Eliding consent in extractivist states: Bolivia, Canada, and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

Ten years ago, the United Nations adopted the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which articulates global minimum standards for indigenous rights. What are the effects of the declaration and how has it altered indigenous politics in countries with economies that are significantly based on natural resource extraction? This article analyses two distinct national contexts to discern the ways that the declaration's norms of indigenous sovereignty and territorial control are evolving: Bolivia and Canada. Particular attention is paid to one of the central rights enshrined in the declaration - free, prior and informed consent, which is distinguished conceptually from the notion of 'veto' with which it is frequently conflated. Consent is theorised as both a process and an endpoint that involves the 'cooperative agreement' of indigenous peoples. The article finds that in both countries, the government's pursuit of resource development agendas has limited compliance with the declaration, with the executive branch serving as the principal brake for indigenous rights. However, there are important distinctions in the institutional settings in which indigenous groups have achieved gains: in Canada the courts have been the most favourable venue, while in Bolivia electoral and constitutional institutions have emerged as critical sites of support.