Article 7.1 of the Paris Agreement establishes the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) to enhance adaptive capacity, strengthen resilience, and reduce vulnerability to climate change, with a view to contributing to sustainable development and ensuring an adequate adaptation response in the context of the temperature goal. To operationalize the GGA, CMA5 in 2023 created the UAE Framework for Global Climate Resilience with seven thematic and four dimensional targets. It also launched the two-year UAE-Belém work programme on indicators for measuring progress achieved towards these targets (2024-2025), which is expected to conclude at CMA7.
The Subsidiary Bodies were requested to initiate the process of undertaking the UAE-Belém work programme at SB60 (June 2024), after which the SB Chairs convened technical experts to identify, refine, and (as needed) develop indicators for the targets of the Framework. At CMA6, it was decided that the final outcome of the UAE-Belém work programme may include a manageable set of no more than 100 indicators that (a) are globally applicable with a view to informing an analysis of relevant global trends; (b) constitute a menu that captures various contexts of adaptation action; and (c) are designed to enable assessment of progress towards achieving the different components of the targets.
Indigenous Peoples and local communities bring vital knowledge systems, practices, and governance approaches to adaptation and resilience-building. Their knowledge and lived experience inform local-level responses to climate risks, and integrating these systems alongside scientific and technical approaches enhances the inclusiveness and effectiveness of adaptation planning and implementation. Effectively recognizing Indigenous and local knowledge within the GGA process is essential to achieving climate-resilient outcomes that reflect the voices of those most affected. This article reviews the set of draft GGA indicators in relation to Indigenous Peoples and local communities, highlighting direct and cross-cutting linkages and classifying them into categories.
As a general cross-cutting consideration, the inclusion of Indigenous Peoples and local communities, as well as their relevant knowledge systems, has been consistently included in relevant decisions.
CMA5 decided that the UAE Framework for Global Climate Resilience should "take into account the best available science and the worldviews and values of Indigenous Peoples" and emphasizes that adaptation action should be based on and guided by, inter alia, "traditional knowledge, Indigenous Peoples’ knowledge, local knowledge systems." It also recognized the important role of all stakeholders, including Indigenous Peoples and local communities, as well as the leadership of Indigenous Peoples and local communities as stewards of nature, and encouraged the ethical and equitable engagement with Indigenous Peoples and local communities and application of traditional knowledge, the knowledge, wisdom and values of Indigenous Peoples, and local knowledge systems in implementing the UAE Framework for Global Climate Resilience.
CMA6 further emphasized "the importance of including traditional knowledge, knowledge of Indigenous Peoples and local knowledge systems" in work under the UAE–Belém work programme as well as "the importance of the exchange of knowledge, experience and information and sharing of best practices pertaining to the targets," including through the work of the Facilitative Working Group of the Local Communities and Indigenous Peoples Platform.
Since the sixtieth meeting of the Subsidiary Bodies (SB 60) which took place in June 2024, the group of experts established under the UAE–Belém Work Programme on indicators has received guidance from Parties to ensure that the work remains coherent, inclusive, and aligned with the UAE Framework for Global Climate Resilience. They requested the experts to identify a manageable and globally relevant set of indicators covering all eleven targets of the GGA. Parties emphasized the use of existing data and methodologies, the inclusion of metadata to ensure methodological transparency, and the importance of indicators that are globally relevant and applicable across scales, from local to global, to enable the assessment of collective progress.
Parties instructed that the indicators should address both outcomes and enabling conditions such as access to finance, capacity-building, technology, and inclusive governance. They encouraged disaggregation across social, geographic, and ecological dimensions to capture differentiated vulnerabilities and adaptive capacities. The guidance also emphasized the use of diverse knowledge systems, including Indigenous Peoples’ knowledge and local knowledge systems, and encouraged inclusive and participatory engagement throughout the technical process to ensure that indicators are relevant and equitable across contexts.
The emerging approach proposed by the expert group, for consideration by Parties at SB 63 and CMA 7 (COP 30, Belém), combines quantitative and qualitative indicators, acknowledges the importance of multiple knowledge sources, and seeks to balance scientific robustness with policy relevance and inclusivity.
