VIII. Gender & Social Inclusion · Claim under review
"Treating consent as a veto stalls infrastructure that benefits indigenous communities themselves"
What does the MDB say? — AIIB 2020 (nearest to 2021)
"AIIB's 2020 reports contain no mention of indigenous consent, FPIC, or related safeguards for infrastructure projects."
The provided 2020 AIIB excerpts do not address indigenous peoples' rights, free prior informed consent (FPIC), consultation requirements, veto power, land rights, or safeguards related to infrastructure projects affecting indigenous communities.
Academic verdict 3 peer-reviewed papers
🔴 Refute 1 🟡 Conditional 2
Academic evidence
🔴 Refute · Journal of Management Studies · 2024 · Cited by 27
‘Let's Go to the Land Instead’: Indigenous Perspectives on Biodiversity and the Possibilities of Regenerative Capital
论文强调通过Two-Eyed Seeing实现共治共建,反对将同意权简化为单方否决,主张协作式 consent。
🟡 Conditional · Journal of Business Ethics · 2021 · Cited by 113
Responsible Leadership and the Reflective CEO: Resolving Stakeholder Conflict by Imagining What Could be done
论文主张以“整合式领导”兼顾原住民权益与基建发展,但强调需通过道德想象力共创方案,而非简单否决同意权。
🟡 Conditional · Organization Science · 2021 · Cited by 44
Contracting Beyond the Market
论文指出当原住民社区集体动员能力增强时更可能签约,暗示 consent 若被滥用为否决权会阻碍合作,但合同本身是平衡机制。