2013
DOI: 10.1111/geob.12008
View full text |Buy / Rent full text
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: In British Columbia, Canada's westernmost province, unresolved Aboriginal claims to land remain highly contentious. Since the early 1990s, a unique treaty negotiation process has sought to resolve questions about land ownership and establish a new relationship between Aboriginal peoples and the Crown. After almost two decades, the limitations of this treaty process are increasingly evident and answers to the land question remain elusive. This article examines this treaty‐making process through a property lens,… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
(3 reference statements)
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These are said to resolve the deficiencies of other failed land titling programs by maintaining reversionary title to First Nations, by allowing for land to be held first collectively and then individually in fee simple on a voluntary basis, and by including a Torrens-style land registry controlled by First Nations (Flanagan et al., 2010). However, despite the land reversionary clauses built into treaties as well as the FNPOA legislation being promoted, fee simple is ultimately a notion derived from the Anglo-Saxon feudal property system in which the landholder technically is considered a tenant of the holder of underlying title: the Crown (Egan, 2013). Thus, despite the certainty that treaties and other laws purport to provide to First Nations, there remains debate as to where allodial or ‘real title’ actually rests, and uneasiness with the very meaning of the property forms which structure them.…”
Section: The Continued Making Of Native Spacementioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…These are said to resolve the deficiencies of other failed land titling programs by maintaining reversionary title to First Nations, by allowing for land to be held first collectively and then individually in fee simple on a voluntary basis, and by including a Torrens-style land registry controlled by First Nations (Flanagan et al., 2010). However, despite the land reversionary clauses built into treaties as well as the FNPOA legislation being promoted, fee simple is ultimately a notion derived from the Anglo-Saxon feudal property system in which the landholder technically is considered a tenant of the holder of underlying title: the Crown (Egan, 2013). Thus, despite the certainty that treaties and other laws purport to provide to First Nations, there remains debate as to where allodial or ‘real title’ actually rests, and uneasiness with the very meaning of the property forms which structure them.…”
Section: The Continued Making Of Native Spacementioning
confidence: 99%
“…This legal obligation then might form the basis of a renewed land relation rule for the Tŝilhqot’in built upon sharing and reciprocity. In many contexts, in fact, Indigenous land laws which have been well articulated include the notion that ownership is subject to the principles of balance, reciprocity, respect, redistribution, and sharing (Borrows, 2015a; Bryan, 2000; Egan, 2013).…”
Section: (Re) Creating Indigenous Propertymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The state continues to extend its vision of property in the text of modernday land claim settlements by developing entirely new categories of land ownership-treaty settlement land-that harden the "exclusivity" distinctions expressed in common-law Aboriginal title. 52 Here, we more clearly see Canada's interest in exclusivity: exclusivity neatly clarifies which legal personthe collective members of a First Nation-has property rights to which the state may owe a duty, and precludes having multiple duties to two or more First Nations if each has title to the same land. Such settlement agreements are largely consistent with the stridently neoliberal proposals of Flanagan, Alcantara, and le Dressey to create a framework that would turn other First Nations lands into private "fee simple" land holdings that could leverage equity in conventional real estate markets.…”
Section: The Merits Hearingmentioning
confidence: 99%