DOCSLIB.ORG

Confronting Remote Ownership Problems with Ecological Law

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Confronting Remote Ownership Problems with Ecological Law CONFRONTING REMOTE OWNERSHIP PROBLEMS WITH ECOLOGICAL LAW Geoffrey Garver* ABSTRACT ThomasBerry’s powerfulappeal foramutually enhancing human- Earthrelationshipfaces many challengesdue to theecological crisis that is co-identifiedwith dominant growth-insistenteconomic,political, andlegal systemsacrossthe world. Thedomains of environmental history, ecological restoration, and eco-culturalrestoration, as well as studies by Elinor Ostrom and othersofsustainableuse of commonpool resources,provide insightsonthe necessary conditions foramutually enhancing human-Earth relationship. Atheme commontothesedomains is theneed forintimate knowledgeofand connectiontoplace that requiresalong-standing commitment of people to theecosystems that sustainthem.Remoteprivate ownership—oftenbylarge and politically powerful multinational corporations financed by investorsseeking thehighest possiblereturns and lacking knowledgeorinterestinthe places and people they harm—is deeplyengrained in theglobal economic system.The historical rootsof remote ownership and controlgoback to territorial extensification associated with thesharpriseofcolonialismand long-distancetradeinthe earlymodernera.Yet remote owners’and investors’ detachment from place poses an enormous challenge in thequest foramutually enhancing human-Earthrelationship. ThisEssaypresents an analysis of how contemporary environmental lawundergirds theremoteownershipproblem and of how limits-insistentecological lawcouldprovide solutions. ABSTRACT..................................................................................................425 INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................426 I. AMUTUALLY ENHANCING HUMAN-EARTH RELATIONSHIP:AMORAL GROUNDING FOR ECOLOGICAL LAW .........................................................428 II. THE REMOTE OWNERSHIP PROBLEM ....................................................436 A. EcologicalDisruptionfromAgriculture...........................................437 B. Metabolic Rift andthe Rise of GlobalTrade....................................440 *Dr. GeoffreyGarver,Ph.D.,J.D., L.L.M.,coordinates research on lawand governance for theEconomicsfor theAnthropocene Partnership (e4a-net.org)and teaches environmental coursesat McGill University and ConcordiaUniversity.Heisonthe steeringcommitteeofthe Ecological Law and Governance Association, ELGA(elga.world). 426 Vermont Law Review [Vol.43:425 C. ModernGlobal Trade and Investment..............................................443 D. Trade, Investment,and Remote Ownership Problems .....................449 III. CONFRONTING REMOTE OWNERSHIP UNDER ECOLOGICAL LAW .......450 CONCLUSION ..............................................................................................453 INTRODUCTION Thegrowing tensionbetween theglobally dominant socio-political narrative, based on insistence on economic growth,and thealternative limits-based narrative in whichthe emerging field of ecologicallaw is grounded, createsanurgently needed openingfor transformationoflaw.1 Contemporarylegal systems co-evolved with other socially constructed normativesystems that characterizethe growth-insistent narrative.2 Therefore, theradical transformationthatecological lawcalls for necessarily involves concomitant transformationofthe social,political, economic,and cultural systems with whichlaw interactsacross temporal andspatialscales.3 1. KathrynGwiazdon, We Cannot Fail: The Promise and Principles of Ecological Lawand Governance,11MINDING NATURE 36, 36 (2018) (highlightingthe creationofthe Ecological Law and Governance Association (ELGA)asone response to theneedtostructureprinciples of lawand governance around thefoundations of life). 2. PANARCHY:UNDERSTANDING TRANSFORMATIONS IN HUMAN AND NATURAL SYSTEMS 5 (Lance H. Gunderson &C.S.Hollingeds.,2002) (explaining that co-evolutioninvolves aconstant “interplay between change and persistence, between thepredictableand unpredictable”). 