Impact assessment and indigenous self-determination: a scalar framework of participation options

References

• Åhrén M. 2016. Indigenous peoples’ status in the international legal system. Oxford: University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Allard C. 2015. Renskötselrätt i nordisk belysning [Reindeer herding rights in nordic perspective]. Göteborg: Makadam.
   Google Scholar
• Anaya J. 2005. Indigenous peoples' participatory rights in relation to decisions about natural resource extraction. The more fundamental issue about what rights indigenous peoples have in land and resources, Arizona J Inter Comp Law. 22(1):7–17.
   Google Scholar
• Arnstein S. 1967. A ladder of citizen participation. AIP Journal. 216–224.
   Google Scholar
• Broderstad EG. 2001. Political autonomy and integration of authority: The understanding of Saami self-determination. Int J Min Group Rights. 8:151–175.
   Google Scholar
• Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. 2017. Building common ground. A new vision for impact assessment in Canada – the final report of the expert panel for the review of environmental assessment processes.
   Google Scholar
• Colchester M, Ferrari MF. 2007. Making FPIC – free, prior and informed consent – work: challenges and prospects for indigenous peoples. Moreton-in-Marsh: Forest Peoples Program.
   Google Scholar
• Collins, K, Ison, R 2006. Dare we jump off Arnsteins ladder? Social learning as a new policy paradigm. Proceedings of Participatory Approaches in Science and Technology (PATH) Conference, Jun 4–7, Edinburgh.
   Google Scholar
• Coombes BL, Hill S. 2005. “Na whenua, na Tuhoe. Ko D.o.C. te partner”—Prospects for Comanagement of Te Urewera National Park. Soc Natur Res. 18:135–152.10.1080/08941920590894516
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coombes B, Johnson J, Howitt R. 2014. Indigenous Geographies I: Mere resource conflicts? The complexities in Indigenous land and environmental claims. Progr Hum Geogr. 36(6):810–821.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costanza J. 2015. Indigenous peoples’ right to prior consultation: transforming human rights from the Grassroots in Guatemala. J Hum Rights. 14:260–285.10.1080/14754835.2014.997871
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• County Administrative Board of Norbotten and Sweco. 2016. Ökad samverkan mellan rennäring och gruvnäring [Increased cooperation between reindeer herding and mining industry]. Report to the Swedish Ministry of Enterprise and Innovation.
   Google Scholar
• Dodson G. 2014. Co-governance and local empowerment? conservation partnership frameworks and marine protection at Mimiwhangata, New Zealand. Soc Natur Res. 27:521–539.10.1080/08941920.2013.861560
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ehrlich A. 2010. Cumulative cultural effects and reasonably foreseeable future developments in the Upper Thelon Basin, Canada. Impact Assess Project Appraisal. 28:279–286.10.3152/146155110X12838715793084
   Google Scholar
• Ehrlich A 2015. Co-management in Canada’s North. Presentation to the workshop: Cumulative effects of development projects on reindeer herding, Vindeln, May 7–8, convened by the Vilhelmina norra reindeer herding community, Swedish Sami Association, and the Swedish Sami Parliament.
   Google Scholar
• Ehrlich A, Ross W. 2015. The significance spectrum and EIA significance determinations. Impact Assess Project Appraisal. 33:87–97.10.1080/14615517.2014.981023
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eythorsson E, Thuestad AE. 2016. Incorporating traditional knowledge in environmental impact assessment – how can it be done?. Arctic Rev Law Pol. 6:132–150.
   Google Scholar
• Falch T, Selle P, Strømsnes K. 2016. The Sámi: 25 years of indigenous authority in Norway. Ethnopolitics. 15:125–143.10.1080/17449057.2015.1101846
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flyvbjerg B. 2006. Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qual Inquir. 12(2):219–245.10.1177/1077800405284363
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibson RB. 2006. Sustainability assessment and conflict resolution: reaching agreement to proceed with the Voisey’s Bay nickel mine. J Cleaner Prod. 14:334–348.10.1016/j.jclepro.2004.07.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Government of Norway and Samediggi. 2005. Procedures for consultation between state authorities and the Sami parliament, May 11 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Holmgaard SB, Thuestad A, Eythórsson E. 2017. Ecosystem services and impact assessment in coastal Northern Norway. Presentation to the session ‘Impact assessments in contested landscapes: indigenous rights, resistance, and co-management’, Nordic Meeting of Geographers; Jun 20; Stockholm University.
   Google Scholar
• Howitt R. 2005. The importance of process in social impact assessment: ethics, methods and process for cross-cultural engagement. Eth Place Environ. 8:209–221.10.1080/13668790500237336
   Google Scholar
• Howitt R, Suchet-Pearson S. 2006. Rethinking the building blocks: ontological pluralism and the idea of ‘management’. Hum Geog. 88:323–335.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobson C, Matunga H, Ross H, Carter RW. 2016. Mainstreaming indigenous perspectives: 25 years of New Zealand’s Resource Management Act. Australas J Environ Manage. 23:331–337.10.1080/14486563.2016.1259201
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones M, Morrison-Saunders A. 2016. Making sense of significance in environmental impact assessment. Impact Assess Project Appraisal. 34(1):87–93.10.1080/14615517.2015.1125643
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Josefsen E, Söreng SU, Selle P. 2016. Regional governance and indigenous rights in norway: the Finnmark estate case. In: Herrmann TM, Martin T, editors. Indigenous Peoples’ Governance of Land and Protected Territories in the Arctic. Springer International Publishing Switzerland.
