This article examines changing contexts and emerging processes related to “land grabbing”. In particular, it uses the case of Laos to analyze the driving forces behind land takings, how such drivers are implied in land policies, and how affected people respond depending on their socio-economic assets and political connections.

ABSTRACTED FROM OPENING PARAGRAPHS: Land confiscation is one of the leading causes of protest and unrest in Burma, having led to the forced displacement of hundreds of thousands of people in recent years. It also undermines Burma’s fragile peace processes. The 2008 constitution and subsequent laws are used to legitimize arbitrary land confiscation, deny access to justice, and perpetuate an environment of impunity.

ABSTRACTED FROM EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Half a decade into the global land rush, land-intensive investment throughout Southeast Asia continues to confront social and environmental issues such as land conflict and improperly regulated forest conversion. This study uses publicly available financial and spatial data to examine the geography of land-intensive investment in Southeast Asia, and to identify the limits imposed by problems with data availability.

FIRST PARAGRAPH: The historical weight of the political culture of development in Burma – now more commonly referred to as Myanmar – must not be discounted during the democracy-neoliberal reform era. National development discourse and practice in Myanmar has combined elements from monarchical patronage and military authoritarianism after decades of ruling military dictatorships where the military-state ‘knows best’ for its people.

In 2008, three sugar companies were awarded nearly 20,000 hectares of Economic Land Concessions (ELCs) in Oddar Meanchey province. The new research finds that associated land grabbing totaling more than 17,000 hectares has affected more than 2,000 families. Of these, 214 families were forcibly evicted. Meanwhile, at least 3,000 hectares of the misappropriated land has been used for logging rather than sugar plantations, according to the report, ‘Cambodia: The Bitter Taste of Sugar’, commissioned by ActionAid and Oxfam GB.

Successful development experiences have demonstrated the greater efficiency achieved with a growth strategy based on small and medium-scale farmers (SMFs). This study is sought to identify potential agribusiness models for enhancing inclusive growth through NGOs partnerships with SMFs in Myanmar. The paper illustrates that agricultural sector in Myanmar is characterised by already high land inequality and landlessness, and low productivity of most SMFs.

This paper examines the main drivers of resource conflict in Myanmar. The author first looks at the major resource-related projects that could crate conflict in the country, namely the Myitsone hydroelectric dam project, the Letpadaung copper mine and the Shwe oil and gas project. He then explores some of the other areas connected to resource conflict.

In June 2012, the Cambodian Government issued a policy directing the private titling of all plots throughout the country’s rural areas. In this study conducted in collaboration with seven NGOs throughout 79 indigenous villages in Ratanakiri Province, indigenous leaders reported negative impacts of the policy including loss of communal land, lack of transparency and information, and coercion to privatize land.

In light of the increasingly volatile nature of the land conflict in Cambodia, this Report aims to describe the sources, forms and impact of the conflict throughout the country. The Report offers an overview of the land conflict throughout the country and provides recommendations to the RGC. Chapter 1 (Introduction) provides a brief overview of the status of land rights and the different ownership system throughout Cambodia’s history and of the land situation in today’s Cambodia, before discussing the scope, methodology and purpose of this Report.

The purpose of the report is to provide documentary evidence of land disputes recorded throughout 2013. This evidence was gathered from articles on land disputes from local printed media, meetings with Land and Housing Right Network (LAHRiN)2 members, and through on site data collection.

The Coca-Cola Company believes that land grabbing is unacceptable. Our Company does not typically purchase ingredients directly from farms, nor are we owners of sugar farms or plantations, but as a major buyer of sugar, we acknowledge our responsibility to take action and to use our influence to help protect the land rights of local communities. The Coca-Cola Company commits to the following plan of action to prevent and address land grabs and other land controversies in our supply chain.

Over 72% of land leases involve foreign investors, primarily Chinese, Vietnamese, and Thai companies. Most products from these operations are exported as raw material to the investor countries, leaving little to no room for added value domestically to benefit the Laotian economy. Rubber is the largest single industry within land investment, making up 34% of all land concessions. The two largest rubber investors are Vietnamese corporations, Hoang Anh Gia Lai (HAGL) and Vietnam Rubber Group (VRG).