Dancer of the Save Our Ancestors Remains and Resources Indigenous Network Group (SOARRING) Foundation (2020)
Indigenous peoples, also referred to as first people, aboriginal people, native people, or autochthonous people, are culturally distinct ethnic groups who are native to a particular place. The term indigenous was first, in its modern context, used by Europeans, who used it to differentiate the indigenous peoples of the Americas from black people who were brought to the Americas as slaves from Africa. It may have first been used in this context by Sir Thomas Browne in 1646, who stated "and although in many parts thereof there be at present swarms of Negroes serving under the Spaniard, yet were they all transported from Africa, since the discovery of Columbus; and are not indigenous or proper natives of America."[1][2]
Peoples are usually described as indigenous when they maintain traditions or other aspects of an early culture that is associated with a given region.[3] Not all indigenous peoples share this characteristic, as many have adopted substantial elements of a colonizing culture, such as dress, religion or language. Indigenous peoples may be settled in a given region (sedentary) or exhibit a nomadic lifestyle across a large territory, but they are generally historically associated with a specific territory on which they depend. Indigenous societies are found in every inhabited climate zone and continent of the world except Antarctica.[4] It is estimated that there are approximately five thousand indigenous nations throughout the world.[5]
Since at least the 15th century, indigenous peoples' homelands have been invaded and occupied by European colonizers, who initially justified colonization under the authority of the Catholic Church to spread Christianity through the Doctrine of Discovery.[6] Thousands of indigenous nations throughout the world remain occupied by about two hundred political constructs known as states which formed as a result of colonialism.[7] Indigenous peoples continue to face threats to their sovereignty, economic well-being, languages, ways of knowing, and access to the resources on which their cultures depend. Indigenous rights have been set forth in international law by the United Nations, the International Labour Organization, and the World Bank.[8] In 2007, the UN issued a Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) to guide member-state national policies to the collective rights of indigenous peoples, including culture, identity, language and access to employment, health, quality education and natural resources.[9]
Estimates of the total global population of indigenous peoples usually range from 250 million to 600 million.[10] This is because official designations and terminology on who is considered Indigenous vary widely between countries. In settler states colonized by Europeans, such as in the Americas, Australia, New Zealand, and Oceania, Indigenous status is generally unproblematically applied to groups descended from peoples who lived there prior to European settlement. In Asia and Africa, where the majority of indigenous peoples live, indigenous population figures are less clear and may fluctuate dramatically as states tend to underreport the population of indigenous peoples or define them by different terminology.[11]
Etymology
Indigenous is derived from the Latin word indigena, meaning "sprung from the land, native" and -genus "to be born from."[12] The Latin indigena is based on the Old Latinindu "in, within" + gignere "to beget, produce." Indu is from the archaic Greek word endo, "in, within," which is an extended form of the Proto-Indo-Europeanen or "in."[13] The origins of the term indigenous are not related in any way to the origins of the term Indian, which, until recently, was commonly applied to indigenous peoples of the Americas.[14] Any given people, ethnic group or community may be described as indigenous.[15]
Autochthonous originates from the Greek αὐτός autós meaning self/own, and χθών chthon meaning Earth. The term is based in the Indo-European root dhghem- (earth). The earliest documented use of this term was in 1804.[16]
Definitions
Taino Indigenous people
The term 'indigenous peoples' refers to culturally distinct groups affected by colonization. As a reference to a group of people, the term indigenous first came into use by Europeans who used it to differentiate the indigenous peoples of the Americas from enslavedAfricans. It may have first been used in this context by Sir Thomas Browne. In Chapter 10 of Pseudodoxia Epidemica (1646) entitled "Of the Blackness of Negroes," Browne wrote "and although in many parts thereof there be at present swarms of Negroes serving under the Spaniard, yet were they all transported from Africa, since the discovery of Columbus; and are not indigenous or proper natives of America."[1][2]
In the 1970s, the term was used as a way of linking the experiences, issues, and struggles of groups of colonized people across international borders. At this time 'indigenous people(s)' also began to be used to describe a legal category in indigenous law created in international and national legislation. The use of the 's' in 'peoples' recognizes that there are real differences between different indigenous peoples.[17][18]James Anaya, former Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, defined indigenous peoples as "living descendants of pre-invasion inhabitants of lands now dominated by others. They are culturally distinct groups that find themselves engulfed by other settler societies born of forces of empire and conquest".[19][20]
National definitions
Throughout history, different states designate the groups within their boundaries that are recognized as indigenous peoples according to international or national legislation by different terms. Indigenous people also include people indigenous based on their descent from populations that inhabited the country when non-indigenous religions and cultures arrived—or at the establishment of present state boundaries—who retain some or all of their own social, economic, cultural and political institutions, but who may have been displaced from their traditional domains or who may have resettled outside their ancestral domains.[21]
The status of the indigenous groups in the subjugated relationship can be characterized in most instances as an effectively marginalized or isolated in comparison to majority groups or the nation-state as a whole. Their ability to influence and participate in the external policies that may exercise jurisdiction over their traditional lands and practices is very frequently limited. This situation can persist even in the case where the indigenous population outnumbers that of the other inhabitants of the region or state; the defining notion here is one of separation from decision and regulatory processes that have some, at least titular, influence over aspects of their community and land rights.[22]
The presence of external laws, claims and cultural mores either potentially or actually act to variously constrain the practices and observances of an indigenous society. These constraints can be observed even when the indigenous society is regulated largely by its own tradition and custom. They may be purposefully imposed, or arise as unintended consequence of trans-cultural interaction. They may have a measurable effect, even where countered by other external influences and actions deemed beneficial or that promote indigenous rights and interests.[21]
Indigenous communities, peoples, and nations are those that, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing in those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop, and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal systems.[25]
The primary impetus in considering indigenous identity comes from considering the historical impacts of European colonialism. A 2009 United Nations report published by the Secretariat of the Permanent Forum on indigenous Issues stated:[26]
For centuries, since the time of their colonization, conquest or occupation, Indigenous peoples have documented histories of resistance, interface or cooperation with states, thus demonstrating their conviction and determination to survive with their distinct sovereign identities. Indeed, Indigenous peoples were often recognized as sovereign peoples by states, as witnessed by the hundreds of treaties concluded between Indigenous peoples and the governments of the United States, Canada, New Zealand and others. And yet as indigenous populations dwindled, and the settler populations grew ever more dominant, states became less and less inclined to recognize the sovereignty of indigenous peoples. Indigenous peoples themselves, at the same time, continued to adapt to changing circumstances while maintaining their distinct identity as sovereign peoples.[27]
The World Health Organization defines indigenous populations as follows: "communities that live within, or are attached to, geographically distinct traditional habitats or ancestral territories, and who identify themselves as being part of a distinct cultural group, descended from groups present in the area before modern states were created and current borders defined. They generally maintain cultural and social identities, and social, economic, cultural and political institutions, separate from the mainstream or dominant society or culture."[28]
History
Classical antiquity
Greek sources of the Classical period acknowledge people whom they referred to as "Pelasgians". These peoples inhabited lands surrounding the Aegean Sea before the subsequent migrations of the Hellenic ancestors claimed by these authors. The disposition and precise identity of this former group is elusive, and sources such as Homer, Hesiod and Herodotus give varying, partially mythological accounts. However, it is clear that these cultures were distinguished by the subsequent Hellenic cultures (and distinct from non-Greek speaking 'foreigners,' termed "barbarians" by the historical Greeks). Greco-Roman society flourished between 330BCE and 640CE and commanded successive waves of conquests that gripped more than half of the known world at the time. But because already existent populations within other parts of Europe at the time of classical antiquity had more in common culturally speaking with the Greco-Roman world, the intricacies involved in expansion across the European frontier were not so contentious relative to indigenous issues.[29]
