Module 5, Lesson 3: Tactics inside and outside of negotiation rooms

Self-paced course

Negotiating Impact and Benefit-Sharing for Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities

Module 5: Negotiation Tactics Lesson 3: Tactics Inside and Outside of Negotiation Rooms

Start

Start

How to Navigate this Lesson

Before you begin, here’s a quick guide to navigating this interactive lesson:

Start

Up next

Click Next to move forward.

Click Back to revisit a previous section.

Return to completed sections and retake them anytime.

Access the Section Overview anytime.

Click on highlighted terms for definitions.

Click interactive elements (buttons, tabs, images) to reveal more details.

Complete all activities to unlock the next section.

Click to show all interactive elements on a screen.

Welcome to lesson 3

Up next

Welcome to Lesson 3

Welcome to Lesson 3 of the Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities, Negotiations and Benefit-Sharing Agreements self-paced course. This lesson is divided into four sections. To make the most out of your learning experience, you’ll need to complete each section before moving on. Get ready to learn about tactics inside negotiating rooms and outside of negotiation rooms. Click below to begin!

Lesson 3 overview

Up next

Section 1:

2 min

Start

Introduction

10 min

Start

Section 2:

Tactics inside negotiating rooms

3 min

Start

Section 4:

Conclusion

10 min

Start

Section 3:

Tactics outside negotiating rooms

Introduction

Welcome to Module 5 Lesson 3 of the course on Negotiating Impact and Benefit-Sharing for Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities. In this lesson you will learn how communities can use tactics both inside and outside the negotiating room to protect their interests when facing power imbalances, and strengthen their bargaining position.

Lesson 3 overview

Section 1 completed

Section 1:

2 min

Completed

Introduction

10 min

Start

Section 2:

Tactics inside negotiating rooms

3 min

Start

Section 4:

Conclusion

10 min

Start

Section 3:

Tactics outside negotiating rooms

Keep internal disagreements off the negotiating table

An important rule for any Indigenous or local community negotiating team is to never argue with each other in front of the project proponent. The negotiating table is not the place to reveal internal tensions or conflicting views. When outsiders witness behaviors that can be interpreted as disunity, they may see an opportunity to apply pressure and even play sides against each other. Even small disagreements can be misinterpreted as a lack of clarity or authority. But unity does not mean that conflict never happens, it means conflict is handled privately and respectfully, within the community’s own space. If things begin to fall apart during a meeting (for example, if members are no longer aligned, if doubts arise, or if the conversation becomes tense), the negotiating team and/or community members can stop the meeting. Calling for private discussions allows the negotiating team to regroup and talk through disagreements before returning to the table.

Taking breaks to stay in control

Up next

References

Taking breaks to stay in control

During negotiations, moments of tension or confusion are inevitable. When discussions become heated or too complex to process on the spot, the negotiating team can use the balcony tactic, stepping back from the immediate pressure of the negotiation and taking a short break. These breaks help the negotiating team to regain perspective, refocus, and check in with each other. It also prevents the proponent from pushing the negotiation forward faster than the team is ready for.

For communities negotiating with companies or project proponents, these pauses are opportunities to consolidate their position and gather feedback on the negotiating strategy. They can also use these moments to assess offers that have been proposed and reconsider their bottom line if needed. Importantly, just as the community uses breaks strategically, it should assume the other side is doing the same.

Learn more

How breaks strengthened the UNDRIP negotiations

Walking out as a negotiation tactic

Up next

References

Walking out as a negotiation tactic

Walking out of a negotiation is one of the most serious tactics a community can use, and it should only be adopted after every other option has been exhausted and the consequences have been considered. When used repeatedly, it loses its impact, risking to damage the credibility of the negotiating team and weaken their negotiating power. But at the right moment, with full community involvement, a walk-out can send the message that the process is no longer fair, and the community will not legitimize it by remaining at the table. For example, a walk-out may be justified when the other party has:

• Deliberately ignored elements of a previous framework agreement or protocol;
• Tried to negotiate with members other than the designated negotiating group, in an effort to weaken community unity;
• Broken major commitments made previously during the negotiation; or
• Persistently displayed a lack of willingness to work towards agreement,

Communities may also choose to walk out in other situations they consider serious, especially when they feel their rights are being violated and if negotiators judge that the process has become harmful or unfair. Each community has the autonomy to define what crosses the line, based on its own values and experiences.