3. See id. (“The cross-scale,interdisciplinary,and dynamic natureofthe theoryhas [led] us to coin theterm panarchy for it.”); RICHARD O. BROOKS ET AL., LAW AND ECOLOGY 36 (2002) (suggesting that “bothecologyand environmental laware undergoing transformations to betteradapt to eachother and to theenvironmental problems they areseeking to resolve”);DonaldT.Hornstein, Complexity Theory, Adaptation, and AdministrativeLaw,54DUKE L. REV.913, 932, 944 (2005) (demonstratinghow transformations that transcendour routinepolitical and social systemsmay come from a“republican moment[]”);J.B.Ruhl, Law’s Complexity: APrimer,24GA.ST.U.L.REV.885, 896–97, 901 (2008) (“[I]n social systems, change veryoften is the specificintent of human intervention, in whichcaseknowinghow thesystemresponds to changeshouldbeanimportant factor in thedesign of theinstrumentofchange.”); J.B. Ruhl, Panarchy and theLaw,17ECOLOGY &SOC’Y,no. 3, 2012, art. no. 31, https://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol17/iss3/art31/ (demonstratingthatadaptivesystems theoryhas alreadyspread to economics,ecology, and sociology); RobinKundisCraig, Learning to Think About Complex EnvironmentalSystems inEnvironmental and Natural Resource Lawand Legal Scholarship: ATwenty-Year Retrospective,24FORDHAM ENVTL.L.REV.87, 92 (2013) (“Howdowe transform environmentaland natural resources lawintogovernance systems that can cope with continual change, ever-present uncertainty,and thepotential forcatastrophic...thresholdcrossings in socio-ecological systems?”); AhjondS.Garmestani&Melinda Harm Benson, AFramework for Resilience-BasedGovernance of Social-Ecological Systems,18ECOLOGY &SOC’Y,no. 1, 2013, art. no. 9, http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol18/iss1/art9/(“The primaryproblems with our current framework for environmentallaw are that it does not often account forscale andtends to lock-in‘fixes’ 2019] ConfrontingRemoteOwnershipProblemswithEcological Law 427 Propertyregimes andstate sovereigntyare twoofthe main normative constructsthat will needprofound rethinking and regroundinginany transitionfromcontemporarylaw to ecological law.4 Deeply entrenched protections of privateproperty rightsand strong resistance to stringent supranationallegal regimesfor environmental protectionand othermatters act—often in concert—to impede meaningful,widespread achievement of an ecologically sustainable balance between societal developmentand ecological integrity.5 In particular,remoteprivateownership and absentee landlords associated with land andresource grabbing oftenlodge prevailing power overland usedecisions in decisionmakers whoare geographically farremoved fromthe effected ecological systems andlackinginthe knowledge neededfor managingthem in an ecologically sustainable manner.6 Thomas Berry’s conceptionofamutually enhancing human-Earth relationshipprovidesacompellingcoreobjectivefor ecological lawand the becauseofthe needfor certainty in the legalprocess.”); RakhyunE.Kim &KlausBosselmann, International Environmental Law in the Anthropocene:Towards aPurposive System of Multilateral Environmental Agreements,2TRANSNAT’L ENVTL.L.285, 307 (2013) (“[T]heultimatepurpose of internationalenvironmentallaw should be aboutsafeguardingthe integrityofEarth’s life-support system, or all identified andpotentialplanetary boundaries, as thenon-negotiable biophysical preconditions forhuman existence and development.”); Olivia Odom Greenetal., Barriers and Bridges to the Integration of Social–Ecological Resilience and Law,13FRONTIERS ECOLOGY &ENV’T 332, 332, 335 (2015) (demonstratingthatadaptivegovernancemay be apart of thetransformationto ecologicallaw). 4. See Geoffrey Garver, ASystems-Based Tool forTransitioning to Law foraMutually Enhancing Human-EarthRelationship,157 ECOLOGICAL ECON.165, 166 [hereinafter Garver, A Systems-BasedTool forTransitioningtoLaw](explaining that “the dominant anthropocentric narrative...[is]reinforced by legal systems built around strong notions of statesovereignty and private property rights”); GeoffreyGarver, The Rule of EcologicalLaw:The Legal ComplementtoDegrowth Economics,5SUSTAINABILITY 316, 319, 321 (2013) [hereinafter Garver, The RuleofEcological Law] (contending that aflawofenvironmental lawand economicsisthe favoring of monetization, leading to primaryeconomic rather than ecological constraints on land). 5.See Garver, ASystems-Based Tool for Transitioning to Law, supra note4(“Prevailing legal systems ...assume[] non-human nature is subjecttohuman dominance ....”). 6. See FRED PEARCE,THE LAND GRABBERS:THE NEW FIGHT OVER WHO OWNS THE EARTH viii,5–6 (2012) (explaining thefirst exampleofthe global “landgrabs” he explored, including Al Amoudi, whorecruitedaformer Zenawiminister—Hail Assegdie—who plans to digacanal through villagers’landwithouttheir knowledge);Jampel Dell’Angeloetal., The Tragedy of theGrabbed Commons:Coercion and Dispossession in the Global Land Rush,92WORLD DEV.1,9(2017) (demonstratingthatthe “broaderdynamicsoflandgrabbing cannot be prevented by acting onlyon property regimeswithoutaddressingpower dynamicsand systemsofproduction”); Marc Edelman, CarlosOya &Saturnino M. Borras Jr., Global LandGrabs: Historical Processes, Theoretical and Methodological Implicationand Current Trajectories,34THIRD WORLD Q.,1517,1528 (2013) (connectingchanges in agrarian economy, capitalism,and other driversofdevelopment with solutions in environmental law). 428 Vermont Law Review [Vol.43:425 relatedfield of ecological economics.7 This Essay is asystems-based examinationofhow ecologicallaw that supports an ongoing questfor a mutually enhancing human-Earthrelationshipprovidesecologically