The Doctrine of Discovery is a legal and religious concept tied to the Roman Catholic Church which rationalized and 'legalized' colonization and the conquering of indigenous peoples in the eyes of Christianized Europeans. The roots of the Doctrine go back as far as the fifth century popes and leaders in the church who had ambitions of forming a global Christian commonwealth. The Crusades (1096-1271) were based on this ambition of a holy war against who the church saw as infidels. Pope Innocent IV's writings from 1240 were particularly influential. He argued that Christians were justified in invading and acquiring infidel's lands because it was the church's duty to control the spiritual health of all humans on Earth.[6]
The Doctrine developed further in the 15th century after the conflict between the Teutonic Knights and Poland to control 'pagan' Lithuania. At the Council of Constance (1414), the Knights argued that their claims were "authorized by papal proclamations dating from the time of the Crusades [which] allowed the outright confiscation of the property and sovereign rights of heathens." The council disagreed, stating that non-Christians had claims to rights of sovereignty and property under European natural law. However, the council upheld that conquests could 'legally' occur if non-Christians refused to comply with Christianization and European natural law. This effectively meant that peoples who were not considered 'civilized' by European standards or otherwise refused to assimilate under Christian authority were subject to war and forced assimilation: "Christians simply refused to recognize the right of non-Christians to remain free of Christian dominion."[6]
Christian Europeans had already begun invading and colonizing lands outside of Europe before the Council of Constance, demonstrating how the Doctrine was applied to non-Christian indigenous peoples outside Europe. In the 14th and 15th centuries, the indigenous peoples of what are now referred to as the Canary Islands, known as Guanches (who had lived on the islands since the BCE era) became the subject of colonizers' attention. The Guanches had remained undisturbed and relatively 'forgotten' by Europeans until Portugal began surveying the island for potential settlement in 1341. In 1344, a papal bull was issued which assigned the islands to Castile, a kingdom in Spain. In 1402, the Spanish began efforts to invade and colonize the islands.[30] By 1436, a new papal edict was issued by Pope Eugenius IV known as Romanus Pontifex which authorized Portugal to convert the indigenous peoples to Christianity and control the islands on behalf of the pope.[6] The Guanches resisted European invasion until the surrender of the Guanche kings of Tenerife to Spain in 1496. The invaders brought destruction and diseases to the Guanche people, whose identity and culture disappeared as a result.[30][31][32]
Portuguese possessions in North Africa (1415–1769)
As Portugal expanded southward into North Africa in the 15th century, new edicts were added by subsequent popes which extended Portuguese authority over indigenous peoples. In 1455, Pope Nicholas V re-issued the Romanus Pontifex with more direct language, authorizing Portugal "to invade, search out, capture, vanquish, and subdue all Saracens and pagans" as well as allowing non-Christians to be placed in slavery and have their property stolen. As stated by Robert J. Miller, Jacinta Ruru, Larissa Behrendt, and Tracey Lindberg, the doctrine developed over time "to justify the domination of non-Christian, non-European peoples and the confiscations of their lands and rights." Because Portugal was granted 'permissions' by the papacy to expand in Africa, Spain was urged to move westward across the Atlantic Ocean, searching to convert and conquer indigenous peoples in what they would understand as the 'New World.' This division of the world between Spain and Portugal was formalized with the Treaty of Tordesillas in 1494.[6]
Spanish King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella hired Christopher Columbus, who was dispatched in 1492, to colonize and bring new lands under the Spanish crown. Columbus 'discovered' a few islands in the Caribbean as early as 1493 and Ferdinand and Isabella immediately asked the pope to 'ratify' the discovery. In 1493, Pope Alexander VI issued the Inter caetera divinai, which affirmed that since the islands had been "undiscovered by others" that they were now under Spanish authority. Alexander granted Spain any lands that it discovered as long as they had not been "previously possessed by any Christian owner." The beginnings of European colonialism in the 'New World' effectively formalized the Doctrine of Discovery into 'international law,' which at that time meant law that was agreed upon by Spain, Portugal, and the Catholic Church. Indigenous peoples were not consulted or included in these arrangements.[6]
Depiction of a Spaniard entering Chalco with three Tlaxcalan soldiers and an indigenous porter in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (pre-1585).
Spain issued the Spanish Requirement of 1513 (Requiremento), a document that was intended to inform indigenous peoples that "they must accept Spanish missionaries and sovereignty or they would be annihilated." The document was supposed to be read to indigenous peoples so that they theoretically could accept or reject the proposal before any war against them could be waged: "the Requiremento informed the natives of their natural law obligations to hear the gospel and that their lands had been donated to Spain." Refusal by indigenous peoples meant that, in the Spaniard's eyes, war could 'justifiably' be waged against them. Many conquistadors apparently feared that, if given the option, indigenous peoples would actually accept Christianity, which would legally not permit invasion of their lands and the theft of their belongings. Legal scholars Robert J. Miller, Jacinta Rura, Larissa Behrendt, and Tracey Lindberg record that this commonly resulted in Spanish invaders reading the document aloud "in the night to the trees" or reading it "to the land from their ships." The scholars remark: "so much for legal formalism and the free will and natural law rights of New World Indigenous peoples."[33]
Being Catholic countries in 1493, England as well as France worked to 're-interpret' the Doctrine of Discovery to serve their own colonial interests. In the 16th century, England established a new interpretation of the Doctrine: "the new theory, primarily developed by English legal scholars, argued that the Catholic King Henry VII of England, would not violate the 1493 papal bulls, which divided the world for the Spanish and Portuguese." This interpretation was also supported by Elizabeth I's legal advisors in the 1580s and effectively set a precedent among European colonial nations that the first Christian nation to occupy land was the 'legal' owner and that this had to be respected in international law. This rationale was used in the colonization of what was to become the American colonies. James I stated in the First Virginia Charter (1606) and the Charter to the Council of New England (1620) that colonists could be given property rights because the lands were "not now actually possessed by any Christian Prince or People...." English monarchs issued that colonists should spread Christianity "to those [who] as yet live in Darkness and miserable Ignorance of the true Knowledge and Worship of God, [and] to bring the Infidels and Savages, living in those parts, to human civility, and to a settled and quiet Government."[33]
This approach to colonization of indigenous lands resulted in an acceleration of exploration and land claiming, particularly by France, England, and Holland. Land claims were made through symbolic "rituals of discovery" that were performed to illustrate the colonizing nation's legal claim to the land. Markers of possession such as crosses, flags, and plates claiming possession and other symbols became important in this contest to claim indigenous lands. In 1642, Dutch explorers were ordered to set up posts and a plate that asserted their intention to establish a colony on the land. In the 1740s, French explorers buried lead plates at various locations to reestablish their 17th century land claims to Ohio country. The French plates were later discovered by indigenous peoples of the Ohio River. Upon contact with English explorers, the English noted that the lead plates were monuments "of the renewal of [French] possession" of the land. In 1774, Captain James Cook attempted to invalidate Spanish land claims to Tahiti by removing their marks of possession and then proceeding to set up English marks of possession. When the Spanish learned of this action, they quickly sent an explorer to reestablish their claim to the land.[33]
The English developed the legal concept of terra nullius (land that is null or void) or vacuum domicilium (empty or vacant house) to validate their lands claims over indigenous peoples' homelands. This concept formalized the idea that lands which were not being used in a manner that European legal systems approved of were open for European colonization. Historian Henry Reynolds captured this perspective in his statement that "Europeans regarded North America as a vacant land that could be claimed by right of discovery." These new legal concepts were developed in order to diminish reliance on papal authority to authorize or justify colonization claims.[33]
As the 'rules' of colonization became established into legal doctrine agreed upon by between European colonial powers, methods of laying claims to indigenous lands continued to expand rapidly. As encounters between European colonizers and indigenous populations in the rest of the world accelerated, so did the introduction of infectious diseases, which sometimes caused local epidemics of extraordinary virulence. For example, smallpox, measles, malaria, yellow fever, and other diseases were unknown in pre-Columbian Americas and Oceania.
