Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Human Rights in the Extractive Industries pp 311–337Cite as

Norm Contestation and (Non-)Compliance: The Right to Prior Consultation and FPIC in the Extractive Industries

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Interdisciplinary Studies in Human Rights ((CHREN,volume 3))

Abstract

This chapter scrutinizes norm contestation over the right to prior consultation and free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) and argues that the lack of a shared understanding of this norm substantially contributes to the widespread non-compliance with this right. The analysis focuses on the contested social practices with regard to the regulation and implementation of the consultation and consent right in the extractive industries. The paper’s theoretical framework draws on and contributes to debates on norm contestation and norm compliance led by scholars of international relations and on the practice of human rights led by legal anthropologists. As Bolivia, Colombia and Peru are the Latin American countries that have implemented prior consultation processes with indigenous and African-American communities in their extractive industries most systematically, the chapter is mainly based on empirical data from these countries. This study finds that divergent claims of authority, territorial control and decision-making coexist within the analysed domestic contexts and that these divergences lie at the root of the fierce contestations over indigenous participatory rights. In addition, such divergent claims or competing resource sovereignties are embedded within power asymmetries that clearly work in favour of strategic economic interests to extract natural resources and disadvantage strong indigenous and participatory rights. I argue that the contestations concerning the right to prior consultation and FPIC are so profound that under current conditions the emergence of a shared understanding of this norm is very improbable.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Risse and Ropp (2013), p. 10.

  2. 2.

    See UN Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights, Statement of Ms. Victoria Tauli-Corpuz, United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples at the Tenth session of the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Tenth Anniversary of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. 12 July 2017, http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=21889&LangID=E (last accessed 1 October 2018).

  3. 3.

    Risse and Ropp (2013).

  4. 4.

    Risse and Ropp (2013), p. 36.

  5. 5.

    Bebbington and Bury (2013a) and Burchardt and Dietz (2014).

  6. 6.

    Global Witness, Defenders of the Earth. Global killings of land and environmental defenders in 2016. 2017, https://www.globalwitness.org/en/campaigns/environmental-activists/defenders-earth/ (last accessed 1 October 2018).

  7. 7.

    Doyle (2014).

  8. 8.

    See the chapter by de Casas in this volume.

  9. 9.

    Rodríguez et al. (2010).

  10. 10.

    Szablowski (2010), p. 127.

  11. 11.

    Szablowski (2010).

  12. 12.

    Szablowski (2010).

  13. 13.

    See, for instance, Flemmer (2015); Flemmer and Schilling-Vacaflor (2016); Bebbington (2012); Pellegrini and Arismendi (2012); Rodríguez GA, De La Consulta Previa Al Consentimiento Libre, Previo E Informado a Pueblos Indígenas En Colombia (From the Prior Consultation to the Free, Prior and Informed Consent of Indigenous Peoples). 15 April 2015, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2592988 (last accessed 1 October 2018); Weitzner (2017).

  14. 14.

    See Goodale and Merry (2007), Merry (2006) and Wilson (1999).

  15. 15.

    Wiener (2009), Wiener (2014) and Dietz and Engels (2017).

  16. 16.

    Von Benda-Beckmann et al. (2009) and Clarke and Goodale (2010).

  17. 17.

    Merry (1988) and Von Benda-Beckmann (2001, 2002).

  18. 18.

    De Sousa Santos (1987), pp. 297–298.

  19. 19.

    Sieder (2011).

  20. 20.

    De Sousa Santos (1987, 2002, 2003)) and De Sousa Santos and Rodríguez-Garavito (2005).

  21. 21.

    Merry (1992), p. 369.

  22. 22.

    Wilson (1999).

  23. 23.

    Scott (2008).

  24. 24.

    Wiener (2014).

  25. 25.

    Wiener (2009).

  26. 26.

    Taylor (1993), p. 57.

  27. 27.

    Goodale (2007).

  28. 28.

    Goodale and Merry (2007), p. 24.

  29. 29.

    Wilson (1999).

  30. 30.

    Wiener (2009).

  31. 31.

    Zürn (2002).

  32. 32.

    Risse and Ropp (2013).

  33. 33.

    Finnemore and Sikkink (1998), p. 914.

  34. 34.

    Jetschke (2011).

  35. 35.

    Liese (2009).

  36. 36.

    Wiener (2009), p. 201.

  37. 37.

    Wiener (2009).

  38. 38.

    Article 6, ILO C169.

  39. 39.

    Article 15, ILO C169.

  40. 40.

