The recent political and economic liberalization in Burma/Myanmar, while indicative of some positive steps toward democratization after decades of authoritarian rule, has simultaneously increased foreign and domestic investments and geared the economy toward industrialization and large-scale agriculture.
Research indicates that key parameters of “land grabbing” differ across regions (e.g., ILC 2012) – particularly in view of who invests and/or when the bulk of investments occurred. At the same time, my review of the “land grab” literature since 2008 reveals that hardly any comparative assessments of “land grabbing” from a home country perspective exist that study whether and/or in which way and why “land grabs” of a single investor country differ across regions.
Large-scale land acquisition are not new in the Mekong region but have been encouraged and have gathered momentum since the end of the 90s, particularly Cambodia, Laos, and Myanmar. These acquisitions are realized by national and foreign companies from the region, particularly China, Vietnam, and Thailand in a movement strongly associated with economic globalization and neo-liberal policies which promote free flow of capital at the regional and global level and the adaptation of national spaces to the requirement of liberal and global markets (Peemans, 2013).
A submission from EarthRights International regarding the Paperwork Review Act approval process for the reporting requirements. On July 11, 2012, the U.S. Government announced a partial waiver of the ban on new investments in Myanmar. Americans are now allowed to invest in Myanmar but will be required to provide annual reports on their policies and procedures for human rights, environmental management, labor standards, land acquisition, and anti-corruption.
Debates and critiques around land policy often focus on the neo-liberal agenda of formalising land as alienable property, most notably through land titling schemes. Sometimes these schemes are posited against alternatives such as land reform and community land holding under common property arrangements. Claims and counter- claims are made for land titling as a means to boost smallholder security in the face of involuntary or otherwise unfair alienation of land sometimes under the rubric of land grabbing.
Community forests (CFs) in northern Burma have been gaining momentum since the mid-2000s, spearheaded by national NGOs, mostly in response to protect village land from encroaching agribusiness concessions. While the production of these new CF landscapes represents the material resistance against state-sponsored rubber, in effect it produces contested state authority by formalizing control of former customary swidden hills under the Forestry Department.
Land grabbing is a bitter secret in the sugar supply
chains of some of the world’s biggest food and beverage companies. Poor communities across the globe are in dispute or have lost their land to
Grâce à notre moteur de recherche robuste, vous pouvez rechercher n'importe quel document parmi les plus de 64 800 ressources hautement conservées dans la bibliothèque du foncier.
Si vous souhaitez avoir un aperçu de ce qui est possible, n'hésitez pas à consulter le guide de recherche.
