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}
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.
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.