Across multiple targets of the UAE Framework for Global Climate Resilience, a pattern emerges in relation to the proposed indicators. As a way to assess them, the indicators can be grouped into eight interlinked categories in relation to how they relate to Indigenous Peoples and local communities:
Participation, representation, and decision-making
Several draft indicators assess whether Indigenous Peoples and local communities are meaningfully included in decision-making, planning, and monitoring of adaptation policies. Examples include proposed indicators under ecosystems and biodiversity, infrastructure and human settlements, and monitoring, evaluation and learning, which track equitable representation, locally led adaptation (LLA), and inclusion of Indigenous actors in national adaptation plans (NAPs) and institutional capacity-building. These reflect not only measuring outcomes but also tracking process-based inclusion, for instance, whether community participation mechanisms exist, or whether NAPs embed LLA principles. Such indicators operationalize the rights-based and participatory governance aspects of the Paris Agreement and the Local Communities and Indigenous Peoples Platform (LCIPP).
Integration of diverse knowledge systems, including Indigenous Peoples’ knowledge and local knowledge systems
A second cluster of draft indicators explicitly includes Indigenous Knowledge and local knowledge as a foundation for adaptive capacity. Under the targets related to food and agriculture; cultural heritage and knowledge; and impact, vulnerability and risk assessment; indicators aim to measure the degree to which research, adaptation planning, and risk systems incorporate traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) and Indigenous Peoples’ knowledge. They capture both recognition (for example research and development (R&D) programs or infrastructure design informed by traditional knowledge) and application (including initiatives operationalising TEK for ecosystem-based adaptation or using Indigenous weather forecasting). This reinforces the role of Indigenous Peoples and local communities as both beneficiaries as well as knowledge holders and innovators in climate adaptation.
Cultural heritage, capacity, and awareness
Multiple draft indicators link adaptation to cultural heritage resilience. These include training and awareness programs for Indigenous Peoples and local communities, protection of traditional knowledge, participation in culture-sector policy processes (e.g. under UNESCO), and the retrofitting of heritage sites using traditional materials and design. Together, these indicators recognize the interdependence of culture, identity, and adaptation, highlighting that safeguarding cultural heritage and supporting intergenerational knowledge transmission are key components of resilience.
Numerous draft indicators listed relate to Indigenous Peoples and local communities, as well as other groups, in a cross-cutting way.
Disaggregation and equity in data systems
Many of the draft indicators include disaggregation by Indigenous status (in addition to gender, age, disability etc.). Examples are found under the target on food and agriculture, which measures adoption of climate-resilient practices and income changes by producer type, sex, age, and Indigenous status. Similar disaggregation is used in the draft capacity-building and finance indicators. Through this approach, adaptation outcomes and benefits could be tracked for Indigenous Peoples (and local communities in some cases) rather than being reported only as averages.
Inclusion in adaptation processes
Under the target on planning, draft indicators relate to whether NAPs and related policies have been developed through documented, inclusive participation of Indigenous Peoples, women, youth, and other stakeholders. They also assess whether these plans include measures targeting vulnerable populations, including Indigenous Peoples. Under the target on implementation, the draft indicators assess the share of adaptation finance and capacity-building that reaches subnational or local institutions and diverse groups, including Indigenous Peoples. They aim to measure whether adaptation governance is inclusive and participatory at both national and local levels.
Access to resources, services, and opportunities
Some draft indicators, particularly under the target on food and agricultural production, address access to adaptation resources such as climate-resilient technologies. Others, including those under the target on implementation, focus on access to finance and capacity-building opportunities for a number of groups, including Indigenous Peoples. They aim to track the equitable distribution of resources for adaptation.
Cultural and territorial dimensions
Draft indicators under the target on ecosystems and biodiversity and the target on cultural heritage and knowledge include measures of restoration, conservation, and implementation of ecosystem-based adaptation in cultural landscapes. These can be disaggregated to account for Indigenous and traditional territories or culturally important sites. They acknowledge the contribution of Indigenous and local stewardship of ecosystems and heritage, even where Indigenous or local knowledge systems are not explicitly referenced.
The review indicates that references to Indigenous Peoples and local communities, as well as their knowledge systems, vary across the set of 100 GGA indicator options submitted by the experts. This reflects the differing relevance of the targets to these groups. Several targets, such as those on ecosystems and biodiversity, cultural heritage and knowledge, and planning contain strong Indigenous and local dimensions. These dimensions are also reflected under the cross-cutting targets, which address participation, knowledge systems, and enabling conditions in a more integrated manner. Taken together, the proposed indicators provide both direct and indirect linkages to Indigenous Peoples and local communities and recognize the value of their knowledge and participation across the adaptation framework.
