Search results

Despite the implementation of the “land for social security” scheme to compensate for land expropriation in rural China, the distribution of social security benefits varies widely both between and within provinces. Why do local officials offer pension compensation in addition to cash payments to some landless farmers and not to others? Using in-depth interviews and survey data, I find that certain attributes of collective demands may signal a threat to social stability, prompting government concessions in the form of welfare benefits. Particularly, among the dispossessed farmers who have engaged in petitions, those who petitioned to higher-level officials were found to be more likely to receive pension benefits than those who have participated in claim-making with a bigger crowd. I propose that in the administrative hierarchy system of cadre evaluation, local officials may perceive public visits and petitions to higher levels of government as more threatening to their career prospects. Moreover, the dilemma between compensation and stability maintenance may also enable local officials to condone strategic targeting rather than collective gathering.

In Senegal, the government has encouraged private investment in agriculture and biofuel production since the 2000s, generating several attempted or effective large-scale land acquisitions by domestic and international investors. In reaction to these projects, local groups of opponents have joined forces with national peasant organizations, civil society associations, and think tanks to resist perceived land grabs. This article examines the emergence of this social movement and explains why anti-land grabs campaigns were successful in halting some projects, but not successful in others. I argue that four main factors are at play: a strong mobilization of local populations measured by group cohesion and level of determination; the assistance of national and international NGOs in scaling up protests beyond the local level; the capacity of opponents to harness the support of influential elites and decision-makers; and the legal status of the land under contention. This paper draws on an analysis of secondary data, qualitative interviews, and field observations carried out in Senegal for several months from 2013 to 2018.

Soil is a non-renewable and increasingly deteriorating resource, yet it is barely protected by European Union (EU) legislation. This constitutes a puzzling gap within the otherwise encompassing and progressive environmental policy of the EU. To explain the integration resistance of soil protection, I draw on insights from rationalist and sociological institutionalist theory. The institutional rigidity of the community method of environmental decision-making limits policy change to favorable interest constellations, but this constraint is usually compensated by agenda competition among the national environmental pioneers. However, successful agenda-setting depends on the skillful combination of political venues and issue frames. Matters of land politics, such as soil protection, are difficult to frame in terms that make them suitable for European policy venues. The theoretical argument is illustrated using an in-depth case study of the agenda-setting, negotiation, and eventual withdrawal of the ill-fated proposal for an EU soil framework directive, with a focus on the changing role of Germany. Reframing of soil politics as locally bound and as essentially national affair, subnational actors extended the conflict to include the German federal chamber as policy venue. As a result, Germany turned from “pusher by example” and first mover to “defensive front-runner,” successfully pursuing a blocking strategy.

Colombia has one of the highest levels of inequality in landholding in the world. This inequality has persisted in spite of numerous state-led land reform efforts, which leads to the question: why has it been so difficult to reverse unequal land distribution in Colombia? To answer this question, the chapter examines the role of the state, non-state armed groups, land inequality, land reform efforts, and a history of violence to reveal the relationship between land, inequality and violence in Colombia. This chapter explores the nature of this relationship to understand Colombia’s enduring inequality and to inform theoretical approaches to statehood and power. Rather than reducing state capacity to common Weberian binary constructions of state and statelessness, I explore how state capacity takes on different forms in different regions of Colombia – analyzing how various actors shape land inequality and violence across the territory. Using a comprehensive longitudinal panel data set of displaced persons, I use a negative binomial regression model to demonstrate how land reform, land inequality, and a history of violence have directly affected current displacement of citizens. I argue that several constellations of powerful social actors have at various points converged to control land, through non-state armed groups, to exert a local form of logistical control outside the scope of the federal state, deeply affecting the dynamics violence across different territories. These groups have subsequently engaged in a land grabbing process that has resulted in a reverse form of land reform – leading to persisting inequality in Colombia.

The study aims to highlight and reflect on resistance to Brazil's illiberal accelerationist politics highlighting alternative possibilities based on affects and forms of relatedness.

Drawing on the case of public universities and the arts in today's Brazil, the authors point out a tragedy of resistance (when opposing change fuels its acceleration) and explore a strategy of lines of flight and becomings in the light of Deleuze and Guattari's perspective on acceleration.

Alongside an oppositional and reactive resistance, that is caught in a tragedy of resistance, the authors explore an alternative strategy that protects a plurality of life forms and forces and their becoming. This strategy differs from most critiques of accelerationism.

This strategy of resistance seems more faithful to Deleuze than the accelerationist strategies that claim to be inspired by him. The authors suggest another reading of the often quoted passage by Deleuze and Guattari. While Deleuze and Guattari favor continuous deterritorializations of the flows of desire, accelerationism reterritorializes these flows towards a (often) undesirable future.

The purpose of the paper is to investigate compensation and related welfare issues in the case of the expropriation of land for urban redevelopment in China.

A mixed methods quantitative and qualitative approach was selected to undertake the research. This involved a wide ranging qualitative review of the academic and policy literature to explore the relevant arguments and issues, combined with a quantitative regression analysis of survey data collected from research subjects.

The research identified the complex and changeable phenomena of urban village redevelopment in China, and the variable compensation arrangements used. The research found that monthly family income before land expropriation, monthly family expense before expropriation, the location of the housing expropriation and family unit size are important determinants for the property holders chosen methods of compensation. It also found that an increase in family size leads to a decreasing probability that the expropriated farmers choose the single monetary compensation relative to the alternative option of housing compensation. The degree of satisfaction with compensation, changes in monthly family income and expense are found to be significant determinants for changes in life satisfaction.

The research made the following four recommendations based upon the qualitative and quantitative analysis: that local governments should pay closer governance/ political attention to changes in the welfare of the farmers/ villagers whose property has been expropriated; that central and local government should aim to improve the compensation system for rural land and property expropriation, to make the compensation policy be perceived as fairer and more reasonable by citizens; that a broad National standard of compensation be used within a pragmatic locally focussed regime; that the Chinese Central, Provincial and Local governments can devise improved policy tools and make more effective policy interventions by learning from the experiences (both successes and failures) of other countries approaches to this topic. It also suggested that further research be undertaken investigating the multitude of local level policy experiments, as a way of developing better National compensation standards based upon those compensation standards that appear to be working – and have citizen support – at the local level.

The literature review identified recent developments in Chinese urban studies and originally synthesised both recent and longstanding work on the issue of urban villages in China. The research also suggested changes to the National and Local legal and policy framework for compensation cases in urban redevelopment expropriation scenarios.