My concern with giving that power or agency to international organizations is that there is a lot of cultural differences, priorities, etc. that can be lost in the process, and also the corruption, interest, and bureaucracy that can happen and which affects the outcomes. I believe that we should start to think of giving more power to communities and grass-root movements to take agency of this procesess since it is their land and they are the affected. I do see how it is more likely that International organizations fulfil this role since they are more powerful next to corporations than an indegenous community. But I feel like we shoulc be asking how can we then help to increase their political power or media profile for them to defend themselves in their own terms and priorities?
Yeah this is a really good point. Big international organization may have more financial backing but they are how ever many more degrees of separation from the issue at hand. Especially in regards to indigenous communities, large international organization are ignorant to a lot of the cultural or lifestyle differences which could be a huge problem to indigenous autonomy. I agree, as much deliberation, consultation an indigenous autonomy as possible is a necessary consonant to change. These large organizations may be able to evoke change more quickly, but it won't necessarily be positive unless the communities in question are at the forefront of any decision making.
I will say, I think theres two main issues I can generally identify. 1) The environmental issues associated with indigenous and vulnerable populations 2) The environmental issues caused by the western world (most of the pollution). I think that when it comes to the first side of things, I completely agree that big organizations are way too far removed from the issues at hand. The strategy of supporting the increase of power and voice in indigenous communities is very important for that. But I think when it comes to the second side of things, the big corporations aren't too far removed. Big corporations are the forefront of those problems the green economy approach (and other sort of capitalistic concepts) feels very important in discussions about solutions to that for me.
I think that you all pose very important concerns and potential solutions. @Julieta I completely agree that the power should be in the hands of the grassroots organizations, and that indigenous communities should be leading the conversation on what activity occurs on their land. However, I think that @caroline22 proposes this dichotomy between two issues very well, and that larger international organizations simply mediating conversations, to ensure that the voices of communities that have been historically ignored are given rightful power in conflict against mega-corporations. I believe that their voices should be at the forefront of the conversation, but I see larger international organizations as a transitionary step towards indigenous communities being recognized by all corporations as the rightful power over these lands. These conferences could also be a hub for media coverage, where international news outlets can cover stories and ensure that the global public is informed, and able to contribute by holding corporations accountable. I just worry that if these international steps aren't taken that there will continue to be many mega corporations that ignore the rights of indigenous communities, and that these conferences could be a means for accountability during this shift from elitist power. But, remembering the hold of corruption is really essential, and I guess I'm creating this vision under the hopes that the UN, or some other international organization, is above the grasp of money, which is wildly idealistic.
I guess though as I think more about it, the second set of things I describe doesn't really exist outside of the first. I think I was focused on indigenous populations in my head for that last post because of all our recent readings and my paper. Going back to earlier discussions we had in the class, the big polluting companies are located somewhere and that will always impact vulnerable populations. While I think the big organizations do have a role in the situation/solutions, I agree with @Julieta they are way too far removed from the actual problem than those actually being locally affected by it.
I agree that consent of an indigenous group is an important tool but I don't see it as a guarantee for protection. I think that with the way extractive practices and the treatment of indigenous people are today it can be assumed in a lot of cases that indigenous land will remain vulnerable. In the film "Children of the Jaguar" a part of the ruling was that explosives had to be disarmed or removed from their property. This was shocking to me because I didn't really understand why they would put explosives on their land in the first place. With activists and environmental defenders being killed so frequently I sadly wouldn't be surprised if the Sarayaku Kichwa people or neighboring people experienced this or just the illegal use of their land.
I think one of the best things moving forward for indigenous land rights would be for some sort of organization, ideally grassroots, to take on a larger roll of protecting these people. It's sad but indigenous people are often not respected/ are racially profiled and changing that will take a really long time. In the meantime defending these people could add a lot of strength to their fight to protect their land, get better access to resources, etc. I think there should be more organizations whose goal is solely to protect and fight for these people. If the organization made a name for itself a community could say "we are working with ____" and that could hold power.
Comments
I guess though as I think more about it, the second set of things I describe doesn't really exist outside of the first. I think I was focused on indigenous populations in my head for that last post because of all our recent readings and my paper. Going back to earlier discussions we had in the class, the big polluting companies are located somewhere and that will always impact vulnerable populations. While I think the big organizations do have a role in the situation/solutions, I agree with @Julieta they are way too far removed from the actual problem than those actually being locally affected by it.
I agree that consent of an indigenous group is an important tool but I don't see it as a guarantee for protection. I think that with the way extractive practices and the treatment of indigenous people are today it can be assumed in a lot of cases that indigenous land will remain vulnerable. In the film "Children of the Jaguar" a part of the ruling was that explosives had to be disarmed or removed from their property. This was shocking to me because I didn't really understand why they would put explosives on their land in the first place. With activists and environmental defenders being killed so frequently I sadly wouldn't be surprised if the Sarayaku Kichwa people or neighboring people experienced this or just the illegal use of their land.
I think one of the best things moving forward for indigenous land rights would be for some sort of organization, ideally grassroots, to take on a larger roll of protecting these people. It's sad but indigenous people are often not respected/ are racially profiled and changing that will take a really long time. In the meantime defending these people could add a lot of strength to their fight to protect their land, get better access to resources, etc. I think there should be more organizations whose goal is solely to protect and fight for these people. If the organization made a name for itself a community could say "we are working with ____" and that could hold power.