Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The namele mechanism: a methodological tool to assist climate adaptation

  • Article
  • Published:
Jindal Global Law Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the context of the escalating imperative of responding to the impacts of global warming, there is a need for enforcement and methodological mechanisms that bridge the gaps between legislation, principles, conventions, protocols and their ‘on-ground’ application. A new tool in environmental law for such a purpose is proposed in this paper, named the ‘namele mechanism’, and is developed to guide processes of adaptive co-management. This methodological mechanism has been built on platforms of traditional local knowledge and practices of first peoples and local communities, particularly those from Vanuatu and the South Pacific, where systems of traditional customary law are still being practised. Much thought underpinning its development was founded on the empirical data captured in 58 in-depth interviews with chiefs, community leaders, government representatives and legal scholars. The namele mechanism recognises the effectiveness of contemporary management practices that are informed by science and technology, as well as customary law and historic practices that may have been in situ for tens of thousands of years. The introduction of such a mechanism is supported by existing protocols and instruments such as the Nagoya Protocol and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The rationale behind its approach promises to strengthen and innovate optimal environmental management approaches that are bespoke for specific places and communities. Such a mechanism will assist with the delivery of Sustainable Development Goals, in particular Goals 13, 14 and 15. Through a ‘bottom-up’ approach that focuses on the involvement of local communities in the protection of their local ecosystems, the namele mechanism will provide an important step towards the empowerment of first peoples and local communities as they adapt to changing environmental conditions imposed by global warming.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Joshua Cinner and Shankar Aswani, Integrating Customary Management into Marine Conservation, 140 Biological Conservation 201, 209.

  2. E.A. Hernández-Delgado, , The Emerging Threats of Climate Change on Tropical Coastal Ecosystem Services, Public Health, Local Economies and Livelihood Sustainability of Small Islands: Cumulative Impacts and Synergie, 101 Marine Pollution Bull. 5, 7 .

  3. Id. at 8.

  4. Rafael Leal-Arcas, Climate Change Mitigation from the Bottom Up: Using Preferential Trade Agreements to Promote Climate Change Mitigation, 7 Carbon & Climate L. Rev. 34, 39.

  5. Hannah Reid, Community-Based Adaptation to Climate Change inParticipatory Learning and Action Plan Series, No. 60, International Institute for Environment and Development 11.

  6. Kirsten Davies, Changing Tides — A South Pacific Study, J. of South Pacific L. 104; Erika Techera, Samoa: Law, Custom and Conservation, 10 New Zealand J. of Envtl. L. 361.

  7. Kirsten Davies, Ancient and New Legal Landscapes: Customary Law and Climate Change, a Vanuatu Case Study 18 Asia Pacific J. of Envtl. L. 43; Cameron Holley, Public Participation, Environmental Law and New Governance: Lessons for Designing Inclusive and Representative Participatory Processes, 27 Envtl and Plan. L. J. 360, 362.

  8. Davies, supra note 6 at 65, 66.

  9. Indigenous and Local Knowledge in IPBES, Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services , http://www.ipbes.net/work-programme/indigenous-and-local-knowledge.

  10. Id.

  11. Mehdi Ghorbani, et. al., The Role of Indigenous Ecological Knowledge in Managing Rangelands Sustainability in Northern Iran, 18 Ecology & Soc’y 15.

  12. Fikret Berkes et al., Rediscovery of Traditional Ecological Knowledge as Adaptive Management, 10 Ecological Applications 1251.

  13. Nathan Vogt, et. al., Local Ecological Knowledge and Incremental Adaptation to Changing Flood Patterns in the Amazon Delta, 11 Sustainability Science 611, 613.

  14. Id. at 621, 612.

  15. Davies, supra note 6 at 45; Anthony Craig, et. al., Adaptive Law and Resilience, 43 Envtl. L. Rep. 10426.

  16. Davies, supra note 6 at 48; Joe McCarter & Michael Gavin, In Situ Maintenance of Traditional Ecological Knowledge on Malekula Island, Vanuatu, 27 Soc’y & Nat. Res. 1115.

