Land issue in Cambodia

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Ratana PEN on September 16, 2010 at 16:30

Dear Mr. Kimlong,

Nice to see the raising concern on the land issues in Cambodia. Yes, we are not sure what are the fact behind the trend of increasing conflict sharply. We are here having many law and legal framework to support or escaping the conflict. But the rate still increasing. What wrong with the Land Law 2001, Forestry Law 2002 and other sub-decrees and declarations?

Regarding to your questions, i feel that we can see many weak points that lead to land conflict. Economic Land Concessions (ELCs), and powerful persons in country, etc. are the main factor contribute to the land conflicts? Is the weakness of the Development? From 1990-2000 we had a problem on Forest Issues, but the land conflict rate might be low. then the banning all the forest concession --> the new type of concession,ELCs, is coming and then what happen to the people and natural resources? For forest concessions, the companies take most the hard wood but the ELCs clear all the land (called damage forest-who defined this?). people can not access to there any more or access to there but what they need to go to there? All NTFPs gone!!!

Is it the ELCs becoming new type issues (some time i would think it as the new era of colonial-(economic) but this is the land ownership for 99-years? I am sure there is a good and bad companies. But what are the fact? French company who doing business at Mondulkiri when they arrived that and start operation, Pnoung Indigenous destroyed their heavy machinery. this is one case (I am sure it was listed in the NGO forum report). Not only the ELCs! what else that lead to these ISSUES.

This is from what i have seen.

Ratana

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kimlong LY on September 16, 2010 at 21:09

Dear Ratana,

Thank you very much for your interest responding to my post. I think that in order make our discussion go smoothly, we should try to find out arguments as much as we can to answer each question. I hope that at the end we can draw out the conclusion and possible policy implications. But we have to wait the contribution from the other before moving a head. Therefore, to reach the conclusion will be very long way to go.

Let me contribute to the first question why the land conflict was at pick in the year 1998 and year 2008?
We should look back to what happen in these years (period). To me, this seems like a coincident that the statistical data empirically show the conflict was very high accordingly in those year.

It should be noted that Khmer Rouge integration was taking place in year 1996. This period there is strong military involvement in forest clearance for acquiring the land from both parts (former Khmer rouge and RCAF-military). There is also huge wave of migration and settlement in the area where the land available from all over the country. At this time, land is not yet clear demarcated and not yet formalized. In on 5-6th July 1997 is coup d' etate. In 1998 is the year of stabilization. It is integration again between political parties and election took place. At the same time, economic is rapid growth. After the integration,the tendency of land seeking and land appropriation from the landless, the elite and military officials were apparently/gradually increased particularly area under control of the former Khmer Rouge. This should be coincident to the year 1998, that is two year right after 1996. That is why in the number of conflicts projected on the map illustrated in NGO forum 's report show that Battambang has highest land conflict comparing to other province in Cambodia.

For the year 2008, it is obviously seen that the strong economic growth and especially land speculation plus the unclear land demarcation, leading more people seize for land as land price was very high. Those who have more power tend to use its power to claim its land holding or to grab the land. Moreover, right after land law enacted in 2001 allow market mechanism to formalize the land. That is why the conflict were so high, and higher than the year 1998.

I think that conflict was declined right after the year 2008 may be the result of Global Financial Crisis (GFC) leading to decrease land price. Real estate and land market was stuck. This calms down land conflict. If there is no GFC, I am pretty sure that land conflict tend to increase at the following year 2009 and 2010.

Next step, after getting comments from other member, I will contribute to the question what are the root causes of the conflict. After having sufficient understanding on root cause of land conflict, we can discuss what are the current attempt to resolve land conflict. At the end, we can draw what would be the possible social impact from land issue to Cambodian society with some recommendations and policy implications.

Best regards,

Kimlong

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pok Sophak on September 25, 2010 at 23:38

Dear Mr. Kimlong,

I'd like to contribute to the 3 questions regarding land conflict in Cambodia as follows:

1. In my opinions, there are a few reasons why land conflict rate peaked in 1998 and 2008. The first reason is that land/real estate market was booming in both years and the land prices substaintially increased. Therefore, more and more people regarded land as predominant source of money. Another reason perhaps involves large land development projects, mainly in urban areas, in which the case was hard to resolve. The last reason that might lead to high land conflicts is the land tenure and cadastral systems as well as limited restrictions, which give the chance for land speculation ususally done by some elites.

