{"title":"努纳武特地区的土地权利和资源冲突","authors":"W. Bernauer","doi":"10.1080/1088937X.2019.1648582","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The 1993 Nunavut Agreement was intended to help resolve disputes over resource extraction and facilitate responsible development in Nunavut. However, conflicts have persisted. In the Kivalliq region, debates over uranium mining and mining in caribou calving grounds have caused divisions between different representative organizations created by the Nunavut Agreement. Scholars have explained these conflicts with reference to the structures created by the Nunavut Agreement, especially the corporate structure of the territory's Inuit organizations. While this is an important factor driving these conflicts, I argue that the system of land rights created by the Nunavut Agreement, especially the extinguishment of Aboriginal title, is also an important causal factor in these disputes. I begin with an overview of the concept of Aboriginal title and its extinguishment in British-Canadian law. Next, I discuss the Nunavut Agreement's provisions for land rights, especially the exchange of Aboriginal title over a large territory for fee-simple ownership over relatively small parcels of land. This is followed by an examination of the conflicts over uranium mining and mining in calving grounds. I conclude that the provisions of the Nunavut agreement intended to provide ‘certainty’ for capital investment have in some cases had the opposite effect by fueling ongoing conflicts.","PeriodicalId":46164,"journal":{"name":"Polar Geography","volume":"76 1","pages":"253 - 266"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Land rights and resource conflicts in Nunavut\",\"authors\":\"W. Bernauer\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/1088937X.2019.1648582\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The 1993 Nunavut Agreement was intended to help resolve disputes over resource extraction and facilitate responsible development in Nunavut. However, conflicts have persisted. In the Kivalliq region, debates over uranium mining and mining in caribou calving grounds have caused divisions between different representative organizations created by the Nunavut Agreement. Scholars have explained these conflicts with reference to the structures created by the Nunavut Agreement, especially the corporate structure of the territory's Inuit organizations. While this is an important factor driving these conflicts, I argue that the system of land rights created by the Nunavut Agreement, especially the extinguishment of Aboriginal title, is also an important causal factor in these disputes. I begin with an overview of the concept of Aboriginal title and its extinguishment in British-Canadian law. Next, I discuss the Nunavut Agreement's provisions for land rights, especially the exchange of Aboriginal title over a large territory for fee-simple ownership over relatively small parcels of land. This is followed by an examination of the conflicts over uranium mining and mining in calving grounds. I conclude that the provisions of the Nunavut agreement intended to provide ‘certainty’ for capital investment have in some cases had the opposite effect by fueling ongoing conflicts.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46164,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Polar Geography\",\"volume\":\"76 1\",\"pages\":\"253 - 266\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-08-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Polar Geography\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/1088937X.2019.1648582\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GEOGRAPHY, PHYSICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Polar Geography","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1088937X.2019.1648582","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY, PHYSICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
ABSTRACT The 1993 Nunavut Agreement was intended to help resolve disputes over resource extraction and facilitate responsible development in Nunavut. However, conflicts have persisted. In the Kivalliq region, debates over uranium mining and mining in caribou calving grounds have caused divisions between different representative organizations created by the Nunavut Agreement. Scholars have explained these conflicts with reference to the structures created by the Nunavut Agreement, especially the corporate structure of the territory's Inuit organizations. While this is an important factor driving these conflicts, I argue that the system of land rights created by the Nunavut Agreement, especially the extinguishment of Aboriginal title, is also an important causal factor in these disputes. I begin with an overview of the concept of Aboriginal title and its extinguishment in British-Canadian law. Next, I discuss the Nunavut Agreement's provisions for land rights, especially the exchange of Aboriginal title over a large territory for fee-simple ownership over relatively small parcels of land. This is followed by an examination of the conflicts over uranium mining and mining in calving grounds. I conclude that the provisions of the Nunavut agreement intended to provide ‘certainty’ for capital investment have in some cases had the opposite effect by fueling ongoing conflicts.
期刊介绍:
Polar Geographyis a quarterly publication that offers a venue for scholarly research on the physical and human aspects of the Polar Regions. The journal seeks to address the component interplay of the natural systems, the complex historical, political, economic, cultural, diplomatic, and security issues, and the interchange amongst them. As such, the journal welcomes comparative approaches, critical scholarship, and alternative and disparate perspectives from around the globe. The journal offers scientists a venue for publishing longer papers such as might result from distillation of a thesis, or review papers that place in global context results from coordinated national and international efforts currently underway in both Polar Regions.