scholarly journals Rights of nature and the indigenous peoples in Bolivia and Ecuador: A Straitjacket for Progressive Development Politics?

2014 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rickard Lalander
Keyword(s):  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Progressive Development ◽  
Development Politics ◽  
Rights Of Nature

Reply to Bridgewater (2021), 'Response to Davies et al., 'Towards a Universal Declaration of the Rights of Wetlands"

2021 ◽  
Vol 72 (10) ◽  
pp. 1401
Author(s):  
G. T. Davies ◽  
C. M. Finlayson ◽  
E. Okuno ◽  
N. C. Davidson ◽  
R. C. Gardner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Local Knowledge ◽  
Local Communities ◽  
Universal Declaration ◽  
Legal Rights ◽  
Indigenous And Local Knowledge ◽  
Rights Of Nature ◽  
Areas Of Concern ◽  
Management Approaches ◽  
Conservation And Management

We reply to the main concerns raised by Bridgewater (2021) in his response to Davies et al. (2021a), ‘Towards a Universal Declaration of the Rights of Wetlands’. We appreciate the contribution of Bridgewater (2021) to this emerging conversation and, although we disagree with some of his assessments and statements, we do not find his points to be incompatible with support for the Declaration of the Rights of Wetlands (ROW). This reply focuses on four areas of concern raised by Bridgewater (2021). First, we describe why a wetlands-specific declaration will add important value to other Rights of Nature declarations. Second, we discuss how the ROW does not detract from, but rather can contribute to and complement, existing conservation and management approaches and mechanisms. Third, we agree on the importance of weaving Indigenous and local knowledge with other knowledges and emphasise that the ROW should not be confused with or misused to undermine the rights of Indigenous peoples and local communities. Finally, we explain how legal rights can and have been granted to non-humans, including elements of Nature, such as wetlands.

scholarly journals Decolonizing Law and expanding Human Rights: Indigenous Conceptions and the Rights of Nature in Ecuador

2019 ◽  
pp. 59-86
Author(s):  
Juan José Guzmán
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Indigenous Knowledge ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Post Colonial ◽  
Anthropological Theory ◽  
Rights Of Nature ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
Symbolic Ecology ◽  
Discourse Practice ◽  
Human Rights Discourse

This article critically addresses the crucial aspects for understanding the rights of nature as a resistance platform for indigenous peoples in Ecuador. By basing my arguments in a post-colonial approach to human rights and the concept of coloniality of power, I argue that the lack of inclusion of indigenous knowledge in human rights is a manifestation of neocolonialism. Thus, the introduction of non-Western narratives into the human rights discourse/practice is an attempt to decolonize what has traditionally been a colonialist discourse. Later on, I develop the concept of ‘rights of nature’ arguing that they are a practical example of the inclusion of indigenous narratives in human rights. In the end, the biggest problem is that the dominant Western thought does not challenge the human-nature relationships that are responsible for nature’s degradation. In this regard, I use ethnographic material, post-colonial anthropological theory, and symbolic ecology to argue that Amazonian indigenous nature ontologies —which understand the nature/culture relationship in a very different way— are contained in the rights of nature that the Ecuadorian Constitution enshrines. Therefore, becoming a legal tool with a significant potential for indigenous people’s historical justice.Received: 01 September 2019Accepted: 05 December 2019Published online: 20 December 2019

Stop Burying the Lede: The Essential Role of Indigenous Law(s) in Creating Rights of Nature

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 403-427 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erin O'Donnell ◽  
Anne Poelina ◽  
Alessandro Pelizzon ◽  
Cristy Clark
Keyword(s):  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Indigenous Leadership ◽  
Indigenous Law ◽  
The Past ◽  
Transformative Potential ◽  
Scholarly Publications ◽  
Rights Of Nature ◽  
Pluralist Approach ◽  
Rapid Emergence

AbstractThe rapid emergence of rights of Nature over the past decade across multiple contexts has fostered increasing awareness, recognition, and, ultimately, acceptance of rights of Nature by the global community. Yet, too often, both scholarly publications and news articles bury the lede – namely, that the most transformative cases of rights of Nature have been consistently influenced and often actually led by Indigenous peoples. In this article we explore the ontologies of rights of Nature and earth jurisprudence, and the intersections of these movements with the leadership of Indigenous peoples in claiming and giving effect to their own rights (while acknowledging that not all Indigenous peoples support rights of Nature). Based on early observations, we discern an emerging trend of increased efficacy, longevity, and transformative potential being linked to a strongly pluralist approach of lawmaking and environmental management. A truly transformative and pluralist ecological jurisprudence can be achieved only by enabling, and empowering, Indigenous leadership.

Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henry F. Carey
Keyword(s):  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Third Generation ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
General Direction ◽  
Cultural Rights ◽  
Progressive Development ◽  
Governmental Organizations ◽  
Non Governmental Organizations ◽  
The World ◽  
Civil And Political Rights

Economic, social, and cultural rights (ESCRs) emerged in the twentieth century as the set of “second-generation” rights after civil and political rights (CPRs). ESCRs represent the “equality” phase of human rights after the “liberty” aspect of CPRs. Despite having achieved legal respect and parity with all other CPRs, ESCRs are often perceived as having less legal clarity and required compliance in practice. ESCRs, however, have a substantial doctrine for many rights of progressive development or realization. In addition to progressive development of all the rights in the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), the Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Committee, which explains and monitors that treaty, has established a set of core obligations of states. Despite the problems inherent in the process of monitoring ESCRs, there are three major institutions which review the state of ESCRs in the world today: the United Nations (UN), states parties, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Additionally, the general direction of the literature on ESCRs is geared towards implementation and promotion of these rights. However, there is a tendency to examine ESCR violations that have a link to CPRs or to UN peace projects. There have also been various initiatives affecting second- and especially third-generation rights, such as the protection of indigenous peoples.

scholarly journals Replacing Rights with Indigenous Relationality to Reclaim Homelands

2021 ◽  
pp. 261-306
Author(s):  
Joshua L. Reid
Keyword(s):  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Historical Context ◽  
Social Constructs ◽  
Native Peoples ◽  
Wilderness Preservation ◽  
Nation States ◽  
Rights Of Nature ◽  
The Common ◽  
White Settlers

Indigenous peoples have had and continue to have contested relations with protected spaces of nature, many of which nation states have carved from Indigenous homelands and waters. Usually in the name of the common good, governments and their officials prohibit or limit Native peoples from exercising their rights in these spaces. This gives rise to conflicts and tensions that emerge from a Western rights framework that white settlers and elites have used to prioritize the rights of nature over Indigenous peoples. This chapter seeks to provide some historical context for the way that three problematic and closely related “white-settler social constructs”—wilderness, preservation, and the ecological Indian—came to shape the emergence and management of protected spaces of nature, particularly under a Western rights framework. Overall, the chapter argues that a relationality framework offers an Indigenous-based counterpoint to the rights framework, in which white settlers and elites privilege the rights of nature over those of Native peoples.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document