Description
Beginning with the premise that Indigenous peoples’ agency in global politics is not rendered impotent by the power of the state – contradicting fundamental assumptions in International Relations theory – this paper explores the contentious relationship between state authority and Indigenous self-determination in the context of the Canadian resource extraction sector. Defining authority as power transmuted by legitimacy, or a generalized perception that behaviour reflects accepted norms and values, I demonstrate that Indigenous peoples may affect state authority by manipulating perceptions about state legitimacy. Through analyses of think tank reports and media in over sixty cases of conflict between First Nations and the mining sector, I offer empirical evidence that Indigenous peoples destabilise perceptions of state legitimacy by thwarting dominant actors’ expectations about the timeline, scope, and costs of resource extraction projects. The gap between expectations and circumstances leads dominant actors to suspect that their preferences and those of the state diverge, and to distrust that the state can deliver their preferences. I argue that these changes in perceptions of legitimacy auger retrenchment of state authority. A corollary suggests that among the most effective overall strategies for Indigenous peoples attempting to affect resource project outcomes is to challenge investors’ perceptions of risk or instability surrounding a project, thereby subverting proponents’ capacity to fund a project. By refuting the state-centric assumptions of mainstream International Relations, my findings reorganize hierarchies of authority to reimagine sources of power in global politics.