SLYCAN Trust is a non-profit think tank. It has been a registered legal entity in the form of a trust since 2016, and a guarantee limited company since 2019. The entities focus on the thematic areas of climate change, adaptation and resilience, sustainable development, environmental conservation and restoration, social justice, and animal welfare. SLYCAN Trust’s activities include legal and policy research, education and awareness creation, capacity building and training, and implementation of ground level action. SLYCAN Trust aims to facilitate and contribute to multi-stakeholder driven, inclusive and participatory actions for a sustainable and resilient future for all.
Article 7.1 of the Paris Agreement establishes the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) to enhance adaptive capacity, strengthen resilience, and reduce vulnerability to climate change, with a view to contributing to sustainable development and ensuring an adequate adaptation response in the context of the temperature goal. To operationalize the GGA, CMA5 in 2023 created the UAE Framework for Global Climate Resilience with seven thematic and four dimensional targets. It also launched the two-year UAE-Belém work programme on indicators for measuring progress achieved towards these targets (2024-2025), which is expected to conclude at CMA7.
The Subsidiary Bodies were requested to initiate the process of undertaking the UAE-Belém work programme at SB60 (June 2024), after which the SB Chairs convened technical experts to identify, refine, and (as needed) develop indicators for the targets of the Framework. At CMA6, it was decided that the final outcome of the UAE-Belém work programme may include a manageable set of no more than 100 indicators that (a) are globally applicable with a view to informing an analysis of relevant global trends; (b) constitute a menu that captures various contexts of adaptation action; and (c) are designed to enable assessment of progress towards achieving the different components of the targets.
Indigenous Peoples and local communities bring vital knowledge systems, practices, and governance approaches to adaptation and resilience-building. Their knowledge and lived experience inform local-level responses to climate risks, and integrating these systems alongside scientific and technical approaches enhances the inclusiveness and effectiveness of adaptation planning and implementation. Effectively recognizing Indigenous and local knowledge within the GGA process is essential to achieving climate-resilient outcomes that reflect the voices of those most affected. This article reviews the set of draft GGA indicators in relation to Indigenous Peoples and local communities, highlighting direct and cross-cutting linkages and classifying them into categories.
As a general cross-cutting consideration, the inclusion of Indigenous Peoples and local communities, as well as their relevant knowledge systems, has been consistently included in relevant decisions.
CMA5 decided that the UAE Framework for Global Climate Resilience should "take into account the best available science and the worldviews and values of Indigenous Peoples" and emphasizes that adaptation action should be based on and guided by, inter alia, "traditional knowledge, Indigenous Peoples’ knowledge, local knowledge systems." It also recognized the important role of all stakeholders, including Indigenous Peoples and local communities, as well as the leadership of Indigenous Peoples and local communities as stewards of nature, and encouraged the ethical and equitable engagement with Indigenous Peoples and local communities and application of traditional knowledge, the knowledge, wisdom and values of Indigenous Peoples, and local knowledge systems in implementing the UAE Framework for Global Climate Resilience.
CMA6 further emphasized "the importance of including traditional knowledge, knowledge of Indigenous Peoples and local knowledge systems" in work under the UAE–Belém work programme as well as "the importance of the exchange of knowledge, experience and information and sharing of best practices pertaining to the targets," including through the work of the Facilitative Working Group of the Local Communities and Indigenous Peoples Platform.
Since the sixtieth meeting of the Subsidiary Bodies (SB 60) which took place in June 2024, the group of experts established under the UAE–Belém Work Programme on indicators has received guidance from Parties to ensure that the work remains coherent, inclusive, and aligned with the UAE Framework for Global Climate Resilience. They requested the experts to identify a manageable and globally relevant set of indicators covering all eleven targets of the GGA. Parties emphasized the use of existing data and methodologies, the inclusion of metadata to ensure methodological transparency, and the importance of indicators that are globally relevant and applicable across scales, from local to global, to enable the assessment of collective progress.
Parties instructed that the indicators should address both outcomes and enabling conditions such as access to finance, capacity-building, technology, and inclusive governance. They encouraged disaggregation across social, geographic, and ecological dimensions to capture differentiated vulnerabilities and adaptive capacities. The guidance also emphasized the use of diverse knowledge systems, including Indigenous Peoples’ knowledge and local knowledge systems, and encouraged inclusive and participatory engagement throughout the technical process to ensure that indicators are relevant and equitable across contexts.
The emerging approach proposed by the expert group, for consideration by Parties at SB 63 and CMA 7 (COP 30, Belém), combines quantitative and qualitative indicators, acknowledges the importance of multiple knowledge sources, and seeks to balance scientific robustness with policy relevance and inclusivity.