2. There are many causes of conflicts over land in Cambodia. To me, some of those causes can be:
- weak cadastral system (many land parcels have no title to secure full ownership)
- lack of public consultation in any long-term land leasing or economic land concession
- land law enforcement is inadequate

3. Small land holders in rural areas have not been considerably affected by this global economic crisis. In terms of land confict, if it is as in the report which says 60% took place on agricultural land, care should be taken on this issue. The government has to make sure that local people in the granted concession area won't be victims of such development and get certain benefits they deserve.


Best regards,

Sophak

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kimlong LY on November 3, 2010 at 11:55

Dear Sophak,

Thank you very much for your contribution to each question. It is interesting to read your opinion. I agree with you in almost aspect, but one point that make me doubt concerning your statement at point 3 that "Small land holders in rural areas have not been considerably affected by this global economic crisis". I think that the reality is the small land holder who is seriously affected by the global economic crisis in the context of our discussion.

With their small land, peasant got only subsistence or mainly below subsistence to sustain their livelihood. Whether working on the small land that is not enough to support living, or selling the land with lot of money, then invest in other alternative such wage labor job migration are choice that small land holder have to make choice.

In this case, as family member increase, and given the high land price and land speculation, my field observation in several places in Cambodia, I found that the small land holder see that see market force (money) for future investment for their alternatives strategy especially wage labor from migration rather than see long term investment on the land. Therefore, a lot of small land holders sold their land before the global economic crisis(during the land price increase).

One just go to one remote village and ask the villagers that during the land price increase is there any land broker come to your village and seek for land? Villager will interject that Yes..there were a lot of land broker come to my village every day. They come to convince villagers to sold their land.

What happen to small land holder who already sold the land in the time of economic crisis? They are landless, non-farm job and job migration they expect to get does not meet the expectation, land that offer the subsistence or below subsistence is no longer belong. So what do they do? Can you guess? I will give the answer to this question in the next post.

Best regards,

Kimlong

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pok Sophak on November 15, 2010 at 22:52

What I really mean is that the small landholders have not been directly impacted by global finacial crisis, but some of them certainly have been experienced the case of land grabbing as I've also been to the field and heard from the communities. I look forward to seeing your next post regarding the situation of the landless affected by what you stated above.

Thanks.
Sophak

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Yim Sok Sophors on December 22, 2010 at 15:49

Dear Mr. Kimlong,

 

Thank you very much for raising land issues for discussion. I would like to contribute my small idea. To me, i think that the government should directly conduct in-depth impact study at the community in order to know that the provision of Economic Land Concession (ELC) will not negatively affect to the grassroots people. In addition, I think that the government should provide right for the local authorities and community people to manage their community land by themselves. However, it depends on the willingness of the government.

 

Kind regards,

Phors

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Nophea Sasaki (PhD) on February 22, 2011 at 7:14

Dear All,

 

thank you for raising this important but sensitive topic.

Here are my quick responses

 

1. Among many factors, political stability is one of the reason. We had national elections on both years. Before and during the elections, it was difficult to control the opportunists because many political parties were busy with campaigning. Other countries had the same problems during the election campaign and shortly after the election.

 

2. Unlike developed countries where lands are privately owned for many years, lands in developing countries are state owned, meaning that everyone can claim the lands. Lack of land tenure rights and law enforcement would have contributed to the conflict, I think. This kind of problem also occurred in other developing countries.

 

3. Without law enforcement and acceptance by parties involved, it might still be difficult to solve the problem perfectly. It must a compromised solution. Though some medias blamed the government, I think some problems were created by land opportunistic seekers. I have visited many remote rural areas and interviewed people. Some of them have their houses in another province, but they immigrated to claim land in other province. that are also the problems.

 

I hope these help.

 

Nophea

 

• ▶ Reply