How to walk out strategically

Up next

References

How to walk out strategically

It is important that the basis for a walk-out be clearly communicated so the other party understands the community’s decision and so the possibility of returning to the table remains open. Walking out and returning to the negotiating table must be thoughtfully calculated with clear goals. It is equally important to state the conditions under which negotiations can resume. The entire negotiating team must be sure that the community supports this decision and that it will not lead to division in the community. It is also important that the whole negotiation team agrees to walk out, as it will considerably weaken the position of the whole team if only one member walks out and the rest of the team remain at the table.

Learn more

Walking Away from Negotiations – Sagada, Philippines

Choosing who should be at the table and role of power figures

Up next

References

Choosing who should be at the table and role of power figures

Knowing who to bring into negotiations at specific moments is an important tactical decision. Elders carry significant cultural authority and their presence can be powerful, but they may not always be available, especially when travel is required, and many would prefer to participate only when truly necessary. In discussions that involve complex or highly technical matters, the presence of elders who may not understand the details can also be counter-productive. This means the negotiation team must be thoughtful about when elder participation is most needed and when other representatives may be better suited to the discussed topic. However, elders’ participation should not be understood as limited. Even if they may not always understand very technical discussions, this does not mean they cannot choose to attend or deepen their understanding of technical information when they consider it important. When considered more suitable, the community can instead involve members who are directly affected and can speak clearly to the realities behind the agenda. For example, when water access is being discussed, mothers can communicate the daily importance of reliable water not only for fields but for essential household needs. Maintaining appropriate gender balance and diversity within the negotiating team ensures that the right voices can be brought in at the right time, and that critical input is not lost at key moments in the negotiation.

Managing relationships during negotiations

Up next

References

Managing relationships during negotiations

Strong relationships between the two sides are essential for successful negotiations, especially because any agreement reached is only the beginning of a long-term process. Building mutual respect early on helps create a foundation for cooperation and smooth implementation later. How the relationship develops during negotiations has a major effect on how the agreement will work in practice. to the community.

Both the community and the project proponent share responsibility for nurturing this relationship, which may include addressing stereotypes, engaging in joint problem solving, and keeping communication open even in difficult moments. Bringing project officials into the community or to places of cultural importance can also shift perspectives, helping them understand what is at stake and why certain issues matter deeply to the community.

Lesson 3 overview

Section 2 completed

Section 1:

2 min

Completed

Introduction

10 min

Completed

Section 2:

Tactics inside negotiating rooms

3 min

Start

Section 4:

Conclusion

10 min

Start

Section 3:

Tactics outside negotiating rooms

Engaging the media strategically

The media can be both an asset and a liability for Indigenous Peoples and local communities involved in negotiation. In some parts of the world, communities working to negotiate the use of their lands and resources are portrayed as obstacles to development. But Indigenous Peoples and local communities can also leverage a relationship with the media to improve their bargaining position, especially when the community and the project proponent are deadlocked in negotiation. By clearly explaining their concerns to a wider audience, communities can raise public awareness and increase pressure on project proponents to address their demands. Through the media, communities can call out harmful behavior from actors connected to the project, such as governments, companies, parent corporations, investors, multilateral institutions, or insurers.