Across multiple targets of the UAE Framework for Global Climate Resilience, a pattern emerges in relation to the proposed indicators. As a way to assess them, the indicators can be grouped into eight interlinked categories in relation to how they relate to Indigenous Peoples and local communities:
Participation, representation, and decision-making
Several draft indicators assess whether Indigenous Peoples and local communities are meaningfully included in decision-making, planning, and monitoring of adaptation policies. Examples include proposed indicators under ecosystems and biodiversity, infrastructure and human settlements, and monitoring, evaluation and learning, which track equitable representation, locally led adaptation (LLA), and inclusion of Indigenous actors in national adaptation plans (NAPs) and institutional capacity-building. These reflect not only measuring outcomes but also tracking process-based inclusion, for instance, whether community participation mechanisms exist, or whether NAPs embed LLA principles. Such indicators operationalize the rights-based and participatory governance aspects of the Paris Agreement and the Local Communities and Indigenous Peoples Platform (LCIPP).
Integration of diverse knowledge systems, including Indigenous Peoples’ knowledge and local knowledge systems
A second cluster of draft indicators explicitly includes Indigenous Knowledge and local knowledge as a foundation for adaptive capacity. Under the targets related to food and agriculture; cultural heritage and knowledge; and impact, vulnerability and risk assessment; indicators aim to measure the degree to which research, adaptation planning, and risk systems incorporate traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) and Indigenous Peoples’ knowledge. They capture both recognition (for example research and development (R&D) programs or infrastructure design informed by traditional knowledge) and application (including initiatives operationalising TEK for ecosystem-based adaptation or using Indigenous weather forecasting). This reinforces the role of Indigenous Peoples and local communities as both beneficiaries as well as knowledge holders and innovators in climate adaptation.
Cultural heritage, capacity, and awareness
Multiple draft indicators link adaptation to cultural heritage resilience. These include training and awareness programs for Indigenous Peoples and local communities, protection of traditional knowledge, participation in culture-sector policy processes (e.g. under UNESCO), and the retrofitting of heritage sites using traditional materials and design. Together, these indicators recognize the interdependence of culture, identity, and adaptation, highlighting that safeguarding cultural heritage and supporting intergenerational knowledge transmission are key components of resilience.
Numerous draft indicators listed relate to Indigenous Peoples and local communities, as well as other groups, in a cross-cutting way.
Disaggregation and equity in data systems
Many of the draft indicators include disaggregation by Indigenous status (in addition to gender, age, disability etc.). Examples are found under the target on food and agriculture, which measures adoption of climate-resilient practices and income changes by producer type, sex, age, and Indigenous status. Similar disaggregation is used in the draft capacity-building and finance indicators. Through this approach, adaptation outcomes and benefits could be tracked for Indigenous Peoples (and local communities in some cases) rather than being reported only as averages.
Inclusion in adaptation processes
Under the target on planning, draft indicators relate to whether NAPs and related policies have been developed through documented, inclusive participation of Indigenous Peoples, women, youth, and other stakeholders. They also assess whether these plans include measures targeting vulnerable populations, including Indigenous Peoples. Under the target on implementation, the draft indicators assess the share of adaptation finance and capacity-building that reaches subnational or local institutions and diverse groups, including Indigenous Peoples. They aim to measure whether adaptation governance is inclusive and participatory at both national and local levels.
Access to resources, services, and opportunities
Some draft indicators, particularly under the target on food and agricultural production, address access to adaptation resources such as climate-resilient technologies. Others, including those under the target on implementation, focus on access to finance and capacity-building opportunities for a number of groups, including Indigenous Peoples. They aim to track the equitable distribution of resources for adaptation.
Cultural and territorial dimensions
Draft indicators under the target on ecosystems and biodiversity and the target on cultural heritage and knowledge include measures of restoration, conservation, and implementation of ecosystem-based adaptation in cultural landscapes. These can be disaggregated to account for Indigenous and traditional territories or culturally important sites. They acknowledge the contribution of Indigenous and local stewardship of ecosystems and heritage, even where Indigenous or local knowledge systems are not explicitly referenced.
The review indicates that references to Indigenous Peoples and local communities, as well as their knowledge systems, vary across the set of 100 GGA indicator options submitted by the experts. This reflects the differing relevance of the targets to these groups. Several targets, such as those on ecosystems and biodiversity, cultural heritage and knowledge, and planning contain strong Indigenous and local dimensions. These dimensions are also reflected under the cross-cutting targets, which address participation, knowledge systems, and enabling conditions in a more integrated manner. Taken together, the proposed indicators provide both direct and indirect linkages to Indigenous Peoples and local communities and recognize the value of their knowledge and participation across the adaptation framework.
