LAND TENURE in OCEANIA ASSOCIATION for SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY in OCEANIA Monograph Series
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
LAND TENURE IN OCEANIA ASSOCIATION FOR SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY IN OCEANIA Monograph Series Vern Carroll, Editor Everett A. Wingert, Associate Editor for Cartography Previously published in this series: No. 1 Adoption in Eastern Oceania, edited by Vern Carroll ASAO Monograph No. 2 LAND TENURE IN OCEANIA Edited by Henry P. Lundsgaarde THE UNIVERSITY PRESS OF HAWAII HONOLULU Open Access edition funded by the National Endow- ment for the Humanities / Andrew W. Mellon Foundation Humanities Open Book Program. Licensed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Interna- tional (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits readers to freely download and share the work in print or electronic format for non-commercial purposes, so long as credit is given to the author. Derivative works and commercial uses require permission from the publisher. For de- tails, see https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/. The Creative Commons license described above does not apply to any ma- terial that is separately copyrighted. Open Access ISBNs: 9780824883720 (PDF) 9780824883737 (EPUB) This version created: 5 September, 2019 Please visit www.hawaiiopen.org for more Open Access works from University of Hawai‘i Press. Copyright © 1974 by The University Press of Hawaii All rights reserved CONTENTS Editor’s Preface ix 1. An Approach to the Analysis of Land Tenure Systems Ron Crocombe 1 2. Melpa Land Tenure: Rules and Processes Andrew Strathern 18 3. Land Tenure in the Woleai William H. Alkire 39 4. Land Tenure on Kapingamarangi Michael D. Lieber 70 5. Landholding on Namu Atoll, Marshall Islands Nancy J. Pollock 100 6. Land Tenure in the Ellice Islands: A Changing Profile Ivan Brady 130 7. The Evolution of Tenure Principles on Tamana Island, Gilbert Islands Henry P. Lundsgaarde 179 8. Land Tenure in a Test Tube: The Case of Palmerston Atoll Ron Crocombe 215 9. Pacific Land Tenure in a Nutshell Henry P. Lundsgaarde 265 References 277 Contributors 287 EDITOR’S PREFACE Discussions of land tenure in social anthropology have usually been deeply embedded in broader empirical and theoretical explanations of social, economic, legal, and political institutions. In this volume we have sought to correct the emphasis of previous studies by focus- ing our attention directly on land tenure, without, it must be added, losing sight of the connections between land tenure principles and general social structure. We have deliberately looked for similarities by analyzing each tenure system from the same analytical and conceptual perspective. Chapters 1 and 9 specifically discuss the methodological and theoretical frame- work that evolved in the course of analyzing the seven tenure systems described in chapters 2 through 8. The difficulties and problems en- countered by the contributors in presenting their data in comparable form is reflected by the more than three years of analysis, writing, edit- ing, and rewriting necessary to complete this volume. The seven substantive ethnographic chapters illustrate the range and diversity in the land tenure practices which are found within the vast culture area of Oceania. The similarities in basic tenure prin- ciples between all seven systems seem all the more remarkable in light of the varied geographical and cultural settings of the seven so- cieties. In all of these societies we find a complete absence of fee simple ownership and a corresponding presence of entailed family es- tates. x PREFACE The ethnography reveals tenure principles that detail an impres- sive number and variety of separate categories of property. Each category, in turn, includes an even greater number of rights and duties that symbolize different forms of proprietorship. The differen- tial allocation of these rights and duties among persons and groups represents the exact point of connection between land tenure and social structure. For example, kinship principles that specify the dis- tribution of authority within age, sex, descent, and status categories converge on such tenure principles as land use, land distribution, succession, and inheritance. Principles of political organization con- cerning the relative scaling of authority and power within the society have clear parallels in the land tenure system, where corporate and individual tenure privileges are differentiated. Economic principles subtly merge with land tenure principles in social domains, where land as a resource and land as a value intersect. It is a pleasure to acknowledge the cooperation received from all the contributors to this volume. Professor Vern Carroll has excelled in the performance of his duties as A.S.A.O. Monograph Series editor. I also wish to thank a number of anonymous scholars who helped to evaluate early drafts of individual chapters. My very special gratitude is reserved for Kenneth G. Norman, who, in his dual capacity as law student and research assistant, undertook the most demanding bibliographical and editorial assignments with- out complaint. I also wish to acknowledge my indebtedness to Professors William W. Elmendorf and Homer G. Barnett, who jointly supervised my early fieldwork in the Gilbert Islands, and to Professors Harry E. Maude and Martin G. Silverman for their continuous encouragement of my stud- ies of Gilbertese culture. Finally, generous fellowship stipends from the American Council of Learned Societies and Harvard Law School al- lowed me the freedom to plan and organize this volume during 1969 and 1970 in a stimulating atmosphere of productive scholarship. LAND TENURE IN OCEANIA NOTE Single quotes are used consistently throughout this book for glosses of native words, concepts, and conventional phrases. 