Structural power imbalances, colonial legacies, and intra‑community dynamics shape Indigenous consent to resource projects worldwide
Original framing: “Beyond yes or no: Why Indigenous consent to resource projects is so complex” — The Conversation - Global
Indigenous epistemologies prioritize relational stewardship, intergenerational responsibility, and collective sovereignty, which refract the notion of consent beyond individual assent. Traditional decision‑making bodies—such as the Filipino 'pangkat' or the Canadian 'band council'—embed spiritual rites that validate agreements, making consent a lived covenant rather than a contractual tick‑box. Ignoring these frameworks reduces complex cultural protocols to procedural formalities.
Indigenous consent is a dynamic, relational process shaped by colonial histories, power asymmetries, and culturally specific governance that cannot be reduced to a binary vote.
By integrating Indigenous legal traditions, participatory scientific assessments, and forward‑looking scenario modelling, co‑governance structures can transform consent from a procedural hurdle into a genuine partnership. Marginalised voices, especially women and youth, must be institutionalised within decision‑making bodies, while international trade mechanisms provide external accountability. Artistic and spiritual expressions, together with trickster insights, remind policymakers that consent is as much about moral imagination as it is about legal compliance. Together, these systemic pathways can reconfigure resource development toward equitable, sustainable, and culturally respectful outcomes.