Introduction: Local Reaction to Global Integration-The Political Economy of Development in Indigenous Communities

By Aikau, Hokulani K.; Spencer, James H. | Alternatives: Global, Local, Political, January-March 2007 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Introduction: Local Reaction to Global Integration-The Political Economy of Development in Indigenous Communities


Aikau, Hokulani K., Spencer, James H., Alternatives: Global, Local, Political


The case studies explored in this volume show how indigenous communities from North America, South America, and Asia have articulated their collective interests within the context of development. This global perspective reveals at least three recurring dilemmas: Who defines the indigenous group and toward what end? How do such groups assert these identities and claims against the nation state, even as they depend on that state for legitimacy? In a fast-globalizing world of placelessness, how and why do they articulate socio-spatial identities? Presenting these cases together offers a constructive platform for better understanding conflicts between globalization and specific localities as well as indigenous reactions to development planning. KEYWORDS: indigenous politics, development, planning, globalization, locality.

**********

For over thirty years, Moloka'i Island residents have fought to block economic development plans to expand tourism and urbanization. Moloka'i Island is located midway between O'ahu Island to its northeast and Maui Island to its southwest. Many consider Moloka'i to be one of the few "Native Hawaiian" places in the state because the majority of the 7,300 inhabitants are Kanaka Maoli (Native Hawaiians), the indigenous people of the Hawaiian Islands. Despite high rates of unemployment and poverty since the closing of the pineapple industry in the late 1970s and early 1980s, Moloka'i residents continue to actively challenge large-scale economic development programs. In 2003, residents successfully blocked plans by cruise ship companies to include Moloka'i on their inter-island tours. More recently, in October 2006, approximately 300 activist-residents protested plans to create a large luxury subdivision at La'au Point, a pristine beach on the southwest tip of the island, by physically occupying the land where the development was to take place. Moke Kim, a resident of Moloka'i, expressed the view held by other protestors: "Everyone says that we must assimilate so that we will not be left behind.... I don't want to be assimilated. I want to be left behind." (1) The development plan, proposed by Moloka'i Ranch Ltd., a subsidiary of the multinational corporation BIL International Ltd., was in part intended to create jobs, but according to residents, these jobs would be at the expense of a particular kind of lifestyle that residents want to maintain. Rational development theory is unable to account for perspectives like those of Kim, who sees the entry of such large development plans as a choice between maintaining a rural, subsistence lifestyle and working in a low-paying service job. From the perspective of the state and the developers, Kim and other activists are irrational, and their indigenous perspectives appear to be counterproductive to the more rational project of economic expansion.

This example illustrates many of the factors involved in the political economy of development for indigenous communities. Moloka'i residents use their indigenous position, namely their pre-contact connection to the land and the distinct society that grew out of the relationship between the land, sea, and people, in order to block any further encroachment on those traditional ways of life by the State of Hawai'i, multinational corporations, and others seen as "outsiders." In a political climate in which the interests and demands of indigenous peoples are becoming widely recognized, Moloka'i residents have seen some success. One of the theoretical challenges that this case poses, however, is that by establishing their claims on the grounds of maintaining "tradition," indigeneity becomes counterposed to modernity, development, and globalization. As Frank Hirtz explains, this is one of the dilemmas of indigeneity: "Modernity needs the contrasting concept of indigeneity and tradition, whereas traditional societies in pre-modern or precolonial time did not need to establish their 'otherness' in opposition to modernity or their own history.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Introduction: Local Reaction to Global Integration-The Political Economy of Development in Indigenous Communities
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?