A/HRC/15/37 29. With ever increasing frequency, as discussed at the expert meeting in Sitges, corporate activities in indigenous territories are causing serious social conflicts, which spark circles of violence and, in turn, new human rights violations. In such situations, as the Special Rapporteur has already demonstrated, indigenous peoples are not the only victims: social conflicts relating to corporate activities in indigenous territories have a negative impact on the economic interests and the image of the corporations themselves, and on the interests of the Governments concerned.18 30. Such situations are frequently linked to an absence of adequate knowledge on the part of companies about their responsibility with regard to the rights of indigenous peoples and the contents of those rights.19 In many cases, companies tend to argue that their responsibility is limited to compliance with the legislation in force in the countries in which they are operating; however, this is clearly a limited argument and one that does not provide adequate solutions in cases where existing standards are inadequate or non-existent in relation to international standards or, simply, where the indigenous peoples affected are not officially recognized as such. 31. Faced with the constant refusal to recognize their rights in the context of corporate activities on their territories, many indigenous peoples have demonstrated their opposition to, or even their overt rejection of, such activities. However, as has been demonstrated in many international and national fora, the majority of indigenous peoples and communities are not opposed to corporate activity per se or to the potential benefits of such activity for their own economic and social development. Indeed, experience has shown that corporate activity may become a key factor in indigenous peoples’ development when they themselves can control such activity in the exercise of their rights to autonomy and selfgovernment. What indigenous people are opposed to, understandably, is development which is carried out without respect for their basic rights, which brings with it only adverse impacts and which does not result in any visible benefits for their communities. 32. The Special Rapporteur considers therefore that there is an urgent need to reach a minimum understanding of what corporate responsibility is with regard to the rights of indigenous peoples. Such a debate should be based on the same premises as the current international and multilateral debate on corporate responsibility and human rights in general. A. Corporate responsibility with respect to human rights 33. While there is at present no clear international legal framework concerning corporate responsibility with respect to human rights, the international community as a whole has at least reached a certain normative consensus with regard to the existence of some type of responsibility. This consensus is reflected in the many regulatory and self-regulatory frameworks governing corporate responsibility that have appeared in recent decades, at 18 19 8 A/HRC/6/12, para. 56. This aspect was highlighted by the Special Rapporteur, for example, in 2009 with regard to the case of the construction of the hydroelectric project Chan 75 in Panama. See report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people, James Anaya. Addendum: Observations on the situation of the Charco la Pava community and other communities affected by the Chan 75 hydroelectric project in Panama (A/HRC/12/34/Add.5), paras. 54 to 59. GE.10-15075