Several bombs exploding on the London Underground, and the arson of 20,000 cars in the suburbs of French cities in 2005 demonstrated the catastrophic growth of cultural problems in European countries. Brought about by the younger generation of immigrant laborers, these incidents testify to the failure of the multicultural model of integration adopted by the British Government and the Republican model of integration held sacrosanct by the French Government.
The background to these incidents can be found in the explosion of nationalistic sentiment that European peoples are experiencing. Feeling threatened by EU expansion and the process of globalization, they are trying to construct inner barriers by emphasizing their “own” cultural heritage and discriminating against Cultural Others living in the same country.
Since the Industrial Revolution, industrialized countries have been confronted with social problems such as poverty, environmental pollution and deterioration of the environment. Activists and sociologists have thought that social movements, once properly organized, could solve these problems. That has been the master narrative of modern sociology, which has shaped itself as a theoretical and practical response to those problems. In contrast, socio/ cultural anthropologists have not yet found a master narrative to solve the cultural problems we are confronted with.
Should we reject the notion of culture, formulated as something homogeneous on the inside and exclusive on the outside, following the model of the Nation-State? Or should we replace this notion of culture with another , such as locality or space where many cultures can meet and co-exist? To find some answers to these questions is the focus of this article, based on my field researches in Paris and Marseille in 2005.

Key Words: culture, cultural others, discrimination, integration, locality, multiculturalism

Many large-scale development projects have been planned and carried out in lands which indigenous peoples have traditionally occupied, owned or used. These projects often adversely affect the lives and cultures of the peoples caught up in the process. However, indigenous peoples and their organizations have maintained that their rights to the land and natural resources should be recognized and respected by the State concerned as well as by the international community as a whole. In particular, they demand that their rights should be safeguarded in cases where the negative effect of the development project is so grave that their distinct culture and identity or physical survival is at risk. In such cases, respect for, and realization of, their free, prior and informed consent towards the development is the most fundamental principle. This article aims to highlight the legal development of the principle through a comparative analysis of the relevant cases as well as authoritative texts and documents in international human rights law.

Key Words: indigenous peoples, development, Working Group on Indigenous Populations, principle of free, prior and informed consent, international human rights law

The Inca state that developed in the Andean region of South America in the 15^th and 16^th centuries conquered up to 10 million people in an area extending some 4000 km from north to south. In the Inca state, a road network was laid connecting the capital Cuzco to the administrative centers, which were established in various places, to rule over the local ethnic groups. This article examines the changes that occurred in local societies at the time of the conquest, based on a case study in the Cajamarca region, Northern Highlands of Peru, and considers the characteristics of provincial rule in the Inca state.
The documents of the early colonial period suggest that the Inca state conquered the local ethnic groups and incorporated them under its dominion without any great changes. The archaeological data, however, does not coincide with the documents, demonstrating heterogeneity rather than homogeneity in the ceramics, architecture, and tombs of the Pre-Inca period within the Cajamarca region, an administrative unit in the Inca state. Although we cannot examine the prototypes of the Inca period’s administrative units or ethnic groups in the Pre-Inca period, it can be concluded that the local ethnic groups were divided, integrated and reorganized on a large scale in the Inca period.

Key Words: Andes, Inca, state, provincial rule