  17. Ryan Plummer, The Adaptive Co-Management Process: An Initial Synthesis of Representative Models and Influential Variables, 14(2) Ecology & Soc’y 24.

  18. Rio Declaration on Environment and Development principle 22, U.N. Doc. A/CONF.151/26 (vol. I), 31 ILM 874 (1992) [hereinafter Rio Declaration].

  19. Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, A/CONF.151/26/Rev.1 (Vol I), Resolution 1, annex 2: Agenda 21 [26.1] (12 August 1992) (‘Agenda 21’).

  20. Id. at [26.3].

  21. United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, art. 27, 43, G.A. Res. 61/295, U.N. Doc. A/RES/61/295 (Sept. 13, 2007), 46 I.L.M. 1013 (2007).

  22. UNDP, Concept Note: Supporting Meaningful Participation of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities in UNFCCC COP 21 in Partnership with the International Indigenous Peoples Forum on Climate Change (IIPFCC) (Draft of 25 May 2015) 1.

  23. Id.

  24. Adoption of the Paris Agreement, Decision 1/CP.21 in COP Report No. 21, Addendum, at 2, U.N.Doc. FCCC/CP/2015/10/Add.1.,136.

  25. Id. at art. 7(5).

  26. ILO, Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, art.8, June 27, 1989, 1650 U.N.T.S 383.

  27. Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization to the Convention on Biological Diversity, art. 12, Oct. 29, 2010, UNEP/CBD/COP/DEC/X/1 of 29.

  28. Id.

  29. Marcia Dieguez Leuzinger & Kylie Lingard, The Land Rights of Indigenous and Traditional Peoples in Brazil and Australia, 13 Braz. J. Int’l L. 418, 438.

  30. Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment in Report of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, principle 13, U.N. Doc. A/CONF/48/14/REV.1 (June 1972) [hereinafter Stockholm Declaration].

  31. Sumudu Atapattu, Emerging Principles of International Environmental Law 130 (2007).

  32. Rio Declaration, principle 4, U.N. Doc. A/CONF.151/26 (vol. I), 31 ILM 874 (1992).

  33. André Nollkaemper, Three Conceptions of the Integration Principle in International Environmental Law, inEnvironmental Policy Integration: Greening Sectoral Policies in Europe 22, 31 (Andrea Lenschow, ed., 2002).

  34. Nicolas de Sadeleer, Environmental Principles: From Political Slogans to Legal Rules 61 (2002) .

  35. Johan G Lammers, International and European Community Law: Aspects of Pollution of International Watercourses, inEnvironmental Protection and International Law 115, 117 (Winfried Lang et. al. eds., 1991); Philippe Sands, Principles of International Environmental Law 195 (1995).

  36. Cairo Robb, International Environmental Law Reports 310 (1999) .

  37. Stockholm Declaration, principle 21.

  38. Maurice Sunkin, David Ong and Robert Wight, Sourcebook on International Law 30 (1998).

  39. Rio Declaration, principle 2, U.N. Doc. A/CONF.151/26 (vol. I), 31 ILM 874 (1992).

  40. de Sadeleer , supra note 34 at 66.

  41. Id. 90.

  42. Wes Jackson, Protecting Public Health and the Environment: Implementing The Precautionary Principle 23 (1999).

  43. de Sadeleer , supra note 34 at 75.

  44. Sonja Boehmer-Christiansen, The Precautionary Principle in Germany — Enabling Government, inInterpreting the Precautionary Principle 31, 38 (Timothy O’Riordan & James Cameron eds., 1994).

  45. Axel Luttenberger, The Role of Precautionary Principle in Environmental Protection of Coastal Area, 2014 U. of Rijeka, Trends in Tourism and Hospitality Mgmt. 70, 71.

