Certainty Must Run Both Ways: Indigenous Economic Statecraft and the Power of Uncertainty

Chiefs in Assembly at the BC AFN

For years, governments and industry in British Columbia have repeated a familiar phrase: “The economy needs certainty.”

We hear it in discussions about resource development, permitting, and investment. Markets require certainty. Investors require certainty. Governments require certainty.

But there is a question that Indigenous Nations must now ask:

Certainty for whom?

For more than 150 years, First Nations in British Columbia have lived with profound uncertainty about the recognition and implementation of our rights. Our title was denied. Our governance systems were undermined. Our lands were developed without consent.

For generations, governments did not treat that uncertainty as an emergency.

Yet today we are told there is an urgent need to amend or weaken the implementation of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (DRIPA).

If there is suddenly an emergency, it is important to say clearly:

Your emergency is not our emergency.

Our Nations have waited generations for the implementation of our rights. We are not responsible for the consequences of governments failing to plan for that reality.

The Return of Indigenous Economic Power

Across British Columbia, Indigenous Nations are rebuilding economic capacity.

Indigenous economic development corporations are now major partners in forestry, energy, infrastructure, and finance. Nations influence billions of dollars in investment decisions.

This represents something larger than economic development.

It represents the return of Indigenous economic governance.

Long before colonization, Indigenous Nations shaped regional economies through trade routes, alliances, and territorial stewardship. Access to land and resources was governed through relationships and protocols.

Today, those economic governance tools are re-emerging in modern forms.

Economic Sanctions as a Tool of Sovereign Governance

Around the world, governments use economic sanctions when negotiations break down or when their rights and interests are threatened.

Sanctions are not acts of hostility. They are instruments of political leverage.

Indigenous Nations possess similar economic tools today.

These tools do not require confrontation. They arise naturally from the legal, economic, and territorial authority Nations already hold.

The Province should understand that if certainty around Indigenous rights is weakened, uncertainty will inevitably appear elsewhere in the system.

That is simply how political economies function.

Real-World Examples of Indigenous Economic Leverage

This dynamic is not theoretical. Indigenous economic influence has already reshaped major political and economic decisions.

Haida Nation and Forestry Governance (British Columbia)

In the early 2000s, conflict over forestry in Haida Gwaii created significant uncertainty for logging companies and the Province. Through sustained pressure, territorial governance, and economic leverage, the Haida Nation forced negotiations that ultimately resulted in the Haida Gwaii Reconciliation Act and the Haida Gwaii Management Council.

Today, forestry decisions in Haida territory are made through shared governance between the Province and the Haida Nation.

Economic pressure created the conditions for a new governance model.

Coastal GasLink Financing Pressure

During the Wet’suwet’en conflict, Indigenous opposition created uncertainty that reached global financial markets. Major banks and investors faced pressure regarding the legal, environmental, and governance risks associated with the project.

The resulting uncertainty demonstrated how Indigenous governance can influence project financing and investor confidence, a powerful form of economic leverage in modern markets.

Indigenous Equity Partnerships in Major Projects

Across Canada, governments and industry increasingly recognize that projects lacking Indigenous support face economic risk.

This has led to a new model where Nations hold equity stakes in major infrastructure and energy projects, including pipelines, hydroelectric facilities, and renewable energy developments.

These arrangements reflect a growing reality: economic development in Canada increasingly depends on Indigenous partnership.

Without it, projects face uncertainty.

Forms of Indigenous Economic Sanctions

Economic pressure does not need to be dramatic to be effective. Often, the most powerful tools are quiet governance decisions that affect investment and development.

Some examples include:

Withholding Consent for Development

Major projects increasingly require Indigenous partnership and consent. Nations can pause negotiations, delay agreements, or refuse consent when rights are not respected.

In capital markets, uncertainty around consent can significantly affect financing.

Territorial Access and Land Governance

Nations exercise authority over access to lands and resources. Decisions regarding stewardship, land access, and permitting processes can shape the viability of projects.

This authority can directly influence economic activity.

Strategic Economic Partnerships

Indigenous Nations increasingly determine which companies they partner with.

Companies that respect Indigenous governance gain opportunities. Those that do not may find those opportunities closed.

Investor and Market Signaling

Modern capital markets are highly sensitive to environmental, legal, and governance risk.

When Indigenous Nations identify risks related to rights recognition, investors and lenders often respond.

Inter-Nation Economic Coordination

When Nations coordinate regionally, their economic influence grows significantly.

Collective action among Nations can shape development patterns across entire sectors.

Certainty Requires Respect

Governments often speak about the importance of certainty for the economy.

But certainty cannot be one-sided.

If governments create uncertainty around Indigenous rights, they should expect uncertainty in markets and development decisions.

This is not conflict.

It is simply how political economies function.

A Choice Before the Province

The discussions between First Nations leadership and the Province present an important moment.

There are two possible paths forward.

The first path is partnership — the meaningful implementation of Indigenous rights and shared governance over the lands and resources of this province.

The second path is continued uncertainty.

Indigenous Nations have waited generations for recognition. We have shown patience, resilience, and leadership.

But patience should not be mistaken for the absence of power.

As Indigenous economic capacity grows, Nations will increasingly shape the conditions under which development occurs.

The question before the Province is simple:

Will certainty be built through partnership — or will Nations be forced to exercise their economic governance to protect their rights and territories?

Closing Thought

If governments want certainty in markets, they must first ensure certainty in the recognition of Indigenous rights.

Because the next phase of reconciliation will not be decided in courtrooms.

It will be decided in economies.