美国各州和地区土著咨询法:改善健康的社会决定因素的潜在战略。

IF 3 4区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Lorinda Riley, Kristina Hulama, Ian Tapu, Anna Weightmann, Tehani Louis-Perkins, Carly Kajiwara, Kamaile Maldanado, Meldrick Ravida
{"title":"美国各州和地区土著咨询法:改善健康的社会决定因素的潜在战略。","authors":"Lorinda Riley, Kristina Hulama, Ian Tapu, Anna Weightmann, Tehani Louis-Perkins, Carly Kajiwara, Kamaile Maldanado, Meldrick Ravida","doi":"10.1177/00333549241260636","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The United Nations (UN) has articulated the right to self-determination as a human right for Indigenous people; however, US states and territories have been slow to operationalize this aspect of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Indigenous consultation laws require all federal executive agencies to consult with tribal nations before implementing policies that have a \"tribal implication,\" and these form the cornerstone of US efforts to implement the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Despite these federal efforts, less is known about the degree to which state and territorial laws require consultation with Indigenous communities.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We reviewed all Indigenous consultation laws identified through a search of 50 US states, the District of Columbia, and 5 territories to provide a holistic picture of how jurisdictions have regulated Indigenous consultation efforts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 56 states, 49 (87.5%) had at least 1 Indigenous consultation law; the remaining 7 jurisdictions had none. States engaged in Indigenous consultation in various ways, generally falling into 1 of 3 categories: (1) centralized consultation facilitated through an agency or department, (2) indirect consultation through a designated commission, and (3) fragmented Indigenous consultation through discrete laws. Important gaps were identified, including the lack of a definition for Indigenous consultation, the absence of an appeal process, and the need to train state officials on existing policies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results provide a baseline on the degree to which US states and territories consult with Indigenous communities and can be used to identify gaps in US compliance with UN human rights mandates.</p>","PeriodicalId":20793,"journal":{"name":"Public Health Reports","volume":" ","pages":"333549241260636"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11569739/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"US State and Territorial Indigenous Consultation Laws: A Potential Strategy to Improve the Social Determinants of Health.\",\"authors\":\"Lorinda Riley, Kristina Hulama, Ian Tapu, Anna Weightmann, Tehani Louis-Perkins, Carly Kajiwara, Kamaile Maldanado, Meldrick Ravida\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00333549241260636\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The United Nations (UN) has articulated the right to self-determination as a human right for Indigenous people; however, US states and territories have been slow to operationalize this aspect of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Indigenous consultation laws require all federal executive agencies to consult with tribal nations before implementing policies that have a \\\"tribal implication,\\\" and these form the cornerstone of US efforts to implement the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Despite these federal efforts, less is known about the degree to which state and territorial laws require consultation with Indigenous communities.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We reviewed all Indigenous consultation laws identified through a search of 50 US states, the District of Columbia, and 5 territories to provide a holistic picture of how jurisdictions have regulated Indigenous consultation efforts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 56 states, 49 (87.5%) had at least 1 Indigenous consultation law; the remaining 7 jurisdictions had none. States engaged in Indigenous consultation in various ways, generally falling into 1 of 3 categories: (1) centralized consultation facilitated through an agency or department, (2) indirect consultation through a designated commission, and (3) fragmented Indigenous consultation through discrete laws. Important gaps were identified, including the lack of a definition for Indigenous consultation, the absence of an appeal process, and the need to train state officials on existing policies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results provide a baseline on the degree to which US states and territories consult with Indigenous communities and can be used to identify gaps in US compliance with UN human rights mandates.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20793,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Public Health Reports\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"333549241260636\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11569739/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Public Health Reports\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00333549241260636\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Health Reports","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00333549241260636","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目标:联合国(UN)已将自决权明确规定为土著人民的一项人权;然而,美国各州和地区在落实《联合国土著人民权利宣言》这方面的工作进展缓慢。土著协商法要求所有联邦行政机构在实施具有 "部落影响 "的政策之前与部落民族进行协商,这些法律构成了美国实施《联合国土著人民权利宣言》的基石。尽管联邦做出了这些努力,但人们对各州和地区法律要求与土著社区协商的程度却知之甚少:我们审查了通过对美国 50 个州、哥伦比亚特区和 5 个领地进行搜索而确定的所有土著咨询法律,以全面了解各司法管辖区如何规范土著咨询工作:在 56 个州中,49 个州(87.5%)至少有一部土著咨询法;其余 7 个辖区没有土著咨询法。各州参与土著咨询的方式多种多样,一般分为以下三类:(1)通过机构或部门促进集中咨询;(2)通过指定委员会进行间接咨询;(3)通过独立法律进行零散的土著咨询。研究发现了一些重要的不足,包括缺乏土著磋商的定义、缺乏上诉程序,以及需要对国家官员进行现行政策培训:研究结果提供了美国各州和地区与土著社区协商程度的基线,可用于确定美国在遵守联合国人权任务方面的差距。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
US State and Territorial Indigenous Consultation Laws: A Potential Strategy to Improve the Social Determinants of Health.

Objectives: The United Nations (UN) has articulated the right to self-determination as a human right for Indigenous people; however, US states and territories have been slow to operationalize this aspect of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Indigenous consultation laws require all federal executive agencies to consult with tribal nations before implementing policies that have a "tribal implication," and these form the cornerstone of US efforts to implement the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Despite these federal efforts, less is known about the degree to which state and territorial laws require consultation with Indigenous communities.

Methods: We reviewed all Indigenous consultation laws identified through a search of 50 US states, the District of Columbia, and 5 territories to provide a holistic picture of how jurisdictions have regulated Indigenous consultation efforts.

Results: Of the 56 states, 49 (87.5%) had at least 1 Indigenous consultation law; the remaining 7 jurisdictions had none. States engaged in Indigenous consultation in various ways, generally falling into 1 of 3 categories: (1) centralized consultation facilitated through an agency or department, (2) indirect consultation through a designated commission, and (3) fragmented Indigenous consultation through discrete laws. Important gaps were identified, including the lack of a definition for Indigenous consultation, the absence of an appeal process, and the need to train state officials on existing policies.

Conclusions: The results provide a baseline on the degree to which US states and territories consult with Indigenous communities and can be used to identify gaps in US compliance with UN human rights mandates.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Public Health Reports
Public Health Reports 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
6.10%
发文量
164
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Public Health Reports is the official journal of the Office of the U.S. Surgeon General and the U.S. Public Health Service and has been published since 1878. It is published bimonthly, plus supplement issues, through an official agreement with the Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health. The journal is peer-reviewed and publishes original research and commentaries in the areas of public health practice and methodology, original research, public health law, and public health schools and teaching. Issues contain regular commentaries by the U.S. Surgeon General and executives of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Health. The journal focuses upon such topics as tobacco control, teenage violence, occupational disease and injury, immunization, drug policy, lead screening, health disparities, and many other key and emerging public health issues. In addition to the six regular issues, PHR produces supplemental issues approximately 2-5 times per year which focus on specific topics that are of particular interest to our readership. The journal''s contributors are on the front line of public health and they present their work in a readable and accessible format.
×
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