Cited by 129Mining and Resource ManagementIndigenous Peoples' Rights and LawExtractivism and Socioeconomic Issues

Operationalizing Free, Prior, and Informed Consent in the Extractive Industry Sector? Examining the Challenges of a Negotiated Model of Justice

Szablowski, David·2010·Canadian Journal of Development Studies / Revue canadienne d'études du développement

Abstract

Free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) is a key principle being promoted in an attempt to reshape a broad family of governance regimes designed to address the local consequences of extractive industry development in indigenous territory. This article explores the development of the principle of FPIC and the challenges that it presents to conventional forms of governance. FPIC is examined as a form of negotiated justice that aims to produce regulatory decisions through horizontal and decentralized forms of engagement. The article seeks to develop and clarify issues in building a critical research agenda on the operationalization of FPIC.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/02255189.2010.9669284

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The need for investors to establish workable relations with local actors has fostered the negotiation of community-investor agreements aimed at channelling benefits to the local economy.

    “The need for investors to establish workable relations with local actors has fostered the negotiation of communityinvestor agreements aimed at channelling benefits to the local economy.”
  • Many companies have come to see community-investor contractual arrangements as a strategy to promote support for the business, while some indigenous movements and NGOs have appropriated the language of partnerships to advance local claims to natural resources.

    “Many companies have come to see these contractual arrangements as a strategy to promote support for the business, while some indigenous movements and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) have appropriated the language of partnerships to advance local claims to natural resources.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 24 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Szablowski, D.
Affiliations
York University (CA)
Corresponding author
Szablowski, David
Venue
Canadian Journal of Development Studies / Revue canadienne d'études du développement
Published
2010-01
Volume
30
Issue
1-2
Pages
111-130
ISSN
  • 0225-5189 (ISSN-L)
  • 2158-9100
OpenAlex
W1621422478
Cited by
129
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 3
FWCI
3.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Canadian Journal of Development Studies/Revue canadienne d études du développement (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › Mining and Resource Management
  • Social Sciences › Law › Indigenous Peoples' Rights and Law
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Extractivism and Socioeconomic Issues
Keywords
free, prior and informed consent, extractive industries, indigenous territories, negotiated justice, governance, operationalization, horizontal governance, decentralized decision-making, regulatory decision-making, indigenous rights

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review