Task 3 – Develop a community engagement plan

Contents in this section:

Sites should, together with the indigenous community or communities, develop and agree a Community Engagement Plan or equivalent. The objective of the Community Engagement Plan is to establish a process for engagement between the site and the indigenous community and for the meaningful participation of indigenous groups in decision-making. Sites should engage an indigenous adviser to support and advise on local culture, customs and engagement practices to inform initial engagement with indigenous communities. An Indigenous Peoples engagement officer or equivalent should also be appointed to maintain engagement with indigenous groups on an ongoing basis . Where Indigenous Peoples speak a different language or distinct dialect, the site team should ensure that there are senior level staff or the appropriate support that can communicate in that language.

The Community Engagement Plan should include the following elements:

Mutually agreed values underpinning the engagement and process for good-faith negotiation between the site and the indigenous group, such as open, transparent, and respectful engagement. The site representatives should follow cultural protocols, allow sufficient time for meetings, discussions and decision-making to take place, and show respect at all times. An attitude of respectful listening and willingness to learn from indigenous people will help to build mutual trust and confidence.
Mutually agreed objectives for engagement and how they are to be recognised.
Mutually agreed procedures for engagement between the site and the indigenous groups. This may include agreement on the preferred avenues and formats for sharing information. Engagement may include regular site visits to see site activities. Logistical aspects, including when and where meetings will take place, should also be agreed.
Mutually agreed participants in engagements between the site and the indigenous groups, and their respective responsibilities. Indigenous Peoples’ representative bodies and organisations (e.g. councils of elders or village councils), as well as members of the wider indigenous community, should be involved in engagements. The Community Engagement Plan should establish ways to ensure adequate and fair representation in engagement activities, even where this may not be reflected in traditional representation structures. Engagement activities need to be gender- and age-inclusive and involve a broad cross-section of members of the community. If there are societal norms or other barriers to participation in engagement activities for some groups, the site should make efforts to enhance levels of participation by establishing separate processes or other means of inclusive engagement; for example, holding informal discussions with these groups in separate meetings or by seeking the help of third parties who can gather input from these groups.
Mutually agreed process for obtaining consent where FPIC is required. The Community Engagement Plan should include: a description of the process for seeking consent; a description of the site activities, project(s), objective(s), or outcomes consent is being sought for; define what consent is considered to be and how it will be demonstrated, as agreed with the affected indigenous community; explain how the indigenous community will make a collective decision regarding whether or not to provide consent; who should provide consent and who may sign off on an FPIC agreement; conditions, if any, under which the company may return to seek FPIC for the same or similar activities in the event that consent is not obtained through the initial process; how information between the site and the indigenous groups will be shared in a way that allows them to fully understand the impacts being discussed; and how views from the wider indigenous community, including vulnerable members, will be sought, documented, and taken into account. Where administrative and traditional systems recognise different leaders, where leadership is known to be highly politicised and/or only marginally representative of the affected population or if there are multiple groups representing different interests, FPIC should rely on identification, recognition and engagement of greater numbers or representativeness of stakeholder sub-groups. If there is more than one indigenous community represented within the population that may be impacted and requiring a proces of FPIC, they may be included in a single process, or separate FPIC processes, as desired by the people themselves.
A mutually agreed process for decision-making. Sufficient time for decision-making should be provided.
A mutually agreed process for developing the IPP. An IPP should be developed collaboratively, following a structure and approach agreed in advance between the community and the company.
Issues of particular significance to indigenous groups (e.g. cultural heritage, land rights, customary use of land and resources, water issues, access to resources where this might be blocked, protection of livestock, including migration routes, etc.) and mutual agreement on how engagement on these issues will be managed. Sites should involvethe necessary expertise upfront to help identify, understand and advise on the management of these issues.
A mutually agreed baseline data-collection process and research ethics. This includes methods to be used for data collection and transparency and collaboration in the analysis and presentation of the data. Certain data-collection methods, such as interviews and photographing, may require informed consent from members of the community.
A mutually agreed grievance and dispute-resolution process (see Section 3B). The grievance process should be in line with traditional forms of problem solving and conflict resolution. Where the indigenous group is a small sub-section of a larger community, the grievance mechanism of the larger community may be deemed to suffice for the indigenous group to use. It is more likely, however, that a separate procedure is needed based on traditional problem-solving and dispute-resolution approaches. Administrative and legal recourse or remedies, and any legal aid available to assist the indigenous groups as part of the process of consultation and informed participation should be clarified. Dispute resolution may include mediation.
A mutually agreed process, frequency, and format of reporting on activities and progress against the agreed objectives and outcomes.
A mutually agreed approach to resolve any capacity issues that may prevent the full and informed participaton of members of indigenous groups, such as a lack of access to legal or technical expertise or language and literacy issues. The site should provide funding and/or help secure other means, including culturally appropriate training and educational activities, to meet capacity needs. In some cases, translation of documents may be required. In other cases, an explanation of document content or broader capacity building on certain specific issues may be needed. Provisions may be made for accessing independent advice. Staff may also need training to help them communicate and explain complex information using plain and non-technical language.
A mutually agreed process for reviewing and updating of the Community Engagement Plan, including frequency of review and any triggers for review outside of the planned timeline, such as a change to a project plan.

