Since the adoption of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, indigenous peoples' agency and ideas of development have become more central to wider development processes. This change finds its roots in the concept of 'self-determined development' (SDD), which has been fortified by the adoption of UNDRIP. SDD is built around key norms of UNDRIP, such as the rights of self-determination, free, prior and informed consent, the links between cultural rights and development and rights pertaining to land and natural resources. The normative shift towards SDD is surveyed in this article by looking at three topics: the jurisprudence of regional human rights courts on case law concerning development on indigenous peoples' land; the advocacy of indigenous peoples around the indicators of the Sustainable Development Goals; and the adoption of community bio-cultural protocols by indigenous peoples to regulate development of their land, natural resources and cultural heritage. In each example, UNDRIP has influenced positive changes in law and policy concerning indigenous peoples' views on development.

Afro-descendant civil society organisations in Latin America have pursued an important strand of advocacy on reforming national censuses. Th e aim has been to increase the 'visibility' of Afrodescendant populations through disaggregated data and thus to improve recognition of their distinct identity. Brazil is leading the way on such data collection while other countries are taking fi rst steps, like Argentina and Chile. International organisations have off ered support in these eff orts, including development agencies and human rights institutions. Th e census questions added have not always met the expectations of civil society, nor have civil society actors always agreed among themselves on the categories of self-identifi cation. Th e 2001 World Conference against Racism has also played a key role by challenging the 'racial democracy' myth, exposing racism as a factor in inequality and stimulating increased Afro-descendant social mobilisation.

Activist scholarship in human rights has made valuable contributions to the fulfilment of human rights globally but there is a very little critical self-reflection on what activist scholarship in human rights means or how it should be pursued. This article seeks to open up discussion on these points but drawing on the wider discourse of activist scholarship. Activist scholarship is distinguished by new and critical approaches to knowledge production, whereby researchers and activists collaborate in politically engaged research and use research for the purpose of furthering justice and equality of various forms. While general human rights scholarship often shares these aims, activist scholarship in human rights goes further by adopting specific methodologies and employing critical theories. The article distinguishes between the pursuits of scholarship and activist scholarship in human rights and outlines the perils and dilemmas that activist scholars in human rights can face. The article ends by proposing what a human rights-based approach to activist scholarship in human rights might consist of, drawing from the core human rights principles of non-discrimination, the right to participation and the obligation of accountability.