Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Land and rivers can own themselves

Land and rivers can own themselves <jats:sec> <jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Purpose</jats:title> <jats:p>The purpose of this paper is to describe and critically review the new tenure arrangements that have been established to recognise Māori relationship with land (Te Urewera) and river (Whanganui River), to ascribe them their own legal personality.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Design/methodology/approach</jats:title> <jats:p>The paper describes the development of the legal arrangements in Aotearoa, New Zealand, for Treaty settlements with Māori, and documents the various forms of rights and divisions of space that are changing the face of property institutions.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Findings</jats:title> <jats:p>The paper finds that the acknowledgement of land and nature as having their own legal status and, therefore, owned by themselves is bold and innovative, but is still not a full recognition of customary tenure. The recognition of rivers as indivisible entities is stated but not clearly implemented.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Practical implications</jats:title> <jats:p>Māori interests and authority are now more clearly articulated, and Māori may expect to be able to engage in customary practices and restore their traditional relationships with their land more explicitly.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Social implications</jats:title> <jats:p>The avoidance of an ownership regime has tempered public concerns about issues such as ownership of flowing water. The formalities are still being completed in the case of the Whanganui River, so the full implications are yet to be felt.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Originality/value</jats:title> <jats:p>This is an innovative development in tenure arrangements seen by some as providing for the rights of nature, but actually responding to the rights of the Indigenous people. This article may inform others about possible models for more diverse tenure arrangements elsewhere.</jats:p> </jats:sec> http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png International Journal of Law in the Built Environment CrossRef

Land and rivers can own themselves

International Journal of Law in the Built Environment , Volume 9 (1): 4-17 – Apr 10, 2017

Land and rivers can own themselves


Abstract

<jats:sec>
<jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Purpose</jats:title>
<jats:p>The purpose of this paper is to describe and critically review the new tenure arrangements that have been established to recognise Māori relationship with land (Te Urewera) and river (Whanganui River), to ascribe them their own legal personality.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>
<jats:sec>
<jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Design/methodology/approach</jats:title>
<jats:p>The paper describes the development of the legal arrangements in Aotearoa, New Zealand, for Treaty settlements with Māori, and documents the various forms of rights and divisions of space that are changing the face of property institutions.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>
<jats:sec>
<jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Findings</jats:title>
<jats:p>The paper finds that the acknowledgement of land and nature as having their own legal status and, therefore, owned by themselves is bold and innovative, but is still not a full recognition of customary tenure. The recognition of rivers as indivisible entities is stated but not clearly implemented.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>
<jats:sec>
<jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Practical implications</jats:title>
<jats:p>Māori interests and authority are now more clearly articulated, and Māori may expect to be able to engage in customary practices and restore their traditional relationships with their land more explicitly.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>
<jats:sec>
<jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Social implications</jats:title>
<jats:p>The avoidance of an ownership regime has tempered public concerns about issues such as ownership of flowing water. The formalities are still being completed in the case of the Whanganui River, so the full implications are yet to be felt.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>
<jats:sec>
<jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Originality/value</jats:title>
<jats:p>This is an innovative development in tenure arrangements seen by some as providing for the rights of nature, but actually responding to the rights of the Indigenous people. This article may inform others about possible models for more diverse tenure arrangements elsewhere.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>

Loading next page...
 
/lp/crossref/land-and-rivers-can-own-themselves-Pe0J4eBnNO

References (19)

Publisher
CrossRef
ISSN
1756-1450
DOI
10.1108/ijlbe-10-2016-0016
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

<jats:sec> <jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Purpose</jats:title> <jats:p>The purpose of this paper is to describe and critically review the new tenure arrangements that have been established to recognise Māori relationship with land (Te Urewera) and river (Whanganui River), to ascribe them their own legal personality.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Design/methodology/approach</jats:title> <jats:p>The paper describes the development of the legal arrangements in Aotearoa, New Zealand, for Treaty settlements with Māori, and documents the various forms of rights and divisions of space that are changing the face of property institutions.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Findings</jats:title> <jats:p>The paper finds that the acknowledgement of land and nature as having their own legal status and, therefore, owned by themselves is bold and innovative, but is still not a full recognition of customary tenure. The recognition of rivers as indivisible entities is stated but not clearly implemented.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Practical implications</jats:title> <jats:p>Māori interests and authority are now more clearly articulated, and Māori may expect to be able to engage in customary practices and restore their traditional relationships with their land more explicitly.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Social implications</jats:title> <jats:p>The avoidance of an ownership regime has tempered public concerns about issues such as ownership of flowing water. The formalities are still being completed in the case of the Whanganui River, so the full implications are yet to be felt.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Originality/value</jats:title> <jats:p>This is an innovative development in tenure arrangements seen by some as providing for the rights of nature, but actually responding to the rights of the Indigenous people. This article may inform others about possible models for more diverse tenure arrangements elsewhere.</jats:p> </jats:sec>

Journal

International Journal of Law in the Built EnvironmentCrossRef

Published: Apr 10, 2017

There are no references for this article.