Impact and benefit agreements: a contentious issue for environmental and aboriginal justice.

Abstract

Impact and benefit agreements (IBAs) have become a common part of a standard package of agreements negotiated between an industrial proponent and a representative aboriginal organization. Among other things, IBAs recognize aboriginal peoples' interests with the land and parallel more broadly with the corporate social responsibility phenomena. IBAs seek to establish a bond based on consultation and support of both parties in a mineral development scenario. Challenges facing IBAs include their confidential nature and their relationship to conventional environmental assessment (EA). IBAs go beyond the regulatory and advisory EA processes and often find themselves in conflict due to overlapping objectives and blurred boundaries. IBAs can perpetuate injustices if benefits are not equally distributed to the community or if monitoring and follow-up on behalf of both parties are not continuous. To consider both challenges and opportunities, brief descriptions and comparison of IBAs and EAs are discussed and questions regarding the advantages of IBAs are considered.

Les Ententes sur les repercussions et les avantages (ERA) sont devenues monnaie courante dans les series d'ententes types negociees entre un promoteur industriel et une organisation autochtone representative. Les ERA reconnaissent entre autres les droits et les interets des personnes autochtones en lien avec leur territoire et evoluent fortement dans un contexte de responsabilite sociale. Les ERA cherchent a etablir des ententes conclues sur une base de consultation et d appui des parties concernees dans un scenario de developpement minier. On retrouve parmi les defis des ERA, leur nature confidentielle ainsi que leur rapport serre avec les evaluations environnementales (EE) classiques. Les ERA vont au-dela du processus reglementaire et consultatif des EE et entrent donc souvent en conflit avec celles-ci en raison des chevauchements d'objectifs et des frontieres floues. Les ERA peuvent perpetuer des injustices si les avantages qu'elles apportent ne sont pad distribues de facon egale dans la communaute ou si la surveillance et le suivi ne sont pas maintenus aupres des deux parties. Afin de considerer autant les defis et les perspectives, une breve description ainsi qu'une comparaison des ERA et des EA seront discutees et les questions touchant les avantages des ERA seront abordees.

Keywords

Mining, environmental assessment, Impact and Benefit Agreements, aboriginal participation, mineral development

Introduction

Impact benefit agreements (IBAs) have become common practice in Canada when mineral development is located within or adjacent to traditional aboriginal or treaty lands. IBAs are confidential bilateral agreements, negotiated between mining corporations and aboriginal communities to address a multitude of adverse socio-economic and biophysical impacts that can arise from mining development. Although not compulsory in most cases, they are increasingly becoming part of a standard package of agreements negotiated between an industrial proponent and a representative aboriginal organization that can recognize aboriginal peoples' interests with the land. There are some modern land claim settlements in which proponents must negotiate and complete IBAs with the regional government before proceeding with mineral development. The latter contractual arrangements involve the government and are therefore not a product of private commercial law and will not be discussed here. Rather, this paper will focus on IBAs that are negotiated on confidential bilateral terms without government involvement and which exist, therefore, outside of a modern land claim settlement model and adjunct statutory requirements.