Building effective media and social media strategies

Up next

References

Building effective media and social media strategies

Formulating effective media strategies requires substantial skill, including understanding which sorts of stories are likely to attract and retain media attention, building lasting relationships with journalists, and knowing how to mobilize media coverage quickly when needed. In some circumstances effective use of direct action will be an important component of a media strategy, drawing attention to unjust practices, as well as a means of putting pressure on state or company interests. Social media can also be a powerful tool, helping communities reach civil society directly or substitute for independent media where it is lacking. However, capacity to utilize social media may vary across the Global South, in part because of technical and geographical issues. Especially in remote areas, access to phone networks and the internet may be severely limited, with the result that Indigenous leaders or spokespersons can only utilize social media platforms when they visit regional centers or capital cities. This is a significant barrier to effective use of social media, which requires constant presence and reinforcement of messages, an ability to monitor and quickly respond to material from other sources, and a capacity to achieve immediacy in terms of events that one wishes to publicize.

Direct action: using community mobilization to support negotiations

Up next

References

Direct action: using community mobilization to support negotiations

When negotiations stall or begin to move in bad faith, community mobilization can become a necessary tool to bring project proponents back to the table or keep the process on track. Mobilization can take many forms, depending on the context and the community’s strategy. In some cases, pressure is directed at the proponent’s leadership; in others, actions target work sites, public opinion, or regulatory processes. These efforts remind proponents that the community is organized, unified, and willing to defend its rights beyond the meeting room. Examples of community mobilization include:

• When proponents have made public commitments, communities can press them on social license issues through direct contact with board members or the chair. However, this strategy is often adopted as a last resort.
• Protests at key work sites, such as roads, supply lines, or pipeline valves, can temporarily halt operations until bargaining tactics change.
• Media campaigns can influence policymakers and regulators responsible for permits, licenses, or funding decisions.
• Setting up camps near a culturally significant or environmentally sensitive site can demonstrate continuous presence and highlight the importance of the area.

Direct action: using community mobilization to support negotiations, continued

Up next

Direct action: using community mobilization to support negotiations, continued

Political mobilization and negotiation are not opposing strategies, both types of action are essential elements of a successful strategy. In most effective processes, they work together in a way that pressure from the community strengthens the negotiation team, and negotiation reinforces the community’s goals.

Learn more

Direct action by the Innu – Voisey’s Bay, Labrador, Canada

Conflict and security risk management

Up next

References

Conflict and security risk management

In some contexts, political mobilization can trigger retaliation from governments or project proponents, including denial of essential services, freezing of financial assets, or even violence. Indigenous Peoples and local communities, in particular, have often faced serious security threats and extrajudicial retaliation for defending their lands and rights. This makes it essential for communities to establish strong internal safety and security protocols during negotiations. Effective preparation includes:

• Assessing conflict and retaliation risks, and designing internal security measures;
• Ensuring that health, safety, and security safeguards guide all negotiation activities;
• Addressing unresolved past human rights violations through precursor agreements, when necessary;
• Seeking external expertise to design or monitor security management plans aligned with human rights standards.
• Reviewing and screening security personnel;
• Implementing human rights training for security actors.

Learn more

Safety and Security Risks in the IFC–Dinant Case (Honduras)

Using legal options

Up next

References

Using legal options

Preparing to use legal options effectively involves understanding the legal framework that applies to the project, reviewing previous assessments, studying national and international precedents, and securing the right alliances or legal advisors. Because the legal context of any agreement is highly specific, professional guidance is usually necessary. Litigation can create pressure on a project proponent to return to the negotiating table, but it must be approached carefully, as it can make future dialogue more difficult. Research shows that litigation based on various forms of law, including general environmental law, can help Indigenous Peoples and local communities counter the bargaining disadvantages they often face when dealing with powerful corporations or government actors. However, legal processes are typically slow, and the effectiveness of litigation depends heavily on whether governments uphold the rule of law. In many cases, governments may fail to inform communities about developments, act in ways that undermine livelihoods, or ignore legal protections. In more serious contexts, litigation or protest can even expose community members to human rights violations. For these reasons, legal options should be part of a broader, carefully planned strategy that balances negotiation pressure and the protection of the people involved.

