land policy and FPIC

Vestas was to start delivering 132 V90-3.0 megawatt (MW) turbines in the second quarter of 2012. The turbines were to be installed in the Isthmus of Tehuantepec region of Oaxaca, a southern state in Mexico. However, on 17 October 2012, Vestas’s deliveries were put on hold when social organisations and 40 indigenous Zapotec and Huave people held rallies in front of the Danish Embassy in Mexico City. With banners and placards, the protestors demanded Vestas’s exit from the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. The indigenous people suggested that although European companies had traditionally been present in Mexico and were among the most experienced wind developers in the world, “their capitalist model” failed to take into account, “the spiritual and social ties between the indigenous rural communities and the land”. According to local residents, the basic problem was a clash of cultures.
This case can be analysed taking into consideration different perspectives, such as: 1) social movements, 2) development, 3) business models, 4) international business, 5) institutions and governance, and 6) corporate social responsibility. An additional angel that could be considered is the communication process and stakeholder involvement between MNCs, governmental officials and local communities, when implementing large-scale investment projects.
The case presents a conflict which involves four actors: 1) Indigenous communities in the Isthmus of Tehuantepec region in Oaxaca, Mexico: Zapotecas, Huaves or Ikoot, 2) The Mexican Government 3) VESTAS, and 4) Mareña Renovables.

La implementación de la reforma energética en México, así como la firma de diversos convenios y tratados internacionales, ha tenido como consecuencia que el gobierno tome medidas con el objeto de alcanzar las metas de reducción de carbono, uso de energías limpias, así como la mitigación de daños ambientales que hayan sido causados. Tales medidas han derivado en megaproyectos, cuyo diseño, implementación y ejecución causan debates, discusiones y diversas formas de resistencia. En su presentación a la sociedad quedan ideas y mentalidades variadas que se discuten en el espacio público. Debido a ello, en este artículo se presenta un análisis de la forma en la que este discurso sobre las energías renovables es presentado los medios de comunicación en el estado de Yucatán, México.

Based on data from the Land Matrix database, this paper briefly analyses large-scale land acquisitions in the context of current complex and dynamic land and climate governance discourse, within the water-food-energy nexus, and the increasing role for science, technology and innovation in agriculture.

Key words: LSLA · land governance · climate governance · transformative change · land matrix global observatory · climate change · Paris Agreement · SDGs · INDCs · smallholders · food sovereignty · social agrarian movements · soft law · FPIC · VGGT · elites · e-agriculture · crowdsourcing data · CSA · ICTs · innovation · (r)urbanization · next generation farmers

Using a “Fourth World perspective,” the chapter also analyses how the FPIC
norm as adopted and implemented in the Philippines has been framed within the legal regime of state sovereignty over natural resources. Finally, it argues that there is a legal basis to allow for the substantial participation of indigenous peoples in international law-making and that allowing for such participation would provide valuable parallel mechanisms to correct the distinct disadvantage that characterizes the status of indigenous peoples not only in the domestic sphere, but in the international
legal system as well. The chapter begins in Sect. 2 by laying down its theoretical framework—a Fourth World perspective of international law. Section 3 explores the privileged status of states in international law, as illustrated by the concepts of permanent sovereignty over international law, the Regalian Doctrine, and FPIC itself as an international legal norm. Section 4 explores how FPIC, as conceptualized and operationalized in the Philippines, seems to merely perpetuate the unequal power relations between states and indigenous peoples in international law and ends with a Fourth World critique of FPIC. Section 5 explores indigenous sovereignty
as a basis for participation in international law-making and the potential for
such participation as an alternative means of rights-representation for indigenous
peoples.

Abstract: Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) - Consultation has become one of the most powerful tools indigenous people and minorities have to generate a dialogue and begin a negotiation in the country to face
Government decisions, private companies seeking to carry out any work or when legislative measures are about to be implemented on their territories with a possibility of damaging them. In Mexico, this right is based over
a group of not articulated among themselves normative foundations. This end up causing confusion and uncertainty on its application. This article presents elements to review the FPIC - Consultation foundations in Mexico for discussion and theoretical deepening in the light of human rights.

