![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
International law establishes who has rights to self-determination and outlines the rights of Indigenous people through the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). Many countries who are United Nations members, such as those of our case studies, have not made changes to their laws to implement UNDRIP. This affects how Indigenous peoples can engage in capabilities for self-determination for their wellbeing. Drawing from methods that are adapted to be in alliance with Indigenous methodologies through utilising Indigenous relational theoretical frameworks, we present two case studies, one in the U.S. that used ethnographic futures research and one in Bangladesh that used participatory action research. Our paper critically discusses: (1) how the capability approach relates to Indigenous self-determination and wellbeing, (2) how colonisation affects the ability of Indigenous people to engage in capabilities for self-determination, (3) how Indigenous people define and utilise self-determination as an individual and collective capability for their wellbeing, and (4) how unfreedoms restrict Indigenous people from utilising the capabilities for self-determination. We hope that this paper will contribute to broadening the capability approach to be able to engage more fully with Indigenous peoples.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1 It is important to note that while there are 574 federally recognized Tribes in the U.S., there are additional Tribes in the U.S. that the federal government does not recognize that still consider themselves sovereign Native Tribes. Some of these Tribes have state recognition and are in the process of applying for federal recognition.
2 Although Indigenous people have different cultures, languages, and ways of knowing that are different from the Bangladeshi mainstream people, the primary difference between Indigenous and mainstream populations is determined by religious identity. The majority of the population in Bangladesh, referred to as the Bangladeshi mainstream people in this paper, are Muslim.The Laitu Khyeng Indigenous people do not identify as Muslim and instead draw on different understandings of spirituality such as (Indigenous spirituality and Buddhism). Additionally, the Laitu Khyeng Indigenous people consider the Bangladeshi mainstream people to be illegal settlers as they control the government and through both Bangladeshi government and military initiatives, they have displaced the Laitu Khyeng Indigenous people and taken the Laitu Khyeng peoples’ land (Adnan Citation2004; Roy Citation2000).
3 Datta, Citation2019
Additional information
Funding
Notes on contributors
Heather Sauyaq Jean Gordon
Dr Heather Sauyaq Jean Gordon is Iñupiaq and an enrolled member of the Nome Eskimo Community. Her research areas of interest include self-determination, sustainability, wellbeing, culture as a protective factor, decolonisation, missing and murdered Indigenous people, Indigenous methodologies, Indigenous Knowledge, and engaging in mutually beneficial research with Indigenous communities.
Ranjan Datta
Dr Ranjan Datta is of South Asian minority descent from Bangladesh. His research areas of interest include Indigenous environmental sustainability, environmental management, Indigenous land rights, anti-racist theory and practice, decolonisation, social and environmental justice, community gardens, and cross-cultural research methodologies and methods.