Gør som tusindvis af andre bogelskere
Tilmeld dig nyhedsbrevet og få gode tilbud og inspiration til din næste læsning.
Ved tilmelding accepterer du vores persondatapolitik.Du kan altid afmelde dig igen.
This important collection of essays is compulsory reading for all those who wish to gain a better understanding of the dynamic processes of change which Mexico and its indigenous peoples have undergone. The book relates different experiences and makes various proposals relative to the issue of indigenous autonomy.Contributions to the process of constructing a national proposal for autonomy are related. International and constitutional aspects of autonomy are analyzed. A feminine view is provided as well. Significant cases of local autonomy and the struggle of indigenous peoples and their resources and environment in the face of a mistaken and badly planned government policy for the infrastructural development are presented.Finally, the situation in Chipas is discussed before Aracely Burguete Cal y Mayor closes the book with an analytical chapter on the new ethnic conformation of the highlands of Chipas and the San Cristobal de las Casas, as a contextual framework for the autonomous tendencies and indigenous empowerment of the region.
The book aims to critically analyze the possible legal mechanisms and processes, which could be used by indigenous peoples in the protection and management of their cultural and intellectual property. The book studies the historic and legal context in which the debate on the rights of indigenous peoples has developed. It analyses mechanisms such as the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPS). The book ends with a discussion on the possible courses of action, which indigenous peoples could take in order to improve the levels of protection and management available to them regarding their cultural and intellectual rights.
Jens Dahl is a Danish anthropologist and former director and Board member of IWGIA who has followed the organization''s development for the last 40 years.
This book is concerned with the first peoples (those people who are considered indigenous by themselves and others) of southern Africa such as the San, the Nama, and the Khoi, and their rights. Although living in democratic countries like Namibia, South Africa, Zimbabwe, and Botswana --and in principle sharing the same rights and responsibilities as the rest of the population--practice shows that these peoples more often than not are at the margins of the societies in which they live; they often face extreme poverty, and they frequently are subjected to discriminatory treatment and exposed to all kinds of human rights abuses.Robert K. Hitchcock is professor of anthropology and geography at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, USA. He has done extensive research and development work in southern Africa in general and among San peoples in particular. Diana Vinding is an anthropologist working with the International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs (IWGIA) in Copenhagen.
This book stands alone in its comprehensive presentation of current information affecting indigenous peoples in different regions throughout the world. With contributions from both indigenous as well as non-indigenous scholars and activists, it provides an overview of recent developments that have impacted indigenous peoples in North America, Central America, South America, Australia and the Pacific, Asia, Africa, and elsewhere.The Indigenous World 2001-2002 contains the most recent information available on international human rights efforts in addition to movements and changes in the indigenous organizational landscape. This book serves as an update on the state of affairs of indigenous peoples around the world by region and country. It also updates the human rights processes and other international processes such as the african Commision on Human and People''s Rights.
Tilmeld dig nyhedsbrevet og få gode tilbud og inspiration til din næste læsning.
Ved tilmelding accepterer du vores persondatapolitik.