Contenido

Es la delimitación geográfica en la cual se encuentra asentada la población. Dentro de este concepto político, es el componente esencial para la conformación de un Estado.

Physical element of the State

There are human groups in which territory is not of primary importance, for example: the church, or international organizations. The territory is the first-order element placed next to the human element in the case of the State.

The men called to make up the State must be permanently established in their soil, which is called homeland (homeland: land of the fathers).

An equality or similarity between the State and the church cannot be made in the territorial aspect, because the purely spiritual mission and purposes of the church are different from the mission and purposes of the State, in which material interests are fundamentally involved.

Territory functions

The territory has two functions:

• - Negative: it is a negative function by virtue of the fact that it limits the borders, the limits of state activity and also the activity of foreign States within the national territory.

• - Positive: consists of constituting the physical seat of its population, the fundamental source of the natural resources that it needs and the geographical space where the legal order is in force.

The State, to carry out its mission and its purposes, needs a territory, that is, a specific portion of the land that provides it with the necessary means to satisfy the needs of its population. The State that loses its territory disappears, since it no longer has space to assert its power.

The nature of the right of the State over its territory

It is a right of ownership that the State has, which is manifested in the power of expropriation for reasons of public utility.

"The limitation and organization of political power within a given society, seeking as its ultimate and central objective to ensure the full validity of fundamental rights, has different ways of occurring and materializing. One of them takes the territory of the State as a variable for this limitation and organization, usually referring to the various possibilities that may be presented in respect with the name of Forms of State.".[2]​ The Federal, the unitary and the question about whether territorial decentralization really exists in Peru.[3]​.

Spatial scope of validity of the legal order. One of the components of the State. In constitutional law, territory is understood as not necessarily the spatial unit. For this reason, the unit of “territory” is not a geographical unit. The territory may be composed of parts separated from each other by other territories, which may belong to different States or not belong to any State (in the strict sense of “territory”), such as the high seas. If all these geographically unconnected parts constitute a unitary whole, a single territory, it is due, solely and exclusively, to the fact that they are nothing other than the spatial scope of the validity of one and the same legal order. The identity of the territory of the State is nothing more than the entity of the legal order.[4]​.

For other authors it is the portion on the surface of the globe over which the state usually exercises its sovereignty. It constitutes the physical basis of the State, as well as the necessary element for the subsistence of the State, which is geographically individualized, by virtue of the permanence of a people on the ground. Furthermore, it constitutes the determination of the Imperium, since the validity of the legal order must be referred to limits of space. The State is distinguished from other entities by virtue of power and its territorial character.[5]​.

The importance of the administrative political decentralization of the sovereign geographic space of the State, together with the development of technological means to annotate maps in the context of web 2.0, has allowed the emergence of means of defining territories independently of the official, based on communal-social production and local experience. In this way, the territory is produced according to the meaning that people give to the place they live in. The territory thus defined is consolidated to the extent that this way of understanding the place becomes common and even massive. Both the social habitat, the daily experience, the attachment to the place, and the historical traces of the places make up a common sense called territory, in this way the territory is the result of adding a sense (meaning) to a place, and that this sense of the place is validated by a critical mass of people.[6]​.

The community definition of a territory can often be opposed to the definition that the State has of a geographical space, especially when large projects can attack territorially constituted ways. When geographical space is appropriated by a community sense, and by other senses such as environmentalism, landscaping can become significant opponents to large projects undertaken by the State, large companies or both in collusion. From there it emerges that the territory must be understood as subject to local definitions.

This problem has been understood as a disciplinary challenge for sociology, ethnography and human geography dedicated to knowing the senses of place that achieve the status of territories,[7]​ regardless of the official definitions, in this dynamic what can be called local micro-geopolitics is generated.[8]​ To understand these dynamics, the discipline of social geosemantics has emerged, proposed by the Chilean sociologist Diego Cerda Seguel, as the science in charge of knowing the territories as the result. of the community social production of geographical spaces, at the intersection between place and meaning.

The idea of ​​"territory" is a methodological conceptualization that is part of the geographical corpus in various senses: from the experience of space to the critical consideration of the concept and its application to the different sciences. However, it is important to remember that this concept can also be applied to culture.

In this sense, "territory" explains and describes the spatial development of social relationships established by human beings in the cultural, social, political or economic spheres.

It is composed of concatenations of symbolic expressions that allow appropriation of the environment. In this way, territory goes from being just a geographical point and becomes the lived space, in which experience and abstraction play an important role. Culturally speaking, territory is the interpretation of the ownership of a specific land surface, it is thinking of the territory as a social construction mediated by the worldview of the community, assuming it as part of oneself and one's identity.[9]​.