   Google Scholar
• Kemp D, Vanclay F. 2013. Human rights and impact assessment: clarifying the connections in practice. Impact Assess Project Appraisal. 31:86–96.10.1080/14615517.2013.782978
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King T. 2012. A curious account of native people in North America. Minneapolis, MN: University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Larsen RK, Raitio K, Stinnerbom M, Wik-Karlsson J. 2017. Sami-state collaboration in the governance of cumulative effects assessment: a critical action research approach. Environ Imp Assess Rev. 64:67–76.10.1016/j.eiar.2017.03.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawrence and Larsen. 2017. The politics of planning: assessing the impacts of mining on Saami lands. Third World Quart. 38:1164–1180.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leifsen E, Gustafsson M-T, Guzmán-Gallegos MA, Schilling-Vacaflor A. 2017. New mechanisms of participation in extractive governance: between technologies of governance and resistance work. Third World Quarterly. 38:1043–1057.10.1080/01436597.2017.1302329
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDonald F, Wood B. 2016. Potential through paradox: indigenous rights as human rights. Citiz St. 20:710–727.10.1080/13621025.2016.1139056
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morgan RK. 2012. Environmental impact assessment: the state of the art. Impact Assess Proj Appraisal. 30:5–14.10.1080/14615517.2012.661557
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morgan TKKB, Fa’aui TN. Forthcoming. Empowering indigenous voices in disaster response: applying the Mauri Model to New Zealand’s worst environmental maritime disaster. Eur J Operation Res. in press, doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2017.05.030.
   Google Scholar
• Mörkenstam U, Josefsen E, Nilsson R. 2016. The Nordic Sámediggis and the limits of indigenous self-determination. J Indigenous Peoples Rights. 1:6–46.
   Google Scholar
• Nadasdy P. 2007. Adaptive co-management and the gospel of resilience. In: Armitage D, Berkes F, Doubleday N, editors. Adaptive co-management: Collaboration, learning and multilevel governance. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press; p. 208–227.
   Google Scholar
• Nadeem O, Fischer TB. 2011. An evaluation framework for effective public participation in EIA in Pakistan. Env Imp Ass Rev. 31(1):36–47.10.1016/j.eiar.2010.01.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noble B. 2016. Learning to listen: snapshots of aboriginal participation in environmental assessment. Technical Report, MacDonald-Laurier Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Norwegian Sami Parliament. 2010. Sametingets planveileder [The Sami Parliament’s Planning Guide]. https://www.sametinget.no/content/download/865/13761.
   Google Scholar
• O’Faircheallaigh C. 1999. Making social impact assessment count: a negotiation-based approach for indigenous peoples. Soc Nat Resour. 1:63–80.10.1080/089419299279894
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Faircheallaigh C. 2009. Effectiveness in social impact assessment: aboriginal peoples and resource development in Australia. Impact Assess Project Appraisal. 27:95–110.10.3152/146155109X438715
   Google Scholar
• O’Faircheallaigh C. 2013. Extractive industries and Indigenous peoples: a changing dynamic? J Rural Stud. 30:20–30.10.1016/j.jrurstud.2012.11.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Faircheallaigh C, Corbett T. 2005. Indigenous participation in environmental management of mining projects: the role of negotiated agreements. Environ Polit. 4:629–47.10.1080/09644010500257912
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Papillon M, Rodon T. Forthcoming. Proponent-Indigenous agreements and the implementation of the right to free, prior, and informed consent in Canada. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 62:216–224.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peirce CS. 1878. How to make our ideas clear. Popular Sci Mon. 12:286–302.
   Google Scholar
• Ruckstuhl K, Thompson-Fawcett M, Rae H. 2014. Maori and mining: indigenous perspectives on reconceptualising and contextualising the social licence to operate. Impact Assess Project Appraisal. 32:304–314.10.1080/14615517.2014.929782
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sehlin MacNeil K. 2015. Shafted: a case of cultural and structural violence in the power relations between a Sami community and a mining company in Northern Sweden. Ethnol Scand. 45:1–15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, LT. 2012. Decolonizing methodologies research and indigenous peoples. 2nd ed. London: Zed Books.
   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. Can J Develop St. 30:111–130.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tarras-Wahlberg NH. 2014. Social license to mine in Sweden: do companies go the extra mile to gain community acceptance?”. Min Econ. 27:143–147.10.1007/s13563-014-0053-9
   Google Scholar
• Tully J. 1995. Strange multiplicity – constitutionalism in an age of diversity. Cambridge: University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139170888
   Google Scholar
• Turvey A. 2009. Te Ao Maori in a “sympathetic” legal regime: the use of Maori concepts in legislation. Victoria U Wellington L Rev. 40:531–553.
   Google Scholar
• UNHRC. 2016. Report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples on the human rights situation of the Sami people in the Sápmi region of Norway, Sweden and Finland. A/HRC/33/42/Add.3.
   Google Scholar
• Walker R, Jojola T, Natcher D, editors. 2013. Reclaiming indigenous planning. Kingston: McGill-Queen University Press
   Google Scholar
• Ward A. 2001. New Zealand experience: the treaty of waitangi. Newcas L Rev. 65:65–81.
   Google Scholar
• Ward T. 2011. The right to free, prior, and informed consent: indigenous peoples’ participation rights within international law. Northw J Int’l Hum Rts. 54(10):54–84.
   Google Scholar
• Weston J. 2010. EIA theories – all Chinese whispers and no critical theory. J Environ Assess Pol Manage. 12:357–374.10.1142/S1464333210003693
   Google Scholar
• White G, Christensen V, Ehrlich A. 2007. Involving Canada’s indigenous peoples in environmental impact assessment: co-management through the Mackenzie valley environmental impact review board. Paper presented at: 27th Annual Conference of the International Association for Impact Assessment, Seoul, Korea.
   Google Scholar