  46. Rio Declaration, principle 15, U.N. Doc. A/CONF.151/26 (vol. I), 31 ILM 874 (1992).

  47. Simon Marr, The Southern Bluefin Tuna Cases: The Precautionary Approach and Conservation Management of Fish Resources, 11 EJIL 815; Jim Bridges & Olga Bridges, Hormones as Growth Promoters: The Precautionary Principle or a Political Risk Assessment?, in Late Lessons from Early Warnings: The Precautionary Principle 1896–2000 149 (Poul Harremoës, et. al. eds., 2001).

  48. OECD, Recommendations of the Council on Guiding Principles Concerning International Economic Aspects of Environmental Policies, OECD/LEGAL/0102.

  49. De Sadeleer, supra note 34 at 21.

  50. Convention on the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea Area, April 9, 1992, 1507 U.N.T.S. 167, 13 ILM 546 [hereinafter Helsinki Convention]; Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic,Sept.22, 1992, 2354 U.N.T.S. 67, 32 ILM 1069 (1993) .

  51. Rio Declaration, principle 16, U.N. Doc. A/CONF.151/26 (vol. I), 31 ILM 874 (1992).

  52. De Sadeleer, supra note 34 at 60.

  53. Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters, June 25, 1998, 2161 U.N.T.S. 447, 38 ILM 517 (1999) [hereinafter Aarhus Convention].

  54. Rio Declaration, principle 6,7,8, U.N. Doc. A/CONF.151/26 (vol. I), 31 ILM 874 (1992).

  55. Atapattu, supra note 31 at 137.

  56. Duncan French, Developing States and International Environmental Law: The Importance of Differentiated Responsibility, 49 Int’l Comp. L. Q., 35.

  57. Agenda 21.

  58. Id. at ¶ 39.3(d).

  59. Nina Bafundo, Compliance with the Ozone Treaty: Weak States and the Principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibility, 21 Am. U. Int’l L. Rev. 461, 467.

  60. Jeffrey McGee and Jens Steffek, The Copenhagen Turn in Global Climate Governance and the Contentious History of Differentiation in International Law , 28 J. Envtl. L. 37, 51.

  61. Francesco N. Tubiello et al., Carbon Financial Mechanisms for Agriculture and Rural Development: Challenges and Opportunities Along the Bali Roadmap, 97 Climatic Change 3.

  62. McGee and Steffek, supra note 60.

  63. Rachel Boyte, Common but Differentiated Responsibilities: Adjusting the Developing/Developed Dichotomy in International Environmental Law, 14 N.Z. J. Envtl. L. 63, 70.

  64. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Preamble, Dec. 10, 1982, 1833 U.N.T.S. 3; Convention on Biological Diversity, Preamble, June 5, 1992, 1760 U.N.T.S. 79, 31 ILM 818 ; United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Preamble, May 9, 1992, U.N. Doc. A/AC.237/18 (Part II)/Add.1, 1771 U.N.T.S. 107.

  65. Tuula Honkonen, The Principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibility in Post-2012 Climate Negotiations, 18 Rev. European Comty. & Int’l Envtl. L. 257.

  66. See generally Rowena Maguire, Incorporating International Environmental Legal Principles into Future Climate Change Instruments, 6 Carbon and Climate L. Rev. 101; Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia) Judgment, 1997 I.C.J. Rep. 7, 74-75, ¶ 140.

  67. Patricia Birnie, Alan Boyle & Catherine Redgwell, International Law and the Environment 121(3rd ed. 2009); Dinah Shelton, Equity inThe Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law 639, 642 (Daniel Bodansky et al. eds., 2007); see Edith Brown Weiss, In Fairness to Future Generations and Sustainable Development, 8 Am. U. Int’l L. Rev. 19.

