No description available.

Indigenous Peoples' Land Rights in Latin America Indigenous peoples' cultures are known for their collective, spiritual, intergenerational relationship to their ancestral lands. Indigenous peoples not only depend on their territories with their subsistence but also with the preservation of their distinct cultures. Lands are, however, a significant factor in the vast human rights violations to which they subject. They are often faced with the dispossession of their traditional lands and the disruption of the ecological integrity of their territories. This also affects their traditional way of life and leads to the loss of their cultures. From the 1980s, indigenous peoples have started reclaiming their rights, which has also been reflected in their position under international law. In 1989, the International Labour Organisation Convention No. 169, the Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention was adopted. This Convention anchored significantly higher standards of protection of indigenous peoples' rights to their lands. Above all, it abandoned the patriarchal approach of the International Labour Organisation's Convention No. 107, the Indigenous and Tribal Populations Convention. Convention No. 169, moreover, addresses indigenous peoples as 'peoples' rather than 'populations', as was the case in its...

No description available.

This study has the aim to analyze what impacts land grabbing in Rift Valley, Kenya, has on rural poor, as it is perceived from a gendered perspective. Land acquisitions, or land grabbing, is a growing global phenomenon, where companies and states (foreign and domestic) are claiming land for investments, to secure the growing demand for food and biofuels, with neg-ative impacts on the rural population. Most exposed are the rural poor women. The gender issue is however not analyzed in a proper way in the debate, which is why study is important.In Rift Valley, Kenya the situation is slightly different with domestic actors standing behind the grabs. The consequences are nonetheless felt by the rural poor population, especially by the women. Through field studies and interviews with women exposed to the phenomenon I have found that even though legislation exists to provide human rights, these are often violat-ed on the ground. Women’s experiences are examined and together with other first- and sec-ondary sources these are analyzed with the theoretical lens of post-colonial feminism and the capabilities approach, leading to the conclusion that women are more vulnerable for land grabs but are capable actors fighting to make their lives better.

Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD+) is a global carbon trading program intent on mitigating or reversing carbon emissions from forestry in the global south. REDD+ was negotiated at the 2005 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and is coordinated by the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF), administered by the World Bank Group. In this project, I explore REDD+ activity in Costa Rica, drawing on Michel Foucault's concept of governmentality. Costa Rica became a participant in the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility in July of 2008. Since then, indigenous peoples throughout the country have contested the program. This project is a single-case study of the Bribri contestation of REDD+ schemes, one of the larger indigenous communities in Costa Rica. Bribri argue that REDD+ disrespects their worldview and further endangers their local rights to land and forestry. This project argues that REDD+ and Bribri have different perceptions of nature, enabling disagreement on REDD+ goals. Whereas REDD+ perceives nature as commodifiable for the purposes of neoliberal climate policies, Bribri express a spiritual, harmonious relationship with nature. I conclude by noting that REDD+ can pose negative implications for indigenous life and culture. This is not only because REDD+ draws external and domestic actors to land and forestry for incentive-based purposes. But also because REDD+ defines 'rightful behavior' among forestry resources, challenging indigenous conceptions of environmental management. However, the Bribri are resisting REDD+ imposition and, particularly, the program's external governing of indigenous behavior amongst forests. / Master of Arts

