In this essay, I will examine the theory of territorial rights developed by Anna Stilz. The overarching project of hers is to defend a system of territorially sovereign states, the defense of which is grounded in the natural rights of individuals to personal autonomy and self-preservation. She begins her theoretic project by arguing for the plausibility of the preinstitutional occupancy right, intended to grant individuals usage-rights over the earth, existing irrespective of social or moral conventions, formally defined as follows: “Occupancy Rights. A person has a preinstitutional right to occupy a particular area if (1) access to spaces in that area is fundamental to his located life plans and (2) his connection to the territory was established without any wrongdoing on his part, involving (at a minimum) no expulsion or wrongful interference with prior occupants or infringement of others’ claims to an equitable distribution of geographical space.” The condition of equitable distribution expresses a concern for proportionality.  It seems as if Stilz believes that no territorial holding will be legitimate unless it is of an appropriate scale, with regard to the holdings of others. This condition is referred to by Stilz as the fair-use proviso. The fair-use proviso concerns the occupancy claims made by individuals. Stilz also introduces conditions for a legitimate global distribution of territory, named as the full proviso. Stilz’ defines the full proviso as follows: (conditions for a legitimate global distribution of territory): “The full proviso hold that a just distribution of the earth’s spaces must (i) satisfy everyone’s basic territorial interests and (ii) grant groups with shared practice-based interests the right to use geographical space in ways that reflect these interests, so long as the groups are of sufficient size, and so far as this is institutionally feasible.” For an individual occupancy claim to be legitimate is simply that it is consistent with the conditions for a legitimate global distribution of territory, i.e. the full proviso. The full proviso and the fair-use proviso are thus inseparable parts of a whole. In what follows, if not specified otherwise, I will alternate in referring to the fair-use proviso as the fair-use proviso or simply the proviso. The full proviso will always be italicized when discussed.  The purpose of this essay is to investigate whether the fair-use proviso is satisfying in the face of some criticism. In completing this task, I will draw on an objection put forth by Lea Ypi. The objection as formulated by her is not in direct response to Stilz, however I believe we might draw on her work to formulate a powerful objection from scarcity to Stilz’ fair-use proviso. The question at stake in this essay is thus if the objection of scarcity is successful against Stilz’ fair-use proviso.

Submitted by William Justo Figueiro (williamjf) on 2015-08-28T17:53:52Z No. of bitstreams: 1 38e.pdf: 1438325 bytes, checksum: 1782ee01676020b77af210f96dda5b33 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2015-08-28T17:53:52Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 38e.pdf: 1438325 bytes, checksum: 1782ee01676020b77af210f96dda5b33 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2013-03-22 / CAPES - Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / Esta dissertação aborda a (re)construção dos direitos territoriais indígenas no cenário jurídico brasileiro, partindo de fatos histórico-jurídicos da América Latina, que tornou-se o palco da colonização/conquista europeia a partir do final do século XV e início do século XVI. A chegada do europeu conquistador teve várias dimensões, mas nesta dissertação é analisada a expulsão dos povos indígenas dos seus territórios originais e a constituição da outra face da Modernidade, cuja qual fundamentou-se na colonização e conquista das terras e povos latino-americanos. A Modernidade subalternizou os povos nativos da América Latina, embora desde o início da colonização tenha havido a previsão nas legislações da colônia brasileira de que os indígenas eram os donos naturais de suas terras originais. Avanços e retrocessos marcaram a história legislativa e constitucional brasileira quanto à causa territorial, em essencial, a indígena. A mudança na relação do Estado brasileiro com os indígenas ocorreu de forma significativa na efetivação da proteção das terras nos anos 90, com o processo de democratização do Brasil. Assim, a presente dissertação preocupa-se em analisar a relação que os indígenas possuem com as suas terras tradicionais e a relevância que a proteção dos direitos originários sobre as terras tradicionalmente ocupadas apresenta para a preservação das suas culturas. Objetiva-se analisar em que medida o respeito aos direitos territoriais indígenas serve para a preservação das culturas e dos modos de vida destes povos. Esta análise transcende os limites da disciplina jurídica, recorrendo a outras áreas do conhecimento. Os diferentes caminhos percorridos pela pesquisa tiveram a preocupação de buscar elementos para a compreensão do que são os novos direitos territoriais indígenas no Brasil, quais as características destes direitos, como o ordenamento jurídico brasileiro reage diante destes direitos e qual a percepção dos povos indígenas quanto a este assunto. Neste cenário, a discussão sobre o direito, a terra e o território, tanto a partir do exemplo de etnias regionais (Guarani, Kaingang e Charrua) como de decisões internacionais de direitos humanos, foi fundamental para o desenvolvimento desta dissertação. / This dissertation discusses the (re)construction of indigenous land rights in the Brazilian legal scenario, from historical and legal facts of Latin America, which became the stage of European colonization/conquest from the late fifteenth and early sixteenth century. The arrival of European conqueror had several dimensions, but in this dissertation analyzes the expulsion of indigenous peoples from their original territories and the establishment of the other face of Modernity, whose which was based on conquest and colonization of the lands and peoples of Latin America. The Modernity slaughtered the native peoples of Latin America, although since the beginning of colonization has been forecast by the laws of the Brazilian colony that the Indians were the natural owners of their homelands. Advances and setbacks marked the legislative and constitutional history as the Brazilian territorial question, in essence, the indigenous. The change in the relationship of the Brazilian state with the Indians occurred significantly through the effective protection of land in the 90s, with the democratization process of Brazil. Thus, this dissertation is concerned with analyzing the relationship that indigenous people have with their traditional lands and the relevance that the protection of the original rights to the lands traditionally occupied presents for the preservation of their cultures. The objective is to analyze the extent to which the respect for indigenous land rights serves to preserve the cultures and ways of life of these people. This analysis transcended the boundaries of legal discipline, using other areas of knowledge. The different paths taken by this research were concerned to seek elements for understanding which are new indigenous territorial rights in Brazil, which are the features these rights, such as the Brazilian legal system reacts to these rights and what is the perception of indigenous peoples as this matter. In this scenario, the discussion about the right, the land and the territory, both from the example of regional ethnic groups (Guarani, Kaingang and Charrua) as decisions of international human rights was essential to the development of this dissertation.