  68. Stockholm Declaration, principle 2; Rio Declaration, principle 3, U.N. Doc. A/CONF.151/26 (vol. I), 31 ILM 874 (1992); G.A. Res. 2997, principle 6 (Dec. 15, 1972)

  69. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, art.3(1), May 9, 1992, U.N. Doc. A/AC.237/18 (Part II)/Add.1, 1771 U.N.T.S. 107.

  70. Catherine Redgwell, Principles and Emerging Norms in International Law: Intra- and Inter-Generational Equity inThe Oxford Handbook of International Climate Change Law 185, 188 (Cinnamon P Carlarne et al. eds., 2016).

  71. Id.

  72. Weiss, supra note 67 at 20.

  73. World Comm’n on Env’t and Dev., Our Common Future (1987).

  74. Redgwell, supra note 70 at 188–9.

  75. Content of the Principle in Intergenerational Equity inMax Planck Encyclopaedia of Public International Law, 7.

  76. Bering Sea Fur Seals case (U.S. v. U.K.), XXVIII R.I.A.A. 263; Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia) Judgment, 1997 I.C.J. Rep. 7, 78, ¶ 141; Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion, 1996 I.C.J. Rep. 226.

  77. Redgwell, supra note 70 at 199; Weiss, supra note 68 at 35.

  78. Rakhyun E. Kim & Klaus Bosselmann, Operationalizing Sustainable Development: Ecological Integrity as a Grundnorm of International Law, 24 Rev. Eur., Comp. and Int’l Envtl. L. 194, 205; seeHans Kelsen, Pure Theory of Law (1967) for jurisprudence on grundnorms.

  79. Kim and Bosselman, supra note 78.

  80. See id. for a discussion on the content of ecological integrity.

  81. Kim and Bosselman, supra note 78 at 203; Simon A. Levin and Jane Lubchenco, Resilience, Robustness, and Marine Ecosystem-Based Management, 58 Bioscience 27.

  82. The Australian Panel of Experts on Environmental Law, The Foundations of Environmental Law: Goals, Objects, Principles and Norms, 34 (April 2017).

  83. Id. at 36.

  84. See Johanna Rinceanu, Enforcement Mechanisms in International Law: Quo Vadunt?, 15 J. Envtl L. and Litig. 147, 154–155.

  85. Id.

  86. Id. at 16.

  87. Supra note 82 at 36.

  88. Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW).

  89. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, supra note 64.

  90. See Lavanya Rajamani, The Principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibility and the Balance of Commitments under the Climate Change Regime, 9 Rev. Eur. Cmty. & Int’l Envtl. L. 120.

  91. Id.

  92. Plummer, supra note 17.

  93. Sara Singleton, Collaborative Environmental Planning in the American West: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly,11 Envtl. Politics 54, 54.

  94. Pamela Chasek et al., Getting to 2030: Negotiating the Post-2015 Sustainable Development Agenda, 25 Rev. Eur. Cmty. & Int’l Envtl. L. 5, 8.

  95. Sustainable Development Goals Knowledge Platform, Sustainable Development Goal 13: Take Urgent Action to Combat Climate Change and Its Impacts (2017), United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs <https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdg13>.

  96. Economic and Social Council, Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable Development Goal Indicators, UN ESCOR, 48th sess, Agenda Item 3(a), UN Doc E/CN.3/2017/2 (15 December 2016) Annex III 30-31 (‘Revised List of Global Sustainable Development Goal Indicators’).

  97. Transforming our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, GA Res 70/1, UN GAOR, 70th sess, Agenda Items 15 and 116, UN Doc A/Res/70/1 (21 October 2015) 24.

  98. Chasek et al., supra note 94 at 13.

  99. Charles Zerner, People, Plants, and Justice: The Politics of Nature Conservation (2000).

  100. Adaptive Co-Management: Collaboration, Learning, and Multi-Level Governance 1 ( Derek Armitage et al. eds., 2010).

  101. For a discussion on utilising public participation as the primary strategy for achieving goals of environmental law, see Ben Boer, Social Ecology and Environmental Law, 1 Envtl. & Plan. L. J.

