Safeguards in Action: Good Practices from a CI-GEF Project in Honduras and Guatemala

Photo 1 Ian Kissoon at one of the project intervention sites in Honduras where coffee farmers benefited from solar drying facilities (Photo by: Heifer International)

A contributing factor behind the success of a project in Guatemala and Honduras was its proactive and adaptive approach to environmental and social safeguards, guided by the Conservation International–Global Environment Facility (CI-GEF) Agency’s Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF). With the CI-GEF Agency serving as the Implementing Agency and Heifer International executing activities on the ground, the project sought to enhance climate resilience and promote sustainable agricultural practices in cardamom, coffee, and cocoa production. Recognizing the socio-environmental complexity of the intervention areas—including the presence of Indigenous Peoples, entrenched gender inequalities, and biodiversity-sensitive ecosystems—safeguards were placed at the core of the project’s design and implementation. These safeguards were not merely protective measures; they served as catalysts for inclusive development, shaping how the project engaged with local communities, distributed benefits, and ultimately achieved its success.

Culturally Grounded Indigenous Peoples Engagement

The project’s commitment to Indigenous Peoples' rights was a defining element of its safeguard strategy. In Guatemala, where the Q’eqchi’ Maya makes up over 90% of the target population, and in Honduras, where smaller Pech and Tawahka communities were present, the project took deliberate and respectful steps to ensure inclusive engagement and benefit-sharing. A hallmark of the Guatemalan implementation was the project’s all-Indigenous field team, which enhanced trust and effectiveness.

A formal Indigenous Peoples Plan (IPP) guided the approach in both countries. Its implementation was strengthened by the early hiring of safeguard specialists, who helped revise the IPP and other instruments to reflect evolving local dynamics. In Guatemala, materials were translated into Q’eqchi’, and engagement tools were adapted for low-literacy contexts. The Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) process was not a checkbox exercise; it involved structured surveys, interviews, and community workshops in the villages of the Alta Verapaz region. This process respected traditional governance systems and ensured that consent was meaningful and aligned with cultural norms.

In Honduras, the project built legitimacy through coordinated engagement with traditional authorities and Indigenous federations, such as the Federation of Pech Indigenous Tribes of Honduras. Beneficiaries like the Kao Kamasa Pech group confirmed that their participation—through field schools, trainings, and exchange visits—was facilitated via tribal structures that ensured cultural alignment and inclusion.

Importantly, the project’s operational model emphasized working through established community structures such as Consejos Comunitarios de Desarrollo (COCODES) and producer associations, which helped institutionalize FPIC processes and ensure ongoing consultation. The Accountability and Grievance Mechanism (AGM) was introduced during these sessions, offering culturally appropriate pathways for feedback and redress.

Advancing Gender Equality Through Strategic and Adaptive Measures

Gender equity was another cornerstone of the safeguard strategy. From the outset, a Gender Mainstreaming Plan (GMP) was integrated into the project’s design, acknowledging the systemic barriers women face in both countries—limited land ownership, restricted access to education and financial resources, and exclusion from decision-making spaces.

Photo 2: One of the women who received technical training from the project demonstrates to other farmers how to check coffee berries for sugar content in order to inform ripeness for harvesting (Photo by: Ian Kissoon)

Heifer International mobilized dedicated Social Capital Officers and gender specialists, including Indigenous staff in Guatemala, to translate these strategic commitments into grassroots action. Gender-sensitive grievance channels and participatory processes were launched early and reinforced throughout implementation.

To address gender disparities in participation, the project set ambitious targets and adapted when gaps emerged. For instance, when initial engagement revealed low female participation, the project intensified outreach to women’s groups, adjusted training schedules, and ensured that sessions were held in accessible locations using visual and linguistically appropriate materials. Notable outcomes included the all-women San Luis Tonitzul group in Guatemala and the participation of women in chocolate-making and nursery trainings in San Isidro Tonzul.

By the project’s close, 1,456 women reported increased income due to their involvement. Women received training, planting materials, tools, and infrastructure support—such as nurseries and rainwater harvesting systems. In communities affected by male out-migration, these interventions empowered women to assume stronger roles in land management and income generation.

While progress was evident, cultural norms—especially around the cardamom value chain—continued to restrict women’s involvement, and comprehensive data on empowerment outcomes remained limited. Nonetheless, the adaptive strategy, rooted in continuous feedback and learning, allowed the project to enhance women’s inclusion over time.

Inclusive Stakeholder Engagement
Stakeholder engagement was a foundational pillar of the project’s safeguard strategy. A dedicated Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) ensured that diverse local voices informed project design and implementation from the outset. Through structured consultations, participatory planning workshops, and regular community meetings, the SEP helped build trust and transparency across both countries. This inclusive process strengthened social legitimacy and enabled the project to respond quickly and adaptively to community feedback and emerging risks. Importantly, engagement strategies were tailored to local contexts—employing multilingual materials, visual tools, and culturally appropriate facilitation methods to ensure meaningful participation from all stakeholders, including women and Indigenous groups.

Photo 3 Farmers who received technical training on pruning cacao plants show off their increased yields (Photo by: Ian Kissoon)

Culturally Responsive Grievance Redress
To ensure accountability and foster trust, the project introduced a culturally responsive Accountability and Grievance Mechanism (AGM). Developed with community input and introduced early in the project cycle, the AGM provided accessible, confidential channels for individuals or groups to raise concerns and seek redress. The mechanism was designed to reflect local norms and preferences—leveraging traditional structures such as COCODES in Guatemala and tribal councils in Honduras to ensure legitimacy and acceptance. By addressing grievances in a timely and respectful manner, the AGM helped prevent conflict, reinforced the project’s commitment to fairness, and strengthened its social license to operate.

Adaptive Safeguards: A Driver of Project Success

The project’s safeguards were not static. The Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP), Indigenous Peoples Plan (IPP), Gender Mainstreaming Plan (GMP), and Accountability and Grievance Mechanism (AGM) were living instruments, refined through feedback, community consultations, and evolving realities on the ground.

A critical success factor was the project’s use of local staff and community-based structures to deliver safeguards in a culturally competent and trusted manner. This approach strengthened community ownership and embedded accountability mechanisms that extended beyond the project lifecycle.

By proactively implementing and continuously adapting safeguard measures, the project created enabling conditions for equitable participation, enhanced trust, and successful outcomes. These safeguards were not just protective tools; they were catalysts for inclusive development and resilience-building in some of the region’s most vulnerable communities.

For more information, contact Ian Kissoon: ikissoon@conservation.org