Coexistence: planning and the challenge of indigenous rights
Coexistence: planning and the challenge of indigenous rights
复制标题
共存：规划和土著权利的挑战
DOI：
10.4324/9781315279251.ch3
复制
发表时间：
2010
影响因子：
2.2
通讯作者：
G. J. Lunkapis
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
R. Howitt;G. J. Lunkapis
在土著领域，殖民统治的压迫性遗产对土著人民的利益产生了深远和持续的影响。土著人民的共存，以及他们对土地、资源和地方的潜在要求和利益，构成了现代后殖民国家，由各种规划系统管理，是社会理论可以促进改进规划实践的重要领域。因此，规划理论的主要挑战之一是承认和解决对地方有着不同要求、不同关系和不同理解的民族共存的问题，以及它们对规划系统中公正、公平和可持续决策的影响。共享空间的经验常常被（错误地）描述为文明、定居、秩序和治理的前沿，穿过未开化和无政府状态的土著领域，留下法治和民主秩序。城市、区域和土地利用规划一直是殖民遭遇和后殖民共存经验中的关键技术。在许多地方，前殖民、殖民和后殖民社会形态共存的经验受到城市和区域规划制度、土地使用分区制度和对房地产市场的严格监督、开发批准制度和法律的约束。土著一词没有简单、明确的定义。它经常与一系列其他术语互换使用，如“土著”、“土著”、“原始”、“第一民族”和“部落”或其他类似概念。在本章中，所采用的方法是土著人民问题国际工作组（IWGIA）的范例，其使命声明指出，“土著人民属于世界上最边缘化和最贫困的群体，有权得到承认，其基本人权应得到尊重。”特别是，土著人民有权能够作为民族生存下去，并根据自己的愿望、愿景和特性，普遍地保持和发展自己的文化。按照Johnson等人推荐的做法，本章中“Indigenous”、“Native”和“Aboriginal”这三个术语通常大写（Johnson等人，2007）。
In Indigenous 1 domains, the oppressive legacies of colonial administration have had a profound and continuing effect on the interests of Indigenous peoples. Coexistence of Indigenous peoples, and their underlying claims and interests in the land, resources and places that constitute the modern postcolonial states that are governed by a variety of planning systems, is an important area in which social theory can contribute to improved planning practices. One of the key challenges for planning theory, then, is to acknowledge and address the coexistence of peoples with very different sorts of claims to, relationships with and understandings of place – and each other – and its implications for just, equitable and sustainable decision-making in planning systems. The experience of sharing space is often (mis)represented as a frontier of civilization, settlement, order and governance, moving through uncivilized and anarchic Indigenous domains leaving the rule of law and the order of democracy in its wake. Urban, regional and land use planning have been key technologies in both colonial encounters and postcolonial experiences of coexistence. In many places the experience of coexisting pre-colonial, colonial and postcolonial social formations is disciplined by urban and regional planning systems, land use zoning regimes and the strict oversight of property markets, development approval regimes and legally � The term Indigenous has no simple, unambiguous definition. It is often used interchangeably with a range of other terms such as ‘aboriginal’, ‘native’, ‘original’, ‘ first nations’ and ‘tribal’ or other similar concepts. In this chapter, the approach adopted is that exemplified by the International Working Group on Indigenous Peoples (IWGIA) whose mission statement notes that ‘Indigenous peoples, belonging to the most marginalized and impoverished groups in the world have the right to be recognized and to have their basic human rights respected. In particular Indigenous peoples have the right to be able to survive as peoples and to maintain and develop their cultures based on their own aspirations, visions and identity, and generally’ ( ). Following the practice recommended by Johnson et al., the terms Indigenous, Native and Aboriginal are generally capitalized in this chapter (Johnson et al. 2007).