東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

Reclaiming Indigenous Land and Livel...

Long, Sarou,

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Reclaiming Indigenous Land and Livelihoods in North-East Cambodia /

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Reclaiming Indigenous Land and Livelihoods in North-East Cambodia // Sarou Long.
Author:	Long, Sarou,
Description:	1 electronic resource (150 pages)
Notes:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 86-12, Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International86-12A.
Subject:	Native peoples. -
Online resource:	https://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=32018078
ISBN:	9798286421107

Reclaiming Indigenous Land and Livelihoods in North-East Cambodia /
Long, Sarou,

Reclaiming Indigenous Land and Livelihoods in North-East Cambodia /Sarou Long. - 1 electronic resource (150 pages)

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 86-12, Section: A.

Cambodia's upland regions are currently sites of contest and conflict over land between diverse actors, including the Indigenous populations that hold customary rights to these landscapes. In North-East Cambodia, the state has exerted its authority and control over resources and lands by zoning customary lands as protected areas and by granting land concessions to plantation companies. Conservation NGOs have been entangled in green grabs and forest carbon schemes in collaboration with state institutions. Lowland migrants and powerful elites also enter Indigenous landscapes to similarly take customary lands. Through these authorised and informal processes, Indigenous landscapes have been transformed and become fragmented, posing significant challenges for Indigenous populations. This research explores how Indigenous communities engage with these diverse institutions, actors and interventions to negotiate their land claims and livelihoods, and how these negotiations in turn shape their lives and material relationships to land, including using these lands for commercial crops and securing loans to improve their livelihoods.I employ the lens of "bricolage" as the analytical framework to understand these diverse strategies and practices. Bricolage is a process whereby people combine their resources, networks, customary and novel institutions to negotiate their resource claims (after Cleaver 2012, Cleaver & De Koning 2015). I use the concept of bricolage to go beyond existing studies of local resistance to land grabs to examine what happens "after the land grab." I particularly aim to understand how Indigenous groups engage in everyday interactions to reclaim customary lands that were previously dispossessed and to improve their livelihoods within a fragmented landscape. My research draws on two case studies that used mixed methods to work with Indigenous Bunong communities in Mondulkiri, Cambodia. I used qualitative methods (online interviews, document reviews, and ethnographic work) and mapping to understand land relations and land uses. I additionally used household surveys to gain a more systematic understanding of livelihood activities and challenges. Collectively, these research methods enabled me to closely examine local strategies to progress Indigenous land claims and livelihoods.My study finds that Bunong communities are using a range of approaches to take back lands. However, these have produced a variety of outcomes in the area of land gained, the duration of land access, and how secure the arrangements were. Bunong recognition as an "Indigenous group" under the Cambodia Land Law in 2001 was an essential first step for this group to formalise their land claims through communal land titles (CLTs). In my two case studies, however, the framing of Indigenous identity and customary tenure systems were strongly co-opted by state legal institutions. Where CLTs were granted, it was usually for a fraction of the lands that were originally sought. In other cases, CLT was a long time coming and often difficult to achieve. These factors help to explain why Bunong households have sought mechanisms beyond CLT in pursuing their land claims, to reclaim specific areas of their dispossessed lands. Emerging institutional shifts, such as state land titling interventions, "private titles", community forestry and community protected areas were key examples from my case studies.

English

ISBN: 9798286421107Subjects--Topical Terms:

3558955
Native peoples.

Reclaiming Indigenous Land and Livelihoods in North-East Cambodia /
LDR:04707nmm a22003973i 4500 001 2435536
005 20251009101016.5
006 m o d
007 cr|nu||||||||
008 261011s2025 miu||||||m |||||||eng d
020 $a 9798286421107
035 $a (MiAaPQD)AAI32018078
035 $a (MiAaPQD)AustNatlU733735213
035 $a AAI32018078
040 $a MiAaPQD $b eng $c MiAaPQD $e rda
100 1 $a Long, Sarou, $e author. $3 3825859
245 1 0 $a Reclaiming Indigenous Land and Livelihoods in North-East Cambodia / $c Sarou Long.
264 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2025
300 $a 1 electronic resource (150 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 86-12, Section: A.
500 $a Advisors: Mahanty, Sango.
502 $b Ph.D. $c The Australian National University (Australia) $d 2025.
520 $a Cambodia's upland regions are currently sites of contest and conflict over land between diverse actors, including the Indigenous populations that hold customary rights to these landscapes. In North-East Cambodia, the state has exerted its authority and control over resources and lands by zoning customary lands as protected areas and by granting land concessions to plantation companies. Conservation NGOs have been entangled in green grabs and forest carbon schemes in collaboration with state institutions. Lowland migrants and powerful elites also enter Indigenous landscapes to similarly take customary lands. Through these authorised and informal processes, Indigenous landscapes have been transformed and become fragmented, posing significant challenges for Indigenous populations. This research explores how Indigenous communities engage with these diverse institutions, actors and interventions to negotiate their land claims and livelihoods, and how these negotiations in turn shape their lives and material relationships to land, including using these lands for commercial crops and securing loans to improve their livelihoods.I employ the lens of "bricolage" as the analytical framework to understand these diverse strategies and practices. Bricolage is a process whereby people combine their resources, networks, customary and novel institutions to negotiate their resource claims (after Cleaver 2012, Cleaver & De Koning 2015). I use the concept of bricolage to go beyond existing studies of local resistance to land grabs to examine what happens "after the land grab." I particularly aim to understand how Indigenous groups engage in everyday interactions to reclaim customary lands that were previously dispossessed and to improve their livelihoods within a fragmented landscape. My research draws on two case studies that used mixed methods to work with Indigenous Bunong communities in Mondulkiri, Cambodia. I used qualitative methods (online interviews, document reviews, and ethnographic work) and mapping to understand land relations and land uses. I additionally used household surveys to gain a more systematic understanding of livelihood activities and challenges. Collectively, these research methods enabled me to closely examine local strategies to progress Indigenous land claims and livelihoods.My study finds that Bunong communities are using a range of approaches to take back lands. However, these have produced a variety of outcomes in the area of land gained, the duration of land access, and how secure the arrangements were. Bunong recognition as an "Indigenous group" under the Cambodia Land Law in 2001 was an essential first step for this group to formalise their land claims through communal land titles (CLTs). In my two case studies, however, the framing of Indigenous identity and customary tenure systems were strongly co-opted by state legal institutions. Where CLTs were granted, it was usually for a fraction of the lands that were originally sought. In other cases, CLT was a long time coming and often difficult to achieve. These factors help to explain why Bunong households have sought mechanisms beyond CLT in pursuing their land claims, to reclaim specific areas of their dispossessed lands. Emerging institutional shifts, such as state land titling interventions, "private titles", community forestry and community protected areas were key examples from my case studies.
546 $a English
590 $a School code: 0433
650 4 $a Native peoples. $3 3558955
650 4 $a Plantations. $3 3560053
650 4 $a Minority & ethnic groups. $3 3422415
650 4 $a Politics. $3 685427
650 4 $a Households. $3 579926
650 4 $a Ethnic studies. $2 bicssc $3 1556779
650 4 $a Native studies. $3 3642179
650 4 $a Political science. $3 528916
650 4 $a Southeast Asian studies. $3 3344898
690 $a 0631
690 $a 0741
690 $a 0615
690 $a 0222
710 2 $a The Australian National University (Australia). $e degree granting institution. $3 3765800
720 1 $a Mahanty, Sango $e degree supervisor.
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 86-12A.
790 $a 0433
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2025
856 4 0 $u https://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=32018078