E/CN.4/2003/90 page 21 Malaysia in the 1990s. In the case of the Bakun project, rights to indigenous common land in the Ulu Belaga site were not recognized or properly assessed. Industrial countries’ experience with indigenous peoples in the era of building large dams was not very different from that of developing countries. Dams built during the 1950s and 1960s cost the indigenous nations of the Missouri River basin in the United States an estimated 142,000 hectares of their best land, including a number of burial and other sacred sites, leading to further impoverishment and severe cultural and emotional trauma. A guarantee used to rationalize the plan - that some 87,000 hectares of Indian land would be irrigated - was scrapped as the project neared completion. “Another case is the second stage of the Churchill Rivers project in Labrador, Canada, consisting of two dams and two river diversions that will flood a large area of hunting territory of the Innu people who live on both sides of the provincial boundary. The Innu have yet to be clearly recognized as the owners of their lands, and the whole area is the subject of an unresolved Innu land claim currently being negotiated with the Canadian Government.” 61. The Commission recommends that in the future major development projects such as dams be approached on the basis of the recognition of rights and the assessment of risks, which is of particular relevance to indigenous peoples: “The recognition of rights and the assessment of risk identify the interested and affected parties who possess rights or entitlements as well as risk takers and bearers. This opens the way for a negotiated approach that enables the decision-making process to assess options and reach project agreements. Those whose rights are most affected, or whose entitlements are most threatened, have the greatest stake in the decisions that are taken. The same applies to risk: those groups facing the greatest risk from the development have the greatest stake in the decisions and, therefore, must have a corresponding place at the negotiating table. “Further, the Commission has sought to demonstrate that an approach based on the recognition of rights and assessment of risks can lay the basis for greatly improved and significantly more legitimate decision-making on water and energy development. This is an effective way to determine who has a legitimate place at the negotiation table and what issues need to be included on the agenda.” 68 62. The debate on dams and indigenous peoples has wider implications, as reflected in the discussions on the environment and sustainable development. The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (1992) recognized that: “Indigenous people … have a vital role in environmental management and development because of their knowledge and traditional practices. States should recognize and duly support their identity, culture and interests and enable their effective participation in the achievement of sustainable development.”69 Ten years later, the World Summit on Sustainable Development took a small step further by reaffirming: “… the vital role of the indigenous peoples in sustainable development.”70 These statements must necessarily be taken into consideration seriously in the design, planning and execution of major development projects that affect the lives and livelihoods of indigenous peoples.