    Barelli (2012), p. 11.

  41. 41.

    Article 3, UNDRIP.

  42. 42.

    Article 10, UNDRIP.

  43. 43.

    Article 18, UNDRIP.

  44. 44.

    Article 19, UNDRIP.

  45. 45.

    Article 32, UNDRIP.

  46. 46.

    US Department of State, Announcement of U.S. Support for the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. 12 January 2012, https://2009-2017.state.gov/s/srgia/154553.htm (last accessed 1 October 2018).

  47. 47.

    UN Human Rights Council, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples, James Anaya Anaya. Extractive industries and indigenous peoples, UN Doc. A/HRC/24/41, 1 July 2013.

  48. 48.

    UN Human Rights Council, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples, James Anaya Anaya. Extractive industries and indigenous peoples, UN Doc. A/HRC/24/41, 1 July 2013.

  49. 49.

    CEPAL, CEPALSTAT Database. Export of primary export as a share of total exports. http://interwp.cepal.org/sisgen/ConsultaIntegrada.asp?IdAplicacion=6&idTema=119&idIndicador=1910&idioma=I (last accessed 21 June 2016).

  50. 50.

    UNDP, Regional Human Development Report for Latin America and the Caribbean Multidimensional progress: well-being beyond income. 2016, http://www.latinamerica.undp.org/content/rblac/en/home/library/human_development/informe-regional-sobre-desarrollo-humano-para-america-latina-y-e.html (last accessed 1 October 2018).

  51. 51.

    Burchardt and Dietz (2013), p. 189.

  52. 52.

    Svampa (2015).

  53. 53.

    Bebbington and Bury (2013b), p. 11.

  54. 54.

    McNeish (2017).

  55. 55.

    APG (2008).

  56. 56.

    Nolte and Schilling-Vacaflor (2012).

  57. 57.

    Pérez (2012).

  58. 58.

    Domínguez (2015), p. 56.

  59. 59.

    De Almenara and Linares (2017), p. 87.

  60. 60.

    For an overview see Rodríguez (2015), pp. 102–103.

  61. 61.

    According to international human rights standards, prior consultation and FPIC processes have to be carried out whenever legislative or administrate measures may affect indigenous peoples directly. Hence, indigenous peoples have to be consulted on laws and decrees affecting their rights, with the aim of reaching an agreement and/or their consent. In particular, the lack of prior consultation and consent processes concerning laws and decrees that regulate the right of consultation and consent has been criticized vehemently by indigenous organizations in many Latin American countries.

  62. 62.

    Domínguez (2015), p. 46.

  63. 63.

    See, for instance, Weitzner (2017).

  64. 64.

    Herrera and García (2012).

  65. 65.

    Howland et al. (2013), p. 26.

  66. 66.

    Howland et al. (2013), p. 26.

  67. 67.

    Schilling-Vacaflor et al. (2018).

  68. 68.

    Schilling-Vacaflor and Flemmer (2015).

  69. 69.

    Flemmer and Schilling-Vacaflor (2016).

  70. 70.

    De Almenara and Linares (2017), p. 87.

  71. 71.

    The Bolivian government has released four supreme decrees (SD) that are directly related to extraction projects and indigenous rights, all of which have been vehemently opposed by indigenous organizations. SD 2195, from November 2014, established upper limits between 0.3 and 1.5% of the investment sums of hydrocarbon projects for compensation payments to the inhabitants of collective lands according to different project types. SD 2298 states that prior consultation processes should not surpass a maximum duration of 45 days; SD 2366 authorizes hydrocarbon activities in protected areas; and SD 2368 declares that gas ducts are of national interest. The three last decrees were adopted in May 2015. Schilling-Vacaflor (2017a).

  72. 72.

    VII Comisión Nacional de la elaboración de la ley de consulta. Anteproyecto de Ley de Consulta Previa Libre e Informada [Proposal of the Law on Free, Prior and Informed Consultation]. La Paz, 2013.

  73. 73.

    Interview with staff from the corporation Gas Trans Boliviano GTB, Santa Cruz, 18.11.2014.

  74. 74.

    De Almenara and Linares, Buenas prácticas de las defensorías del pueblo de Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador y Perú en procesos de consulta previa. 2017, https://www.business-humanrights.org/sites/default/files/documents/GIZ_BuenasPraGestion_16082017BAJA.pdf (last accessed 1 October 2018).

  75. 75.

    Schilling-Vacaflor and Flemmer (2015).

  76. 76.

    Schilling-Vacaflor (2017b).

