Doctoral Dissertation Research: Legal Geographies of U.S. Indigenous Land Use/Property Rights Regimes: The Case of Hawaii and Guam

2007年，联合国大会通过了《联合国土著人民权利宣言》，土著人民的权利首次由一个国际理事机构全面阐述。 虽然《宣言》在技术上不具约束力，但有几个国家没有签署《宣言》，其中之一是美国。 美国的殖民历史仍然没有得到充分的研究，特别是在非大陆群体和土地的法律的地理方面。特别是，虽然美国大陆的部落民族已经开始了联邦承认和收回其祖先土地的进程，但这一进程对土著太平洋岛民来说才刚刚开始。 正如历史学家所断言的那样，西方对太平洋岛民祖先土地的掠夺导致土著群体在当代处于边缘化的社会经济地位，他们团结起来，把“归还”祖先土地作为社会经济和社区复兴的关键。然而，土著太平洋岛民不能像大陆部落国家那样被“送回"他们祖先的土地。 与大陆部落民族不同，土著太平洋岛民经历了微观空间流离失所，在本项目中定义为流离失所，但在同一块土地或附近的土地。 博士生贝丝Tamayose，教授洛伊斯高桥的监督下，将进行一项研究，澄清土地的法律的地理在太平洋岛屿的复杂性，通过探索两个太平洋岛屿的情况下（夏威夷和关岛）的法律的土地/财产权。分析的时间框架集中在美国利益的进入（夏威夷在19世纪50年代，关岛在1940年代），随后是正式的关系（夏威夷在1959年成为一个州，关岛在1950年被吞并为美国领土）。这种历史和法律的地理分析的基本假设是，性别、印第安人和阶级在美国介入之前和之后如何看待和“拥有”土地方面发挥了至关重要的作用。档案文件和访谈构成主要数据来源。档案资料包括19世纪中期夏威夷的财产索赔和购买记录;关岛在西班牙殖民主义、日本占领和第二次世界大战期间建立美国军事存在期间的地图和财产记录;以及对学者和政府官员关于土著、性别和阶级在土地权利、价值和使用方面的作用的采访。文本文件和访谈记录的定性编码将使文件和口述历史之间建立联系。 对于档案地图，方法包括比较空间形态学来跟踪“城市”形态的演变，识别空间特征和典型的空间布局，以及识别和检查扩展区域。 太平洋岛民联邦承认将使美国联邦政府在法律的上对土著群体加以区分，从而允许（尽管并非总是在所有群体之间达到相同程度）“国中之国”的地位，从而为指定群体提供货币援助和方案资格。 虽然这项研究没有提出任何支持或反对这种联邦行为的主张，但研究结果将突出土地治理与社会经济和政治边缘化相互交织的方式。

With the adoption of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples by the United Nations' General Assembly in 2007, indigenous rights were for the first time spelled out in a comprehensive manner by an international governing body. While the Declaration technically is non-binding, several countries did not sign the declaration, one of which was the United States. The colonial history of the United States remains understudied especially with respect to non-mainland groups and legal geographies of land. In particular, while continental US tribal nations have begun the process of Federal Recognition and of regaining their ancestral lands, this process has only just begun for indigenous Pacific Islanders. As historians assert that the Western cooptation of Pacific Islander ancestral land led to the contemporary marginalized socio-economic status of indigenous groups, they have rallied around 'return' of ancestral land as the key to socio-economic and community rejuvenation. However, native Pacific Islanders cannot be 'returned' to their ancestral lands in the same ways that mainland tribal nations might be. Unlike mainland tribal nations, indigenous Pacific Islanders experienced micro spatial displacement, defined in this project as displacement but on the same land mass or onto nearby land masses. Doctoral student Beth Tamayose, under the supervision of Professor Lois Takahashi, will conduct a study that clarifies the complexities of the legal geographies of land in the Pacific Islands, by exploring the legal land/property rights in two Pacific Island contexts (Hawaii and Guam). The timeframe for analysis centers on the entrance of US interests (1850s for Hawaii, 1940s for Guam) followed by formalized relationships (statehood for Hawaii in 1959, and Guam's annexation as a US territory in 1950). The underlying presumption for this historical and legal geographic analysis is that gender, indigeneity, and class played vital roles in how land was viewed and 'owned' prior to and post-US involvement. Archival documents and interviews comprise the primary data sources. Archival data include mid-1800s property claims and purchase records in Hawaii; maps and property records for Guam during Spanish colonialism, Japanese Occupation, and the establishment of US Military presence during World War II; and interviews with scholars and government officials concerning the roles of indigeneity, gender, and class with respect to land rights, value, and use. Qualitative coding of the text documents and interview transcripts will enable linkage between documents and oral histories. For the archival maps, methods include comparative spatial morphology to track the evolution of 'urban' form, identification of spatial characteristics and typical spatial arrangement(s), and identification and examination of expansion areas. Pacific Islander Federal Recognition would provide a legal distinction by the US federal government to indigenous groups that would allow for, though not always to the same extent across all groups, 'nation-within-a-nation' status, thereby providing monetary assistance and program eligibility to designated groups. Although this study does not make any claims either in support of or against such federal acts, the results will highlight the ways in which land governance intersect with socio-economic and political marginalization.