Although the establishment of colonies throughout the world by various European powers was intended to expand their nation's wealth and influence, settler populations in some localities became anxious to assert their own autonomy. For example, settler independence movements in the American colonies were successful by 1783, following the American Revolutionary War. This resulted in the establishment of the United States of America as a separate entity from British Empire. The United States continued and expanded European colonial doctrine through adopting the Doctrine of Discovery as the law of the American federal government in 1823 with the US Supreme Court case Johnson v. M'Intosh. Statements at the Johnson court case illuminated the United States' support for the principles of the discovery doctrine:[34]
The United States ... [and] its civilized inhabitants now hold this country. They hold, and assert in themselves, the title by which it was acquired. They maintain, as all others have maintained, that discovery gave an exclusive right to extinguish the Indian title of occupancy, either by purchase or by conquest; and gave also a right to such a degree of sovereignty, as the circumstances of the people would allow them to exercise. ... [This loss of native property and sovereignty rights was justified, the Court said, by] the character and religion of its inhabitants ... the superior genius of Europe ... [and] ample compensation to the [Indians] by bestowing on them civilization and Christianity, in exchange for unlimited independence.[34]
Indigenous societies range from those who have been significantly exposed to the colonizing or expansionary activities of other societies (such as the Maya peoples of Mexico and Central America) through to those who as yet remain in comparative isolation from any external influence (such as the Sentinelese and Jarawa of the Andaman Islands).
Precise estimates for the total population of the world's indigenous peoples are very difficult to compile, given the difficulties in identification and the variances and inadequacies of available census data. The United Nations estimates that there are over 370 million indigenous people living in over 70 countries worldwide.[35] This would equate to just fewer than 6% of the total world population. This includes at least 5,000 distinct peoples[36] in over 72 countries.
Contemporary distinct indigenous groups survive in populations ranging from only a few dozen to hundreds of thousands and more. Many indigenous populations have undergone a dramatic decline and even extinction, and remain threatened in many parts of the world. Some have also been assimilated by other populations or have undergone many other changes. In other cases, indigenous populations are undergoing a recovery or expansion in numbers.
Certain indigenous societies survive even though they may no longer inhabit their "traditional" lands, owing to migration, relocation, forced resettlement or having been supplanted by other cultural groups. In many other respects, the transformation of culture of indigenous groups is ongoing, and includes permanent loss of language, loss of lands, encroachment on traditional territories, and disruption in traditional ways of life due to contamination and pollution of waters and lands.
Environmental and economic benefits of having indigenous peoples tend land
A WRI report mentions that “tenure-secure” indigenous lands generates billions and sometimes trillions of dollars’ worth of benefits in the form of carbon sequestration, reduced pollution, clean water and more. It says that tenure-secure indigenous lands have low deforestation rates,[37][38] they help to reduce GHG emissions, control erosion and flooding by anchoring soil, and provide a suite of other local, regional and global ecosystem services. However, many of these communities find themselves on the front lines of the deforestation crisis, and their lives and livelihoods threatened.[39][40][41]
Indigenous populations are distributed in regions throughout the globe. The numbers, condition and experience of indigenous groups may vary widely within a given region. A comprehensive survey is further complicated by sometimes contentious membership and identification.
Starting fire by hand, San people in Botswana.Nama man greeting visitors.
In the post-colonial period, the concept of specific indigenous peoples within the African continent has gained wider acceptance, although not without controversy. The highly diverse and numerous ethnic groups that comprise most modern, independent African states contain within them various peoples whose situation, cultures and pastoralist or hunter-gatherer lifestyles are generally marginalized and set apart from the dominant political and economic structures of the nation. Since the late 20th century these peoples have increasingly sought recognition of their rights as distinct indigenous peoples, in both national and international contexts.
Though the vast majority of African peoples are indigenous in the sense that they originate from that continent, in practice, identity as an indigenous people per the modern definition is more restrictive, and certainly not every African ethnic group claims identification under these terms. Groups and communities who do claim this recognition are those who, by a variety of historical and environmental circumstances, have been placed outside of the dominant state systems, and whose traditional practices and land claims often come into conflict with the objectives and policies implemented by governments, companies and surrounding dominant societies.
Indigenous peoples of the American continent are broadly recognized as being those groups and their descendants who inhabited the region before the arrival of European colonizers and settlers (i.e., Pre-Columbian). Indigenous peoples who maintain, or seek to maintain, traditional ways of life are found from the high Arctic north to the southern extremities of Tierra del Fuego.
The impacts of historical and ongoing European colonization of the Americas on indigenous communities have been in general quite severe, with many authorities estimating ranges of significant population decline primarily due to disease, land theft and violence. Several peoples have become extinct, or very nearly so. But there are and have been many thriving and resilient indigenous nations and communities.
North America
North America is sometimes referred to by indigenous peoples as Abya Yala or Turtle Island.
In Mexico, about 25 million people self-reported as indigenous in 2015. Some estimates put the indigenous population of Mexico as high as 40-65 million people, making it the country with the highest indigenous population in North America.[42][43] In the southern states of Oaxaca (65.73%) and Yucatán (65.40%), the majority of the population is indigenous, as reported in 2015. Other states with high populations of indigenous peoples include Campeche (44.54%), Quintana Roo, (44.44%), Hidalgo, (36.21%), Chiapas (36.15%), Puebla (35.28%), and Guerrero (33.92%).[44][45]
Indigenous peoples in Canada comprise the First Nations,[46]Inuit[47] and Métis.[48] The descriptors "Indian" and "Eskimo" have fallen into disuse in Canada.[49][50] More currently, the term "Aboriginal" is being replaced with "Indigenous". Several national organizations in Canada changed their names from “Aboriginal” to “Indigenous.” Most notable was the change of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC) to Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) in 2015, which then split into Indigenous Services Canada and Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Development Canada in 2017.[51] According to the 2016 Census, there are over 1,670,000 indigenous peoples in Canada.[52] There are currently over 600 recognized First Nations governments or bands spread across Canada, such as the Cree, Mohawk, Mikmaq, Blackfoot, Coast Salish, Innu, Dene and more, with distinctive indigenous cultures, languages, art, and music.[53][54] First Nations peoples signed 11 numbered treaties across much of what is now known as Canada between 1871 and 1921, except in parts of British Columbia. Many treaty promises have been historically and contemporarily broken.
