A/HRC/27/64 indigenous communities. Mexico stressed the importance of providing information on disaster risk reduction in indigenous languages, highlighting a programme whereby 120 public information messages had been recorded and disseminated in the local indigenous languages of eight states with high disaster risk. The Plurinational State of Bolivia stressed the links between vulnerability to disasters and broader challenges such as poverty and the need for a more harmonious relationship with nature, referring to its Ley Marco de la Madre Tierra, which in addition to establishing a basis for sustainable development in harmony with nature, also created a national framework for the prevention and reduction of risk and vulnerability to disasters. 68. The New Zealand Human Rights Commission commented on the impact of the 2010 Canterbury earthquakes on the Maori population. This example illustrated the impact that disasters could have on urban indigenous peoples living in high-risk areas. The Commission mentioned resources that had been developed following the earthquakes, including a document produced by the Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management entitled “Including culturally and linguistically diverse communities: information for the civil defence and emergency management sector”. 69. Indigenous peoples’ representatives called upon the Expert Mechanism to give more emphasis to the role played by extractive industries in exacerbating disaster risk, and drew attention to man-made causes of disasters. Specific suggestions were made as to how the study could better address the contribution of traditional knowledge to disaster risk reduction. The Asia Indigenous Caucus, for example, noted that indigenous peoples should not only be looked upon as “vulnerable people”, but rather as ecosystem experts who had a sound knowledge of and intimate relationship with the environment. Several examples mentioned by indigenous peoples illustrated how they, while inhabiting some of the most fragile ecosystems and locations on the planet, had developed unique strategies for coping with climate change and other drivers of disasters. Several interventions also emphasized the link between vulnerability to disasters and insecurity over land tenure and resources. 70. International Chief Littlechild intervened to make three points. First, it was important to link the examination of the topic of disaster risk reduction to the right of indigenous peoples to self-determination, as articulated in the Expert Mechanism’s follow-up study on the right to participate in decision-making, with a focus on extractive industries, specifically paragraphs 11, 12, 44 and 45, as well as Expert Mechanism advice No. 4, and its comment on the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Those documents provided guidance for States, businesses and indigenous peoples that was aimed at ensuring respect for the right to self-determination; for free, prior and informed consent; and for the full, equal and effective participation of indigenous peoples in the global post2015 framework for disaster risk reduction. Second, he highlighted the importance of the United Nations system, and of States, providing financial support for indigenous peoples’ participation in relevant United Nations forums, particularly in relation to the post-2015 development agenda. Third, he highlighted a good practice in Canada whereby indigenous peoples and governments worked in partnership to address natural disaster risk reduction via the country’s Emergency Management Agency. IX. United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples 71. Prior to opening the discussion on the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, International Chief Littlechild provided an overview of the Expert Mechanism’s work in that area, including a review of the final summary of responses to the questionnaire seeking the views of States and indigenous peoples on best practices regarding possible appropriate measures and implementation strategies to attain the goals of 16