Anthropology and change over the ‘land rights era’: Towards treaties?

IF 0.5 3区 社会学 Q3 ANTHROPOLOGY
Francesca Merlan
{"title":"Anthropology and change over the ‘land rights era’: Towards treaties?","authors":"Francesca Merlan","doi":"10.1111/taja.12541","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Australia has made no treaties with its Indigenous peoples. Despite that, over the past five decades (the ‘land rights era’ of the title), Australia has granted proportionally more land area to Indigenous interests than have other, treaty-making Anglo settler colonies (Canada, the United States, New Zealand). Despite complexities of comparison by area, an order of difference is clearly discernible. After comparing these countries, this article examines legal and political changes involved in the transformation from no ‘Indigenous estate’ in Australia to a comparatively large one, and sketches the role anthropologists have played in land and native title claims which has enlarged the Indigenous estate. Subsequent articles in this issue treat the kinds of change that anthropologists, in their commitment to close ethnographic work, have been observing at this intersection of law and anthropology. This article concludes by considering directions in which land and native title claims seem to be moving.</p>","PeriodicalId":45452,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Anthropology","volume":"36 1","pages":"19-39"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/taja.12541","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Anthropology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/taja.12541","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Australia has made no treaties with its Indigenous peoples. Despite that, over the past five decades (the ‘land rights era’ of the title), Australia has granted proportionally more land area to Indigenous interests than have other, treaty-making Anglo settler colonies (Canada, the United States, New Zealand). Despite complexities of comparison by area, an order of difference is clearly discernible. After comparing these countries, this article examines legal and political changes involved in the transformation from no ‘Indigenous estate’ in Australia to a comparatively large one, and sketches the role anthropologists have played in land and native title claims which has enlarged the Indigenous estate. Subsequent articles in this issue treat the kinds of change that anthropologists, in their commitment to close ethnographic work, have been observing at this intersection of law and anthropology. This article concludes by considering directions in which land and native title claims seem to be moving.

人类学与“土地权利时代”的变迁:走向条约?
澳大利亚没有与土著人民签订任何条约。尽管如此,在过去的50年里(这个头衔的“土地权利时代”),澳大利亚按比例授予土著利益的土地面积比其他签订条约的盎格鲁殖民者殖民地(加拿大、美国、新西兰)要多。尽管按面积比较比较复杂,但差异的数量级是清晰可辨的。在比较了这些国家之后,本文考察了澳大利亚从没有“土著庄园”到一个相对较大的“土著庄园”的转变所涉及的法律和政治变化,并概述了人类学家在扩大土著庄园的土地和土著所有权主张中所起的作用。本期的后续文章探讨了人类学家在致力于密切的民族志工作中,在法律和人类学的交叉领域观察到的各种变化。本文的结论是考虑土地和土著所有权主张似乎正在发生变化的方向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
12.50%
发文量
38
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信