  77. 77.

    Schilling-Vacaflor (2017b).

  78. 78.

    Howland, Uprimny and Barsanti, Voces y Palabras Mayores de los pueblos étnicos de Colombia sobre el derecho a la consulta y al consentimiento previo, libre e informado. Oficina en Colombia del Alto Comisionado de Naciones Unidas para los Derechos Humanos. April 2013, http://www.acnur.org/fileadmin/scripts/doc.php?file=fileadmin/Documentos/Publicaciones/2013/9171 (last accessed 1 October 2018).

  79. 79.

    The Rrom (or gitano) people, in English also referred to as Romani, have migrated to Colombia from Northern India over 1000 years ago. In the decree 2957 from 6 August 2010, the Colombian state recognizes the own ethnic identity of the Rrom people.

  80. 80.

    Domínguez (2015).

  81. 81.

    Fontana and Grugel (2016).

  82. 82.

    Flemmer and Schilling-Vacaflor (2016).

  83. 83.

    Riaño DMM, Revisión crítica del derecho a la consulta previa de proyectos y sus procedimientos. Semillas, 55/56, http://www.semillas.org.co/es/revisi (last accessed 1 October 2018), pp. 54–26; Guzmán-Gallegos (2017); Schilling-Vacaflor and Eichler (2017).

  84. 84.

    UN Human Rights Council, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples, James Anaya. Extractive industries and indigenous peoples, UN Doc. A/HRC/24/41, 1 July 2013.

  85. 85.

    For instance from the CCC, see Col. Sentencia T-129 de 2011.

  86. 86.

    Referred to as “corporate science” by Kirsch (2014).

  87. 87.

    See Leifsen et al. (2017).

  88. 88.

    Flemmer and Schilling-Vacaflor (2016).

  89. 89.

    Howland T, Uprimny M and Barsanti P, Voces y Palabras Mayores de los pueblos étnicos de Colombia sobre el derecho a la consulta y al consentimiento previo, libre e informado. Oficina en Colombia del Alto Comisionado de Naciones Unidas para los Derechos Humanos. April 2013, http://www.acnur.org/fileadmin/scripts/doc.php?file=fileadmin/Documentos/Publicaciones/2013/9171 (last accessed 1 October), p. 22.

  90. 90.

    Colombian presidential directive 001 (2010).

  91. 91.

    CCC, Ruling T-769.

  92. 92.

    See paper “La jurisprudencia de la CC de Colombia y el TC del Peru en casos con referencia al derecho a a la Consulta Previo de los PP II” presented by René Kuppe at the “Extracting Justice?” project meeting, Santa Cruz-Bolivia, 11.11.2015.

  93. 93.

    Ruling of Peru’s Constitutional Tribunal, 00025-2009-PI/TC.

  94. 94.

    CCC, Ruling Col SU-039 from 1997.

  95. 95.

    Doyle (2014), pp. 146–148; The CCC argued: “On the one side there is the prior consultation entailing the right to veto […] on the other side there is the prior consultation consisting primarily in the provision of information. According to the court’s perspective, the criteria that permits the reconciliation of these extremes depends on the grade to which the communities would be affected” (Col. Sentencia T-129 e 2011).

  96. 96.

    Interestingly, with a critical stance towards such discriminatory interpretations, the CCC argued the following: “In the case of a conflict between the general interest and another interest that is constitutionally protected, […] this is a conflict between two collective interests and not between one particular interest and the general interest. […] The interest of the indigenous community possesses a major legitimacy when it is based on fundamental rights that are comprehensively protected by the Constitution.” (COL T-428 de 1992).

References

  • APG (2008) Plan de Vida Guaraní [Guaraní life plan]. APG, Camiri

    Google Scholar 

  • Barelli M (2012) Free, prior and informed consent in the aftermath of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples: developments and challenges ahead. Int J Hum Rights 16(1):1–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bebbington DH (2012) Consultation, compensation and conflict: natural gas extraction in Weenhayek territory, Bolivia. J Lat Am Geogr 11(2):49–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bebbington A, Bury J (2013a) Subterranean struggles: new dynamics of mining, oil, and gas in Latin America. University of Texas Press, Austin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bebbington A, Bury J (2013b) Political ecologies of the subsoil. Subterranean struggles. In: Bebbington A, Bury J (eds) New dynamics of mining, oil, and gas in Latin America. University of Texas Press, Austin, pp 1–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Burchardt HJ, Dietz K (2013) Extraktivismus in Lateinamerika – der Versuch einer Fundierung. In: Burchardt HJ, Dietz K, Öhlschläger R (eds) Umwelt und Entwicklung im 21. Jahrhundert. Nomos, Baden-Baden, pp 181–200

