Nomadic Peoples and Alternate Conceptions of Place

Fully Human ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 129-149
Author(s):  
Lindsey N. Kingston

Under pressure from sedentary majority populations, nomadic peoples face serious threats to their cultural survival and livelihood. Nomadic groups have long faced suspicion and discrimination—as illustrated by the ongoing marginalization of European Roma and Travellers, the Maasai of Tanzania and Kenya, and the Bedouin of the MENA region—and modern societies tend to see human rights, including the basic rights of freedom of movement and property rights, through a lens that privileges settlement. Indeed, nomadic peoples are often viewed with suspicion and excluded from the citizenry because they move “too much” and do not conform to majority views related to settlement, land use, and community membership. This bias leaves nomadic peoples without functioning citizenship in regard to state governments, who fail to understand their basic needs and perspectives. Resulting rights abuses center not only on rights to land and natural resources but also on cultural and political expression.

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Terence K. Teo ◽  

In contrast to the substantial scholarship on whether bilateral investment treaties (BITs) increase foreign direct investment (FDI), there is less work on what drives governments to sign these treaties in the first place. I develop a theory of treaty signing that emphasizes the domestic factors that motivate a government to sign BITs. Using a panel dataset of developing countries from 1960 to 2010, I find that governments scarce in natural resources are more likely to sign BITs compared to their richer counterparts. In addition, governments with middle levels of property rights are more likely to sign BITs compared to those with low or high levels. Finally, the most likely BIT signers are resource-scarce countries with middle levels of property rights. That strategic dynamics exist in BIT signing has implications for assessing the effects of these treaties in other issue areas such as trade, human rights, and the environment.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 131-161
Author(s):  
Peter Inalegwu Awodi

This study digresses from the dominant narratives advanced in extant literature which have mainly analysed the question of national sovereignty over natural resources in Nigeria from the perspective of contestations over crude oil in the restive Niger Delta region. This study brings a fresh insight to the debate about national sovereignty over natural resources by examining the interface between international law and national land governance laws in an age of land grabbing in Nigeria. This study reveals how provisions of the ‘Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests’, international human rights laws, international investment laws, the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) and the Land Use Act of 1978 were deployed to reinforce land grabbing by foreign capitalist agribusiness firms in Nigeria. Findings from the study reveal how the 2007/2008 global economic recession shifted investors’ interest to agriculture, leading to a renewed interest in acquiring large swathes of farmlands in Nigeria. The instrumentality of international and Nigerian laws was deployed in the processes of acquiring, establishing and operationalising these controversial commercial farms. A combination of superimposing international and national legal frameworks underpinning investments, land tenure systems and human rights was invoked to acquire land to establish the 15 000-hectare Casplex Farms, the 13 000-hectare Shonga Farms, and the 10 000-hectare Olam International Rice Farm in northcentral Nigeria. Basically, provisions in section 12.1 of Part 4 of the FAO’s ‘Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests’, art 17(1) of the UDHR, s 43 of Part 4 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended), and s 28(1) of Part 5 of the Land Use Act of 1978 have reinforced land grabbing in Nigeria. At the same time, the study, which draws on historical and exploratory research designs, brings to light the human security implications of such expropriation of indigenous farmland used by vulnerable smallholder women farmers who hold fragile customary rights to land. The study recommends the review of legal instruments on the control of land resources to prevent exploitation by capitalist foreign investors and to provide adequate legal protection for peasants to curtail institutional arbitrariness. Cette étude se dissocie des études existantes dans la littérature qui ont le plus souvent analysé la question de la souveraineté nationale sur les ressources naturelles au Nigeria sous l’angle des contestations sur le pétrole brut dans la région rebelle du Delta du Niger. Cette étude apporte un nouvel aperçu dans le débat à propos de la souveraineté nationale sur les ressources naturelles en examinant l’interface entre le droit international et les lois nationales de gestion de la question foncière à l’ère de l’accaparement des terres au Nigeria. Cette étude révèle comment les dispositions des « Directives volontaires pour une gouvernance responsable des régimes fonciers applicables aux terres, aux pêches et aux forêts », les lois internationales sur les droits de l’homme, les lois internationales sur les investissements, la Constitution de la République Fédérale du Nigeria 1999 (telle que modifiée) et la loi sur l’utilisation de la terre ont été déployées pour renforcer l’accaparement des terres par les entreprises capitalistes étrangères agro-industrielles au Nigeria. Les recherches montrent comment la récession économique mondiale de 2007/2008 a dévié l’intérêt des investisseurs vers l’agriculture, ce qui a suscité un intérêt pour l’acquisition de grandes parcelles de terres agricoles. L’instrumentalisation des lois internationales et nigérianes ont été déployées dans ce processus d’acquisition, d’établissement et d’opération de ces plantations commerciales controversées. Une combinaison suprême des cadres juridiques internationaux et nationaux sous -tendant les investissements a été invoquée pour acquérir les terrains pour établir la plantation Casplex de 15 000 hectares, la plantation Shonga de 13 000 hectares, et la rizière d’Olam International de 10 000 hectares dans le centre-nord du Nigeria. Essentiellement, les dispositions de l’article 12 alinéa 1er Partie 4 des « Directives volontaires pour une gouvernance responsable des régimes fonciers applicables aux terres, aux pêches et aux forêts », de la FAO, article17 alinéa 1er de la Déclaration universelle des droits de l’Homme, article 43 de la Partie 4 de la Constitution de la République Fédérale du Nigeria 1999 (telle que modifiée), et l’article 28 alinéa 1er de la loi sur l’utilisation de la terre de 1978 ont renforcé l’accaparement des terres au Nigeria. Dans le même temps, cette étude qui s’inspire des modèles de recherches historiques et exploratoires, met en relief les implications sur la sécurité humaine d’une telle expropriation des terres agricoles autochtones utilisées par des petites agricultrices détenant des droits coutumiers fragiles sur la terre. Cette étude recommande la revue des instruments juridiques sur le contrôle des ressources foncières afin de prévenir l’exploitation des investisseurs étrangers capitalistes et de prévoir une protection juridique adéquate aux paysans pour réduire l’arbitraire institutionnel.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Terence K. Teo

