On what's working

Public campaigning and galvanizing general opinion is one of the most effective tools.

Sophie describes Survival's core approach: mobilizing public support through clear, resonant messaging, and using that pressure to change government and company behavior. When Survival began campaigning for the Sentinelese, the Indian government was attempting to forcibly contact them. Sustained public pressure contributed to a fundamental shift: the government now operates on an "eyes on, hands off" principle. It is a concrete demonstration that public campaigning can change policy on the ground.

For the general public, the most effective narrative centers on choice: the idea that uncontacted peoples have deliberately chosen their way of life, and that this choice deserves the same respect as any other. Connecting that choice to the devastation that follows forced contact — disease, death, destruction of land — makes the stakes visceral and personal. For policymakers and companies, legal arguments matter, but so does reputational risk. Being complicit in the destruction of an uncontacted people is something no company or government can easily recover from, and making that consequence clear is one of Survival's most effective tools.

Finding the right lever matters more than finding the right argument.

In Latin America, organizations can submit cases to the Inter-American Commission, a formal legal lever that does not exist in Asia or the Pacific. In Indonesia and India, different approaches are needed. Survival worked with genocide scholars to write directly to the President of India about the Shompen situation, generating significant international attention and condemnation of the planned mega-project. In places like Indonesia, where the government is not receptive to international pressure, it's necessary to find other levers, such as putting pressure on the electric vehicle manufacturers that the government is courting.

On the intersection of climate and PIACI rights

Uncontacted peoples face climate change from all ends, as victims of its effects, of its drivers and of its so-called solutions.

Uncontacted peoples are directly affected by climate change, through changing rainfall patterns, drought, and forest fires, but they are also being harmed by some of the supposed solutions. The clearest example is the Hongana Manyawa, whose territory is being destroyed by nickel mining that is driven by Indonesia's push to supply the global electric vehicle market, an industry presented as a climate solution but one that is devastating the territories of uncontacted people in the process. Attempting to consume our way out of the climate crisis is not viable, Sophie notes, and when that approach destroys the territories of uncontacted peoples, it causes the very harm it claims to prevent.

On consolidating PIACI as a global category

The issue is global, but the tools, frameworks, and levels of understanding are not yet.

The underlying situation is the same for uncontacted peoples in Colombia, Indonesia, and India. What differs is the infrastructure available to address it. Latin America has legislation, dedicated government departments, and the Inter-American Commission. Indonesia has none of this. The gap between the global reality of the problem and the regional concentration of tools to address it is one of the most significant structural challenges facing the field.

Part of closing that gap is agreeing on how to talk about it. Survival uses "uncontacted" because it communicates most directly to a general audience, not because it is necessarily more accurate than other terms. Definitional debates should not become an obstacle to communication or to building the global coalition this issue requires.

On adaptive advocacy

When formal legal tools are not available, effective advocacy means finding the right lever for the context.

Even within unsympathetic governments, there are often sympathetic individuals, and finding and lobbying those people is an important strategy. Where legal frameworks exist, challenge governments on their own laws. Where they don't, use international instruments, public pressure, and company reputational risk. The underlying principle is the same everywhere: identify the pressure points and focus your efforts there.