The Inuit have achieved a degree of administrative autonomy with the creation in 1999 of the territories of Nunavik (in Northern Quebec), Nunatsiavut (in Northern Labrador) and Nunavut, which was until 1999 a part of the Northwest Territories. The autonomous territory of Greenland within the Kingdom of Denmark is also home to a recognised indigenous and majority population of Inuit (about 85%) who settled the area in the 13th century, displacing the indigenous Dorset people and Greenlandic Norse.[55][56][57][58]
In the United States, the combined populations of Native Americans, Inuit and other indigenous designations totaled 2,786,652 (constituting about 1.5% of 2003 U.S. census figures). Some 563 scheduled tribes are recognized at the federal level, and a number of others recognized at the state level.
In some countries (particularly in Latin America), indigenous peoples form a sizable component of the overall national population — in Bolivia, they account for an estimated 56–70% of the total nation, and at least half of the population in Guatemala and the Andean and Amazonian nations of Peru. In English, indigenous peoples are collectively referred to by different names that vary by region and include such ethnonyms as Native Americans, Amerindians, and American Indians. In Spanish or Portuguese speaking countries, one finds the use of terms such as índios, pueblos indígenas, amerindios, povos nativos, povos indígenas, and, in Peru, Comunidades Nativas (Native Communities), particularly among Amazonian societies like the Urarina[59] and Matsés. In Chile, there are indigenous peoples like the Mapuches in the Center-South and the Aymaras in the North; also the Rapa Nui indigenous to Easter Island are a Polynesian people.
The Amerindians make up 0.4% of all Brazilian population, or about 700,000 people.[60] Indigenous peoples are found in the entire territory of Brazil, although the majority of them live in Indian reservations in the North and Center-Western part of the country. On 18 January 2007, FUNAI reported that it had confirmed the presence of 67 different uncontacted peoples in Brazil, up from 40 in 2005. With this addition Brazil has now overtaken the island of New Guinea as the country having the largest number of uncontacted peoples.[61]
Assyrian people, who are indigenous to northern Iraq, are seen here in traditional costume and participating in a folk dance.
The vast regions of Asia contain the majority of the world's present-day indigenous populations, about 70% according to IWGIA figures.[citation needed]
Western Asia
Armenians: are the indigenous people of the Armenian Highlands. There are currently more Armenians living outside their ancestral homeland because of the Armenian genocide of 1915.
Assyrians: are indigenous to Mesopotamia.[62] They claim descent from the ancient Neo-Assyrian Empire, and lived in what was Assyria, their original homeland, and still speak dialects of Aramaic, the official language of the Assyrian Empire.
Nivkh people are an ethnic group indigenous to Sakhalin, having a few speakers of the Nivkh language, but their fisher culture has been endangered due to the development of oil field of Sakhalin from 1990s.[70]
In Russia, definition of "indigenous peoples" is contested largely referring to a number of population (less than 50000 people), and neglecting self-identification, origin from indigenous populations who inhabited the country or region upon invasion, colonization or establishment of state frontiers, distinctive social, economic and cultural institutions.[71][3] Thus, indigenous peoples of Russia such as Sakha, Komi, Karelian and others are not considered as such due to the size of the population (more than 50000 people), and consequently they "are not the subjects of the specific legal protections."[72] The Russian government recognizes only 40 ethnic groups as indigenous peoples, even though there are other 30 groups to be counted as such. The reason of nonrecognition is the size of the population and relatively late advent to their current regions, thus indigenous peoples in Russia should be numbered less than 50,000 people.[73][74][75]
Ainu people are an ethnic group indigenous to Hokkaidō, the Kuril Islands, and much of Sakhalin. As Japanese settlement expanded, the Ainu were pushed northward and fought against the Japanese in Shakushain's Revolt and Menashi-Kunashir Rebellion, until by the Meiji period they were confined by the government to a small area in Hokkaidō, in a manner similar to the placing of Native Americans on reservations.[76] In a ground-breaking 1997 decision involving the Ainu people of Japan, the Japanese courts recognized their claim in law, stating that "If one minority group lived in an area prior to being ruled over by a majority group and preserved its distinct ethnic culture even after being ruled over by the majority group, while another came to live in an area ruled over by a majority after consenting to the majority rule, it must be recognized that it is only natural that the distinct ethnic culture of the former group requires greater consideration."[77]
The Malay Singaporeans are the indigenous people of Singapore, inhabiting it since the Austronesian migration. They had established the Kingdom of Singapura back in the 13th century. The name Singapore itself comes from the Malay word Singapura (Singa=Lion, Pura=City) which means the Lion City.
The Cham are the indigenous people of the former state of Champa which was conquered by Vietnam in the Cham–Vietnamese wars during Nam tiến. The Cham in Vietnam are only recognized as a minority, and not as an indigenous people by the Vietnamese government despite being indigenous to the region.
The Khmer Krom are the indigenous people of the Mekong Delta and Saigon which were acquired by Vietnam from Cambodian King Chey Chettha II in exchange for a Vietnamese princess.
In Indonesia, there are 50 to 70 million people who classify as indigenous peoples.[82] However, the Indonesian government does not recognize the existence of indigenous peoples, classifying every Native Indonesian ethnic group as "indigenous" despite the clear cultural distinctions of certain groups.[83] This problem is shared by many other countries in the ASEAN region.
In the Philippines, there are 135 ethno-linguistic groups, majority of which are considered as indigenous peoples by mainstream indigenous ethnic groups in the country. The indigenous people of Cordillera Administrative Region and Cagayan Valley in the Philippines are the Igorot people. The indigenous peoples of Mindanao are the Lumad peoples and the Moro (Tausug, MaguindanaoMaranao and others) who also live in the Sulu archipelago. There are also others sets of indigenous peoples in Palawan, Mindoro, Visayas, and the rest central and south Luzon. The country has one of the largest indigenous peoples population in the world.
In Myanmar, indigenous peoples include the Shan, the Karen, the Rakhine, the Karenni, the Chin, the Kachin and the Mon. However, there are more ethnic groups that are considered indigenous, for example, the Akha, the Lisu, the Lahu or the Mru, among others.[84]
Ethnic Europeans are indigenous to the region, having lived there for millennia. However, the UN recognizes very few indigenous populations of Europe, mostly people of non-European origin, confined to the far north and far east of the continent.
Polynesian, Melanesian and Micronesian peoples originally populated many of the present-day Pacific Island countries in the Oceania region over the course of thousands of years. European, American, Chilean and Japanese colonial expansion in the Pacific brought many of these areas under non-indigenous administration, mainly during the 19th century. During the 20th century, several of these former colonies gained independence and nation-states formed under local control. However, various peoples have put forward claims for indigenous recognition where their islands are still under external administration; examples include the Chamorros of Guam and the Northern Marianas, and the Marshallese of the Marshall Islands. Some islands remain under administration from Paris, Washington, London or Wellington.
The remains of at least 25 miniature humans, who lived between 1,000 and 3,000 years ago, were recently found on the islands of Palau in Micronesia.[86]
In most parts of Oceania, indigenous peoples outnumber the descendants of colonists. Exceptions include Australia, New Zealand and Hawaii. According to the 2013 census, New Zealand Māori make up 14.9% of the population of New Zealand, with less than half (46.5%) of all Māori residents identifying solely as Māori. The Māori are indigenous to Polynesia and settled New Zealand relatively recently, with migrations thought to have occurred in the 13th century CE. In New Zealand, pre-contact Māori groups did not necessarily see themselves as a single people, thus grouping into tribal (iwi) arrangements has become a more formal arrangement in more recent times. Many Māori national leaders signed a treaty with the British, the Treaty of Waitangi (1840), seen in some circles as forming the modern geo-political entity that is New Zealand.[citation needed]
A majority of the Papua New Guinea (PNG) population is indigenous, with more than 700 different nationalities recognized in a total population of 8 million.[87] The country's constitution and key statutes identify traditional or custom-based practices and land tenure, and explicitly set out to promote the viability of these traditional societies within the modern state. However, conflicts and disputes concerning land use and resource rights continue between indigenous groups, the government, and corporate entities.
Indigenous peoples confront a diverse range of concerns associated with their status and interaction with other cultural groups, as well as changes in their inhabited environment. Some challenges are specific to particular groups; however, other challenges are commonly experienced.[88] These issues include cultural and linguistic preservation, land rights, ownership and exploitation of natural resources, political determination and autonomy, environmental degradation and incursion, poverty, health, and discrimination.
The interactions between indigenous and non-indigenous societies throughout history and contemporarily have been complex, ranging from outright conflict and subjugation to some degree of mutual benefit and cultural transfer. A particular aspect of anthropological study involves investigation into the ramifications of what is termed first contact, the study of what occurs when two cultures first encounter one another. The situation can be further confused when there is a complicated or contested history of migration and population of a given region, which can give rise to disputes about primacy and ownership of the land and resources.
Wherever indigenous cultural identity is asserted, common societal issues and concerns arise from the indigenous status. These concerns are often not unique to indigenous groups. Despite the diversity of indigenous peoples, it may be noted that they share common problems and issues in dealing with the prevailing, or invading, society. They are generally concerned that the cultures and lands of indigenous peoples are being lost and that indigenous peoples suffer both discrimination and pressure to assimilate into their surrounding societies. This is borne out by the fact that the lands and cultures of nearly all of the peoples listed at the end of this article are under threat. Notable exceptions are the Sakha and Komi peoples (two northern indigenous peoples of Russia), who now control their own autonomous republics within the Russian state, and the Canadian Inuit, who form a majority of the territory of Nunavut (created in 1999). Despite the control of their territories, many Sakha people have lost their lands as a result of the Russian Homestead Act, which allows any Russian citizen to own any land in the Far Eastern region of Russia. In Australia, a landmark case, Mabo v Queensland (No 2),[89] saw the High Court of Australia reject the idea of terra nullius. This rejection ended up recognizing that there was a pre-existing system of law practised by the Meriam people.
A 2009 United Nations publication says "Although indigenous peoples are often portrayed as a hindrance to development, their cultures and traditional knowledge are also increasingly seen as assets. It is argued that it is important for the human species as a whole to preserve as wide a range of cultural diversity as possible, and that the protection of indigenous cultures is vital to this enterprise."[27]
The Bangladesh Government has stated that there are "no indigenous peoples in Bangladesh."[90] This has angered the indigenous peoples of Chittagong Hill Tracts, Bangladesh, collectively known as the Jumma.[91] Experts have protested against this move of the Bangladesh Government and have questioned the Government's definition of the term "indigenous peoples."[92][93] This move by the Bangladesh Government is seen by the indigenous peoples of Bangladesh as another step by the Government to further erode their already limited rights.[94]
Hindus and Chams have both experienced religious and ethnic persecution and restrictions on their faith under the current Vietnamese government, with the Vietnamese state confiscating Cham property and forbidding Cham from observing their religious beliefs. Hindu temples were turned into tourist sites against the wishes of the Cham Hindus. In 2010 and 2013 several incidents occurred in Thành Tín and Phươc Nhơn villages where Cham were murdered by Vietnamese. In 2012, Vietnamese police in Chau Giang village stormed into a Cham Mosque, stole the electric generator, and also raped Cham girls.[95] Cham in the Mekong Delta have also been economically marginalised, with ethnic Vietnamese settling on land previously owned by Cham people with state support.[96]
The Indonesian government has outright denied the existence of indigenous peoples within the countries' borders. In 2012, Indonesia stated that ‘The Government of Indonesia supports the promotion and protection of indigenous people worldwide... Indonesia, however, does not recognize the application of the indigenous peoples concept... in the country’.[97] Along with the brutal treatment of the country's Papuan people (a conservative estimate places the violent deaths at 100,000 people in West New Guinea since Indonesian occupation in 1963, see Papua Conflict) has led to Survival International condemning Indonesia for treating its indigenous peoples as the worst in the world.[97]
The Vietnamese viewed and dealt with the indigenous Montagnards from the Central Highlands as "savages," which caused a Montagnard uprising against the Vietnamese.[98] The Vietnamese were originally centered around the Red River Delta but engaged in conquest and seized new lands such as Champa, the Mekong Delta (from Cambodia) and the Central Highlands during Nam Tien. While the Vietnamese received strong Chinese influence in their culture and civilization and were Sinicized, and the Cambodians and Laotians were Indianized, the Montagnards in the Central Highlands maintained their own indigenous culture without adopting external culture and were the true indigenous of the region. To hinder encroachment on the Central Highlands by Vietnamese nationalists, the term Pays Montagnard du Sud-Indochinois (PMSI) emerged for the Central Highlands along with the indigenous being addressed by the name Montagnard.[99] The tremendous scale of Vietnamese Kinh colonists flooding into the Central Highlands has significantly altered the demographics of the region.[100] The anti-ethnic minority discriminatory policies by the Vietnamese, environmental degradation, deprivation of lands from the indigenous people, and settlement of indigenous lands by an overwhelming number of Vietnamese settlers led to massive protests and demonstrations by the Central Highland's indigenous ethnic minorities against the Vietnamese in January–February 2001. This event gave a tremendous blow to the claim often published by the Vietnamese government that in Vietnam “There has been no ethnic confrontation, no religious war, no ethnic conflict. And no elimination of one culture by another.”[101]
In May 2016, the Fifteenth Session of the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (UNPFII) affirmed that indigenous peoples are distinctive groups protected in international or national legislation as having a set of specific rights based on their linguistic and historical ties to a particular territory, prior to later settlement, development, and or occupation of a region.[102] The session affirms that, since indigenous peoples are vulnerable to exploitation, marginalization, oppression, forced assimilation, and genocide by nation states formed from colonizing populations or by different, politically dominant ethnic groups, individuals and communities maintaining ways of life indigenous to their regions are entitled to special protection.
