way of the jungle and the unfortunate events, and proud declarations of Alan Garcia that the forest and its resources belong to all Peruvians may wonder is this a true natural law which place the States?
The State recognizes and guarantees the right to property that communities who work from ancient times, but invents a separation of land and exploitable resources. Mentioned that exploit resources found and belong to the state found. Is it possible to separate the land of its resources? No. It is not possible to intervene physically on resources without intervening on the ground.
this perspective then we can say that it really does and says the state of resources is not only a misappropriation of resources belonging to the owners of the land. Appropriation own spirit colonial regimes, which shed their resources to indigenous peoples, violating not only its economy but also its culture.
The geopolitical struggle in the new millennium hinges on natural resources such as water and agricultural land. There are some experiences of large capital and nations (states like South Korea, China. Saudi Arabia, etc.) That are buying up large tracts of farmland in the world. Many of them by criteria of food security for their nations. While still others by a fever of industrialization in search of biofuel.
This dimension does not see the Peruvian state, unless the Garcia government. And if you know any of this is used to sell more land in the country. Come land and usable water resources for other nations, large capital, as well derive substantial income. Your logic linked investment that only the area of \u200b\u200bresource exploitation and external market of the action without effects of positive impact and consistent with the culture and geography of the surrounding villages, there is more than the theoretical dimension of a system in practice explodes and turns the state into the main actor of a colonial economy.
Under it the State is interested in creating tools fit easily exploitable resources in the subsoil. Not interested in food security, not to preserve the culture and biodiversity. Stripping the forest communities from their land in search of income, nothing more. The country has few of its arable land as neither the government nor the state is concerned about the future of food in the country.
response, three points. Recognize the right to communal property, soil and subsoil in a multinational setting up, developing agriculture to ensure food security of the country and place the Amazon as one of the pillars of national development through sustainable management of water resources and biological diversity. See more
