Impact of Government Policies and Corporate Land Grabs on Indigenous People’s Access to Common Lands and Livelihood Resilience in Northeast Cambodia

Hak, Sochanny; McAndrew, John; Neef, Andreas

doi:10.3390/land7040122

Cited by 30 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Cambodia had the highest absolute loss (>47,500 km 2 ), likely due to particularly intense development during the past two decades (Blunt & Turner 2005;Hak et al 2018). The main driver of deforestation was forest concessions developed from 2000 to 2012 that accounted for up to 27.0% of annual losses (Davis et al 2015).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Loss and vulnerability of lowland forests in mainland Southeast Asia

Namkhan

Gale

Savini

et al. 2020

Conservation Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite containing extraordinary levels of biodiversity, lowland (<200 m asl) tropical forests are extremely threatened globally. Southeast Asia is an area of high species richness and endemicity under considerable anthropogenic threat with, unfortunately, scant focus on its lowland forests. We estimated extent of lowland forest loss from 1998 to 2018, including inside protected areas and determined the vulnerability of this remaining forest. Maximum likelihood classification techniques were used to classify Landsat images to estimate lowland forest cover in 1998 and 2018. We used Bayesian belief networks with 20 variables to evaluate vulnerability of the forest that remained in 2018. Analyses were conducted at two spatial scales: landscape patch (analogous to ecoregion) and country level. Over 20 years, >120,000 km2 of forest (50% of forest present in 1998) was lost. Of the 14 lowland forest patches, 6 lost >50% of their area. At the country scale, Cambodia had the greatest deforestation (>47,500 km2). In 2018, 18% of the lowlands were forested, and 20% of these forests had some formal protection. Approximately 50% of the lowland forest inside protected areas (c. 11,000 km2) was also lost during the study period. Most lowland forest remaining is highly vulnerable; eight landscape patches had >50% categorized as such. Our results add to a growing body of evidence that the presence of protected areas alone will not prevent further deforestation. We suggest that more collaborative conservation strategies with local communities that accommodate conservation concessions specifically for lowland forests are urgently needed to prevent further destruction of these valuable habitats.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Loss and vulnerability of lowland forests in mainland Southeast Asia

Namkhan

Gale

Savini

et al. 2020

Conservation Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the other hand, it does not concur with local visions of an environmentally friendly lifestyle and physically takes away land that was formerly managed exclusively by this local indigenous group. It has been shown in African [39,42] and Asian [43] contexts how commons systems provide vital resources for marginal groups, the dismantling of which undermines the resilience of social and ecological systems [44,45]. In this way, this article can be seen as congruent.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Institutional Change on a Conservationist Frontier: Local Responses to a Grabbing Process in the Name of Environmental Protection

Alvarado

2019

Land

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a wave of global conservationism, Ecuador established two large protected areas in its Amazon region in 1979. One of these is the Reserva de Producción Faunística Cuyabeno (RPFC), located in the northeastern corner of the country. Given that this land was previously managed as commons by local indigenous groups, the establishment of protected areas has had numerous consequences for these people. The research conducted comprised three months’ fieldwork in three of the affected Siona communities, primarily through the use of participant observation. Based on the framework developed by Ensminger, this paper demonstrates how institutional change has occurred in the last few centuries with the arrival of various frontiers overriding the region. This has led to the almost total eradication of traditional institutions and the introduction of a new ideology, namely conservationism. In order to legitimize their existence in the Reserve, indigenous groups are compelled to argue in a conservationist discourse if they want to stay in their ancestral territory. The article discusses tourism as one key impact on the lives of the local Siona, alongside their response to the grabbing process, which takes the form of a re-creation of their identity, including institution shopping from below. This article contributes to the debate on commons grabbing from the perspective of local actors by arguing that institution shopping from below does not necessarily mean a loss of authenticity, considering different ontological perspectives in the process of identity construction.

show abstract

“…Specifically, in resource-abundant villages, resource utilization policies and institutional management are crucial [56,57]. Under the current system of public ownership in China, farmers' resource property rights are not guaranteed, which has actually undermined rural livelihoods during recent decades [52,53].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coupled Relationship between Rural Livelihoods and the Environment at a Village Scale: A Case Study in the Mongolian Plateau

Dai

et al. 2020

Land

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rural livelihoods, which are basic human activities, have long interacted with the environment. In light of the complexity of the human–environment system, more interdisciplinary analyses from geographical, environmental, and social sciences are needed. Using qualitative and quantitative methods from social, environmental, and geographical sciences, this study conducted a geographical regionalization and a comparative analysis of rural livelihoods in different zones in the Loess Plateau to explore the relationship between rural livelihoods and the environment. The results indicated that rural livelihoods are tightly coupled with the environment on a village scale, showing significant geographical regularity and spatial disparity. A combination of geographical location, resource endowment, and environmental sanitation affects rural livelihoods in terms of spatial patterns, development capacity, and quality of life in the context of the public ownership system, the utilization policy of land resources, and limited technical conditions. Coupling the relationship between rural livelihoods and a given environment on a village scale tends to lead to one of four types of relationships: “homeostatic”, “intense”, “transferred”, or “optimized”. Accordingly, governments and policymakers need to consider that countryside revitalization must be locally tailored and implemented through the four aspects of “rights revitalization”, “labor revitalization”, “industrial revitalization”, and “environmental revitalization”.

show abstract

Impact of Government Policies and Corporate Land Grabs on Indigenous People’s Access to Common Lands and Livelihood Resilience in Northeast Cambodia

Cited by 30 publications

References 21 publications

Loss and vulnerability of lowland forests in mainland Southeast Asia

Loss and vulnerability of lowland forests in mainland Southeast Asia

Institutional Change on a Conservationist Frontier: Local Responses to a Grabbing Process in the Name of Environmental Protection

Coupled Relationship between Rural Livelihoods and the Environment at a Village Scale: A Case Study in the Mongolian Plateau

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About