Health issues
In December 1993, the United Nations General Assembly proclaimed the International Decade of the World's Indigenous People, and requested UN specialized agencies to consider with governments and indigenous people how they can contribute to the success of the Decade of Indigenous People, commencing in December 1994. As a consequence, the World Health Organization, at its Forty-seventh World Health Assembly, established a core advisory group of indigenous representatives with special knowledge of the health needs and resources of their communities, thus beginning a long-term commitment to the issue of the health of indigenous peoples.[103]
The WHO notes that "Statistical data on the health status of indigenous peoples is scarce. This is especially notable for indigenous peoples in Africa, Asia and eastern Europe," but snapshots from various countries (where such statistics are available) show that indigenous people are in worse health than the general population, in advanced and developing countries alike: higher incidence of diabetes in some regions of Australia;[104] higher prevalence of poor sanitation and lack of safe water among Twa households in Rwanda;[105] a greater prevalence of childbirths without prenatal care among ethnic minorities in Vietnam;[106] suicide rates among Inuit youth in Canada are eleven times higher than the national average;[107]infant mortality rates are higher for Indigenous peoples everywhere.[108]
The first UN publication on the State of the World's Indigenous Peoples revealed alarming statistics about indigenous peoples' health. Health disparities between indigenous and non-indigenous populations are evident in both developed and developing countries. Native Americans in the United States are 600 times more likely to acquire tuberculosis and 62% more likely to commit suicide than the non-Indian population. Tuberculosis, obesity, and type 2 diabetes are major health concerns for the indigenous in developed countries.[109] Globally, health disparities touch upon nearly every health issue, including HIV/AIDS, cancer, malaria, cardiovascular disease, malnutrition, parasitic infections, and respiratory diseases, affecting indigenous peoples at much higher rates. Many causes of indigenous children's mortality could be prevented. Poorer health conditions amongst indigenous peoples result from longstanding societal issues, such as extreme poverty and racism, but also the intentional marginalization and dispossession of indigenous peoples by dominant, non-indigenous populations and societal structures.[109]
Indigenous peoples have frequently been subjected to various forms of racism and discrimination. Indigenous peoples have been denoted primitives, savages[110] or uncivilized. These terms occurred commonly during the heyday of European colonial expansion, but still continue in use in certain societies in modern times.[111]
During the 17th century, Europeans commonly labeled indigenous peoples as "uncivilized". Some philosophers, such as Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679), considered indigenous people to be merely "savages". Others (especially literary figures in the 18th century) popularised the concept of "noble savages". Those who were close to the Hobbesian view tended to believe themselves to have a duty to "civilize" and "modernize" the indigenous. Although anthropologists, especially from Europe, used[when?] to apply these terms to all tribal cultures, the practice has fallen into disfavor as demeaning and is, according to many anthropologists, not only inaccurate, but dangerous.
Survival International runs a campaign to stamp out media portrayal of indigenous peoples as "primitive" or "savages".[112]Friends of Peoples Close to Nature considers not only that indigenous culture should be respected as not being inferior, but also sees indigenous ways of life as offering frameworks in sustainability and as a part of the struggle within the "corrupted" western world, from which the threat[which?] stems.[113]
After World War I (1914-1918), many Europeans came to doubt the morality of the means used to "civilize" peoples. At the same time, the anti-colonial movement, and advocates of indigenous peoples, argued that words such as "civilized" and "savage" were products and tools of colonialism, and argued that colonialism itself was savagely destructive. In the mid-20th century, European attitudes began to shift to the view that indigenous and tribal peoples should have the right to decide for themselves what should happen to their ancient cultures and ancestral lands.[114]
Cultural appropriation
The cultures of indigenous peoples provides appeal for New Age advocates seeking to find ancient traditional truths, spiritualities and practices to appropriate into their worldviews.[115]
Environmental injustice
Helena Gualinga, an indigenous environmental and human rights activist
At an international level, indigenous peoples have received increased recognition of their environmental rights since 2002, but few countries respect these rights in reality. The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, adopted by the General Assembly in 2007, established indigenous peoples' right to self-determination, implying several rights regarding natural resource management. In countries where these rights are recognized, land titling and demarcation procedures are often put on delay, or leased out by the state as concessions for extractive industries without consulting indigenous communities.[109]
Many in the United States federal government are in favor of exploiting oil reserves in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, where the Gwich'in indigenous people rely on herds of caribou. Oil drilling could destroy thousands of years of culture for the Gwich'in. On the other hand, some of the Inupiat Eskimo, another indigenous community in the region, favor oil drilling because they could benefit economically.[117]
The introduction of industrial agricultural technologies such as fertilizers, pesticides, and large plantation schemes have destroyed ecosystems that indigenous communities formerly depended on, forcing resettlement. Development projects such as dam construction, pipelines and resource extraction have displaced large numbers of indigenous peoples, often without providing compensation. Governments have forced indigenous peoples off of their ancestral lands in the name of ecotourism and national park development. Indigenous women are especially affected by land dispossession because they must walk longer distances for water and fuel wood. These women also become economically dependent on men when they lose their livelihoods. Indigenous groups asserting their rights has most often resulted in torture, imprisonment, or death.[109]
Most indigenous populations are already subject to the deleterious effects of climate change. Climate change has not only environmental, but also human rights and socioeconomic implications for indigenous communities. The World Bank acknowledges climate change as an obstacle to Millennium Development Goals, notably the fight against poverty, disease, and child mortality, in addition to environmental sustainability.[109]
Indigenous peoples in Brazil or Indigenous Brazilians once comprised an estimated 2000 tribes and nations inhabiting what is now the country of Brazil, prior to the European contact around 1500. Christopher Columbus thought he had reached the East Indies, but Portuguese Vasco da Gama had already reached India via the Indian Ocean route, when Brazil was colonized by Portugal. Nevertheless, the word índios ("Indians") was by then established to designate the people of the New World and continues to be used in the Portuguese language to designate these people, while a person from India is called indiano in order to distinguish the two.
Uncontacted peoples are communities or groups of indigenous peoples living without sustained contact to neighbouring communities and the world community, and includes "indigenous peoples in voluntary isolation". In 2013 there were thought to be roughly 100 uncontacted tribes worldwide, half of whom live in the Amazon rainforest.
The indigenous peoples of the Americas are the inhabitants of the Americas before the arrival of the European settlers in the 15th century, and the ethnic groups who now identify themselves with those peoples.
The indigenous people of Africa are those people of Africa whose way of life, attachment or claims to particular lands, and social and political standing in relation to other more dominant groups have resulted in their substantial marginalization within modern African states.
Indigenous peoples of Mexico, Native Mexicans or Mexican Native Americans, are those who are part of communities that trace their roots back to populations and communities that existed in what is now Mexico prior to the arrival of the Spanish.