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Article1. Land Law Article2. Land Ownership Arlicle 3. Unified
    LAND CODE OF THE REPUBLIC OF TAJIKISTAN The present Code regulates land relations and it is directed at the rational use and protection of land, recreation of fertility of the soil, maintenance and improvement of the natural environment and for equal development ofall forms ofeconomic activity in Tajikistan. Chapter 1. BASIC PROVISIONS Article 1. Land law Land relations in the Republic of Tajikistan are regulated by this Code and other Land Laws issued on the basisofthis Code. Issues related to the ownership and use of mountains, forests and water resources, to use and protection of the flora and fauna, protection of the environment is regulated by the current legislation of the Republic ofthe Republic ofTajikistan. Article2. Land ownership Land in the Republic of Tajikistan is an exclusive ownership of the state. The state guarantees its effective use in the interests of its citizens. Certiorari oflands, which belonged to the ancestors, is banned. Arlicle 3. Unified national resources In accordance with the purpose they serve, all national land resources of the Republic of Tajikistan are divided into the following categories: 1. Farming lands, 2. Populated lands (cities, towns, and villages), 3. Land used for industrial, transport, communications, defense and other purposes, 4. Conservation land, land ofhistoric and cultural value, land used for health-improvement and recreation purposes, 5. Lands ofnational wood reserves, 6. Lands ofnational water reserves, 7. State land reserves. The category ofland is stated in the following documents: a) In the state land cadastre; b) In the land use register; 238 c) In the decisions ofexecutive bodies about land allotment; d) In title deeds to land use and tillage.
    [Show full text]
  • The Real Estate Law Review
    The Real EstateThe Law Review Real Estate Law Review Fifth Edition Editor John Nevin Law Business Research The Real Estate Law Review The Real Estate Law Review Reproduced with permission from Law Business Research Ltd. This article was first published in The Real Estate Law Review - Edition 5 (published in February 2016 – editor John Nevin) For further information please email [email protected] The Real Estate Law Review Fifth Edition Editor John Nevin Law Business Research Ltd PUBLISHER Gideon Roberton SENIOR BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT MANAGER Nick Barette SENIOR ACCOUNT MANAGERS Thomas Lee, Felicity Bown, Joel Woods ACCOUNT MANAGER Jessica Parsons MARKETING COORDINATOR Rebecca Mogridge EDITORIAL ASSISTANT Sophie Arkell HEAD OF PRODUCTION Adam Myers PRODUCTION EDITOR Robbie Kelly SUBEDITOR Gina Mete CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Paul Howarth Published in the United Kingdom by Law Business Research Ltd, London 87 Lancaster Road, London, W11 1QQ, UK © 2016 Law Business Research Ltd www.TheLawReviews.co.uk No photocopying: copyright licences do not apply. The information provided in this publication is general and may not apply in a specific situation, nor does it necessarily represent the views of authors’ firms or their clients. Legal advice should always be sought before taking any legal action based on the information provided. The publishers accept no responsibility for any acts or omissions contained herein. Although the information provided is accurate as of February 2016, be advised that this is a developing area. Enquiries concerning
    [Show full text]
  • Study Guide for the Rights of Nature Proposal Prepared by Rev
    Study Guide for The Rights of Nature Proposal Prepared by Rev. Dr. Bob Shore-Goss [email protected] "We are talking only to ourselves. We are not talking to the rivers, we are not listening to the wind and stars. We have broken the great conversation. By breaking that conversation we have shattered the universe. All the disasters that are happening now are a consequence of that spiritual 'autism.'" ~ Thomas Berry Summary: Pope Francis claims, “A true ‘right of the environment’ does exist.” There has been an international movement for the Rights of Nature in the last several decades. For the proposal before you, this serves as a brief study guide of the background. The proposal attempts to link the UCC with this movement that includes environmentalists, environmental Christian ethicists, indigenous peoples worldwide, international organizations that produced the Earth Charter, the Charter of Compassion, and the Parliament of World Religions. No Christian denomination (no world religion, outside indigenous spiritualities) have adopted a statement of faith and prophetic witness that explicitly claims Rights for Nature. There have lists of such rights by Stillheart Declaration and individual Christian ethicists. That is the last section of this study guide. Individual Christian liberation theologians such as the Brazilian Leonardo Boff, Sallie McFague, Thomas Berry, and others have recognize our human responsibility to notion of distributive justice (a fair share of Earth resources and goods for humanity, the more than human life, and bio-regions, and the Earth herself) to nature, living in a wholesome environment, eating well, enjoying a living space, sharing equitably and co-living with Nature, and ultimately respecting the intimate connection of human and the Earth community of life.
