Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Debate within global forums over establishing definitional standards for indigenous peoples versus an unlimited right of indigenous self-identification has exposed something of a dilemma over standard setting in international law. Requiring strict, definitional standards excludes some indigenous groups from the very protections they need, while reifying their identities. Yet failure to establish an accepted deflnition of indigenous peoples leads to host-state concerns over applying international legal instruments to the world's indigenous populations. After surveying indigenous definitions developed by academicians in the fleld of nationalism/international law as well as practitioners from IGOs and NGOs, it is determined that a balance between self-identiflcation and establishing a working definition of indigenous peoples is possible. Utilizing a model of ‘Peoplehood’ refined by Holm, Pearson and Chavis (2003), the article presents a new working deflnition of indigenous peoples that is both flexible and dynamic.
Jeff Corntassel (Sat,) studied this question.