Part of a 3 year collaboration among the national human rights institutions of the region. Each of 8 national studies aims to pull together in a simple form, updated information about large-scale land acquisitions in the region, with the aim of identifying trends, common threats, divergences and possible solutions. As well as summarising trends in investment, trade, crop development and land tenure arrangements, the studies focus on the land tenure and human rights challenges.

ABSTRACTED FROM SUMMARY OF OBJECTIVES: This study aims to examine the validity of some of the concerns expressed in Cambodia over the potential effects of FDI in agriculture on local communities and their environment. Initially, it investigates the extent and nature of FDI in agriculture and its sub-sectors, including crops, livestock, food processing, forestry and fisheries. It then analyses the policy and regulatory environment and institutions governing and facilitating such FDI, as well as prevailing business models, in the acquisition of agricultural land.

Through LMAP, and subsequent LASSP, Cambodia has made impressive progress in building a functioning cadastral system over the last ten years. This process has proved complex and challenging, but since commencing, the land registration teams have successfully issued over 1.7 million land titles, a strong legal framework has been developed for the functioning of the land administration bodies and mechanism, institutions have been built and strengthened, and a dispute resolution process has been established for dealing with disputes over unregistered land.

Under the motto “old policies - new action”, in June 2012 the Cambodian Prime Minister initiated a massive land registration campaign on untitled former forest land. Unauthorised settlers and other long- term users of these lands, including those inside Economic Land Concessions, had been considered illegal before. Those of them who are poor now receive full property title by way of donation. The campaign was planned for 12 months and targets 470,000 families on 700,000 parcels comprising a total of 1,8 Mio hectares. The campaign might be extended though into the year of 2014.

ABSTRACTED FROM THE INTRODUCTION: Foreign investment in agriculture has expanded since 2005, although the figures remain modest. The Cambodian government has prioritized investment in the sector, and an important part of the government strategy has been its policies on land concessions. A 2005 sub-decree sets out the procedures, mechanisms and institutional arrangements for offering economic land concessions (ELCs), with the objective of improving crop diversity, productivity, and employment, among other benefits. By 2009, just over a third of ELCs had gone to foreign investors.

The author argues that the democratic reform in Myanmar is rooted in profound internal and external factors. Since the beginning of the reform, the changes in Myanmar have taken tolls in a series of China’s existing interests inside the country. Economically, Chinese investments have come under increasing scrutiny, criticism, and even oppositions, threatening the viability of strategic projects such as the oil and gas pipelines. Politically, the initial success of the democratic reform in Myanmar raises questions about Beijing’s continuous resistance to reform.

In rural Cambodia the rampant allocation of state land to political elites and foreign investors in the form of ‘‘Economic Land Concessions (ELCs)’’— estimated to cover an area equivalent to more than 50% of the country’s arable land—has been associated with encroachment on farmland, community forests and indigenous territories and has contributed to a rapid increase of rural landlessness. By contrast, less than 7,000 ha of land have been allotted to land-poor and landless farmers under the pilot project for ‘‘Social Land Concessions (SLCs)’’ supported by various donor agencies.

Despite the tens of millions of dollars in aid and concessional loans being spent in Cambodia with the ostensible aim of securing land tenure and making the management of land and natural resources more equitable and sustainable, the evidence shows that tenure insecurity, forced evictions and large-scale land grabbing are escalating to alarming levels.

This publication presents the first nationwide analysis of land concessions and leases in the Lao PDR. It comes at a pivotal moment after investment in land has expanded significantly throughout the country, sparking increased dialogue and a greater level of scrutiny regarding the impacts of this expan- sion, both inside the Government of the Lao PDR (GoL) and throughout wider civil society. Investment in land, particularly foreign direct investment, has been championed as an effective development tool by a number of actors.

In Rubber Barons, Global Witness documents the devastating impact of Vietnam’s rush for rubber on local communities in Laos and Cambodia. The investigation also shows how international financiers Deutsche Bank and the International Finance Corporation were backing these land grabs – often in contravention of their own policies. In both Laos and Cambodia, national laws are supposed to protect forests, limit the size of foreign land concessions and require consultation with local communities over land use, but these laws are rarely enforced.

INTRODUCTION: Large-scale land acquisitions are a reality in most regions worldwide. Vast areas of land are leased to foreign as well as national investors on a long term basis of 30-99 years. A growing number of reports, referring to this practice as ‘land grabbing’, show that these mostly very intransparent deals tend to go along with corruption, forced evictions and other human rights violations as well as enhanced competition over water.

Land deals are frequently agreed in secret between governments and investors. This lack of transparency in the allocation of land fosters an environment where elite capture of natural assets becomes the norm, where human rights are routinely abused with impunity, where environmental destruction is ignored and where investment incentives are stacked against companies willing to adhere to ethical and legal principles.