American Indians, or indigenous peoples of Colombia, are the ethnic groups who have been in Colombia prior to the Europeans in the early 16th century. Known as pueblos indígenas in Spanish, they comprise 3.4% of the country's population and belong to 87 different tribes.
The majority of Vietnamese do not follow any organized religion, instead participating in one or more practices of tam giáo and of folk religions, such as venerating ancestors, or praying to deities, especially during Tết and other festivals. Folk religions were founded on endemic cultural beliefs that were historically affected by various traditions of Buddhism, Confucianism and Taoism from China. These three teachings or tam giáo were later joined by Christianity which has become a significant presence. Vietnam is also home of two indigenous religions: syncretic Caodaism and quasi-Buddhist Hoahaoism.
Human rights in Vietnam have long been a matter of much controversy between the Government of Vietnam and some international human rights organizations and Western governments, particularly that of the United States. Under the current constitution, the Communist Party of Vietnam is the only one allowed to rule, the operation of all other political parties being outlawed. Other human rights issues concern freedom of association, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and the right to a healthy environment.
The largest of the ethnic groups in Cambodia are the Khmer, who comprise approximately 90% of the total population and primarily inhabit the lowland Mekong subregion and the central plains. The Khmer historically have lived near the lower Mekong River in a contiguous arc that runs from the southern Khorat Plateau where modern-day Thailand, Laos and Cambodia meet in the northeast, stretching southwest through the lands surrounding Tonle Sap lake to the Cardamom Mountains, then continues back southeast to the mouth of the Mekong River in southeastern Vietnam.
South America has an estimated population of 418,76 million people.
Indigenous peoples in Chile or Native Chileans form about 10% of the total population of Chile. According to the 2012 census, 2,000,000 people declare having indigenous origins. Most Chileans are of partially indigenous descent, and the term and its legal ramifications are typically reserved to those who self-identify with and are accepted within one or more indigenous groups.
Indigenous rights are those rights that exist in recognition of the specific condition of the indigenous peoples. This includes not only the most basic human rights of physical survival and integrity, but also the rights over their land, language, religion, and other elements of cultural heritage that are a part of their existence and identity as a people. This can be used as an expression for advocacy of social organizations, or form a part of the national law in establishing the relation between a government and the right of self-determination among its indigenous people, or in international law as a protection against violation of indigenous rights by actions of governments or groups of private interests.
The Philippines consist of numerous upland and lowland indigenous ethnolinguistic groups living in the country, with Austronesians making up the overwhelming majority, while full or partial Negritos scattered throughout the archipelago. The highland Austronesians and Negrito have co-existed with their lowland Austronesian kin and neighbor groups for thousands of years in the Philippine archipelago. The primary difference is that they were not absorbed by centuries of Spanish and United States colonization of the Philippines, and in the process have retained their customs and traditions. This is mainly due to the rugged inaccessibility of the mountains and established headhunting and warrior cultures, which discouraged Spanish and American colonizers from coming into contact with the highlanders.
There is no single system of races or ethnicities that covers all modern Latin America, and usage of labels may vary substantially.
The genocide of indigenous peoples is the mass destruction of entire communities of indigenous peoples. Indigenous peoples are understood to be people whose historical and current territory has become occupied by colonial expansion, or the formation of a state by a dominant group such as a colonial power.
Settler colonialism is a form of colonialism that seeks to replace the original population of the colonized territory with a new society of settlers. As with all forms of colonialism, it is based on exogenous domination, typically organized or supported by an imperial authority. Settler colonialism is enacted by a variety of means ranging from violent depopulation of the previous inhabitants to more subtle, legal means such as assimilation or recognition of indigenous identity within a colonial framework. Settler colonialism contrasts with exploitation colonialism, which entails a national economic policy of conquering a country to exploit its population as cheap or free labor and its natural resources as raw material.
The process that has been described as the genocide of indigenous peoples in Brazil began with the Portuguese colonization of the Americas, when Pedro Álvares Cabral made landfall in what is now the country of Brazil in 1500. This started the process that led to the depopulation of the indigenous peoples in Brazil, because of disease and violent treatment by European settlers, and their gradual replacement with colonists from Europe and Africa. This process has been described as a genocide, and continues into the modern era with the ongoing destruction of indigenous peoples of the Amazonian region.
Indigenous feminism is an intersectional theory and practice of feminism that focuses on decolonization, indigenous sovereignty, and human rights for Indigenous women and their families. The focus is upon Indigenous women being empowered in the context of Indigenous cultural values and priorities, rather than mainstream, white, patriarchal ones. In this cultural perspective, it can be compared to womanism in the African-American communities.
The FULRO insurgency against Vietnam was waged by the United Front for the Liberation of Oppressed Races against the South and North Vietnamese governments and the unified Socialist Republic of Vietnam. The FULRO insurgents represented the interests of minority Muslim and Hindu Cham, Christian Montagnards, and Buddhist Khmer Krom against the ethnic Kinh Vietnamese. They were supported and equipped by China and Cambodia according to those countries' interests in the Indochina Wars.
The native inhabitants of the Central Highlands of Vietnam are known as the Montagnard. The Vietnamese conquered the Central Highlands during their "march to the south". Ethnic Vietnamese (Kinh) people now outnumber the indigenous Degars after state-sponsored colonization directed by both the government of South Vietnam and the current Communist government of unified Vietnam. The Montagnards have engaged in conflicts with the Vietnamese, from the anti-Communist South Vietnamese government, the Viet Cong, to the Communist government of unified Vietnam. There are contrasting views on this issue, as the constitution of the government of Vietnam states "Article 36 of the Constitution, the state invests heavily in education and supports various preferential programmes for ethnic minorities, like ethnic minority boarding schools, lower entry requirements and quota for minorities." Both the initial 1945 constitute and the revised 1992 constitution of North Vietnam and the successor state the Socialist Republic of Vietnam stated that all minority groups in Vietnam have the right to maintain their mother tongues in their schooling as well as to use their languages to preserve their ethnic cultures and values, although the degree of enforcement remains ongoingly debated due to complicated nature.
References
1 2 Mathewson, Kent (2004). "Drugs, Moral Geographies, and Indigenous Peoples: Some Initial Mappings and Central Issues". Dangerous Harvest: Drug Plants and the Transformation of Indigenous Landscapes. Oxford University Press. p.13. ISBN9780195143195. As Sir Thomas Browne remarked in 1646, (this seems to be the first usage in its modern sense).
↑ Acharya, Deepak and Shrivastava Anshu (2008): Indigenous Herbal Medicines: Tribal Formulations and Traditional Herbal Practices, Aavishkar Publishers Distributor, Jaipur, India. ISBN978-81-7910-252-7. p. 440
↑ LaDuke, Winona (1997). "Voices from White Earth: Gaa-waabaabiganikaag". People, Land, and Community: Collected E.F. Schumacher Society Lectures. Yale University Press. pp.24–25. ISBN9780300071733.
1 2 3 4 5 6 Miller, Robert J.; Ruru, Jacinta; Behrendt, Larissa; Lindberg, Tracey (2010). Discovering Indigenous Lands: The Doctrine of Discovery in the English Colonies. OUP Oxford. pp.9–13. ISBN9780199579815.
