65 Jerome Lewis
178
ties to control the use of resources on which
their livelihoods depend.
• The protection of their resources and way
of life.
• The redistribution and sharing of benefits
derived from the exploitation of their
resources.
• The facilitation of their own aspirations for
their development.
• The prevention of conflicts between the
local communities and other resource users.
• A general reduction of conflicts, and the
development of partnerships between local
communities and those using their land or
resources.
• The increase in efficiency and sustainability of companies and government
institutions thanks to these partnerships.
Challenges of FPIC
The implementation of FPIC requires
efforts in terms of investment (time,
resources and training) and poses certain
challenges:
• Negotiations can last a long time if literacy levels are not taken into account, or if
social inequality and corruption are high.
• The resolution of conflicts and the establishment of good relations are not
guaranteed in the short term. The opening
of a dialogue between different cultures in a
context marked by great inequalities may
temporarily lead to increased tensions.
• Highly skilled negotiators are required to
overcome the damaging potential of crosscultural misunderstanding.
• Powerful local persons could manipulate
and benefit from information transmitted
to them at the expense of other residents,
and damage the process in general.
• The participation of communities in the
management of natural resources through
FPIC does not automatically generate more
sustainable management practices without
specific agreements and control mechanisms.
• The amount, manner and administration
of compensation and benefits must be negotiated with great care because, depending
on the context, they may increase claims
towards the state, company or organisation,
stir jealousies between and within communities, and foster corruption.
• Ensuring the participation of the majority
of the population may require careful strategies. Methods and special means must be
established to facilitate and measure the
participation of all directly and indirectly
affected people, in particular marginalised
groups such as women.
• State support for the right to say ‘no’ to
proposed developments is difficult to assure.
CONTACT DETAILS
Jerome Lewis
Lecturer in Anthropology and Co-Director of
the Environment Institute and Extreme Citizen
Science Research Group
University College London (UCL)
14 Taviton Street
London
WC1H 0BW
UK
Email: Jerome.lewis@ucl.ac.uk
REFERENCES
Abridged from documents prepared by the author, Sophie Borriel
(Anthroscape), Regula Hafner and Christoph Weidmer (www.gfbv.ch).
For further information see: Lewis J., L. Freeman and S. Borreill (2008)
Free, Prior and Informed Consent and Sustainable Forest Management
in the Congo Basin. Society for Threatened People Switzerland: Berne.
Online: www.rightsandresources.org/publication_details.php?
publicationID=841