    [Show full text]
  • The Opportunities and Challenges Presented by a Land-Based Commons Approach
    Technical Committee on “Land Tenure and Development” The opportunities and challenges presented by a land-based commons approach Societies are currently having to adapt to multiple global reflection, which was facilitated and formalised by Cirad’s issues in a context of political, economic and ecological Green research unit with support from the International crises. The ‘land-based commons’ approach places col- Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), are lective action at the heart of efforts to evaluate and resolve presented in this publication. complex problems, by addressing these issues through Part 1 identifies action situations where it would be the analysis of local contexts and the structure of different useful to consider the opportunities and challenges of- international frameworks. The aim is to facilitate the fered by a land-based commons approach. Part 2 then emergence of institutional arrangements that involve the proposes various entry points that could be used to different groups and communities of interest working to mobilize scientific, cultural and social knowledge and The opportunities tackle issues at the local level, and contribute to policies highlight the different solidarity regimes that support and that can address these questions effectively. mobilize commons. Part 3 discusses the analytical This work on land-based commons is part of much framework for this procedure, which questions some of and challenges broader transdisciplinary reflection by the French Coo- the underlying assumptions that shaped previous initia- peration ‘Land Tenure and Development’ Technical tives to address land issues. Finally, Part 4 sets out six Committee (LTDTC), which has contributed to thinking guiding principles that were developed to facilitate im- presented by a land-based about ongoing changes in land and development over plementation of the land-based commons approach and the last 20 years.
    [Show full text]
  • An Agricultural Law Research Article
    University of Arkansas [email protected] $ (479) 575-7646 An Agricultural Law Research Article The Bioprospecting Question: Should the United States Charge Biotechnology Comapanies for the Commercial Use of Public Wild Genetic Resources? by John R. Adair Originally published in ECOLOGY LAW QUARTERLY 24-1 ECOLOGY L.Q. 131 (1997) www.NationalAgLawCenter.org Comment The Bioprospecting Question: Should the United States Charge Biotechnology Companies for the Commercial Use of Public Wild Genetic Resources? John R. Adair* CONTENTS Introduction. ................................................... 132 I. An Overview of Bioprospecting and Biotechnology .... 135 A. The Rise of the Biotechnology Industry . 135 B. How Bioprospecting Drives the Biotechnology Industry. ............................................ 137 C. The International Legal Framework................ 141 D. Domestic Law...................................... 147 1. Agency Mandates............................... 147 2. Congressional Legislation....................... 149 II. Bioprospecting in the United States 151 A. Recent History..................................... 151 B. Current Bioprospecting Activity. 153 C. The Future: Why Domestic Bioprospecting May Increase. ............................................ 155 III. The Federal Government Should Seek Compensation for the Use of Its Wild Genetic Resources............. 157 A. A Compensation-Seeking Approach Would Champion Consistency and Fairness in Federal Land Use Policy 158 1. Bioprospecting Companies Receive Unwarranted Taxpayer Subsidies 161 Copyright © 1997 by ECOLOGY LAW QUARTERLY. • Associate, Faegre & Benson, Minneapolis, Minnesota. J.D. 1996, Boalt HalI School of Law, University of California at Berkeley; B.A. 1991, Northwestern University. Thank you to the editors of the Ecology Law Quarterly for their hard work, and to Lana for her love and support. 131 132 ECOLOGY LAW QUARTERLY [Vol. XXIV:131 2. The Subjectivity of Environmental "Harm" ..... 161 B. A Compensation-Seeking Approach Would Procure Government Revenues ............................