Process for developing a Community Engagement Plan

Sites must contact the affected indigenous community and start engaging with them in order to develop the Community Engagement Plan. Where an indigenous community has a protocol in place for engaging with external parties, the site should contact and engage the community in accordance with the existing protocol. Note that the existing protocol does not replace the Community Engagement Plan. Where an existing protocol does not exist, sites may use the help of an appropriate third party to contact the community, ascertain from community leaders whether they wish to be engaged, and start engagements.

Where multiple indigenous communities are affected, sites may need to conduct discreet engagement processes with each group or reach agreement with the relevant communities to participate in a joint process. Sites should, with the support of the indigenous adviser and in consultation with the affected community, also consider the best approach for engaging with indigenous groups if they are close to or part of a wider mixed community of indigenous and non-indigenous groups. In some cases it may be appropriate to develop an integrated approach, which addresses the needs of non-indigenous people but still respects traditional engagement methods for indigenous groups. The approach taken should always be determined in consultation with and according to the preferences of the affected communities.

The Community Engagement Plan can remain a stand-alone document or can be incorporated into the site’s SEP. This will again depend, in part, on how mixed the community is and to what extent the indigenous community wants to be considered separately and have a separate engagement process. For example, a separate Community Engagement Plan is likely to be preferred if there are historical experiences of discrimination or exclusion of indigenous groups within a mixed community. The Community Engagement Plan can also be integrated into the IPP and/or any negotiated agreement or simply referenced in those documents, as agreed with the affected community.

If not incorporated within the document itself, a summary and reference to the Community Engagement Plan should be included in the SEP. Detailed planning (e.g. scheduling of specific meetings) and documentation of engagement activities should be incorporated into the site-wide integrated stakeholder database, which includes a stakeholder register, action planner/engagement schedule, consultation log and monitoring and evaluation framework.

Engagement forums

Sites are required to establish a Community Engagement Forum (CEF) (see Section 3A). Depending on the nature and size of the affected communities, a separate Indigenous Peoples Engagement Forum may need to be established; for instance, where the affected community consists of a large community with significant indigenous and non-indigenous populations. Where the affected population consists of non-indigenous populations and a small indigenous community, it may be possible to use the CEF. Where indigenous populations participate in the CEF, respecting and following traditional approaches in terms of engagement and CEF set-up should be considered, and the selection of Indigenous Peoples’ representatives on the CEF should be transparent, even in cases when the traditional process of selection may not be. The wider indigenous community should know about the CEF, its objectives, and who represents them on it.

Plan

Plan

Plan