IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v11y2022i8p1348-d891858.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The (In)Ability of a Multi-Stakeholder Platform to Address Land Conflicts—Lessons Learnt from an Oil Palm Landscape in Myanmar

Author

Listed:
  • Lara M. Lundsgaard-Hansen

    (Centre for Development and Environment (CDE), University of Bern, 3012 Bern, Switzerland
    Institute of Geography, University of Bern, 3012 Bern, Switzerland)

  • Christoph Oberlack

    (Centre for Development and Environment (CDE), University of Bern, 3012 Bern, Switzerland
    Institute of Geography, University of Bern, 3012 Bern, Switzerland)

  • Glenn Hunt

    (Centre for Development and Environment (CDE), University of Bern, 3012 Bern, Switzerland
    Institute of Geography, University of Bern, 3012 Bern, Switzerland)

  • Flurina Schneider

    (Centre for Development and Environment (CDE), University of Bern, 3012 Bern, Switzerland
    Institute for Social-Ecological Research, 60486 Frankfurt, Germany
    Faculty of Biosciences, Goethe University Frankfurt, 60323 Frankfurt, Germany)

Abstract

Oil palm landscapes are often characterised by land conflicts. Multi-stakeholder platforms (MSP) may be a promising means to contribute to conflict resolution. However, the merits of MSPs are limited in contexts with strong power imbalances and entrenched conflict histories. This study analyses an MSP from Myanmar. We developed an analytical framework based on literature on MSPs and social learning and used qualitative methods such as participatory observation and interviews. The study investigates how the MSP was designed and governed and whether it was effective in addressing the land conflicts around oil palm concessions. The study discusses several promising factors of the MSP for being effective, such as adequate inclusion of stakeholders, secured resources, or effective facilitation. However, the analysis also reveals how hindering factors such as lack of a clear mandate, goal, and decision-making competences of the MSP, insufficient communication, or lack of legal and land governance expertise contributed to only limited effectiveness of the MSP. Further, we discuss whether the MSP was a suitable approach in the given context of nontransparent land governance mechanisms, persisting power disparities, and longstanding conflict history. We conclude that designing and governing an MSP in such a context needs to be done very cautiously—if at all—and recommend paying special attention to ten specific points.