    [Show full text]
  • The Commons and Customary Law in Modern Times: Rethinking the Orthodoxies
    UNDP-International Land Coalition Workshop: Land Rights for African Development: From Knowledge to Action Nairobi, October 31 – November 3, 2005 (Proceedings: http://www.undp.org/drylands/lt-workshop-11-05.htm) The Commons and Customary Law in Modern Times: Rethinking the Orthodoxies Liz Alden Wily Independent Consultant Land Tenure Adviser [email protected] INTRODUCTION Let me first lay out my position from the outset - 1. Conceptual confusion still blights ideas of the commons. It is necessary to draw a distinction between territories over which communities customarily exercise domain (Communal Domain) and tangible real estate, those properties within those domains which are the private group-owned property of all members of a community of persons, and which are held (for good reasons) in undivided shares. These are Common Properties. 2. It is my view that individually-held properties have been and still are - despite the last decade of reforms - the wrong target for rural tenure registration and collateralization in agrarian conditions. 3. Priority focus should be upon the rural commons. It is these estates, not the family farm or house, which always have been, and remain today at most risk from involuntary loss. It is these community-owned properties to which governments throughout the continent have so consistently helped themselves and/or reallocate to others and which still bear the status in over half of African States as de facto un-owned or public land. These losses continue right up until the present.1 Moreover these losses directly affect the poor. For even the poorest members of rural communities, those without land or too little land to live on (the ‘land poor’) share the customary ownership of these estates with other, richer members of the community.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparing Community-Based Management to Tradable Environmental Allowances
    7 Common Property, Regulatory Property, and Environmental Protection: Comparing Community-Based Management to Tradable Environmental Allowances Carol M. Rose Pages contained here from the original document pg. 197-232 The days are long gone in which environmentalists have believed that there is a “nature” or “natural world” separable from human activity. Our newspapers are full of stories of the human impact on what might be otherwise fondly thought of as pure “nature,” from the ocean depths through the remotest forests to the skies above; the consequences of human agriculture, transportation, manufacture, and resource extraction affect even the most seemingly inaccessible corners of the globe. Because no part of the world’s environment is untouched by human activity, environmental protection must be seen in large measure as a matter of human social organization. But what social organization is possible for dealing with environmental resources? The pessimistic views of Hardin, and his successor Ophuls, have been well-known for decades: On Hardin’s analysis, as elaborated by Ophuls, environmental resources are the locus of the “tragedy of the commons,” a multiple-person prisoners’ dilemma (PD) (Hardin, 1968; Ophuls, 1977; Ullmann- Margalit, 1977). Here it is in the interest of each resource user, taken individually, to exploit the resource à outrance while doing nothing to conserve, with the result that otherwise renewable resources instead become wasting assets. In the Hardin/Ophuls view, environmental degradation—overfishing, deforestation, overgrazing, pollution, whatever—is only a bleak set of repetitions of the “tragedy,” and only two solutions are possible to stave off the tragic decimation: individual property on the one hand, which internalizes the externalities of common pool exploitation, or “Leviathan” on the other, where governmental directives force individuals to perform in ways that promote the common good (Hardin, 1968; Ophuls, 1977).
