English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Contribution to Collected Edition

Asia: An indigenous cosmovisionary turn in the study of religion and ecology

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons45863

Smyer Yu,  Dan
Religious Diversity, MPI for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity, Max Planck Society;

Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Fulltext (public)
There are no public fulltexts stored in PuRe
Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Smyer Yu, D. (2017). Asia: An indigenous cosmovisionary turn in the study of religion and ecology. In W. J. Jenkins, M. E. Tucker, & J. Grim (Eds.), Routledge handbook of religion and ecology (pp. 120-128). London: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315764788.ch13.


Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-002C-AA5E-0
Abstract
Asia is the home of two-thirds of the world’s indigenous peoples. The total estimated indigenous populations of Asia are said to be around 260 million (IWGIA), mostly found in Siberia, South Asia, Southeast Asia, and Southwest China. Unlike their counterparts in the premodern era who relatively had more autonomy, the contemporary indigenous peoples of Asia are facing multiple distresses regarding the loss of their ancestral lands, the deprivation of their rights for self-determination, and the external exploitation of their natural resources. Modern nation-states often socially and economically marginalize indigenous populations. For instance, Karen in Burma are rarely given land and citizenry rights (Horstmann 2015, 130). China has fifty-five officially recognized ethnic minority groups. All of them except Hui (Muslims) are indigenous populations; however, the Chinese state does not officially recognize their indigenous status. Like the Chinese state, the Bangladesh government does not recognize its ethnic minorities as indigenous peoples but gives them marginal status as “tribes” and “minor races” (Dhamai and Chakma 2015, 314).