It's a little what we just passed, but it's part of the process and of this construction and improvement. It's a shame that we also fell and can't follow the dialogues from the other panelists, but let's go. What do we need to achieve with this discussion at COP? I think the messages here put in the back are important in this sense. The space will be something that puts us in the process and, on the other hand, our participation. We are always in the process of learning spaces, occupying these spaces on the most diverse levels. So I think it's part of this process of what we are consuming, but I would also like to say on the other hand, which is very important and with that I invite everyone who has the opportunity, in the case of Passar, here in Brazil, in the Brazilian Amazon, to know our experiences, to visit the initiatives that we are supporting. And so that they can actually know the reality of the Amazon on its diverse levels, processes, to know our people, our initiatives that have been so beautiful and that have a lot of your participation in these support processes and also to continue to believe in this process, by supporting us in the strengthening of these mechanisms. So I think it was the message more or less at the end that I'm already leaving there. Thank you. Complimenting, I think what we really want in this COP28 is that the promises of financing come out of the paper, that there is a commitment with the indigenous funds of a joint action, of a partnership action that acts as this immersion that Valeria mentioned, of understanding how we work, of not only having a low view or, sorry, from above to below, but to be here together with us, knowing our reality, knowing our results and the impacts that these funds are taking into the territories, which is important in this process of recognition and immersion in the dialogue, in the listening and in seeing with our own eyes how we are positively impacting all our territories. So what we really want in this COP is that in fact all of this comes out of talks and starts to be effective practices by the donors. Thank you so much. Now we're going to move on to the Q&A. We have about 10, 13 minutes. Take on a few of the questions already there. Again, if you have any questions, please use the Q&A box. And of course, if possible, please identify yourself, any organization that you belong to. Now the first question, I think, excuse me, Deborah, I think you might be the best person to answer, but very open for others to come in as well. The first question actually is asking, is there a global database that can show what type of funds that exist to date at various levels for the indigenous peoples and local community organizations? Deborah, would you have any idea? Thank you, Tina. I know there is a lot of partners doing the mapping on the funds, but I don't know if there is a database actually. Thanks, Deborah. Casey, would you have any idea or other speakers, also any idea if such a database exists? No, a database doesn't exist, but there are. The Shandia platform is an umbrella in which all indigenous-led funds are supposed to advocate for direct financing, as well as international funders for indigenous peoples is also creating its own coalition of funds globally, which I know Pudali is a part of. And maybe, Casey, since you're here, you could also pick up the next question, which actually relates to private philanthropic donors, is asking, how can private philanthropic donors access these global regional and national indigenous-led funds? I'm assuming it is to support them. How does the Christensen Fund do and what advice do you have for other philanthropic donors? And Jenny, if you have any advice as well, please feel free to come in. Yeah, so the Christensen Fund puts all of our international grantees, including indigenous-led funds, through a process called equivalency determination, which essentially makes them a U.S. charity for a number of years, and Pudali has gone through this process. And the beautiful thing about that process, while it's complicated, then all other private donors, philanthropic donors can access those organizations and those funds as if they were a U.S.-based charity. So that's the case of the Christensen Fund. Great. Thank you. Anyone wants to add anything? Or shall we move on to the next question? Okay. The next question is, which organizations are best able to help indigenous peoples with mentoring and assisting in organizational development, financial management, monitoring and reporting, project development, proposal development, and the development of advocacy and lobbying programs? So essentially, which organizations are able to help indigenous peoples with essentially a lot of, I guess, capacity building on running these programs? Deborah, Jenny, any thoughts? Maybe I will say that it will depend on each case. For example, as clarified, we are actually supporting the network, the collaborations, organizations with all these processes. But at the same time, we are also trying to make this exchange where people from the ground can tell donors what are some of the things that are hard for them to comply with and how we can actually change some of these aspects. For example, we've been working in Southeast Africa with the pastoralist communities. And there we have, for example, not required on everything report, but we're going to do a gathering. So we have an annual gathering with all the organizations came and they can say what they're learning from the process, what were the constraints and how we can move forward. So for example, if we have these exchanged, then we can create some flexibility because I think I have to be a balance between creating capacity on the organization, but reacting to what is needed with the urgent matter right now and moving funds for that actions on the ground. Great. Thanks so much, Deborah. I'm just wondering if Josemara and Valeria have, you know, have any practical examples as well in terms of organizations that can help indigenous populations with these issues and skills. Intercambio, right? We're here, Josemara, participating in the meeting of community funds that work in the Brazilian Amazon, exactly sharing experiences, sharing experiences from this, the construction of our processes, from this reflection. Because we have a process of construction that we are doing, respecting our process and our modes and above all, our general vision as indigenous peoples, right? So it's very difficult that some institution, let's say, that we recommend, I don't know, that are our partners who have been there for a long time, who know us, right? Because this is important to put as we bring contribution, but respecting the rights, the processes of self-determination of indigenous peoples. This is a central theme for us, right? So intercambio really has been very opportune for us to qualify and improve our processes and adaptation of these intercambio for our realities, right? So it's the path that we are taking in the process of consolidating our funds here in Brazil, in the Brazilian Amazon. Thank you. And we can also realize how much we have a greater autonomy in the construction and execution of these intercambio processes. We indigenous peoples, we are occupying the spaces, including technical spaces to do, right? So the partnerships, they need to adapt to this new context of the greater autonomy of indigenous peoples, right? And as it