    [Show full text]
  • Bioprospecting on Public Lands: Should Private Companies Compensate the Government for Their Seu of Public Land Resources? Sandra Bourgasser-Ketterling
    Journal of Law and Policy Volume 8 | Issue 2 Article 4 2000 Bioprospecting on Public Lands: Should Private Companies Compensate the Government for Their seU of Public Land Resources? Sandra Bourgasser-Ketterling Follow this and additional works at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/jlp Recommended Citation Sandra Bourgasser-Ketterling, Bioprospecting on Public Lands: Should Private Companies Compensate the Government for Their Use of Public Land Resources?, 8 J. L. & Pol'y (2000). Available at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/jlp/vol8/iss2/4 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at BrooklynWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Law and Policy by an authorized editor of BrooklynWorks. BIOPROSPECTING ON PUBLIC LANDS: SHOULD PRIVATE COMPANIES COMPENSATE THE GOVERNMENT FOR THEIR USE OF PUBLIC LAND RESOURCES? Sandra Bourgasser-Ketterling* INTRODUCTION While biotechnology has been exploited by mankind for millennia,' in recent years the practice has become a billion-dollar industry.2 Biotechnology may be defined as "any technological application that uses biological systems, living organisms, or derivatives thereof, to make or modify products or processes for specific use."3 The biotechnology industry, particularly in the areas of pharmaceuticals and agriculture,4 uses bioprospecting to gather * Brooklyn Law School Class of 2001; M.A., University of the Sorbonne, 1994; B.A., University of the Sorbonne, 1992. This Note is dedicated to Jeff Ketterling for his unconditional love and support. ' Linda Maher, The Environment and the Domestic Regulatory Framework for Biotechnology, 8 J. ENVTL. L. & LrIG. 133, 134 (1993) (noting that "[t]he benefits to man from biotechnological processes can be traced back to yeast fermentation in 6000 B.C.").
    [Show full text]
  • “Rights for the Earth” Towards New International Standards
    “RIGHTS FOR THE EARTH” TOWARDS NEW INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS From November 30th to December 11th, during the COP21 (UN Convention on Climate Change Conference of Parties of 2015) in Paris, the world’s nations will reach new agreements on climate change. The major challenge with these negotiations rounds would be the achievement of sufficiently binding commitment to ensure a sustainable living planet. Addressing the global climate complexity requires a moral and legal responsibility that should go beyond the mere “declaration of intentions”. It is necessary to construct a social pact for coexistence of a global governance regime and an international legal framework whose pillars are safeguarding biodiversity and respecting ecosystems’ dynamics, on which humanity depends for survival and well-being. All over the world, initiatives presenting a systemic solution to climate change and the current state of the planet by adapting public international law and criminal law are growing. Whatever may be the approaches or legal tools (Earth Laws, Rights of Nature, Rights of Future generations, fundamental human right to live in a healthy environment, criminal recognition of environmental crimes, ecocides crimes, Global Commons) they all seem to agree in a new socio-ecosystemic perspective, acknowledging that humans are inalienable parts of Nature and their actions not only have consequences over their environment, but also for their own well-being. This growing convergence of initiatives is an historic expression of public will at supranational level to control the way of how norms are defined in the case of major damage to the environment. The meeting of two international stakeholders: the coalition “The Global Alliance for the Rights of Nature” (GARN) and the citizens’ movement “End Ecocide on Earth” (EEE) for the COP21, coming from different fields of law, having both accomplished amazing results on their continents, will be the symbol of this convergence; Seeking to implement a range of actions whose aim is to show the complementarity and necessity of their approaches.
    [Show full text]
  • Indian Land Law--Some Fundamental Concepts for the Title Examiner
    Tulsa Law Review Volume 10 Issue 3 1975 Indian Land Law--Some Fundamental Concepts for the Title Examiner A. F. Ringold Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.utulsa.edu/tlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation A. F. Ringold, Indian Land Law--Some Fundamental Concepts for the Title Examiner, 10 Tulsa L. J. 321 (2013). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.utulsa.edu/tlr/vol10/iss3/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by TU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Tulsa Law Review by an authorized editor of TU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Ringold: Indian Land Law--Some Fundamental Concepts for the Title Examiner TULSA LAW JOURNAL Volume 10 1975 Number 3 INDIAN LAND LAW-SOME FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS FOR THE TITLE EXAMINER A. F. Ringold* INTRODUCTION All land titles in Oklahoma stem from treaties with Indian tribes and acts of Congress vitalizing treaty provisions., No fledgling title examiner can embrace this premise without some degree of awe-even amazement. But the initial historical inter- est which may be aroused often rapidly fades; customarily it is replaced by despair, confusion, or worse. For the title examiner of Oklahoma real property, no single body of law presents so much mystery, com- plexity or difficulty as that small segment of real estate and property law innocently called Indian Land Law. Contrary to the consensus that Indian Land Law presents a complex impregnable maze similar to future interests, today's title examiner can in many instances readily cope with and dispose of substantially all problems concerning the sub- ject.
