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

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 23 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

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.

Overview

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.

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 24 references

Research works printed but not linked: 21

  1. Bass , S. , Parikh , P. S. , Czebiniak , R. and Filbey , M. 2003 . Prior informed consent and mining Washington : Environmental Law Institute .
  2. Colchester , M. and Ferrari , M. F. 2007 . Making FPIC work: Challenges and prospects for Indigenous peoples Moreton-in-Marsh : Forest Peoples Programme .
  3. Colchester , M. and Mackay , F. 2004 . In search of middle ground: Indigenous peoples, collective representation and the right to free, prior and informed consent. Forest Peoples Programme. Paper presented to the loth Conference of the International Association for the Study of Common Property Oaxaca, August 2004
  4. De Echave , J. 2005 . Report: Canadian mining companies investments in Peru: The Tambogrande case and the need to implement reforms Lima : CooperAcción .
  5. De Echave , J. , Keenan , K. , Romero , M. K. and Tapia , A. 2005 . Los Procesos de Dialogoyla Administtración de Conflictos en Territorios de Comunidades: El Caso de la Mina de Tintaya en el Perú Lima : CooperAcción .
  6. Dezalay , Y. 1994 . “ The forum should fit the fuss: The economics and politics of negotiated justice ” . In Lawyers in a postmodern world Edited by: Cain , M. and Harrington , C. B. 155 – 82 . New York : New York University Press .
  7. Garcia Perez , A. 2007 . “ El síndrome del perro del hortelano ” . In El Comercio 27 October 2007 http://www.elcomercio.com.pe/edicionimpresa/html/2007–10-28/el_sindrome_del_perro_del_hort.html
  8. Hertz , S. , La Vina , A. and Sohn , J. 2007 . Development without conflict: The business case for community consent Washington DC : World Resources Institute .
  9. IUCN/ICMM . 2008 . Mining and indigenous peoples issues roundtable: continuing a dialogue between indigenous peoples and mining companies. Sydney, Australia, 30–31 January 2008 http://www.icmm.com/document/237
  10. Keenan , K. , De Echave , J. and Traynor , K. 2002 . Mining and communities: Poverty amidst wealth. Paper presented at International Conference on Natural Assets, 8–11 January 2003 Tagaytay City, , Philippines
  11. Lewis , J. , Freeman , L. and Borreill , S. 2008 . Free, prior and informed consent and sustainable management in the Congo Basin Berne : Intercooperation, Swiss Foundation for Development and International Cooperation Berne and Society for Threatened Peoples Switzerland .
  12. Li , T. M. 2001 . “ Boundary work: Community, market, and state reconsidered ” . In Communities and the environment: Ethnicity, gender, and the state in community-based conservation Edited by: Agrawal , A. and Gibson , C. C. 157 – 79 . New Brunswick, NJ : Rutgers University Press .
  13. Moore , J. 2008 . “ Peru: Piura votes, a dangerous precedent ” . In Upside Down World 16 September 2008 http://upsidedownworld.org/mainlcontent/view/1479/76/
  14. O'Reilly Kevin. 1998 . The BHP Independent Environmental Monitoring Agency as a management tool. Prepared for the Laborador Inuit Association. Submitted to Voisey's Bay Environmental Assessment Panel. http://www.carc.org/rndtable/vbpanels.html
  15. Rousseau , S. and Meloche , F. 2002 . Gold and land: Democratic development at stake. Report of the observation mission of the Tambogrande municipal consultation process in Peru Montreal : International Centre for Human Rights and Democratic Development . http://www.dd-rd.ca/site/publications/index.php?id=1345&subsection=catalopue
  16. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity . 2004 . Akwé: Kon voluntary guidelines for the conduct of cultural, environmental and social impact assessment regarding developments proposed to take place on, or which are likely to impact on, sacred sites and on lands and waters traditionally occupied or used by Indigenous and local communities Montreal : SCBD .
  17. United Nations Economic and Social Council . 2005 . Report of the International Workshop on Methodologies regarding Free Prior and Informed Consent, UN, New York, 17–19 January 2005, E/C.19/2005/3
  18. United Nations General Assembly . 13 September 2007 . 107th plenary meeting A/61/PV.107
  19. Vasquez , M. 2009 . La Criminalización de la Protesta Social. Paper presented at Rethinking Extractive Industry: Regulation, Dispossession and Emerging Claims conference, 5–7 March 2009 Toronto : York University .
  20. Weitzner , V. 2006 . Dealing full force: Lutsel K'e Dene First Nation's experience negotiating with mining companies Ottawa : North-South Institute and Lutsel K'e Dene First Nation .
  21. World Bank Group . 2004 . WBG/Civil Society Meeting transcript. WB-IMF 2004 Spring Meetings, Civil Society Sessions, Meeting on the Extractive Industries Review, 22 April 2004 http://www.ifc.org/ifcext/eir.nsf/Content/WBGCivilSocietyMeetingTranscript

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

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 › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › 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