  102. Carl Folke et al., Adaptive Governance of Social-Ecological Systems, 30 Ann. Rev. Env’t & Resources, 441.

  103. Supra note 100 at 3.

  104. Leuzinger and Lingard, supra note 29 at 438.

  105. Jérôme Ballet et al., Co-Management of Natural Resources in Developing Countries: The Importance of Context, 120 Economie Internationale 53, 56

  106. Id.

  107. FAO, Regional Fisheries Livelihoods Programme for South and Southeast Asia: Ten Lessons for More Effective Co-Management in Small-Scale fisheries (April, 2013) , http://www.fao.org/3/a-ar468e.pdf.

  108. See Jocelyn Davies et al., Innovation in Management Plans for Community Conserved Areas: Experiences from Australian Indigenous Protected Areas, 18 Ecology and Soc’y 14.

  109. Ryan Plummer and Atsuko Hashimoto, Adaptive Co-Management and the Need for Situated Thinking in Collaborative Conservation, 16(4) Hum. Dimensions of Wildlife 222; Derek Armitage et al., Adaptive Co-Management for Social-Ecological Complexity, 7 Frontiers in Ecology and the Env’t 95.

  110. Rebecca Weeks & Stacy Jupiter, Adaptive Co-Management of a Marine Protected Area Network in Fiji (2014) 27 Conservation Biology 1234, 1235.

  111. Id.

  112. Id.

  113. Id.

  114. Id.

  115. Id.

  116. Techera, supra note 6.

  117. Id.

  118. Id.

  119. Id.

  120. Commission on Human Rights, Statement on the World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, in Information received from indigenous organisations, 2, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/AC.4/2001/8 (June 20, 2001).

  121. Techera, supra note 6 at 361.

  122. Robert Earl Johannes, Government-Supported, Village-Based Management of Marine Resources in Vanuatu, 40 Ocean and Coastal Mgmt. 165; Vicki Vaartjes et al., Empowering Community-Based Ecosystem Approaches to Fisheries Management: Strategies for Effective Training & Learning (2015).

  123. Johannes, supra note 122 at 165.

  124. Id.

  125. Id.

  126. Id.

  127. Id.

  128. Id.

  129. Kristi Stanton, A Call for Co-Management: Treaty Fishing Allocation in New Zealand and Western Washington, 11 Pacific Rim L. and Pol’y J. 745.

  130. Valmaine Toki, Adopting a Maori Property Rights Approach to Fisheries, 14 N.Z. J. Envtl. L. 197, 198; David Symes, Towards a Property Rights Framework inProperty Rights and Regulatory Systems in Fishing 257 (David Symes ed.,1998).

  131. Stanton, supra note 129 at 748; Toki, supra note 130 at 201, 205; see Fisheries Act 1983, s 88 (2): nothing in this Act shall affect any Maori fishing rights (N.Z.).

  132. Fisheries Amendment Act 1986 (N.Z.).

  133. Toki, supra note 130 at 205.

  134. Id. at 207; see Ngai Tahu Maori Trust Board v. Director-General of Conservation (1995) 3 NZLR 553 (CA).

  135. Food and Agricultural Organization to the United Nations, Information on Fisheries Management in New Zealand (February 1999), http://www.fao.org/fi/oldsite/FCP/en/NZL/body.htm; see Stanton, supra note 129 at 754.

  136. Food and Agricultural Organization to the United Nations, supra at 135; see Colleen Jacob, Tim McDaniels & Scott Hinch, Indigenous Culture and Adaptation to Climate Change: Sockeye Salmon and the St’át’imc People, 15 Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 859.

  137. Haida Nation v. British Columbia (Minister of Forests) [2004] 3 S.C.R. 511. Treaty rights are contained in the Constitution Act 1982 (Canada) s 35.