日人領台後，以母國利益為最高統治方針，積極從事殖民地治理，為獲取殖民地資源與利益，在台從事資本主義化經濟發展。領台之初，首先宣佈維持台人私有土地權利，承認原有交易舊慣，並以律令排除日本民事不動產法在台實施，建立私有地權制度。1898年9月，後藤開始進行土地調查事業，劃分公、私所有權；收買大租權，將複雜地權關係，轉變為單一性土地所有權，建立現代性地權制度，成果非常豐碩，對台灣發展甚具貢獻。1910年後開始辦理之林野調查事業，因未經詳細籌備規劃，加上經費人力不足，草率進行調查，致成果有限，由於林野調查時土地產權歸屬之查定不當，引發地權爭議，延續至今仍未解決。 1905年首創土地登記制，以土地調查時申報手續及所製作之地籍圖冊，視同完成土地總登記程續，頒布「台灣土地登記規則」，規定業主權、典權、胎權、贌耕權之得喪變更，非經登記，不生效力，此期屬強制登記時期。1922年受到內地延長主義統治方針影響，決定從1923年起，日本內地民法、不動產登記法在台實施，改採任意登記制，規定不動產物權之取得、設定、移轉變更，只要當事人間書面契約簽定後，即生物權變動效力，但登記則可對抗第三人。另外，允准祭祀公業繼續存在，得為土地登記之主體，讓祭祀公業土地續存下來。 台灣總督府獎勵資本主義化經濟發展的結果，導致地權分配不均，形成小佃農大地主結構，租佃制度盛行，更由於租佃關係惡化，引發農民運動，要求政府從事地權改革，但因受台共份子滲透，導致被嚴厲鎮壓，台灣農民運動因而終止。 1945年日本宣布無條件投降，台灣改由國民政府接收，接收時，保留土地私有制度，承認台人原有土地權利，但排除日人於外，將日人及官有土地，一律收歸國有。將土地登記制度加以變更，由任意登記制改為強制登記制。經土地清理之後，就著手租佃制度改善，實施三七五減租，保護佃農權利，將租佃關係徹底改良，然後再推行耕者有其田，扶持自耕農，對日人所留不良地權重新調整分配，戰後地權改革成功，具有時代重要意義，對台灣爾後發展有所貢獻。 本文以歷史研究法，透過對地權制度變遷之考察，探析台灣地權制度形成與變遷之要因，進而掌握日治時期地權制度之主要面貌。研究發現整個制度之變遷，是緩慢逐漸進行，非遽然大改變；整個制度的變遷屬強制性，由台灣總督府主導推動，引進日本近代化地權概念與現代性民事法，對台灣舊地權制度進行改革，這種具現代化地權制度與法規，對當期經濟有所裨益，更對台灣百年來發展具深遠意義。 / After the Japanese rule in Taiwan, safeguard national interests of Japan ruled Taiwan as the highest policy and actively engaged in colonial governance. To obtain the resources and interests of the colonial, capitalist engaged in Taiwan's economic development. When Japan began to rule in Taiwan, was first announced to maintain private ownership of land rights to the people of Taiwan and recognize the original trading habits. Civil law and real estate law to exclude Japan in Taiwan to implement the establishment of private land rights system. September 1898, after the vines begin investigating the cause of the land, dividing the public and private ownership; buying large rental rights, the complex relationship between land ownership, land ownership into a unity, establishing a modern system of land ownership, the results are very fruitful, Taiwan development of a great contribution. Because of the investigative career of forest land which implementation at 1910 years. Owing without detailed plan and lack of funding on the procession. Cause had a bad result, It have lead to land ownership disputes, continues to this day remains unresolved. In 1905 the first land registration system in order when the land survey reporting procedures and the production of cadastral atlas, deemed to have satisfied the total land registration procedures, promulgated Taiwan land registration rules require owners the right to have funeral lien rights, fetal rights, farming rights change, and by the registration, not take effect, this is a mandatory registration period. 1922 by the mainland to extend the principle of domination influence decisions from 1923 onwards, the Japanese mainland civil law, real estate registration law implemented in Taiwan, shift to any registration system, made of real property provisions, setting migration changes, as long as between the parties in writing after the contract was signed, that the effect of changes in biological rights, but may be registered against a third party. In addition, the public sector continues to exist authorized worship, was the subject of registration of land for public sector land ritual survives. Results of the Taiwan Governor award capitalist economic development, resulting in uneven distribution of land ownership, structure formation sharecroppers Squires, tenancy system prevailed, but due to the deterioration of the tenancy relationship, causing the peasant movement, asked the Government to engage in land tenure reform, but because by the Taiwan Communist infiltration, resulting in back harsh repression, Taiwan peasant Movement terminated‧ Japan's unconditional surrender in 1945, Taiwan changed files received by the national government, to retain private land ownership receive, recognize Taiwan original land rights, but the Japanese are excluded, the Japanese and the Crown all the land, should be nationalized . To change the land registration system by any registration system to a mandatory registration system. After the land is cleared, proceed tenancy system and land ownership reform, the implementation of rent reduction, protection of the rights of tenants, the tenancy relationship completely modified, then the implementation of land to the tiller, to support farmers, bad for the Japanese left re-adjust the distribution of land ownership, land rights reform postwar success, the era of great significance for the future development of Taiwan's major contribution.

