Indigenous Self-Government in the Arctic, and their Right to Land and Natural Resources

2009 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 245-281
Author(s):  
Asbjørn Eide
Keyword(s):  
Natural Resources ◽  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
National Level ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Self Management ◽  
Full Independence ◽  
The One ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Economic Globalisation

Abstract The article examines the evolution in international law of indigenous self-government and their control over their land and resources, and explores the extent to which this is being followed up at the national level with particular emphasis on Arctic and other Northern indigenous peoples. It starts by discussing the concept of ‘indigenous peoples’, noting that most of them live in areas that have until recently been considered to be marginal by the dominant parts of society, and observes that two contradictory trends can presently be observed: On the one hand a growing pressure, in the context of expanding economic globalisation and intensification of consumption, for access to the natural resources in the areas where they live, but on the other hand a growing resistance through improved organisation by the indigenous peoples themselves and by a growing recognition of their rights under international law. The impact of this general evolution at the global level on specific cases are examined with regards to the Inuit-controlled self-government of Nunavut in Canada, the move towards full independence of Inuit-controlled Greenland, and the evolution of Sámi self-management in Sámi land of Fenno-Scandinavia.

scholarly journals Desecuritization as Displacement of Controversy: geopolitics, law and sovereign rights in the Arctic

Politik ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc Jacobsen ◽  
Jeppe Strandsbjerg
Keyword(s):  
Arctic Ocean ◽  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
North Pole ◽  
The Other ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
The Arctic Ocean ◽  
Securitization Theory ◽  
The Media ◽  
The One

By signing the Ilulissat Declaration of May 2008, the five littoral states of the Arctic Ocean pre-emptively desecuritized potential geopolitical controversies in the Arctic Ocean by confirming that international law and geo-science are the defining factors underlying the future delimitation. This happened in response to a rising securitization discourse fueled by commentators and the media in the wake of the 2007 Russian flag planting on the geographical North Pole seabed, which also triggered harder interstate rhetoric and dramatic headlines. This case, however, challenges some established conventions within securitization theory. It was state elites that initiated desecuritization and they did so by shifting issues in danger of being securitized from security to other techniques of government. Contrary to the democratic ethos of the theory, these shifts do not necessarily represent more democratic procedures. Instead, each of these techniques are populated by their own experts and technocrats operating according to logics of right (law) and accuracy (science). While shifting techniques of government might diminish the danger of securitized relations between states, the shift generates a displacement of controversy. Within international law we have seen controversy over its ontological foundations and within science we have seen controversy over standards of science. Each of these are amplified and take a particularly political significance when an issue is securitized via relocation to another technique. While the Ilulissat Declaration has been successful in minimizing the horizontal conflict potential between states it has simultaneously given way for vertical disputes between the signatory states on the one hand and the Indigenous peoples of the Arctic on the other.

The impact of international law on natural resource governance in Greenland

Polar Record ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachael Lorna Johnstone
Keyword(s):  
Natural Resources ◽  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous People ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
International Standards ◽  
The Self ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Resource Governance ◽  
The North ◽  
The Impact

Abstract The paper demonstrates how the evolution of international law on colonial and indigenous peoples, in particular evolving rights to sovereignty over natural resources, shaped the changing relationship between Greenland and the rest of the Danish Realm. Greenland today is in a unique position in international law, enjoying an extremely high degree of self-government. This paper explores the history, current status and future of Greenland through the lens of international law, to show how international obligations both colour its relationship with the Kingdom of Denmark and influence its approaches to resource development internally. It considers the invisibility of the Inuit population in the 1933 Eastern Greenland case that secured Danish sovereignty over the entire territory. It then turns to Denmark’s registration of Greenland as a non-self-governing territory (colony) in 1946 before Greenland’s-purported decolonisation in 1953 and the deficiencies of that process. In the second part of the 20th century, Denmark began to recognise the Greenland Inuit as an indigenous people before a gradual shift towards recognition of the Greenlanders as a people in international law, entitled to self-determination, including the right to permanent sovereignty over their natural resources. This peaked with the Self-Government Act of 2009. The paper will then go on to assess competing interpretations of the Self-Government Act of 2009 according to which the Greenland self-government is the relevant decision-making body for an increasing number of fields of competence including, since 1 January 2010, the governance of extractive industries. Some, including members of the Greenland self-government, argue that the Self-Government Act constitutes full implementation of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP 2007), but this view is not universally shared. The paper also considers the status and rights of two Greenland minorities: the North Greenlanders (Inughuit) and the East Greenlanders, each of whom has distinct histories, experiences of colonisation, dialects (or languages) and cultural traditions. While the Kingdom of Denmark accepts the existence of only one indigenous people, namely, the Inuit of Greenland, this view is increasingly being challenged in international fora, including the UN human rights treaty bodies, as the two minorities are in some cases considered distinct indigenous peoples. Their current position in Greenland as well as in a future fully independent Greenland is examined, and the rights that they hold against the Greenland self-government as well as the Kingdom of Denmark explored. Greenland’s domestic regime for governance of non-renewable natural resources (principally mining and hydrocarbons) is briefly analysed and compared with international standards, with a particular emphasis on public participation. The paper assesses the extent to which it complies with the standards in key international instruments.