is also important that the donors know this and see this, right? That our partners, the great zongues and the intermediaries are not the only receptors, right? Today we are taking a much larger role than a few years ago. Great, thank you. We're going to have to close in about six minutes. So we'll take one more question. This one has actually two parts. So I'm going to ask all of our speakers to come in at some point. But the first part is actually Valeria and Josemara. It's directed towards you. And the first part is what capacity do you have that enable you to access and manage funds directly from the donors? And then the second part is for those who do not have that kind of capacity that Valeria and Josemara have, is it not necessary to support them first through so-called intermediaries, I guess, to build the capacity and then eventually enable them to move away from these intermediaries so that they can get direct funding? So for that second part, it would be great to hear, you know, brief thoughts from Deborah, Jenny and Casey. But first, Valeria and Josemara, what capacity do you have that allows you to access and manage funds directly? Fundo, ele é um instrumento criado pelos povos indígenas, pelas organizações indígenas, aonde hoje não tem instrumentos, as nossas organizações nos acessam, para que nós sejamos o caminho, para que nós possamos gerir recursos captados por eles. Isso já acontece no podale. O Mato Grosso, um estado aqui no Brasil, captou o povo Xavante, captou um recurso e indicou o podale para ser o seu mecanismo, né? E da forma para que o podale faça chegar o recurso ao povo Xavante e a gente está organizando isso para a premiação do povo Xavante. É concreto as coisas que a gente está fazendo, ser esse instrumento qualificado e servir ao nosso povo, a nossas organizações, né? Então que eu trago um pouco para vocês, é concreto a experiência que a gente está construindo por aqui. Obrigada. Em relação a uma experiência também do fundo indígena do Rio Negro, nós temos essa base muito forte do movimento indígena, que é a FOIRME, a Pederação das Organizações Indígenas, que faz parte da rede da COYAB, também a nível Brasil. Então as nossas organizações nos fortalecem com essa capacidade, o que nós ainda estamos nos estruturando, nos consolidando. As nossas organizações nos dão oportunidades e nos abrem espaços para que a gente possa atuar de maneira mais direta com relação a esses financiamentos para essas iniciativas de dentro dos territórios, né? Então as nossas organizações são a nossa base de apoio. Great. Thank you so much for taking that on. Despite, like I said, a really difficult challenge of asking you to be brief in your answers. Deborah, do you want to take on the second part of the question? Thank you. I will say that there is a natural allies and partners to the indigenous people's local community and Afro-descendant in the ground. So maybe we can go and work directly with the people and then they can decide who is the natural ally or who is the person or the organization that they want to be the mentor and work with them to make their capacity. This is one important thing. And I think the other important thing is to really understand that the funds, the most of the funds goes directly to the communities, right? So and they decide on how they are going to actually spend these funds underground because sometimes for the capacity building side is a very limited funding. And then, for example, in our case, we were, we are the ones taking, for example, the responsibility of writing the reports and giving that. So we don't pass that to some of our partners and some of our brothers and sisters in the ground. So I think looking at these processes where, for example, from me to my partners, we can have a more flexible way of sharing knowledge and reporting and all that. But that actually I, as a fund, get the responsibility to write the report and do the other things that can be also a model that can be used. But I think the most important part is letting the people on the ground to make the decisions on where, how and which, which person or organisation they want to work with. Thank you, Debra. Jenny, and then maybe after, Casey, we'll perhaps close with you. Any reflections or just to touch on the final, the second half of that question? Thank you. I really echo a lot of Deborah's points just now. I think the most, some of the most exciting emerging models, such as the Teni Facility of those where IP and LC-led organisations can make their own proposals and make their own choices about how they would like to see the money spent and how they can be supported but where there is still technical support available from organisations to help manage that and in a way that the IP and LC-led organisations would like to have rather than that be imposed on them. And I think that really works from the points I made earlier from a bilateral organisation as well to mean that they are easily able to be funded because we're able to channel that funding through an organisation such as Teni Facility. So it's a model such as that that I think we need to scale out where it really works for the donors in terms of the reporting, the administration, absorbing the risks, but it can also really work from the other side also in terms of that really proactive and really empowering model where it's the IP and LC-led organisations who get to design how they would like to see the funds spent and they are the ones who are doing the implementation with technical support. So that's the kind of model I would really like to see scaled up. Great, thank you. Casey, final thoughts? No, I completely agree with Deborah and Jenny's points. I think it's about Indigenous people's right to self-determination. Each case is different. Let the communities decide who they want to work with and define direct finance. If the case is to work with Clarifier or Teni Facility and they think that's direct financing, that's absolutely their decision and a great model and in other cases going directly to communities or funds like Pudali is also a great example. Great, thank you. Unfortunately we have run out of time so we will have to close this webinar. I would really like to thank the audience for staying with us and do apologise that we're not able to take all the questions. And of course I would like to thank all of our speakers, particularly Josimara and Valeria who have joined us despite connectivity issues. We really appreciate you being able to stay for the whole hour as well. Can we give all of our speakers a virtual round of applause, please? Thank you so much for your insights and of course thank you to the audience as well for your participation. Now if you're interested in taking a deeper dive into Indigenous financing and issues at COP28, Teni Facility will be there and they are sharing a link where you can register for a couple of the hybrid events that they are organising. Of course thanks also to our hosts at the Fort Foundation, the Land Portal Foundation, the Teni Facility and the Thomson Royce Foundation. It's been a real pleasure for me to moderate this event and all the best with COP28 and I hope that you know all of what you hope for will come true and that we can you know next year at this time when we have this conversation it will be even more optimistic and positive than it has been. Thank you so much. Have a great day, afternoon, evening or night and goodbye.