Strategic Litigation in the Central Kalahari Game Reserve (Botswana)

Learn more

Lesson 3 overview

Section 3 completed

References

Section 1:

2 min

Completed

Introduction

10 min

Completed

Section 2:

Tactics inside negotiating rooms

3 min

Start

Section 4:

Conclusion

10 min

Completed

Section 3:

Tactics outside negotiating rooms

Key takeaways

• Internal disagreements may be inevitable, but keeping them off the negotiating table is a way of protecting the community’s authority and preventing project proponents from exploiting perceived divisions.
• Breaks, pauses, and stepping back from heated discussions can be tools that allow communities to think clearly, reassess offers, and prevent being rushed into unfavorable decisions.
• Escalation tactics such as walking out, mobilizing politically, or taking direct action can be useful, but only when they are used strategically and with full community backing. Poorly timed or fragmented escalation can weaken credibility rather than strengthen it.
• An effective negotiation can combine what happens at the table with pressure and support built outside of it in order to shape the environment, such as through media engagement, alliances, legal strategies, and community mobilization.
• Oftentimes negotiations occur in real-world contexts that may involve security risks, power imbalances between parties, and long term relationship conditions. Hence, protecting the people involved and planning for implementation of tactics are as important as reaching an agreement.

Conclusion

Up next

Conclusion

The strategies outlined in this lesson highlight that negotiations are rarely linear or predictable. They require negotiators to constantly read the room and adjust their approach to decide when to push forward, pause the negotiation, or change tactics. It is also important to have in mind that what happens at the negotiating table can be influenced by what happens outside of it, such as within the community, in the public sphere, and in the broader political and legal context. Independently of the adopted tactics, communities must stay united, always act deliberately, and think beyond short-term goals. The tactics explored in this section show that strong negotiations require preparation, discipline inside the negotiating room, and the right pressure outside of it. Constant attention to safety and long-term consequences are important to ensure that escalation tactics can bring more benefits than harm, and that actions taken in the moment do not expose community members to unnecessary risks. Ultimately, negotiators who are able to move strategically between different tactics (such as dialogue, pauses, escalation, and alliance-building) are better prepared to adapt to changing conditions.

Completed sections

Up next

Section 1:

2 min

Completed

Introduction

10 min

Completed

Section 2:

Tactics inside negotiating rooms

Congratulations. You have completed the lesson. You can review the sections by clicking on them, or continue in the Learning for Nature platform.

3 min

Completed

Section 4:

Conclusion

10 min

Completed

Section 3:

Tactics outside negotiating rooms

Section 1:

2 min

Completed

Introduction

10 min

Completed

Section 2:

Tactics inside negotiating rooms

3 min

Completed

Section 4:

Conclusion

10 min

Completed

Section 3:

Tactics outside negotiating rooms

1. Conservation International-Asian Indigenous Peoples Pact (AIPP), Asia Regional Workshop on Indigenous Negotiations – Workshop Report. 2019, Chiang Rai, Thailand.

Section overview

Home

Keep internal disagreements off the negotiating table

Taking breaks to stay in control

Walking out as a negotiation tactic

How to walk out strategically

Choosing who should be at the table and role of power figures

Managing relationships during negotiations

1. Conservation International, Pungor Advisors Workshop for Indigenous leaders – Workshop Report (2020). Ngwesi, Kenya.

How breaks strengthened the UNDRIP negotiationsDuring the negotiations that led to the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), short breaks proved to be one of the most valuable tools available to Indigenous representatives. Whenever discussions became intense or the text of the draft Declaration reached a difficult point, stepping out of the formal setting allowed Indigenous negotiators to regain perspective. These breaks also created opportunities for informal meetings with government representatives to discuss specific details of the draft Declaration and explore alternatives that would not have emerged under the pressure of the formal negotiation. These moments of personal exchanges also helped soften the image of States versus Indigenous Peoples, and strengthened relationships between negotiating sides.

1. Getting the Reader to Say “Yes”: Applying Negotiation Principles from the Books Getting to Yes and Getting Past No to Achieve Effective and Persuasive Legal Writing (2025). Patricia G. Montana, St. John's University School of Law. Available here.

