scholarly journals Whose Water? A Comparative Analysis of National Laws and Regulations Recognizing Indigenous Peoples’, Afro-descendants’, and Local Communities’ Water Tenure

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  

This report presents an innovative, international comparative assessment on the extent to which various national-level legal frameworks recognize the freshwater tenure rights of Indigenous Peoples, Afro-descendants, and local communities, as well as the specific rights of women to use and govern community waters.

Land ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (10) ◽  
pp. 154
Author(s):  
Hoops ◽  
Tagliarino

The Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure (VGGT) call for governments to clearly define the term ‘public purpose’ to allow for judicial review of the goals of expropriations of property. However, recent research indicates that national-level legal frameworks that govern expropriation decision-making not only vary greatly from country to country but also often fail to comply with the VGGT standards on expropriation. This creates the potential for unpredictable and, in some cases, arbitrary applications of expropriation law in practice. Focusing on legal norms and jurisprudence applicable to ‘public purpose’ decision-making in South Africa and India, this article provides a comparative analysis of these countries’ legal frameworks as means of ascertaining (1) the current legal boundaries to decisions on the expropriation’s goal; (2) whether these boundaries comply with the VGGTs; and (3) what these two countries can learn from one another in terms enacting legislation and regulations that comply with the VGGTs. To conduct this comparative analysis, we thoroughly examine constitutional provisions, relevant case law, legislation, regulations, and relevant secondary sources to highlight the current status of India’s and South Africa’s law on ‘public purpose’ and how they relate to the VGGTs. We conclude by distilling some key findings that can inform the decisions of expropriation lawmakers in both countries, especially in South Africa where a draft Expropriation Bill is currently being considered.


2015 ◽  
Vol 49 (6) ◽  
pp. 2022-2062 ◽  
Author(s):  
REINER BUERGIN

AbstractThe conceptualization of interrelations between biological and cultural diversity since the 1980s indicates a biocultural turn in discourses and policies regarding nature conservation, sustainable development, and indigenous peoples. These interrelations frequently manifest as conflicts between local communities who derive their livelihoods and identity from their lands and resources, and external actors and institutions who claim control over these areas, invoking superior interests in nature conservation, development, and modernization. In these asymmetric conflicts over biocultural diversity, framed in discourses that demand the preservation of both biological and cultural diversity, the opportunities for local communities to assert their claims crucially depend on external discursive and legal frameworks.Based on a study of the Karen ethnic minority groups in the Thung Yai World Heritage Site in Thailand, this article explores challenges and chances for local communities to assert claims and rights to lands, resources, and self-determination in the context of the biocultural turn in environment and development discourses as well as heterogeneous legal frameworks. Human rights as individual rights are widely recognized, but may be difficult to enforce and of limited suitability in conflicts over biocultural diversity. Group rights like indigenous rights are increasingly devised to protect ethnic minorities and perpetuate cultural diversity, but are often disputed on the national level and may be ambiguous regarding heterogeneous communities. In Thailand and globally, community rights provide another promising framework with regard to conflicts over biocultural diversity if the claims of communities to livelihoods and self-determination are respected.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
◽  

This brief discusses legislative developments during COVID-19 in India, Indonesia, and the Philippines that undermine sustainable human-environment interactions and IPs’ and LCs’ broader enjoyment of their rights over their customary territories. While India, Indonesia and the Philippines have yet to ratify the Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169) (ILO 169), all three countries have ratified the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). Each of these countries has also promoted national-level tenure reforms over lands and forests, though their implementation has been weak.


2017 ◽  
Author(s):  

A new analysis from RRI provides an unprecedented assessment of legal frameworks regarding indigenous and rural women’s community forest rights in 30 developing countries comprising 78 percent of the developing world’s forests.


Shore & Beach ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 53-64
Author(s):  
Edward Atkin ◽  
Dan Reineman ◽  
Jesse Reiblich ◽  
David Revell

Surf breaks are finite, valuable, and vulnerable natural resources, that not only influence community and cultural identities, but are a source of revenue and provide a range of health benefits. Despite these values, surf breaks largely lack recognition as coastal resources and therefore the associated management measures required to maintain them. Some countries, especially those endowed with high-quality surf breaks and where the sport of surfing is accepted as mainstream, have recognized the value of surfing resources and have specific policies for their conservation. In Aotearoa New Zealand surf breaks are included within national environmental policy. Aotearoa New Zealand has recently produced Management Guidelines for Surfing Resources (MGSR), which were developed in conjunction with universities, regional authorities, not-for-profit entities, and government agencies. The MGSR provide recommendations for both consenting authorities and those wishing to undertake activities in the coastal marine area, as well as tools and techniques to aid in the management of surfing resources. While the MGSR are firmly aligned with Aotearoa New Zealand’s cultural and legal frameworks, much of their content is applicable to surf breaks worldwide. In the United States, there are several national-level and state-level statutes that are generally relevant to various aspects of surfing resources, but there is no law or policy that directly addresses them. This paper describes the MGSR, considers California’s existing governance frameworks, and examines the potential benefits of adapting and expanding the MGSR in this state.


Author(s):  
Giulia Sajeva

The conservation of environment and the protection of human rights are two of the most compelling needs of our time. Unfortunately, they are not always easy to combine and too often result in mutual harm. This book analyses the idea of biocultural rights as a proposal for harmonizing the needs of environmental and human rights. These rights, considered as a basket of group rights, are those deemed necessary to protect the stewardship role that certain indigenous peoples and local communities have played towards the environment. With a view to understanding the value and merits, as well as the threats that biocultural rights entail, the book critically assesses their foundations, content, and implications, and develops new perspectives and ideas concerning their potential applicability for promoting the socio-economic interests of indigenous people and local communities. It further explores the controversial relationship of interdependence and conflict between conservation of environment and protection of human rights.


2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 437-456
Author(s):  
María Julia Ochoa Jiménez

Abstract:In Latin America, conflict-of-law norms have not appropriately considered the cultural diversity that exists in their legal systems. However, developments towards the recognition of Indigenous peoples’ human rights, at the international and national levels, impose the task of considering such diversity. In that regard, within the conflict-of-law realm, interpersonal law offers a useful perspective. This article proposes a conflict-of-law rule that can contribute to clarity and legal certainty, offering a sound way of dealing at the national level with Indigenous peoples’ claims for restitution of property with a cultural value for them, which is framed in international instruments on human rights.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document