Thesis (LLM (Public Law))--University of Stellenbosch, 2009. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The 1996 Constitution provides in s 25(7) that individuals and communities who had been dispossessed of rights in land after 19 June 1913, as a result of past discriminatory laws, may claim restitution or equitable redress. The Restitution of Land Rights Act 22 of 1994 reiterates the 1913 cut-off date for restitution claims. The cut-off date appears to preclude pre-1913 land dispossessions. Various reasons are cited for this date, the most obvious being that it reflects the date on which the Black Land Act came into effect. The Richtersveld and Popela decisions of the lower courts appear to confirm the view that historically based land claims for dispossessions that occurred prior to 1913 are excluded from the restitution process. In Australia and Canada restitution orders have been made possible by the judicially crafted doctrine of aboriginal land rights. However, historical restitution claims based on this doctrine are constrained by the assumption that the Crown, in establishing title during colonisation, extinguished all existing titles to land. This would have meant that the indigenous proprietary systems would have been lost irrevocably through colonisation. In seeking to overcome the sovereignty issue, Australian and Canadian courts have distinguished between the loss of sovereignty and the loss of title to land. In this way, the sovereignty of the Crown is left intact while restitution orders are rendered possible. South African courts do not have to grapple with the sovereignty issue since post-apartheid legislation authorises the land restitution process. The appeal decisions in Richtersveld and Popela recognised that some use rights survived the colonial dispossession of ownership. This surviving right was later the subject of a second dispossession under apartheid. By using this construction, which is not unlike the logic of the doctrine of aboriginal title in fragmenting proprietary interests, the second dispossession could then be said to meet the 1913 cut-off date, so that all historically based land claims are not necessarily excluded by the 1913 cut-off date. However, it is still possible that some pre-1913 dispossessions could not be brought under the umbrella of the Richtersveld and Popela construction, and the question whether historically based restitution claims are possible despite the 1913 cut-off date will resurface, especially if the claimants are not accommodated in the government’s land redistribution programme / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die 1996 Grondwet bepaal in a 25(7) dat individue en gemeenskappe wat na 19 Junie 1913 van ‘n reg in grond ontneem is, as gevolg van rasgebaseerde wetgewing en praktyke, geregtig is om herstel van sodanige regte of gelykwaardige vergoeding te eis. Die Wet op Herstel van Grondregte 22 van 1994herhaal die 1913-afsnydatum vir grondeise. Dit lyk dus asof die afsnydatum die ontneming van grond voor 1913 uitsluit. Verskeie redes word vir hierdie datum aangevoer, waarvan die bekendste is dat dit die datum is waarop die Swart Grond Wet in werking getree het. Dit beslissing van die laer howe in beide die Richtersveld- en die Popela-beslissings bevestig blykbaar dat ontneming van grond of regte in grond voor 1913 van die restitusie-proses uitgesluit word. In Australië en Kanada is restitusiebevele moontlik gemaak deur die leerstuk van inheemse grondregte. Historiese restitusie-eise in hierdie jurisdiksies word egter aan bande gelê deur die veronderstelling dat die Kroon, deur die vestiging van titel gedurende kolonialisering, alle vorige titels op die grond uitgewis het. Dit sou beteken dat die inheemsregtelike grondregsisteme onherroeplik verlore geraak het deur kolonialisering. Ten einde die soewereiniteitsprobleem te oorkom het die Australiese en Kanadese howe onderskei tussen die verlies van soewereiniteit en die verlies van titel tot die grond. Op hierdie wyse word die soewereiniteit van die Kroon onaangeraak gelaat terwyl restitusiebevele steeds ‘n moontlikheid is. Suid-Afrikaanse howe het nie nodig gehad om die soewereiniteitskwessie aan te spreek nie omdat post-apartheid wetgewing die herstel van grondregte magtig. Die appélbeslissings in Richtersveld en Popela erken dat sekere gebruiksregte die koloniale ontneming van eiendom oorleef het. Die oorblywende gebruiksregte is later ‘n tweede keer ontneem as gevolg van apartheid. Deur gebruikmaking van hierdie konstruksie, wat dieselfde logika volg as die leerstuk van inheemsregtelike regte en berus op fragmentasie van eiendomsaansprake, kan gesê word dat die tweede ontneming van grond wel binne die 1913-afsnydatum val. Gevolglik sal alle historiese restitusie-eise nie noodwendig deur die 1913- afsnydatum uitgesluit word nie. Dit is steeds moontlik dat sommige pre-1913 ontnemings nooit onder die vaandel van die Richtersveld- en Popela-beslissings gebring sal kan word nie, en die vraag of histories gebaseerde eise moontlik is ongeag die 1913-afsnydatum sal daarom weer opduik, veral indien die grondeisers nie geakkommodeer word in die grondherverdelingsprogram van die staat nie.