Contenido

Es la delimitación geográfica en la cual se encuentra asentada la población. Dentro de este concepto político, es el componente esencial para la conformación de un Estado.

Physical element of the State

There are human groups in which territory is not of primary importance, for example: the church, or international organizations. The territory is the first-order element placed next to the human element in the case of the State.

The men called to make up the State must be permanently established in their soil, which is called homeland (homeland: land of the fathers).

An equality or similarity between the State and the church cannot be made in the territorial aspect, because the purely spiritual mission and purposes of the church are different from the mission and purposes of the State, in which material interests are fundamentally involved.

Territory functions

The territory has two functions:

• - Negative: it is a negative function by virtue of the fact that it limits the borders, the limits of state activity and also the activity of foreign States within the national territory.

• - Positive: consists of constituting the physical seat of its population, the fundamental source of the natural resources that it needs and the geographical space where the legal order is in force.

The State, to carry out its mission and its purposes, needs a territory, that is, a specific portion of the land that provides it with the necessary means to satisfy the needs of its population. The State that loses its territory disappears, since it no longer has space to assert its power.

The nature of the right of the State over its territory

It is a right of ownership that the State has, which is manifested in the power of expropriation for reasons of public utility.

"The limitation and organization of political power within a given society, seeking as its ultimate and central objective to ensure the full validity of fundamental rights, has different ways of occurring and materializing. One of them takes the territory of the State as a variable for this limitation and organization, usually referring to the various possibilities that may be presented in respect with the name of Forms of State.".[2]​ The Federal, the unitary and the question about whether territorial decentralization really exists in Peru.[3]​.

Spatial scope of validity of the legal order. One of the components of the State. In constitutional law, territory is understood as not necessarily the spatial unit. For this reason, the unit of “territory” is not a geographical unit. The territory may be composed of parts separated from each other by other territories, which may belong to different States or not belong to any State (in the strict sense of “territory”), such as the high seas. If all these geographically unconnected parts constitute a unitary whole, a single territory, it is due, solely and exclusively, to the fact that they are nothing other than the spatial scope of the validity of one and the same legal order. The identity of the territory of the State is nothing more than the entity of the legal order.[4]​.

For other authors it is the portion on the surface of the globe over which the state usually exercises its sovereignty. It constitutes the physical basis of the State, as well as the necessary element for the subsistence of the State, which is geographically individualized, by virtue of the permanence of a people on the ground. Furthermore, it constitutes the determination of the Imperium, since the validity of the legal order must be referred to limits of space. The State is distinguished from other entities by virtue of power and its territorial character.[5]​.

The importance of the administrative political decentralization of the sovereign geographic space of the State, together with the development of technological means to annotate maps in the context of web 2.0, has allowed the emergence of means of defining territories independently of the official, based on communal-social production and local experience. In this way, the territory is produced according to the meaning that people give to the place they live in. The territory thus defined is consolidated to the extent that this way of understanding the place becomes common and even massive. Both the social habitat, the daily experience, the attachment to the place, and the historical traces of the places make up a common sense called territory, in this way the territory is the result of adding a sense (meaning) to a place, and that this sense of the place is validated by a critical mass of people.[6]​.

The community definition of a territory can often be opposed to the definition that the State has of a geographical space, especially when large projects can attack territorially constituted ways. When geographical space is appropriated by a community sense, and by other senses such as environmentalism, landscaping can become significant opponents to large projects undertaken by the State, large companies or both in collusion. From there it emerges that the territory must be understood as subject to local definitions.

This problem has been understood as a disciplinary challenge for sociology, ethnography and human geography dedicated to knowing the senses of place that achieve the status of territories,[7]​ regardless of the official definitions, in this dynamic what can be called local micro-geopolitics is generated.[8]​ To understand these dynamics, the discipline of social geosemantics has emerged, proposed by the Chilean sociologist Diego Cerda Seguel, as the science in charge of knowing the territories as the result. of the community social production of geographical spaces, at the intersection between place and meaning.

The idea of ​​"territory" is a methodological conceptualization that is part of the geographical corpus in various senses: from the experience of space to the critical consideration of the concept and its application to the different sciences. However, it is important to remember that this concept can also be applied to culture.

In this sense, "territory" explains and describes the spatial development of social relationships established by human beings in the cultural, social, political or economic spheres.

It is composed of concatenations of symbolic expressions that allow appropriation of the environment. In this way, territory goes from being just a geographical point and becomes the lived space, in which experience and abstraction play an important role. Culturally speaking, territory is the interpretation of the ownership of a specific land surface, it is thinking of the territory as a social construction mediated by the worldview of the community, assuming it as part of oneself and one's identity.[9]​.