The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Territorial Sovereignty: A Philosophical Exploration
Abstract
This book offers a qualified defense of a territorial states system. It argues that three core values—occupancy, basic justice, and collective self-determination—are served by an international system made up of self-governing, spatially defined political units. The defense is qualified because the book does not actually justify all of the sovereignty rights states currently claim and that are recognized in international law. Instead, the book proposes important changes to states’ sovereign prerogatives, particularly with respect to internal autonomy for political minorities, immigration, and natural resources. Part I of the book argues for a right of occupancy, holding that a legitimate function of the international system is to specify and protect people’s preinstitutional claims to specific geographical places. Part II turns to the question of how a state might acquire legitimate jurisdiction over a population of occupants. It argues that the state will have a right to rule a population and its territory if it satisfies conditions of basic justice and facilitates its people’s collective self-determination. Finally, Parts III and IV of this book argue that the exclusionary sovereignty rights to control over borders and natural resources that can plausibly be justified on the basis of the three core values are more limited than has traditionally been thought.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“In these imaginaries, settler jurisdiction is not an inherent ' right to do wrong ' within our legitimate bounded territory (Stilz, 2019: 144), but one of many interdependent and deeply entangled relationships in a shared space.”
From Reorienting Territorial Rights: The Case for Grounded Normative Theory (2024) · cites this paper as Stilz, 2019
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Luoma, M. (2022) · Canadian Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1017/s0008423921000913 · Cited by 18
Rectifying Historical Territorial Injustices
Luoma, M., & Moore, M. (2024) · Res Publica · doi:10.1007/s11158-024-09660-4 · Cited by 11
Reorienting Territorial Rights: The Case for Grounded Normative Theory
Jourdeuil, K. (2024) · Canadian Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1017/s0008423924000416 · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- Stilz, A.
- Corresponding author
- Stilz, Anna
- ORCID
- Stilz, Anna
- Venue
- Oxford University Press eBooks
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press
- Published
- 2019-08-29
- OpenAlex
- W4233232386
- Cited by
- 291
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 74 · 2025: 54 · 2024: 62 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 2
- FWCI
- 19.97
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Oxford University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Philosophy and Ethics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › International Law and Human Rights
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Systems and Governance
- Keywords
- territorial sovereignty, territorial state, collective self-determination, state jurisdiction, political minorities, internal autonomy, immigration, natural resources, borders, international law
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review