A/HRC/36/46 A. Global Environment Facility 90. The Global Environmental Facility, established in 1991 through the World Bank, is the oldest financial mechanism under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Between 15 and 20 per cent of the Facility’s projects involve indigenous peoples and some projects have indigenous executing agencies. Important steps have been undertaken by the Facility to support indigenous participation. Principles and guidelines for engagement with indigenous peoples were adopted in 2012. 50 Among the positive initiatives undertaken by the Facility is the establishment of the Indigenous Peoples Advisory Group and the creation of the Indigenous Peoples Fellowship Programme. 91. The Facility has created a small grants programme which has provided over $850 million to over 22,000 projects in 129 countries However, it has to be noted that as yet there are no disaggregated data available on how much of these funds went directly to indigenous peoples’ communities. An assessment is needed of the lessons learned in terms of impact and of ensuring that the rights and priorities of indigenous peoples are respected and to show the real amount of funds received by indigenous peoples compared with the overall amounts released. B. Clean Development Mechanism 92. The Clean Development Mechanism has been operational since 2006. Through its emission reduction projects, developing countries earn certified emission reduction credits which can be used by developed countries to meet a part of their emission reduction targets under the Kyoto Protocol.51 The Mechanism has been widely criticized for having failed to safeguard human rights as its lack of safeguards has resulted in support for projects which have resulted in the displacement of local communities, and the Special Rapporteur has received allegations of violations of indigenous peoples’ rights experienced in such renewable energy projects funded by the Mechanism as hydroelectric dams and tree plantations. The International Indigenous Peoples’ Forum on Climate Change has been very critical of Mechanism projects set up in indigenous communities without consultation or the free, prior and informed consent of the affected community. 93. UNEP also notes that the Mechanism projects have been characterized by insufficient local stakeholder consultations and clear evidence that they have caused harm to the local populations and/or ecosystems. 52 The Special Rapporteur on human rights and the environment referred to the Mechanism in 2016 as the one climate mechanism which most obviously lacks effective social and environmental safeguards and which has been dogged by the strongest accusations of supporting projects with serious human rights abuses.53 94. There is criticism of the very nature of the Mechanism. Developed countries are the main greenhouse gas emitters and, according to the Convention, they are the ones that should carry the heavier burden of mitigation. However, the Mechanism allows developed countries to buy carbon credits from developing countries so that they can emit more but still meet the Kyoto targets. As a result, developed world’s burden of cutting back emissions is met by the efforts of the developing world. Developed countries support mitigation projects in developing countries through subsidies in the form of loans or grants, and the certified emission reductions from such Mechanism projects will be owned by the developed countries to add to their emission reduction targets. 50 51 52 53 16 See www.thegef.org/publications/principles-and-guidelines-engagement-indigenous-peoples. See http://cdm.unfccc.int/index.html. UNEP, Climate Change and Human Rights,p. 36. See www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Environment/Letter_to_SBSTA_UNFCCC_May2016.pdf; and www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=19962&LangID=E.