|
|
|
PDF
|
|
Type:
|
Conference Paper |
|
Author:
|
Kerkhoff, Elisabeth; Aryal, Achyut; Webster, S. |
|
Conference:
|
Governing Shared Resources: Connecting Local Experience to Global Challenges, the Twelfth Biennial Conference of the International Association for the Study of Commons |
|
Location:
|
Cheltenham, England |
|
Conf. Date:
|
July 14-18, 2008 |
|
Date:
|
2008 |
|
URI:
|
https://hdl.handle.net/10535/1504
|
|
Sector:
|
Social Organization
General & Multiple Resources |
|
Region:
|
Middle East & South Asia |
|
Subject(s):
|
common pool resources
indigenous knowledge
community participation
indigenous institutions
IASC
|
|
Abstract:
|
"In integrated shifting cultivation, as practiced by many indigenous peoples in the Eastern Himalayas, common property regimes are of vital importance. They regulate natural resources management and ensure social security, but government policies fail to recognise their importance. This is a longstanding debate, but what is new is the increasing formal recognition of indigenous peoples rights, including in the Conventions of the International Labour Organisation.
"The study presented here examines how the ILO Conventions No. 111 (Employment and Occupation) and No. 169 (Indigenous and Tribal Peoples) can be applied as tools to defend the right of indigenous peoples to practice shifting cultivation, if they wish to do so, and maintain their common property resources, using a case from Nepal. Convention No. 111 protects shifting cultivators against discrimination in employment, and in accessing the means required for it. Shifting cultivation is considered a traditional occupation for indigenous peoples, and so the rights to land and other resources and to traditional common property regimes are recognised. The convention is strongly interlinked with Convention No. 169, which also emphasises the right to common property resources and regimes.
"The conventions are found to be very applicable to point to issues of discrimination and specific shortcomings in the policy environment. As such, they can be a useful tool to defend common property related rights of shifting cultivators. This is important in Nepal, which currently does not meet its obligations under Convention No.111. While blanket polices do exist to address the needs of the poor, they fail to address the specific needs of shifting cultivators. Most issues identified in the case study will remain relevant even if (ex-) shifting cultivators decide to engage in other occupations or use the land for other purposes. Capacity building is needed to help use the conventions at a wider scale."
|