La consulta previa se ha convertido en una de las herramientas más po- derosas para generar un diálogo y establecer una negociación por parte de los gru- pos indígenas y tribales en el país para con el gobierno y los organismos que buscan la implementar alguna obra o prevean medidas legislativas (proyectos de ley o de decretos) o administrativas susceptibles de afectarles directamente. Este derecho encuentra en México un grupo de fundamentos normativos que no se encuentran articulados entre sí y que terminan causando confusión y desconcierto en su apli- cación, haciendo que la consulta previa pierda su oportunidad y no alcance su ob- jetivo final. En este artículo se presentan elementos para su discusión y profundiza- ción teórica a la luz de los derechos humanos y repensar el derecho a la consulta previa como un derecho que se encuentra en proceso de ampliación de la esfera de protección, mediante la inclusión de nuevos actores y posibilidades en México.

The adoption of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) has catalyzed Indigenous rights conversations in Canada around Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC). The Yukon territory, where a majority of First Nations have self- government and settled land claims, provides a unique case for assessing how FPIC is being defined and exercised in light of possible mine developments. Findings from semi-structured interviews and document review revealed limited explicit engagement with FPIC by key Yukon governance institutions. This thesis serves to identify and make sense of this situation in an exploratory way, offering three factors: time, treaty implementation priorities, and awaited federal action, to explain the apparent lack of institutional engagement with FPIC. Despite instances of consent-like rights held by First Nations in the Yukon, there remains a lack of clear articulation from a majority of these First Nations about expectations for the meaningful expression of consent. Through a case study with the Little Salmon Carmacks First Nation (LSCFN), this research revealed that although LSCFN’s expectations of FPIC are not fully formed as of yet, they include: early and ongoing engagement, full and accessible information, internal engagement and governance processes, the mitigation of resource barriers, enforceable commitments, contextually relevant and mutually agreed upon processes, appropriate representation, agreed upon definitions, and the mitigation of power imbalances. Given the reticence of the State to acknowledge and implement FPIC this thesis also evaluates the treatment of FPIC by the Initiative for Responsible Mining Assurance (IRMA) standard, and largely confirms the comprehensiveness of that novel governance process relative to LSCFN’s emerging expectations around FPIC.

Based on data from the Land Matrix database, this paper briefly analyses large-scale land acquisitions in the context of current complex and dynamic land and climate governance discourse, within the water-food-energy nexus, and the increasing role for science, technology and innovation in agriculture. Key words: LSLA · land governance · climate governance · transformative change · land matrix global observatory · climate change · Paris Agreement · SDGs · INDCs · smallholders · food sovereignty · social agrarian movements · soft law · FPIC · VGGT · elites · e-agriculture · crowdsourcing data · CSA · ICTs · innovation · (r)urbanization · next generation farmers

Vestas was to start delivering 132 V90-3.0 megawatt (MW) turbines in the second quarter of 2012. The turbines were to be installed in the Isthmus of Tehuantepec region of Oaxaca, a southern state in Mexico. However, on 17 October 2012, Vestas’s deliveries were put on hold when social organisations and 40 indigenous Zapotec and Huave people held rallies in front of the Danish Embassy in Mexico City. With banners and placards, the protestors demanded Vestas’s exit from the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. The indigenous people suggested that although European companies had traditionally been present in Mexico and were among the most experienced wind developers in the world, “their capitalist model” failed to take into account, “the spiritual and social ties between the indigenous rural communities and the land”. According to local residents, the basic problem was a clash of cultures. This case can be analysed taking into consideration different perspectives, such as: 1) social movements, 2) development, 3) business models, 4) international business, 5) institutions and governance, and 6) corporate social responsibility. An additional angel that could be considered is the communication process and stakeholder involvement between MNCs, governmental officials and local communities, when implementing large-scale investment projects. The case presents a conflict which involves four actors: 1) Indigenous communities in the Isthmus of Tehuantepec region in Oaxaca, Mexico: Zapotecas, Huaves or Ikoot, 2) The Mexican Government 3) VESTAS, and 4) Mareña Renovables.

This chapter explores how obshchiny, the most numerous grassroots Indigenous peoples’ organizations in contemporary Russia, deal with the challenge of exercising their right to free, prior and informed consent (FPIC). The study nuances our understanding of the agency of obshchiny, drawing much-needed attention to their practices of making a difference in the governance of extractive activities at the local level through FPIC. The analysis explores normative contestation practices of a family-based obshchina in the Sakha Republic (Yakutia), focusing on their members’ efforts to enhance their rights to FPIC in relations with a gold mining company. Despite the obshchina’s inferior position in asymmetrical power relations with the mining company, the study shows that assistance from the Ombudsman for Indigenous Peoples' Rights can increase the obshchina’s chances of maximizing the benefits of negotiations with the company.