Denmark’s Obligations Regarding Mineral Resources in Greenland

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 192-213
Author(s):  
Bent Ole Gram Mortensen ◽  
Ulrike Fleth-Barten
Keyword(s):  
Natural Resources ◽  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
National Level ◽  
Mineral Resources ◽  
The Self ◽  
Legal Issue ◽  
Inuit People ◽  
International Obligations ◽  
Special Rights

Greenland has rich deposits of natural resources. Some of them could have the potential to be commercially developed. The exploitation of these resources could provide enormous opportunities for Greenland’s economic development. Greenland is part of the Kingdom of Denmark and enjoys far reaching rights of self-government. The population of Greenland is overwhelmingly Inuit, a people elsewhere recognized as an Indigenous people. The question concerning the exploitation of the natural resources is thus a complicated legal issue. International law provides indigenous peoples with special rights concerning the natural resources in their territory as referenced in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and ILO Convention 169. The Kingdom of Denmark thus has international obligations regarding free, prior and informed consent. At the national level, the Self-Government Act includes provisions concerning natural resources, and this area is under the sole competence of the self-government. The Greenlandic Mineral Resources Act includes provisions on participation and consultation processes of local inhabitants. This article discusses whether the Kingdom of Denmark, through the Self-Government Act, lives up to its obligations under international law regarding the rights of the Inuit people in relation to the natural resources in their territory.

Sovereignty, Self-Determination, and Natural Resources

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jérémie Gilbert
Keyword(s):  
Natural Resources ◽  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Potential Role ◽  
Food Sovereignty ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Ambivalent Relationship ◽  
The Right

The issue of sovereignty over natural resources has been a key element in the development of international law, notably leading to the emergence of the principle of States’ permanent sovereignty over their natural resources. However, concomitant to this focus on States’ sovereignty, international human rights law proclaims the right of peoples to self-determination over their natural resources. This has led to a complex and ambivalent relationship between the principle of States’ sovereignty over natural resources and peoples’ rights to natural resources. This chapter analyses this conflicting relationship and examines the emergence of the right of peoples to freely dispose of their natural resources and evaluates its potential role in contemporary advocacy. It notably explores how indigenous peoples have called for the revival of their right to sovereignty over natural resources, and how the global peasants’ movement has pushed for the recognition of the concept of food sovereignty.

PP469 From Theory To Practice: Which Value Framework Is Applied For Onco-Hematology Therapies In Italy? A 5-year Retrospective Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (S1) ◽  
pp. 37-37
Author(s):  
Americo Cicchetti ◽  
Rossella Di Bidino ◽  
Entela Xoxi ◽  
Irene Luccarini ◽  
Alessia Brigido
Keyword(s):  
Real World ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
National Level ◽  
Pharmaceutical Products ◽  
European Medicines Agency ◽  
The Real ◽  
R Process ◽  
The One ◽  
The Impact

IntroductionDifferent value frameworks (VFs) have been proposed in order to translate available evidence on risk-benefit profiles of new treatments into Pricing & Reimbursement (P&R) decisions. However limited evidence is available on the impact of their implementation. It's relevant to distinguish among VFs proposed by scientific societies and providers, which usually are applicable to all treatments, and VFs elaborated by regulatory agencies and health technology assessment (HTA), which focused on specific therapeutic areas. Such heterogeneity in VFs has significant implications in terms of value dimension considered and criteria adopted to define or support a price decision.MethodsA literature research was conducted to identify already proposed or adopted VF for onco-hematology treatments. Both scientific and grey literature were investigated. Then, an ad hoc data collection was conducted for multiple myeloma; breast, prostate and urothelial cancer; and Non Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) therapies. Pharmaceutical products authorized by European Medicines Agency from January 2014 till December 2019 were identified. Primary sources of data were European Public Assessment Reports and P&R decision taken by the Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA) till September 2019.ResultsThe analysis allowed to define a taxonomy to distinguish categories of VF relevant to onco-hematological treatments. We identified the “real-world” VF that emerged given past P&R decisions taken at the Italian level. Data was collected both for clinical and economical outcomes/indicators, as well as decisions taken on innovativeness of therapies. Relevant differences emerge between the real world value framework and the one that should be applied given the normative framework of the Italian Health System.ConclusionsThe value framework that emerged from the analysis addressed issues of specific aspects of onco-hematological treatments which emerged during an ad hoc analysis conducted on treatment authorized in the last 5 years. The perspective adopted to elaborate the VF was the one of an HTA agency responsible for P&R decisions at a national level. Furthermore, comparing a real-world value framework with the one based on the general criteria defined by the national legislation, our analysis allowed identification of the most critical point of the current national P&R process in terms ofsustainability of current and future therapies as advance therapies and agnostic-tumor therapies.

