Indigeneity on the Move. Группа авторов. Читать онлайн. Newlib. NEWLIB.NET

Автор: Группа авторов
Издательство: Ingram
Серия:
Жанр произведения: Культурология
Год издания: 0
isbn: 9781785337239
Скачать книгу
and Professionalising Indigenous Knowledge in Ecuador.” Antipode 37(3): 470–96.

      Li, Tania Murray. 2010. “Indigeneity, Capitalism, and the Management of Dispossession.” Current Anthropology 51(3): 385–414.

      Linkenbach, Antje. 2004. “Lokales Wissen im Entwicklungsdiskurs: Abwertung, Aneignung oder Anerkennung des Anderen?” In Lokales Wissen: Sozialwissenschaftliche Perspektiven, ed. Nikolaus Schareika and Thomas Bierschenk, 233–57. Münster: Lit.

      Merlan, Francesca. 2009. “Indigeneity: Global and Local.” Current Anthropology 50(3): 303–33.

      Miller, Daniel. 2011. Tales from Facebook. Cambridge and Malden: Polity Press.

      Molyneux, Maxine, and Marilyn Thomson. 2011. “Cash Transfers, Gender Equity and Women’s Empowerment in Peru, Ecuador and Bolivia.” Gender & Development 19(2): 195–212.

      Morgan, Gordon. 1997. Toward an American Sociology: Questioning the European Construct. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.

      Muehlebach, Andrea. 2001. “‘Making Place’ at the United Nations: Indigenous Cultural Politics at the UN Working Group on Indigenous Populations.” Cultural Anthropology 16(3): 415–48.

      Pelican, Michaela. 2009. “Complexities of Indigeneity and Autochthony: An African Example.” American Ethnologist 36(1): 149–62.

      Pfaff-Czarnecka, Joanna, and Gérard Toffin. 2011. “Introduction: Belonging and Multiple Attachments in Contemporary Himalayan Societies.” In The Politics of Belonging in the Himalayas: Local Attachments and Boundary Dynamics, ed. Joanna Pfaff-Czarnecka and Gérard Toffin, xi–xxxviii. New Delhi: Sage.

      Randeria, Shalini. 2003. “Cunning States and Unaccountable International Institutions: Legal Plurality, Social Movements and Rights of Local Communities to Common Property Resources.” European Journal of Sociology 44(1): 27–60.

      Ruttenberg, Tara. 2013. “Wellbeing Economics and Buen Vivir: Development Alternatives for Inclusive Human Security.” PRAXIS: The Fletcher Journal of Human Security 68(28): 68–92.

      Rycroft, Daniel J., and Sangeeta Dasgupta (eds). 2011. The Politics of Belonging in India: Becoming Adivasi. Abingdon: Routledge.

      Schüttpelz, Erhard. 2007. “Ein absoluter Begriff. Zur Genealogie und Karriere des Netzwerkbegriffs.” In Vernetzte Steuerung: Soziale Prozesse im Zeitalter technischer Netzwerke, ed. Stefan Kaufmann, 25–46. Zürich: Chronos.

      Scott, James. 2009. The Art of Not Being Governed: An Anarchist History of Upland Southeast Asia. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

      Shah, Alpa. 2010. In the Shadows of the State: Indigenous Politics, Environmentalism, and Insurgency in Jharkhand, India. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

      Sillitoe, Paul. 1998. “The Development of Indigenous Knowledge: A New Applied Anthropology.” Current Anthropology 39(2): 223–52.

      Smith, Linda Tuhiwai. 2012. Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples, 2nd ed. London and New York: Zed Books.

      Snively, Gloria, and John Corsiglia. 2001. “Discovering Indigenous Science: Implications for Science Education.” Science Education 85: 6–34.

      Uddin, Nasir. 2014. “Paradigm of ‘Better Life’: ‘Development’ among the Khumi in the Chittagong Hill Tracts.” Asian Ethnicity 15(1): 62–77.

      Venkateswar, Sita, and Emma Hughes. 2011. The Politics of Indigeneity: Dialogues and Reflections on Indigenous Activism. London and New York: Zed Books.

      Verran, Helen. 2001. Science and an African Logic. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

      Villalba, Unai. 2013. “Buen Vivir vs. Development: A Paradigm Shift in the Andes?” Third World Quarterly 34(8): 1,427–42.

      Warren, Kay B., and Jean E. Jackson. 2003. Indigenous Movements, Self-Representation, and the State in Latin America. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.

      Ziai, Aram. 2013. “The Discourse of ‘Development’ and Why the Concept Should Be Abandoned.” Development in Practice 23(1): 123–36.

PART I STRUGGLES OVER LAND AND RESOURCES

      ON THE NATURE OF INDIGENOUS LAND

      Ownership, Access, and Farming in Upland Northeast India

       Erik de Maaker

      Indigeneity and Nature

      The two cases mentioned above reveal the leverage that claims based on the assumed privileged relationships of indigenous people to nature can yield. Internationally, the communities which are referred to within India as “tribes,” tend to be equated with “indigenous people.” Globally, policy makers, journalists, and the general public are open and sympathetic to the idea that the “sacrality” of nature is central to the worldview of indigenous people. This allows perceptions of nature, which such communities supposedly collectively hold, to play a central role in legitimizing claims that extend well beyond vegetation and animals to soil, and thus the “place” at which such groups are or want to be located. These kinds of claims are rooted in oral histories, myths, and religious rituals that state that the people concerned (or better, their predecessors) were the “first” to arrive, and that its members are consequently the oldest settlers on their land (Kuper 2003: 390). Such a claim necessarily denies “firstness” to other inhabitants of the same area, whom it consequently positions as later settlers.

      From the 1970s onwards, demands made in the name of indigenous people have increasingly gained international credibility. Indigenous people have come to be perceived as “nations”: communities with a shared ethnicity, language, history, and culture. Often, they tend to be cast as victims of “internal colonialism,”