    Google Scholar 

  • Burchardt HJ, Dietz K (2014) (Neo-) extractivism – a new challenge for development theory from Latin America. Third World Q 35(3):468–486

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke KM, Goodale M (2010) Mirrors of justice law and power in the post-cold war era. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • De Sousa Santos B (1987) Law: a map of misreading. Toward a postmodern conception of law. J Law Soc 14(3):279–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Sousa Santos B (2002) Toward a new legal common sense: law, globalization, and emancipation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • De Sousa Santos B (2003) Poderá o direito ser emancipatório? Revista crítica de ciências sociais (65):3–76

    Google Scholar 

  • De Sousa Santos B, Rodríguez-Garavito CA (eds) (2005) Law and globalization from below: towards a cosmopolitan legality. Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Dietz K, Engels B (2017) Contested extractivism, society and the state: an introduction. In: Dietz K, Engels B (eds) Contested extractivism, society and the state. Palgrave Macmillan, London, pp 1–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Domínguez DA (2015) El estado del arte ¿Es posible reglamentar la Consulta Previa? In: Rodríguez GA, Albán DA, Moncayo HL (eds) Las rutas de la consulta. Una discusión sobre la reglamentación de la consulta previa, libre e informada, pp 15–92

    Google Scholar 

  • Doyle C (2014) Indigenous peoples, title to territory, rights and resources: the transformative role of free prior and informed consent. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Finnemore M, Sikkink K (1998) International norm dynamics and political change. Int Organ 52(4):887–917

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flemmer R (2015) Lecciones de los primeros procesos de la consulta previa en el sector de hidrocarburos en Perú. Iberoamericana 15(58):166–171

    Google Scholar 

  • Flemmer R, Schilling-Vacaflor A (2016) Unfulfilled promises of the consultation approach: the limits to effective indigenous participation in Bolivia’s and Peru’s extractive industries. Third World Q 37(1):172–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fontana LB, Grugel J (2016) The politics of indigenous participation through “free prior informed consent”: reflections from the Bolivian case. World Dev 77:249–261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodale M (2007) Locating right, envisioning law between the global and the local. In: Goodale M, Merry SE (eds) The practice of human rights: tracking law between the global and the local. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 1–38

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Goodale M, Merry SE (eds) (2007) The practice of human rights: tracking law between the global and the local. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Guzmán-Gallegos MA (2017) Between oil contamination and consultation: constrained spaces of influence in Northern Peruvian Amazonia. Third World Q 38(5):1110–1127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herrera F, García AF (eds) (2012) Estrategias y mecanismos de protección de pueblos indígenas frente a proyectos mineros y energéticos: La experiencia del Resguardo Indígena Cañamomo Lomaprieto. Resguardo Indígena Cañamomo Lomaprieto, Riosucio

    Google Scholar 

  • Jetschke A (2011) Human rights and state security: Indonesia and the Philippines. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kirsch S (2014) Mining capitalism: the relationship between corporations and their critics. University of California Press, Oakland

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Leifsen E, Gustafsson M, Guzmán-Gallegos M, Schilling-Vacaflor A (2017) New mechanisms of participation in extractive governance: between technologies of governance and resistance work. Third World Q 38(5):1043–1057

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liese A (2009) Exceptional necessity – how liberal democracies contest the prohibition of torture and ill-treatment when countering terrorism. J Int Law Int Relat 5:17

    Google Scholar 

  • McNeish JA (2017) A vote to derail extraction: popular consultation and resource sovereignty in Tolima, Colombia. Third World Q 38(5):1128–1145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merry SE (1988) Legal pluralism. Law Soc Rev 22(5):869–896

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merry SE (1992) Anthropology, law, and transnational processes. Annu Rev Anthropol 21:357–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merry SE (2006) Human rights and gender violence: translating international law into local justice. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Nolte D, Schilling-Vacaflor A (eds) (2012) New constitutionalism in Latin America: promises and practices. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Pellegrini L, Arismendi MOR (2012) Consultation, compensation and extraction in Bolivia after the “Left Turn”: the case of oil exploration in the north of La Paz department. J Lat Am Geogr 11(2):103–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pérez JFJ (2012) Colombia’s 1991 constitution: a rights revolution. In: Nolte D, Schilling-Vacaflor A (eds) New constitutionalism in Latin America: promises and practices. Routledge, London, pp 313–323

