Repoliticising indigenous participation
FPIC protocols in Canada and Brazil
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12592849 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Françoise Montambeault (0000-0002-5548-9291, Political Science, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Canada, corresponding author), Martin Papillon (0000-0003-4318-8384, Political Science, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Canada) |
| Year | 2022 |
| Volume | 27 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 335-358 |
| Publication date | 2022-09-09 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The International Journal of Human Rights (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1364-2987 • E-ISSN: 1744-053X |
| Publisher | Routledge (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/13642987.2022.2121707 |
| OpenAlex | W4296231556 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 3 |
Global activism led to the emergence of new international standards concerning state obligations to consult Indigenous peoples and, under certain circumstances, obtain their free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) when extractive projects impact their rights and traditional territories. However, a growing literature shows that the implementation of Indigenous peoples’ participatory rights remains uneven and inconsistent at best. This paper focuses on Indigenous peoples’ agency in operationalising their rights. We do so by focusing on an increasingly common yet overlooked Indigenous strategy: the development of community-based consultation and consent protocols. What role do unilateral Indigenous protocols play in shaping how participatory norms are implemented? How can protocols contribute to shaping Indigenous peoples’ relations with state and industry actors? We present the result of a systematic comparative analysis of thirty-five consultation and consent protocols adopted by Indigenous nations and communities in Canada and Brazil between 2005 and 2020. While they vary in their structure and content, protocols in both countries converge in their use of both programmatic and performative languages to recast participatory processes as spaces to assert Indigenous peoples’ status and legitimacy as self-determining polities. In doing so, protocols re-politicise and re-appropriate participatory processes and put forward an alternative interpretation of their participatory rights that challenges how state authorities and industry actors tend to operationalise consultation and FPIC standards
Agency (philosophy · Citizen journalism · Human rights · Indigenous · Indigenous rights · Legitimacy · Participatory action research · Performative utterance · Political science · Politics · Social science · Sociology · State (computer science · Anthropology · Law · Mining and Resource Management · Public Administration · Water Governance and Infrastructure
Seeking Consent? The Legal Challenges in Consulting Indigenous Peoples for Hydroelectric Dam Projects
Minerales críticos y regionalismo estratégico en América del Norte
Enabling Indigenous-centred decision-making for a just energy transition? Lessons from community consultation and consent in the circumpolar Arctic
| Citations per year | 3 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2025 - 2026 (2) |
| Highly cited | No |