In contrast to the substantial scholarship on whether bilateral investment treaties (BITs) increase foreign direct investment (FDI), there is less work on what drives governments to sign these treaties in the first place. I develop a theory of treaty signing that emphasizes the domestic factors that motivate a government to sign BITs. Using a panel dataset of developing countries from 1960 to 2010, I find that governments scarce in natural resources are more likely to sign BITs compared to their richer counterparts. In addition, governments with middle levels of property rights are more likely to sign BITs compared to those with low or high levels. Finally, the most likely BIT signers are resource-scarce countries with middle levels of property rights. That strategic dynamics exist in BIT signing has implications for assessing the effects of these treaties in other issue areas such as trade, human rights, and the environment.


2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Ann Brower

This article presents a case of using property rights to govern land use in the high country of New Zealand's South Island. It tells the story of a land reform policy and its implementation over two decades, through changes in rules and governing parties. It observes land reform outcomes that are surprisingly favourable to pastoral leaseholders, and surprisingly unfavourable to the Crown. It then explores several possible explanations, including the logic of collective action, bargaining dynamics, principal-agent problems, and ideas of ownership. It concludes that John Locke's labour theory of property holds sway in New Zealand's land reform, despite what the law prescribes. This raises questions about whether using property rights to manage land use meets the ‘3Es’ of good policy: effectiveness, efficiency, and equity.


Think India ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 72-83
Author(s):  
Tushar Kadian

Actually, basic needs postulates securing of the elementary conditions of existence to every human being. Despite of the practical and theoretical importance of the subject the greatest irony is non- availability of any universal preliminary definition of the concept of basic needs. Moreover, this becomes the reason for unpredictability of various political programmes aiming at providing basic needs to the people. The shift is necessary for development of this or any other conception. No labour reforms could be made in history till labours were treated as objects. Its only after they were started being treating as subjects, labour unions were allowed to represent themselves in strategy formulations that labour reforms could become a reality. The present research paper highlights the basic needs of Human Rights in life.


2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Elsa Karino

Production is an activity to convert inputs into outputs through the transformation process. Input in the form of man, money, method, material, machine. While the output is in the form of goods or services. The purpose of production in general is to meet individual needs. There are several factors that influence production namely land and all economic potential that is processed and cannot be separated from the production process, labor is directly related to the demands of property rights through production, and capital, management and technology. In production there are various types of production, namely production which is intermittent and continuous. The production, if viewed from an Islamic perspective, it must fulfill the following principles. First, produce in a halal circle. Second, managing natural resources in production is interpreted as the process of creating wealth by utilizing natural resources must rely on the vision of the creation of this nature and along with the vision of human creation, namely as a blessing for all nature. Third, the Caliph on the earth is not only based on the activity of producing the usefulness of an item but work is done with the motive of benefiting to seek the pleasure of Allah SWT. Key Words: Production, Red Sugar, benefiting


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document