    Google Scholar 

  • Risse T, Ropp SC (2013) Introduction and overview. In: Risse T, Ropp SC, Sikkink K (eds) The persistent power of human rights: from commitment to compliance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 3–25

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rodríguez GA (2015) Hacia la progresividad del derecho a la consulta previa en Colombia. In: Rodríguez GA, Dominguez DA (eds) Las rutas de la consulta. Una discusión sobre la reglamentación de la Consulta Previa, libre e informada. ILSA and RRI, Bogotá, pp 95–124

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodríguez CG, Morris M, Orduz Salina N, Buriticá P (2010) La consulta previa a pueblos indígenas. Los estándares del derecho internacional. Universidad de los Andes, Bogota

    Google Scholar 

  • Schilling-Vacaflor A (2017a) Who controls the territory and the resources? Free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) as a contested human rights practice in Bolivia. Third World Q 38(5):1058–1074

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schilling-Vacaflor A (2017b) “If the company belongs to you, how can you be against it?” Limiting participation and taming dissent in neo-extractivist Bolivia. J Peasant Stud 44(3):658–676

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schilling-Vacaflor A, Eichler J (2017) The shady side of consultation: tactics of “Divide and Rule” in Bolivia’s resource extraction. Dev Change 48(6):1439–1463

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schilling-Vacaflor A, Flemmer R (2015) Conflict transformation through prior consultation? Lessons from Peru. J Lat Am Stud 47(4):811–839

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schilling-Vacaflor A, Flemmer R, Hujber A (2018) Contesting the hydrocarbon frontiers: state depoliticizing practices and local responses in Peru. World Dev 108:74–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott JC (2008) Weapons of the weak: everyday forms of peasant resistance. Yale University Press, New Haven

    Google Scholar 

  • Sieder R (2011) “Emancipation” or “regulation”? Law, globalization and indigenous peoples’ rights in post-war Guatemala. Econ Soc 40(2):239–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Svampa M (2015) Commodities consensus: neoextractivism and enclosure of the commons in Latin America. South Atlantic Q 114(1):65–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szablowski D (2010) Operationalizing free, prior, and informed consent in the extractive industry sector? Examining the challenges of a negotiated model of justice. Canadian Journal of Development Studies/Revue canadienne d’études du développement 30(1–2):111–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor C (1993) To follow a rule. In: Calhoun CJ, LiPuma E, Postone M (eds) Bourdieu: critical perspectives. Polity, Cambridge, pp 45–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Benda-Beckmann FV (2001) Legal pluralism and social justice in economic and political development. IdS Bull 32(1):46–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Benda-Beckmann FV (2002) Who’s afraid of legal pluralism? J Leg Pluralism Unofficial Law 34(47):37–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Benda-Beckmann FV, Von Benda-Beckmann K, Eckert J (2009) Rules of law and laws of ruling: law and governance between past and future. In: von Benda-Von Beckmann FV, von Benda-Beckmann K, Eckert J (eds) Rules of law and laws of ruling. On the governance of law. Law, justice and power. Ashgate, Aldershot, pp 1–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Weitzner V (2017) “Nosotros Somos Estado”: contested legalities in decision-making about extractives affecting ancestral territories in Colombia. Third World Q 38(5):1198–1214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiener A (2009) Enacting meaning-in-use: qualitative research on norms and international relations. Rev Int Stud 35(1):175–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiener A (2014) A theory of contestation. Springer, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson R (1999) Human rights, culture and context. Anthropological perspectives. Pluto Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Zürn M (2002) From interdependence to globalization. In: Carlsnaes W, Risse T, Simmons BA (eds) Handbook of international relations. Sage, London, pp 235–254

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Osnabrück University, Institute for Social Sciences, Osnabrück, Germany

    Almut Schilling-Vacaflor

Authors
  1. Almut Schilling-Vacaflor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Almut Schilling-Vacaflor .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Law, University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany

    Isabel Feichtner

  2. Faculty of Law, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany

    Markus Krajewski

  3. School of Law, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany

    Ricarda Roesch

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Schilling-Vacaflor, A. (2019). Norm Contestation and (Non-)Compliance: The Right to Prior Consultation and FPIC in the Extractive Industries. In: Feichtner, I., Krajewski, M., Roesch, R. (eds) Human Rights in the Extractive Industries. Interdisciplinary Studies in Human Rights, vol 3. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11382-7_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11382-7_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-11381-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-11382-7

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation