Every way you slice and dice it, 'indigenous' is another word for 'pure bred' or 'Fatherland', which, when you use its synonym, makes it sound as dangerous of an idea as it is.

The reason indigeneity is not applied to Europe or Asia is because those cultures are just as indigenous as the natives of other parts of the world, but they've advanced well beyond that.

The resurgence of indigeneity as a concept is due to a resurgence of the noble savage myth on the behalf of europeans and a xenophobic, racial purity craze on behalf of certain self-described indigenous (it's hardly a universal thing).

In reality, being part of a lineage that's been on a certain plot of land gives you no more rights or authority than anyone else. Land division, ownership, and use should be determined by the needs of currently existing people, not tied indeterminably to the past. Why is it that we are happy to toss out any old tradition, and any old legal document, in order to bring it up to date with modern needs, but we simultaneously need to kowtow to people who claim their authority solely from the immobility of their ancestors?