Defining ‘People’ and ‘Indigenous People’ in International Human Rights Law and Its Application in Indonesia

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 373-408
Author(s):  
M. Ya’kub Aiyub Kadir
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Natural Resources ◽  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous People ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Third World

This article investigates the problem of defining ‘people’ and ‘indigenous people’ under the International Human Rights Covenants and their application in the Indonesian context. Using analyses based on the Third World Approach to International Law (twail), this article shows the problems facing Indonesia in identifying indigenous peoples as traditional peoples, in terms of being isolated peoples (Masyarakat Hukum Adat, hereafter mha), and the non-isolated indigenous peoples who were sovereign before the independence of Indonesia. This interpretation has been confusing in relation to the entitlement to natural resources. Therefore, this article proposes a new understanding of indigenous peoples, in order to arrive at better treatment and recognition and in terms of sharing power and the benefits of natural resources in the Indonesian system.

The Polar Regions and the Development of International Law: Contemporary Reflections and Twenty-First Century Challenges

2013 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 233-251 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald R. Rothwell
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
First Century ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Polar Regions ◽  
Foundational Research ◽  
Twenty First Century ◽  
Legal Frameworks ◽  
Global Affairs ◽  
The Antarctic ◽  
The Impact

Abstract The polar regions are increasingly coming to the forefront of global affairs in ways that are beginning to approach the prominence given to the polar regions during the ‘heroic era’ of exploration at the beginning of the twentieth century. This contemporary focus is, however, very much upon governance and the capacity of the existing and future legal frameworks to govern the Antarctic and Arctic effectively. This article revisits foundational research undertaken in 1992–1993 and reassesses the impact of the polar regions upon the development of international law. Particular attention is given to environmental management, living and nonliving resource management, the regulation and management of maritime areas, and governance mechanisms and frameworks. The article seeks to critically assess whether the existing legal frameworks that operate in Antarctica and the Arctic are capable of dealing with their increasing globalisation, or whether there will be a need for new legal and governance regimes to be developed to address twenty-first century challenges.

Analysing Benefit Sharing Scheme as Compensation for Damages Caused by Resource Extraction in Indigenous Territory

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 89-116
Author(s):  
Maria Augusta León Moreta
Keyword(s):  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
National Level ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Cultural Economic ◽  
Economic Interests ◽  
Sharing Scheme ◽  
Mining Project ◽  
The Right ◽  
San Carlos ◽  
The Impact

In Latin America extractive operations have given rise to the loss and environmental degradation of indigenous peoples’ territories. This, in turn, has implied the denial of the access of indigenous peoples to essential resources for their cultural, economic and social development. To compensate the loss of their livelihood, the Inter-American Court on Human Rights, states, multinational and financial institutions have recognised the right of indigenous peoples to benefit sharing. This article analyses the impact of this mechanism on indigenous peoples’ lives. While the definition and scope of benefit sharing is still being shaping at international level, its implementation depends on the political and economic interests at national level. The case of Shuar communities in Ecuador affected by the Mirador and San Carlos Panatza mining project illustrates how a top-down hierarchical approach to implementation leads to violent confrontation between state, corporations and indigenous peoples.

A Bird’s-Eye View of Arctic Governance: Reflecting on the Role of International Law in Arctic Cooperation from a Bird Conservation Perspective

2009 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 401-426
Author(s):  
Arie Trouwborst
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Environmental Governance ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Bird Conservation ◽  
Uria Lomvia ◽  
Ivory Gull ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Binding Agreement

Abstract This article discusses the role of international law in environmental governance in the Arctic. It does so from the perspective of bird conservation. Challenges in the latter field are introduced, including the impact of climate change on Arctic bird habitats and the incidental mortality of seabirds in Arctic fisheries. The ability of the current international legal framework in the Arctic to meet these challenges is scrutinised, and future scenarios for its enhancement are explored, including the conclusion of (a) new legally binding agreement(s). Five species receive particular attention as part of this exercise: gyrfalcon (Falco rusticolus), ivory gull (Pagophila eburnea), spoon-billed sandpiper (Eurynorhynchus pygmeus), Kittlitz’s murrelet (Brachyramphus brevirostris) and Brünnich’s guillemot (Uria lomvia). Special attention is also devoted to the issue of seabird bycatch.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document