1 AN APPROACH TO THE ANALYSIS OF LAND TENURE SYSTEMS Ron Crocombe INTRODUCTION The term land is used here to refer to space on, above, and below the surface of the earth. Although land area is usually thought of in two dimensions, human societies invariably recognize rights and relation- ships that deal with land as though it continued both above and below the earth’s surface, though the distance and circumstances of this ex- tension vary greatly. In addition, land rights apply in greater or lesser degree to things growing in, living on, attached to, or contained in the land or water.1 Land tenure may be broadly defined as the system of relationships between men in respect of land. In describing land tenure as a system it is not intended to suggest that it is a discrete entity. On the con- trary, it is a product of diverse forces and is merely one of the means through which man’s total relationship to his environment is me- diated. Land rights are a subcategory of property rights, and the relationships established by property rights are merely a subcategory of social relations generally. Regarding land tenure as a system is an abstraction—a convenient way to draw boundaries around particular phenomena on which we wish to focus attention. Any land tenure sys- tem is, nevertheless, defined by a quantifiable human population and a quantifiable area of land. Each society classifies its land according to various criteria, some of 2 ANALYSIS OF LAND TENURE SYSTEMS which are explicit and some of which are not.2 An external observer will also, quite appropriately, additionally classify the land, and relations to it, by his own criteria and for his own analytical purposes. For example, land rights and relationships in a particular society frequently differ in relation to the land’s natural qualities and also in relation to the use to which the land is put. Differing natural qualities permit classifica- tion according to such factors as terrain, soil or water type, altitude, or microclimate. Classification by use leads to distinctions among rights to land for hunting, fishing, foraging, gardening, grazing, sacred pur- poses, burial, residence, access, and so on. These various rights are not necessarily discrete, and they frequently overlap. Land tenure then is a system of patterns of behavior that specifi- cally serve to control a society’s use of environmental resources. But land tenure is distinct from land use, which is the physical exploita- tion of land by man. Land use is conditioned by tenure, but tenure does not necessarily result in particular uses, though it often makes them more likely. DETERMINANTS OF A LAND TENURE SYSTEM The form and function of any system of land tenure is determined by the interaction of a number of variables. There is a biological factor in that the territorial drive, which is almost universal in vertebrates, appears to be manifest in man. Geographical variables include the nature of the land and the physical environment. Biotic variables in- clude the fauna and flora sharing this environment and the extent to which they are used by man. Technological factors include the skills, facilities, and equipment available to a particular people. Socio-cul- tural influences include the nature and distribution of various forms of power both now and in the past, the beliefs, values, and aspirations of the people. Economic influences include the productive potential of the land in relation to the level of technology, patterns and types of production, and distribution. The demographic structure, the system of land use, and a number of other factors influence not only the na- ture but also the operation of any tenure system. Ethological factors. It is accepted that almost all vertebrates mani- fest, in varying forms and with varying degrees of intensity, territorial behavior.3 That is, when placed into an environment with others of ANALYSIS OF LAND TENURE SYSTEMS 3 the same species, vertebrates engage in various forms of behavior which result in different individuals or groups having different re- lationships with different portions of that environment. Since this territorial behavior is so widespread it presumably relates to the adaptation and survival of vertebrate populations. The main implication of ethological findings is that in most crea- tures, and probably in man, tendencies to dominate, to space, and to demarcate are at least partly genetic in origin.