This research is based upon fieldwork carried out in 2005 and 2006 among Truku people, a Taiwanese indigenous group living in eastern Taiwan. It examines the transformation of the relationship between women and land, and explores meanings related to women’s ownership of land since the government introduced the privatisation of land ownership and cash cropping into Truku society in the 1960s. However, the imposition of these programmes of land reform and capitalisation has generated various types of conflict over land in Truku society. Since the 1960s, Truku people have suffered from loss of lands, arising from various governmental policies on economic development. Hence, many land reclamation movements have arisen, organised by Truku people in order to reclaim their land rights. Furthermore, the transformation of property relations has generated many conflicts over land and inheritance between different households and has created tensions between women and men in terms of land ownership in contemporary society. Most importantly, I reflect on the prevalent idea that women’s right to own land is not sanctioned by ‘traditional’ Truku culture, an argument which, I argue, is problematic, because the idea does not (neatly) fit into actual Truku practices of property transaction. Truku people strategically make use of this narrative of ‘tradition’ in order to strengthen their own tactical position in land disputes which arise between different households. Furthermore, I am critical of the emphasis placed on masculine or male Truku culture in this narrative, which is constructed by Truku activists in land reclamation movements in contemporary Truku society. Through investigation of the processes by which women obtain land in Truku society, I argue that women’s ownership of land cannot simply be regarded as a consequence of the implications of privatisation, but is also a result of kinship practices and their work in cultivating land and maintaining the economic well-being of the household in contemporary society. This research attempts to contribute to anthropological perspectives on property relations, economic anthropology, gender studies, kinship studies and studies of indigenous movements in Taiwan.

Student Number: 9606978D Masters in Social Anthropology School of Social Sciences / This thesis is an examination of the ways in which people in Barkly East, a small town in the Eastern Cape, attribute feelings of belonging to the land they own and work. In a country such as South Africa, where the contestation of land is prominent and so integral to the political and social discourse, questions related to the idea of belonging are necessary and important. Significant questions addressed by this thesis are: Who belongs and why do they feel they belong? More importantly, the question of who does not belong, is addressed. In Barkly East a tug of war exists between groups and individuals who want matters to remain constant and those who need the status quo to change. What stands out, moreover, in this community, is its duality on many levels of society, which is played out both consciously and unconsciously. This duality is also manifested through social, racial and economic relations, and is supported by an unequal access to land. This thesis identifies three main elements which contribute to the creation of narratives of belonging in Barkly East. Firstly, history and the perception of history create strong links between personal and communal identity, which in turn reinforces and legitimises claims of belonging. Secondly, hierarchy in terms of gender and race plays an important part in this narration, as some residents are more empowered in this process due to either their gender or race. And three, the connection to the land that people appear to have, plays a definitive role in narratives of belonging. Those who feel they have a heritage in this place also feel a connection to the land. For this reason, land for these people embody, not only the physical space of ‘somewhere to belong to’, but becomes an integral ingredient to the act of belonging and even identity formation.

<p>In this full thesis, I explore the impact that HIV and AIDS pandemic is having in the livelihood strategies of rural women in Mozambique. My intention in this work is to highlight the navigation of Mozambican women through this harsh era. I establish a discussion about land as major asset in a poor and mainly agricultural country like Mozambique. And the fact that many scholars and policy makers are concerned about the escalating number of young widows that have had their land and other assets expropriated after the deaths of their husbands, mainly due to the HIV and AIDS pandemic. The convergence of the colonization process, the civil war (that took over 16 years in Mozambique) and the modernization/development process have been systematically trapping women in the interface between traditional and modern social organization. Now, with the spread of HIV and AIDS, young women and children whose only source of subsistence is their land have been losing their traditional rights, and they face the cultural changes brought about by a new social order that does not support them and their children after the death of a husband or father.</p>