The IPLC is free to say “yes” or “no,” as well as “yes, but with conditions” and “no, but let’s continue to discuss” in response to the Final Presentation. They may also indicate a lack of consent by declining to engage in additional discussions. If the IPLC declines to engage, staff should respect that choice and not keep reaching out. If the IPLC accepts some parts of the project and rejects others, TNC must understand exactly which parts are and aren’t acceptable. Listening closely to the IPLC and incorporating their concerns and suggestions into the Consent Agreement will go a long way toward ensuring an initiative’s success.[6]
TNC’s FPIC process might differ from some government-run FPIC processes that are effectively Free, Prior & Informed Consultation processes, in which the state retains ultimate authority over the decision. See Appendix IV – FPIC Frequently Asked Questions for a summary of the distinction between consultation and consent. These processes can be legitimate and compatible with legal regimes that respect IPLC rights. TNC, however, like most non-state actors, has committed to not proceeding with an initiative unless Free, Prior & Informed Consent is given by all impacted IPLCs.
This commitment does not end the discussion on consent; difficult situations may still arise. For example, what if one significantly impacted IPLC gives consent and wants to proceed, while a less significantly impacted IPLC withholds consent? What if an IPLC that is only minimally impacted by an important project withholds consent? What if an IPLC claims it will be impacted and demands an FPIC process, but TNC staff or other observers do not believe the impact claim is plausible?
There are no easy answers. Each scenario must be handled on a case-by-case basis. But TNC staff should hold the conviction that consensus is possible in most cases. TNC’s mission is to conserve the lands and waters on which all life depends. IPLCs share these values more deeply than most because their identities are often inextricably connected to the natural world. The expressions of those values can sometimes be very different and, together with entrenched oppressive systems, power imbalances, and the legacy of colonialism, can lead to conflicts, as has so often happened between conservation groups and IPLCs in the past. FPIC offers a hopeful, and more reliable, path to a future of different outcomes.