We use cookies to improve our website. See our privacy notice.
This website provides information and resources on FPIC as a tool of self-determination to assist communities in decision making. We have selected articles, tool kits, videos, voice messages, and community stories about FPIC and consultation.
This book seeks to help indigenous communities and their organisations to provide their people with basic information on REDD+. It is intended as a guide in understanding climate change, REDD+ and how they relate to the recognition and exercise of the collective rights of indigenous peoples.
This article argues that FPIC processes must remain enduring, enforceable, and meaningful to be effective in resolving disputes between companies and communities. FPIC should benefit both the companies that have the consent of communities and benefit communities with control over resource-based development. The author argues that companies should …
This article discusses the Community Referenda as a consultation strategy to achieve FPIC, in which each community member votes on a potential development project. The development and purpose of FPIC in International law is discussed in the context of mining projects in Latin America that have resulted in conflict. Community Referenda are seen as …
This article describes the limitations of state conducted Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) in the context of hydroelectric dams. The social and cultural impacts are not considered by Brazilian governments who frequently address consultation as a formality. The article advocates for greater consideration of EIA’s in decision-making processes.
The core lesson in the creation of UNDRIP was simple: collective action by Indigenous peoples could force major changes in national and international law. The process of improving conditions for Indigenous peoples has now moved to a different level. The socio-economic and cultural problems of Indigenous have been described globally, really for the…
The UNDRIP was defined at the time of its passage as an "aspirational document." Those governments that resisted the declaration — Canada, United States, Australia and New Zealand in 2007 and which signed on later in 2010 — worried that the creation of international law on Aboriginal rights would elevate Indigenous expectations.