Section overview

Home

Keep internal disagreements off the negotiating table

Taking breaks to stay in control

Walking out as a negotiation tactic

How to walk out strategically

Choosing who should be at the table and role of power figures

Managing relationships during negotiations

1. Conservation International-Asian Indigenous Peoples Pact (AIPP), Asia Regional Workshop on Indigenous Negotiations – Workshop Report. 2019, Chiang Rai, Thailand.

Section overview

Home

Engaging the media strategically

Building effective media and social media strategies

Direct action: using community mobilization to support negotiations

Direct action: using community mobilization to support negotiations, continued

Conflict and security risk management

Using legal options

Section overview

Home

Engaging the media strategically

Building effective media and social media strategies

Direct action: using community mobilization to support negotiations

Direct action: using community mobilization to support negotiations, continued

Conflict and security risk management

Using legal options

Section overview

Home

Engaging the media strategically

Building effective media and social media strategies

Direct action: using community mobilization to support negotiations

Direct action: using community mobilization to support negotiations, continued

Conflict and security risk management

Using legal options

Section overview

Home

Engaging the media strategically

Building effective media and social media strategies

Direct action: using community mobilization to support negotiations

Direct action: using community mobilization to support negotiations, continued

Conflict and security risk management

Using legal options

1. IBA Community Toolkit: Negotiation and Implementation of Impact and Benefit Agreements (2015). Ginger Gibson and Ciaran O’Faircheallaigh. Available here.

Section overview

Home

Engaging the media strategically

Building effective media and social media strategies

Direct action: using community mobilization to support negotiations

Direct action: using community mobilization to support negotiations, continued

Conflict and security risk management

Using legal options

Section overview

Home

Key takeaways

Conclusion

Section overview

Home

Key takeaways

Conclusion

1. Conservation International, Africa Regional Workshop on Indigenous Negotiations, Workshop Report (2018). Nanyuki, Kenya.
2. IBA Community Toolkit: Negotiation and Implementation of Impact and Benefit Agreements (2015). Ginger Gibson and Ciaran O’Faircheallaigh. Available here.

Safety and Security Risks in the IFC–Dinant Case (Honduras) In 2008, the International Finance Corporation (IFC) approved a USD 30 million loan for palm oil development in Honduras’s Bajo Aguán valley, a region already marked by long-standing land conflicts. Over the following years, Dinant Corporation, IFC’s client, was accused of land grabs, forced evictions, armed attacks, torture, killings, and disappearances of peasants and Indigenous community members. These abuses were allegedly carried out by private security forces or with the support of state security personnel, often with impunity. A Compliance Advisor Ombudsman (CAO) audit later found multiple failures by the IFC to meet its own Performance Standards, including serious lapses in assessing and managing human rights and security risks tied to the loan. By 2014, mounting public pressure forced the IFC and Dinant to acknowledge that the risks had been profoundly underestimated and that ineffective mitigation measures may have contributed to the violence. The audit highlighted that the IFC had not properly supervised Dinant’s obligations, such as investigating credible allegations of abuse by security personnel or ensuring that any use of force remained strictly defensive and proportional.

Section overview

Home

Keep internal disagreements off the negotiating table

Taking breaks to stay in control

Walking out as a negotiation tactic

How to walk out strategically

Choosing who should be at the table and role of power figures

Managing relationships during negotiations

Section overview

Home

Keep internal disagreements off the negotiating table

Taking breaks to stay in control

Walking out as a negotiation tactic

How to walk out strategically

Choosing who should be at the table and role of power figures

Managing relationships during negotiations

1. IBA Community Toolkit: Negotiation and Implementation of Impact and Benefit Agreements (2015). Ginger Gibson and Ciaran O’Faircheallaigh. Available here.
2. Conservation International-Asian Indigenous Peoples Pact (AIPP), Asia Regional Workshop on Indigenous Negotiations – Workshop Report. 2019, Chiang Rai, Thailand.