↑ Sanders, Douglas (1999). "Indigenous peoples: Issues of definition". International Journal of Cultural Property. 8: 4–13. doi:10.1017/S0940739199770591.
↑ Muckle,:>:>Robert J. (2012). Indigenous Peoples of North America: A Concise Anthropological Overview. University of Toronto Press. p.18. ISBN9781442604162.
↑ Smith, Linda Tuhiwai (2012). Decolonizing methodologies: research and indigenous peoples (Seconded.). Dunedin, New Zealand: Otago University Press. ISBN978-1-877578-28-1. OCLC805707083.
↑ Robert K. Hitchcock, Diana Vinding, Indigenous Peoples' Rights in Southern Africa, IWGIA, 2004, p. 8 based on Working Paper by the Chairperson-Rapporteur, Mrs. Erica-Irene A. Daes, on the concept of indigenous people. UN-Dokument E/CN.4/Sub.2/AC.4/1996/2 (, unhchr.ch)
↑ S. James Anaya, Indigenous Peoples in International Law, 2nd ed., Oxford University press, 2004, p. 3; Professor Anaya teaches Native American Law, and is the third Commission on Human Rights Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of Indigenous People
↑ Hall, Gillette, and Harry Anthony Patrinos. Indigenous Peoples, Poverty and Human Development in Latin America. New York: Palgrave MacMillan, n.d. Google Scholar. Web. 11 March 2013
1 2 Williams, Victoria R. (2020). "Canarian". Indigenous Peoples: An Encyclopedia of Culture, History, and Threats to Survival. ABC-CLIO. p.225. ISBN9781440861185.
1 2 3 4 Miller, Robert J.; Ruru, Jacinta; Behrendt, Larissa; Lindberg, Tracey (2010). Discovering Indigenous Lands: The Doctrine of Discovery in the English Colonies. OUP Oxford. pp.15–22. ISBN9780199579815.
1 2 Miller, Robert J. (2006). Native America, Discovered and Conquered: Thomas Jefferson, Lewis & Clark, and Manifest Destiny. Praeger Publications. pp.9–10. ISBN9780275990114.
↑ IWGIA (2012). Briefing note. Indigenous peoples in the Russian Federation
↑ Fondahl, G., Filippova, V., Mack, L. (2015). Indigenous peoples in the new Arctic. In B.Evengard, O.Nymand Larsen, O.Paasche (Eds), The New Arctic (pp. 7–22). Springer
↑ IWGIA (2012) Briefing note. Indigenous people in the Russian Federation
↑ Lehtola, M. (2012). HoWhy theory and the cultural transition in the Sakha Republic. In T.Aikas, S.Lipkin, A.K.Salmi (Eds.), Archaeology of social relations: ten case studies by Finnish archaeologists (pp. 51–76). Oulu University
↑ Slezkine, Y. (1994). Arctic mirrors: Russia and the small peoples of the North. New York, NY: Cornell University Press
↑ Judgment of the Sapporo District Court, Civil Division No. 3, 27 March 1997, in (1999) 38 ILM, p. 419
↑ Blust, R. (1999), "Subgrouping, circularity and extinction: some issues in Austronesian comparative linguistics" in E. Zeitoun & P.J.K Li, ed., Selected papers from the Eighth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics. Taipei: Academia Sinica
↑ Bartholomew Dean and Jerome Levi (eds.) At the Risk of Being Heard: Indigenous Rights, Identity and Postcolonial States University of Michigan Press (2003)
1 2 3 4 5 State of the world's indigenous peoples. Vereinte Nationen Department of International Economic and Social Affairs. New York: United Nations. 2009. ISBN978-92-1-130283-7. OCLC699622751.CS1 maint: others (link)
↑ Pike, Sarah M. (2004). "4: The 1960s Watershed Years". New Age and Neopagan Religions in America. Columbia Contemporary American Religion Series. New York: Columbia University Press. p.82. ISBN9780231508384. Retrieved 19 February 2020. Many young people looked to American Indian traditions for alternative lifestyles, and this was to shape New Agers' and Neopagans' subsequent turn to and incorporation of indigenous peoples' practices into their own rituals and belief systems. [...] The desire to share in native peoples' perceived harmony with nature became a common theme of the 1960s counterculture and in 1970s Neopaganism and New Age communities.
Baviskar, Amita (2007). "Indian Indigeneitites: Adivasi Engagements with Hindu NAtionalism in India". In Marisol de la Cadena & Orin Starn (ed.). Indigenous Experience today. Oxford, UK: Berg Publishers. ISBN978-1-84520-519-5.
Bodley, John H. (2008). Victims of Progress (5th.ed.). Plymouth, England: AltaMira Press. ISBN978-0-7591-1148-6.
de la Cadena, Marisol; Orin Starn, eds. (2007). Indigenous Experience Today. Oxford: Berg Publishers, Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research. ISBN978-1-84520-519-5.
Clifford, James (2007). "Varieties of Indigenous Experience: Diasporas, Homelands, Sovereignties". In Marisol de la Cadena & Orin Starn (ed.). Indigenous Experience today. Oxford, UK: Berg Publishers. ISBN978-1-84520-519-5.
Coates, Ken S. (2004). A Global History of Indigenous Peoples: Struggle and Survival. New York: Palgrave MacMillan. ISBN978-0-333-92150-0.
Farah, Paolo D.; Tremolada Riccardo (2014). "Intellectual Property Rights, Human Rights and Intangible Cultural Heritage". Rivista di Diritto Industriale (2, part I): 21–47. ISSN0035-614X. SSRN2472388.
Farah, Paolo D.; Tremolada Riccardo (2014). "Desirability of Commodification of Intangible Cultural Heritage: The Unsatisfying Role of IPRs". Transnational Dispute Management. 11 (2). ISSN1875-4120. SSRN2472339.
Gerharz, Eva; Nasir Uddin; Pradeep Chakkarath, eds. (2017). Indigeneity on the move: Varying manifestations of a contested concept. New York: Berghahn Books. ISBN978-1-78533-723-9.
Howard, Bradley Reed (2003). Indigenous Peoples and the State: The struggle for Native Rights. DeKalb, Illinois: Northern Illinois University Press. ISBN978-0-87580-290-9.
Maybury-Lewis, David (1997). Indigenous Peoples, Ethnic Groups and the State. Needham Heights, Massachusetts: Allyn & Bacon. ISBN978-0-205-19816-0.
Merlan, Francesca (2007). "Indigeneity as Relational Identity: The Construction of Australian Land Rights". In Marisol de la Cadena & Orin Starn (ed.). Indigenous Experience today. Oxford, UK: Berg Publishers. ISBN978-1-84520-519-5.
Pratt, Mary Louise (2007). "Afterword: Indigeneity Today". In Marisol de la Cadena & Orin Starn (ed.). Indigenous Experience today. Oxford, UK: Berg Publishers. ISBN978-1-84520-519-5.
Tsing, Anna (2007). "Indigenous Voice". In Marisol de la Cadena & Orin Starn (ed.). Indigenous Experience today. Oxford, UK: Berg Publishers. ISBN978-1-84520-519-5.
External links
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
