One of the important advancements of the international Indigenous Peoples movement over the last few decades has been the recognition of Indigenous ‘self-determination’, as presented in the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP): empowering Indigenous Peoples through recognizing their rights to define themselves and determine how they do things, as opposed to the status quo, where colonial and majority populations have dominated decision-making processes. While the idea of self-determination is critically important for the Indigenous Peoples movement, including attempts to gain more autonomy and control, one challenge is reconciling the idea of self-determination with the need and desire for government material support and political recognition, so that Indigenous Peoples fit into state frameworks. This topic is particularly important considering the recent enactment of legislation intended to protect and promote people from different ethnic groups in Thailand. This article considers challenges associated with self-determination and government recognition for Indigenous Peoples, relying on examples from mainland South East Asia, particularly Thailand. I argue that most struggles for Indigenous self-determination see both state recognition and self-determination as important. While there is sometimes a disconnect between the two, this is not always the case.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ian G. Baird (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: