Land grabbing, investors, and indigenous peoples: new legal strategies for an old practice?

This article examines how new legal strategies need to be adopted by indigenous peoples to react to the increasing phenomenon of ‘land grabbing’ taking place across the globe. In examining the specificity of the ‘land grab’ and how it particularly affects indigenous peoples, it analyses how new legal strategies targeting the investors need to be adopted by communities to mitigate some of the negative aspects of land grabbing. It argues that since the current ‘land grab’ is driven by investors it is important that indigenous peoples, and their supportive organisations, target investors and lending institutions which are behind the massive investments in land acquisitions.

Meeting the challenges of globalisation in legal education

The focus of this paper is a critical review of the impact of globalisation on international higher education at my own institution, the University of East London (UEL), where I am Programme Leader for LLB (Hons) Law, an undergraduate qualifying law degree. Globalisation, along with internationalisation, has been one of the forces that have most changed the educational landscape in this country over the last two decades. Although closely related to each other, globalisation and internationalisation are usually regarded as distinct forces – the former being defined as the economic, political, and societal forces pushing twenty-first-century higher education towards greater international involvement, while the latter describes the policies and practices of higher education developed to deal with this. Whilst these phenomena have wide implications for higher education as a whole, they present opportunities and challenges that are very specific both to an institution like UEL, which has a high proportion of students from international backgrounds, and to my own discipline, law, which has an increasingly global profile in terms of both legal education and professional practice.

The Corporate University: An E-interview with Dave Hill, Alpesh Maisuria, Anthony Nocella, and Michael Parenti

Since the neo-liberal turn, corporate investment in universities has accelerated as the withdrawal of government funding, among other factors, has further exposed universities to market forces. While this process offers numerous benefits for corporations and wealthy individuals, it has been mostly detrimental for students, educators, and the public at large. In this interview, international scholars Dave Hill, Alpesh Maisuria, Anthony Nocella, and Michael Parenti broadly explain why corporations have been aggressively investing in universities. They address the numerous ways that corporate involvement in university activity negatively impacts academic freedom, research outcomes, and the practice of democracy. The interview ends on a hopeful note by presenting examples of resistance against corporate influence. Their analyses focus primarily on the United States, United Kingdom, and Canada.