Direct action by the Innu – Voisey’s Bay, Labrador, Canada In the 1990s, the discovery of major nickel, copper, and cobalt deposits on the traditional lands of the Innu and Inuit Peoples of Labrador triggered negotiations that stretched from 1996 to 2001. During this period, the process often stalled, with the company failing to honor commitments such as keeping the Innu Nation and the Labrador Inuit Association (LIA) informed about project developments. When communication broke down during the pre-negotiation phase, the Innu Nation responded with decisive direct action: they issued an eviction notice and more than 100 Innu protestors occupied the company’s exploration camp, halting all project activity for 12 days. This action imposed financial costs and demonstrated the seriousness of the Innu’s demands. The clear threat that the community could stop or slow operations put significant pressure on the company to return to negotiations. At the same time, the event attracted substantial media attention, creating visibility for the Innu and Inuit and opening new opportunities to build alliances with supporting organizations.

1. Negotiations in the Indigenous World: Aboriginal Peoples and the Extractive Industry in Australia and Canada (2016). Ciaran O’Faircheallaigh.

Walking Away from Negotiations – Sagada, PhilippinesIn Sagada, Philippines, the company PhilCarbon proposed a 15 MW wind farm that required Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) under the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA). The community, governed by a strong Council of Elders and supported by local non-governmental organizations (NGOs), participated in meetings facilitated by the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples. While the company highlighted only the benefits, technical experts pointed out serious environmental risks, and the community formed a multidisciplinary negotiation team to lead discussions. Throughout the meetings, the Elders carefully signaled their positions, helping guide the process. Tensions rose when the company suggested that young people could be paid to guard toilets for tourists coming to view the windmills, a comment perceived as disrespectful and dismissive of the community’s dignity. This, combined with a pattern of one-sided messaging from the company, prompted the Elders to signal a collective walk-out. Negotiations ended immediately, and the project was ultimately abandoned. The experience demonstrated that proposals cannot compensate for disrespectful engagement or violations of cultural values.

1. A Comprehensive Guide for Social Impact Assessment (2006). UN Centre for Good Governance. Available here.

Section overview

Home

Keep internal disagreements off the negotiating table

Taking breaks to stay in control

Walking out as a negotiation tactic

How to walk out strategically

Choosing who should be at the table and role of power figures

Managing relationships during negotiations

Section overview

Home

Engaging the media strategically

Building effective media and social media strategies

Direct action: using community mobilization to support negotiations

Direct action: using community mobilization to support negotiations, continued

Conflict and security risk management

Using legal options

Strategic Litigation in the Central Kalahari Game Reserve (Botswana)In Botswana, the Khoi San people have long struggled against violent evictions from their ancestral lands in the Central Kalahari Game Reserve (CKGR). Although the High Court ruled in 2006 that the evictions were unconstitutional and affirmed the right of the San to return, the ruling limited the government’s obligation to provide essential services such as water, healthcare, education, or hunting licenses, effectively restricting their ability to live on their lands. Later, the Court of Appeal ordered the government to reissue game licenses and allow the Khoi San to return, yet the government refused to comply, revealing how litigation can be undermined when authorities disregard the rule of law. Negotiations between the San and the government continue, but their experience illustrates two key lessons: a legal victory does not always translate into a fair or enforceable outcome, and litigation is only one tool among many. When governments delay or resist compliance, building broad solidarity and alliances becomes essential. This is especially important for small communities seeking to amplify their influence and defend their rights in the face of prolonged injustice.

Section overview

Home

Introduction

Section overview

Home

Keep internal disagreements off the negotiating table

Taking breaks to stay in control

Walking out as a negotiation tactic

How to walk out strategically

Choosing who should be at the table and role of power figures

Managing relationships during negotiations

1. Environmental Impact Assessment Training Manual (2016). International Institute for Sustainable Development. Available here.
2. Assessing Environmental Impacts: A Global Review of Legislation (2018). United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Available here.