  138. See Delgamuukw v. British Columbia [1997] 3 S.C.R. 1010; Regina v. Sparrow [1990] 1 S.C.R. 1075; Kira Gerwing & Timothy McDaniels, Listening to the Salmon People: Coastal First Nation’s Objectives Regarding Salmon Aquaculture in British Columbia, 19 Society & Natural Resources 259, 260.

  139. Cathy Robinson, Working Towards Regional Agreements: Recent Developments in Co-operative Resource Management in Canada’s British Columbia, 39 Australian Geographical Stud. 183, 189.

  140. Id. at 184.

  141. United States v. Washington , 384 F. Supp. 312, 327 (W.D. Wash., 1974).

  142. Stanton, supra note 129 at 758.

  143. United States v. Washington , 384 F. Supp. 312, 327 (W.D. Wash., 1974); Syma Ebbin, Enhanced Fit through Institutional Interplay in the Pacific Northwest Salmon Co-Management Regime, 26 Marine Policy 253, 255.

  144. Ebbin, supra note 143.

  145. Id.

  146. Id. at 256.

  147. Id. at 258.

  148. Martin Oppermann, Triangulation — A Methodological Discussion, 2 Int’l J. Tourism Res. 141, 142.

  149. Indigenous and Local Knowledge in IPBES, supra note 11.

  150. Davies, supra note 7; Holley, supra note 7 at 176, 362.

  151. Davies, supra note 7 at 45; Anthony, Craig, supra note 15 at 10426.

  152. Davies, supra note 7 at 65; Erika Techera, Enhancing Legal Frameworks for Biodiversity Conservation in the Pacific, 21 Pacific Conservation Biology 87.

  153. Reid, supra note 5.

  154. Davies, supra note 7 at 65.

  155. Per Olsson, Carl Folke & Fikret Berkes, Adaptive Comanagement for Building Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems, 34 Envtl. Mgmt. 75; Ryan Plummer and Derek Armitage, A Resilience-Based Framework for Evaluating Adaptive Co-Management: Linking Ecology, Economy and Society in a Complex World, 61 Ecological Economics 62; Christo Fabricius et al., Powerless Spectators, Coping Actors, and Adaptive Co-Managers: A Synthesis of the Role of Communities in Ecosystem Management, 12 Ecology & Soc’y 29.

  156. Jianguo Liu et al., Complexity of Coupled Human and Natural Systems, 317 Science 1513.

  157. See Lee Godden & Stuart Cowell, Conservation Planning and Indigenous Governance in Australia’s Indigenous Protected Areas, 24 Restoration Ecology 692.

  158. Colin Amundsen, Coupled Human and Natural Systems: A New Perspective on Early Fishing and Fishing Cultures of Northern Norway inHuman Ecodynamics in the North Atlantic: A Collaborative Model of Humans and Nature through Space and Time 55 (Ramona Harrison & Ruth Maher eds., 2014).

  159. Austl. State of the Env’t, Indigenous Land and Sea Management — A Case Study, 3 (Report prepared for the Australian Government Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Populations and Communities on behalf of the State of the Environment 2011 Committee).

  160. Plummer, supra note 17.

  161. The Anthropology of Globalization: A Reader (Jonathan Inda & Renato Rosaldo eds., 2002).

  162. Techera, supra note 6 at 2.

  163. Boris Lariushin, Cycadaceae Family 8 (2013).

  164. Liu et al, supra note 156 at 1513.

  165. Amundsen, supra note 158.

  166. Davies, supra note 6 at 104.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Macquarie Law School, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia

    Kirsten Davies

Authors
  1. Kirsten Davies
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kirsten Davies.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Kirsten Davies—Senior Lecturer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Davies, K. The namele mechanism: a methodological tool to assist climate adaptation. Jindal Global Law Review 10, 91–120 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41020-019-00091-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41020-019-00091-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation