Consultation vs. Consent: Understanding the Difference in Indigenous Economic Development

In the context of Indigenous rights and economic development, the terms consultation and consent are often used interchangeably but carry important differences.

Legal Obligation vs. Decision-Making Power

Understanding the key differences is essential for governments, corporations, and communities alike, especially for those who wish to be actively involved in Indigenous economic development. These concepts form the foundation of how development projects interact with Indigenous peoples, especially when it comes to land, resources, and governance.

Consultation refers to the legal obligation of governments (and sometimes industry) to engage with Indigenous communities when a project may impact their rights or territories. In Canada, this duty stems from Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, which recognizes and affirms Indigenous and treaty rights. The courts have clarified that consultation must be meaningful, carried out in good faith, and tailored to the severity of the potential impact.

The Power of Consent

However, consultation does not require that Indigenous communities agree with the outcome or be involved in the planning of said project. It is a process of dialogue, not necessarily one of granting decision-making power. Too often, consultation is treated as a checkbox exercise –– a meeting or a presentation — rather than a reciprocal process that genuinely includes Indigenous perspectives and priorities.

Consent, by contrast, means that Indigenous communities have the authority to authorize projects that concern them. Enshrined in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), this standard falls within the purview of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC).

Why Consent Creates Better Partnerships

Consent reflects a deeper recognition of Indigenous Peoples as self-determining nations with inherent rights over their lands and ways of life. It implies that development cannot proceed without the approval of the affected communities and elevates Indigenous sovereignty to the utmost importance. Importantly, FPIC is not just merely about veto power but rather encompasses broader values of partnership, respect, and co-creation.

For businesses operating in Indigenous territories, the distinction between consultation and consent is more than legal –– it is strategic. On the one hand, projects developed without consent often face delays, legal challenges, and community opposition. On the other hand, when Indigenous communities are treated as full partners, the result is more sustainable, socially responsible, and mutually beneficial economic development.

Forward-thinking companies are moving beyond minimal legal requirements and embracing Indigenous consent as a best practice. Doing so builds long-term relationships, reduces risk, and creates opportunities for joint ventures, equity partnerships, and community-led growth.

As Canada and the provinces move toward implementing UNDRIP into law and policy, the conversation is shifting. Respecting Indigenous consent is not only a matter of reconciliation by means of economic development, but also good business and to the benefit of all. For members of the Indigenous Chamber of Commerce, this shift presents an opportunity to lead in shaping an economy that honours our rights, cultures, and aspirations.