[pt] Esta tese analisa a hegemonia do agronegócio e as disputas levadas a cabo pelos movimentos sociais do campo – aqui definidos como territórios de resistência - na formação da política externa brasileira no período dos dois governos Lula (2003-2010), com ênfase nas negociações agrícolas na OMC, ALCA e no acordo União Europeia-Mercosul. Para tal, investiga como o campo brasileiro, assentado na persistência da grande propriedade fundiária, passou por uma intensa modernização e internacionalização, forjando os interesses particulares do agronegócio como um suposto interesse nacional unitário, homogêneo e sem conflitos, tentando apagar as disputas, conflitos e lutas por terra e território que marcam a história do país desde o período colonial. Os territórios de resistência considerados atrasados, residuais e fora do sistema ocupam cerca de um terço do território nacional e exercem um papel fundamental na produção e no abastecimento alimentar doméstico. A partir de um olhar pelas lentes de Gramsci e do pensamento decolonial – onde os movimentos sociais do campo interpelam a colonialidade do agro a partir de suas resistências nos territórios e nas disputas por espaço na esfera do Estado – a tese investiga como estas resistências mobilizam questões e desafios a alguns pilares fundamentais das Relações Internacionais, em especial as noções de soberania nacional, de interesse nacional e de Estados Nacionais que se relacionam a partir de territórios nacionais homogêneos. A tese investiga como esses territórios de resistência - e de futuro - indicam possibilidades de se pensar novas abordagens sobre soberania e interesse nacional, sobre o papel do Estado como condutor da política externa e sobre novas perspectivas para o papel do Brasil no mundo. / [en] This thesis analyzes the hegemony of the agribusiness sector and the disputes carried out by rural social movements - here defined as territories of resistance - in the formation of the Brazilian foreign policy in the period of the two Lula administrations (2003-2010), with an emphasis on agricultural negotiations in WTO, FTAA and the European Union-Mercosur agreement. In order to do so, it investigates how the Brazilian countryside, based on the persistence of large land ownership, went through an intense modernization and internationalization, forging the particular interests of agribusiness as a supposed unitary, homogeneous and conflict-free national interest, in an attempt to make invisible disputes, conflicts and struggles for land and territory that are part of the country’s history since the colonial period. Territories of resistance considered backward, residual and outside the system occupy about a third of the national territory and play a fundamental role in domestic food production and supply. Adopting the lens of Gramsci and of Decolonial authors - where rural social movements challenge the coloniality of the agro from their resistance in the territories and in the disputes for space in the sphere of the State - the thesis investigates how these resistances mobilize questions and challenges to some fundamental pillars of the International Relations discipline, especially the notions of national sovereignty, national interest and Nation States that relate with each other based on homogeneous national territories. The thesis investigates how these territories of resistance - and of future - indicate possibilities of thinking about new approaches regarding sovereignty and national interest, the role of the State as a driver of foreign policy and about new perspectives for the role of Brazil in the world.

Cette étude repose sur l’hypothèse selon laquelle, de l’adoption de la constitution fédérale à la Première Guerre Mondiale, l’expansion territoriale des États-Unis d’Amérique, de même que le projet fédéral, ont appelé une « construction » des règles et principes du droit international au sein même des frontières américaines. Car, en 1789 déjà, tant les États-Unis,que les États membres de la Fédération ou les Nations indiennes, revendiquent sur tout ou partie de cet espace la souveraineté que reconnaît le droit international à tout « État ». C’est alors en définissant, en aménageant, en repensant, les notions d’ « État » ou de « souveraineté » sur un territoire, les conditions de détention et de formation d’un titre territorial, ou encore en fixant la valeur juridique interne du droit international, que ces revendications seront – ou non –satisfaites. Fondé sur l’analyse de la pratique, de la doctrine et de la jurisprudence américaines durant le « long XIXe siècle », ce travail a ainsi pour objet d’interroger la question du territoire telle qu’elle se pose au sein de cet « État fédéral » territorialement souverain que constitueraient les États-Unis. Il espère ce faisant mettre au jour des constructions du droit international dont l’actualité tient à leur objet : la question du territoire aux États-Unis entre 1789 et 1914interroge en effet les principales notions et problématiques de ce droit – au premier rang desquelles celle de l’articulation spatiale des compétences. / This study is based upon the hypothesis that, from the entry into force of the federal constitution to the First World War, the United States territorial expansion, as well as the federal project, called for a « construction » of international law’s rules and principles within the American boundaries. It is to be remembered that, in 1789, the United States, the member States and the Indian Nations claimed for themselves, on parts or the whole of that space, the sovereignty that every « State » is entitled to according to international law. It is therefore by defining, adapting, or rethinking the notions of « State » or « territorial sovereignty », the conditions required for a territorial title to be held or formed, and by setting the legal status of international law, that those claims have been enforced – or not. Grounded upon the analysis of the American doctrine, practice and case law, the purpose of this study is thus to inquire about territorial issues as raised within what is usually described as a « federal State », sovereign on its territory. Because those issues, and mainly jurisdictional ones, are fundamental to international law, this work hopes to bring to light constructions of international law which are still relevant today.