Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/2440/116678
Citations
Scopus Web of Science® Altmetric
?
?
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMuecke, S.en
dc.date.issued2017en
dc.identifier.citationLaw and Critique, 2017; 28(2):135-143en
dc.identifier.issn0957-8536en
dc.identifier.issn1572-8617en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2440/116678-
dc.description.abstractAustralian Native Title law is critiqued in three moves: 1. Analysing the kinds of knowledge used in Australian Native Title law to make cases for Indigenous land tenure; 2. Analysing how a Nyikina elder narrates a legal matter of concern from his point of view; 3. Speculating about how an Indigenous ‘legal’ institution called the bugarrigarra was mobilised to resist extraction colonialism. These are all experimental moves in that they are partially composed around matters of concern, rather than displaying matters of fact. They are experiments that stage a learning process as they describe (that is, write about in order to add reality to) a number of different events.en
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityStephen Mueckeen
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherSpringeren
dc.rights© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017en
dc.subjectAborigines; Australia; Native Title; narrative; experimenten
dc.titleEarthbound law: the force of an Indigenous Australian institutionen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.identifier.rmid0030071196en
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s10978-017-9206-7en
dc.identifier.pubid356336-
pubs.library.collectionLaw publicationsen
pubs.library.teamDS14en
pubs.verification-statusVerifieden
pubs.publication-statusPublisheden
Appears in Collections:Law publications

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.