Canada’s legal system has repeatedly ruled that the Crown has a duty to consult with Indigenous Peoples when approving and shaping resource development projects that are located on their land or could infringe on their rights. Yet, there are still incidences where Indigenous communities and organizations find formal consultation processes, and the approach to engagement taken by industry and government, to be lacking. We use insights from the policy studies literature to argue that generating more evidence and analysis about the benefits and impacts of development is unlikely to improve consultation and engagement processes or resolve resource development disputes. We suggest that a policy framing approach, which examines how the different actors frame or define controversial and intractable policy problems, can provide insight into why disputes occur. We examine publicly available documents and statements about consultation and engagement produced by Indigenous groups, Canadian governments, and industry to identify and compare how these groups are likely to frame resource development and consultation activities.

No abstract

No abstract