Suggested Citation

  • Lara M. Lundsgaard-Hansen & Christoph Oberlack & Glenn Hunt & Flurina Schneider, 2022. "The (In)Ability of a Multi-Stakeholder Platform to Address Land Conflicts—Lessons Learnt from an Oil Palm Landscape in Myanmar," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-40, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:8:p:1348-:d:891858
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/8/1348/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/8/1348/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lara M. Lundsgaard-Hansen & Flurina Schneider & Julie G. Zaehringer & Christoph Oberlack & Win Myint & Peter Messerli, 2018. "Whose Agency Counts in Land Use Decision-Making in Myanmar? A Comparative Analysis of Three Cases in Tanintharyi Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-30, October.
    2. Stefan Bächtold & Joan Bastide & Lara Lundsgaard-Hansen, 2020. "Assembling Drones, Activists and Oil Palms: Implications of a Multi-stakeholder Land Platform for State Formation in Myanmar," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 32(2), pages 359-378, April.
    3. Agus Andrianto & Heru Komarudin & Pablo Pacheco, 2019. "Expansion of Oil Palm Plantations in Indonesia’s Frontier: Problems of Externalities and the Future of Local and Indigenous Communities," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-16, March.
    4. Flurina Schneider & Mélanie Feurer & Lara Maria Lundsgaard-Hansen & Win Myint & Cing Don Nuam & Katharina Nydegger & Christoph Oberlack & Nwe Nwe Tun & Julie Gwendolin Zähringer & Aung Myin Tun & Pete, 2020. "Sustainable Development Under Competing Claims on Land: Three Pathways Between Land-Use Changes, Ecosystem Services and Human Well-Being," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 32(2), pages 316-337, April.
    5. Nathalie Steins & Victoria Edwards, 1999. "Synthesis: Platforms for collective action in multiple-use common-pool resources," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 16(3), pages 309-315, September.
    6. Nathalie Steins & Victoria Edwards, 1999. "Platforms for collective action in multiple-use common-pool resources," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 16(3), pages 241-255, September.
    7. Nicolas Faysse, 2006. "Troubles on the way: An analysis of the challenges faced by multi‐stakeholder platforms," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 30(3), pages 219-229, August.
    8. Lakshmy Naidu & Ravichandran Moorthy, 2021. "A Review of Key Sustainability Issues in Malaysian Palm Oil Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-13, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Murat Sartas & Piet van Asten & Marc Schut & Mariette McCampbell & Moureen Awori & Perez Muchunguzi & Moses Tenywa & Sylvia Namazzi & Ana Sole Amat & Graham Thiele & Claudio Proietti & Andre Devaux & , 2019. "Factors influencing participation dynamics in research for development interventions with multi-stakeholder platforms: A metric approach to studying stakeholder participation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(11), pages 1-20, November.
    2. Johnson, Nancy & Ravnborg, Helle Munk & Westermann, Olaf & Probst, Kirsten, 2001. "User participation in watershed management and research:," CAPRi working papers 19, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    3. Charles Heckscher & John McCarthy, 2014. "Transient Solidarities: Commitment and Collective Action in Post-Industrial Societies," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 52(4), pages 627-657, December.
    4. Takako Izumi & Sangita Das & Miwa Abe & Rajib Shaw, 2022. "Managing Compound Hazards: Impact of COVID-19 and Cases of Adaptive Governance during the 2020 Kumamoto Flood in Japan," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-16, January.
    5. Karin Andrea Wigger & Dean A. Shepherd, 2020. "We’re All in the Same Boat: A Collective Model of Preserving and Accessing Nature-Based Opportunities," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 44(3), pages 587-617, May.
    6. José Ribas, 2014. "An Assessment of Conflicting Intentions in the Use of Multipurpose Water Reservoirs," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 28(12), pages 3989-4000, September.
    7. Anabel Sanchez-Plaza & Annelies Broekman & Pilar Paneque, 2019. "Analytical Framework to Assess the Incorporation of Climate Change Adaptation in Water Management: Application to the Tordera River Basin Adaptation Plan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-13, February.
    8. Peter Jones, 2013. "Governing protected areas to fulfil biodiversity conservation obligations: from Habermasian ideals to a more instrumental reality," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 39-50, February.
    9. Nicolas Faysse, 2006. "Troubles on the way: An analysis of the challenges faced by multi‐stakeholder platforms," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 30(3), pages 219-229, August.
    10. Das, Nimai, 2009. "Understanding of Social Capital in Gender-based Participatory JFM Programme: An Evidence from West Bengal," MPRA Paper 15304, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Muñoz Escobar, Marcela & Hollaender, Robert & Pineda Weffer, Camilo, 2013. "Institutional durability of payments for watershed ecosystem services: Lessons from two case studies from Colombia and Germany," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 46-53.
    12. John Selsky & Barbara Parker, 2010. "Platforms for Cross-Sector Social Partnerships: Prospective Sensemaking Devices for Social Benefit," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 94(1), pages 21-37, July.
    13. Sartas, Murat & Schut, Marc & Hermans, Frans & Asten, Piet van & Leeuwis, Cees, 2018. "Effects of multi-stakeholder platforms on multi-stakeholder innovation networks: Implications for research for development interventions targeting innovations at scale," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 13(6), pages 1-20.
    14. Josefina Erikson & Oscar L. Larsson, 2020. "How platforms facilitate collaboration across organizational boundaries: fighting human trafficking in Sweden," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(1), pages 181-203, March.
    15. Weingart, Anne & Kirk, Michael, 2008. "Escaping poverty traps?: Collective action and property rights in post-war rural Cambodia," CAPRi working papers 89, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    16. Helle Ravnborg & María Guerrero, 1999. "Collective action in watershed management -- experiences from the Andean hillsides," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 16(3), pages 257-266, September.
    17. Michiko Iizuka & Jorge Katz, 2011. "Natural Resource Industries, ‘Tragedy of the Commons’ and the Case of Chilean Salmon Farming," Institutions and Economies (formerly known as International Journal of Institutions and Economies), Faculty of Economics and Administration, University of Malaya, vol. 3(2), pages 259-286, July.
    18. Brisbois, Marie Claire & Morris, Michelle & de Loë, Rob, 2019. "Augmenting the IAD framework to reveal power in collaborative governance – An illustrative application to resource industry dominated processes," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 159-168.
    19. Westermann, Olaf & Ashby, Jacqueline & Pretty, Jules, 2005. "Gender and social capital: The importance of gender differences for the maturity and effectiveness of natural resource management groups," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(11), pages 1783-1799, November.
    20. Virginia Vallejo-Rojas & Marta G. Rivera-Ferre & Federica Ravera, 2022. "The agri-food system (re)configuration: the case study of an agroecological network in the Ecuadorian Andes," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(4), pages 1301-1327, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:8:p:1348-:d:891858. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.