A/HRC/61/49 51. The participation of local populations in decision-making is often inadequate or too hasty, and processes to ensure the free, informed and real participation of all are rare. The specific protection granted under international law to minorities and Indigenous Peoples is not fully understood or is minimized or simply discarded. For example, Indigenous Peoples’ right to veto, which is included in their right to free, prior and informed consent in matters that directly affect them, and the need to lead conservation projects in their lands are not taken into account in practice.85 52. Experiences of community-led tourism and observation of biodiversity that integrate local people into the value chain have helped to change the paradigm from prohibition to participation. 86 The Mali Elephant Project was co-developed with local communities, traditional chiefs and nomads, integrating local values and the knowledge of each group to define the measures to be taken for the benefit of the elephants and the wider ecosystem. 87 The Pimachiowin Aki heritage site in Canada demonstrates how an Indigenous-nominated and Indigenous-governed heritage site can integrate both cultural and ecological protection. 88 The Pessamiulnuat people in Quebec, Canada, are lobbying the State to support caribou conservation in their territories according to their own practices and know-how.89 53. Such positive practices of culturally adequate and sustainable development must be highlighted in global conservation policy and standardized at the domestic level. E. Ensuring the right to participate in scientific endeavours 54. Participation of local communities is sometimes prevented because of the misconception that their practices do not constitute “science”. In 2020, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights confirmed that participation in science is part of participation in cultural life. The Committee criticized the rigid distinction between scientists and the general population, which is entitled not only to enjoy the benefits derived from research conducted by scientists, but also to participate in the scientific endeavour and decision-making.90 The Special Rapporteur has previously emphasized the need to embrace an inclusive and decolonized understanding of science to include traditional knowledge and Indigenous science and has called upon States to eliminate exclusionary processes in defining and applying science.91 55. Conservation strategies should embrace and recognize a level of scientific pluralism necessary for addressing biodiversity loss, as the diversity of knowledge and approaches provides a wider understanding and array of tools and methodologies to mitigate adverse developments.92 In Estonia, local residents were invited to contribute to the revision of the sacred cross tree map, together with the heritage culture map of the State Forest Management Centre and the sacred site map of the Hiite Maja Foundation.93 The principle of subsidiarity, whereby the local prevails over the generic, is important: localized, traditional knowledge systems, which cut across science, belief and cultural practices, as opposed to “one-size-fits-all” knowledge systems, may offer important ways forward. The programme for the sustainable management of oasis ecosystems in Algeria demonstrates the value of this approach.94 Traditional and experience-based ecological knowledge is part of science and should be treated as such. 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 14 See www.ohchr.org/en/special-procedures/sr-cultural-rights/cultural-rights-and-development. For examples of failed experiences due to lack of consideration of cultural rights, see submissions from Mexico, p. 5; and Uzbekistan, paras. 27–33. Submission from El Salvador. Submission from Mali, p. 2. Submission from Agnieszka Pawłowska-Mainville. Submission from Amnesty International. General comment No. 25 (2020), paras. 8, 9 and 11. See A/HRC/55/44 and A/HRC/55/44/Corr.1. Submission from Red Española para el Desarrollo Sostenible. Regarding challenges, see also submission from UNESCO, pp. 10 and 11. Submission from Estonia. Submission from Algeria, para. 9. GE.26-01310