    [Show full text]
  • Phd Thesis Modern Law and Local Tradition in Forest Heritage
    PhD Thesis Modern Law and Local Tradition in Forest Heritage Conservation in Cameroon: The Case of Korup A thesis approved by the Faculty of Environmental Sciences and Process Engineering at the Brandenburg University of Technology in Cottbus in partial fulfilment of the requirement for the award of the academic degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) in Environmental Sciences by Master of Arts Terence Onang Egute from Oshie, Momo Division, Northwest Region, Cameroon Supervisor: Prof. Dr. iur. Eike Albrecht Department of Civil and Public Law with References to the Law of Europe and the Environment, BTU Cottbus, Germany Supervisor: Prof. Dr. hab. Konrad Nowacki Department of Environmental Law and Comparative Administrative Law, University of Wroclaw, Poland Day of the oral examination: 26.11.2012 DOKTORARBEIT Modernes Recht und Lokale Traditionen bei der Erhaltung des Walderbes in Kamerun: Eine Fallstudie über Korup Von der Fakultät für Umweltwissenschaften und Verfahrenstechnik der Brandenburgischen Technischen Universität Cottbus genehmigte Dissertation zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades eines Doktors der Philosophie (Ph.D.) in Umweltwissenschaften vorgelegt von Master of Arts Terence Onang Egute aus Oshie, Momo Division, Northwest Region, Kamerun Gutachter: Prof. Dr. iur. Eike Albrecht Lehrstuhl Zivil- und Öffentliches Recht mit Bezügen zum Umwelt- und Europarecht der BTU Cottbus, Deutschland Gutachter: Prof. Dr. hab. Konrad Nowacki Lehrstuhl Umweltrecht und Vergleichendes Verwaltungsrecht der Universität Wroclaw, Polen Tag der mündlichen Prüfung: 26.11.2012 Modern Law and Local Tradition in Forest Heritage Conservation in Cameroon: The Case of Korup Declaration I hereby declare that this dissertation is the result of my original research carried out at the Brandenburg University of Technology Cottbus, Germany within the framework of the doctorate programme Environmental and Resource Management.
    [Show full text]
  • Conveyancing and Law of Property Act Chapter 56:01
    LAWS OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO MINISTRY OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND LEGAL AFFAIRS www.legalaffairs.gov.tt CONVEYANCING AND LAW OF PROPERTY ACT CHAPTER 56:01 Ordinance No. 18 of 1939 Amended by 28 of 1973 51 of 1976 52 of 1976 136/1976 *47 of 1980 *20 of 1981 72 of 2000 *See Note of page 2 Current Authorised Pages Pages Authorised (inclusive) by L.R.O. 1–78 .. UNOFFICIAL VERSION L.R.O. UPDATED TO 31ST DECEMBER 2016 LAWS OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO MINISTRY OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND LEGAL AFFAIRS www.legalaffairs.gov.tt 2 Chap. 56:01 Conveyancing and Law of Property Note on Subsidiary Legislation This Chapter contains no subsidiary legislation. Note on Charges for Common Law Conveyancing Transactions For charges for common law conveyancing transactions see “The Attorneys-at-law (Remuneration) (Non-Contentious Business) Rules, 1997 (LN 77/1997)” contained in the Real Property Act (Ch. 56:02) and the Legal Profession Act (Ch. 90.03). Note on Act No. 47 of 1980 The fines imposed by this Act have been increased by the manner and the formula contained in section 8 of, and the Second Schedule to, the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1980 (Act No. 47 of 1980). Note on Act No. 20 of 1981 The Land Law and Conveyancing Act, 1981 (Act No. 20 of 1981) purported to repeal (in the Fifth Schedule) the Act. However, Act No. 20 of 1981 had not, at the date of the revision of this Act, been brought into operation. UNOFFICIAL VERSION UPDATED TO 31ST DECEMBER 2016 LAWS OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO MINISTRY OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND LEGAL AFFAIRS www.legalaffairs.gov.tt Conveyancing and Law of Property Chap.
    [Show full text]