IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v5y2016i2p11-d69176.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Historical Changes of Land Tenure and Land Use Rights in a Local Community: A Case Study in Lao PDR

Author

Listed:
  • Saykham Boutthavong

    (Graduate School of Social and Culture Studies, Kyushu University, 744, Motooka, Nishi-ku, Fukuoka City 819-0395, Japan
    Faculty of Forestry Sciences, National University of Laos, P.O. Box 7322, Dong Dok Campus, Xaythany District, Vientiane Capital City, Lao PDR)

  • Kimihiko Hyakumura

    (Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Kyushu University, 6-10-1 Hakozaki, Higashi-ku, Fukuoka City 812-8581, Japan)

  • Makoto Ehara

    (Center for International Partnerships and Research on Climate Change, Forestry and Forest Products Research Institute (FFPRI), 1 Matsunosato, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8687, Japan)

  • Takahiro Fujiwara

    (Institute of Decision Science for a Sustainable Society, Kyushu University, 744, Motooka, Nishi-ku, Fukuoka City 819-0395, Japan)

Abstract

Land-titling programs, land and forest allocation programs, and projects on state-allocated land for development and investment in Laos have been key drivers of change in land tenure. These have triggered major shifts in land use rights, from customary, to temporary, and then to permanent land use rights. This article explores how government programs to grant land use rights to individual households have affected the way people have been able to acquire and secure land tenure. For our case study, we selected the village of Napo, the target of many land tenure changes in the past four decades. We collected data from district offices, group discussions with village organizations, and interviews with selected households. The study shows how land use rights shifted over time and reveals that households obtained most of their agricultural land and forestland through a claim process. Original households were mainly land claimers, while migrants were land buyers. The process of formalization and allocation of tenure triggered inequality among households. Attention is needed in future land governance and tenure reforms in order to safeguard the land use rights of local people in an equitable manner.

Suggested Citation

  • Saykham Boutthavong & Kimihiko Hyakumura & Makoto Ehara & Takahiro Fujiwara, 2016. "Historical Changes of Land Tenure and Land Use Rights in a Local Community: A Case Study in Lao PDR," Land, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-20, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:5:y:2016:i:2:p:11-:d:69176
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/5/2/11/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/5/2/11/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Khamphay Manivong & Phouthone Sophathilath, 2009. "Land Use Planning and Land Allocation in the Upland of Northern Laos: Process Evaluation and Impacts," EEPSEA Special and Technical Paper tp200910t2, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), revised Oct 2009.
    2. Meinzen-Dick, Ruth S. & Brown, Lynn R. & Feldstein, Hilary Sims & Quisumbing, Agnes R., 1997. "Gender, property rights, and natural resources," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 25(8), pages 1303-1315, August.
    3. Ian G. Baird & Jefferson Fox, 2015. "How Land Concessions Affect Places Elsewhere: Telecoupling, Political Ecology, and Large-Scale Plantations in Southern Laos and Northeastern Cambodia," Land, MDPI, vol. 4(2), pages 1-18, May.
    4. Edella Schlager & Elinor Ostrom, 1992. "Property-Rights Regimes and Natural Resources: A Conceptual Analysis," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 68(3), pages 249-262.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zhang Yiwen & Shashi Kant & Hexing Long, 2020. "Collective Action Dilemma after China’s Forest Tenure Reform: Operationalizing Forest Devolution in a Rapidly Changing Society," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-18, February.
    2. Katusiime, Juliet & Schütt, Brigitta & Mutai, Noah, 2023. "The relationship of land tenure, land use and land cover changes in Lake Victoria basin," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    3. Salman, Faris & Mori, Akihisa, 2023. "When, where, and how can land governance overcome path dependency? A trajectory of land governance change," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    4. Yiwen, Zhang & Kant, Shashi, 2022. "Secure tenure or equal access? Farmers’ preferences for reallocating the property rights of collective farmland and forestland in Southeast China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    5. Hua, Xiaobo & Kono, Yasuyuki & Zhang, Le & Xu, Erqi & Luo, Renshan, 2020. "Land rental in a multi-ethnic society: Insights from Southwest China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).

    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. Allendorf, Keera, 2007. "Do Women's Land Rights Promote Empowerment and Child Health in Nepal?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 1975-1988, November.
    2. Scherr, Sara J., 2000. "A downward spiral? Research evidence on the relationship between poverty and natural resource degradation," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 479-498, August.
    3. Marcello De Maria, 2019. "Understanding Land in the Context of Large-Scale Land Acquisitions: A Brief History of Land in Economics," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-14, January.
    4. Mwangi, Esther, 2006. "Subdividing the commons: the politics of property rights transformation in Kenya's Maasailand," CAPRi working papers 46, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    5. Feyertag, Joseph & Childress, Malcolm & Langdown, Ian & Locke, Anna & Nizalov, Denys, 2021. "How does gender affect the perceived security of land and property rights? Evidence from 33 countries," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    6. BurnSilver, Shauna & Mwangi, Esther, 2007. "Beyond group ranch subdivision: Collective action for livestock mobility, ecological viability, and livelihoods," CAPRi working papers 66, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    7. Mwangi, Esther, 2007. "Subdividing the Commons: Distributional Conflict in the Transition from Collective to Individual Property Rights in Kenya's Maasailand," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 815-834, May.
    8. Ramona Bunkus & Insa Theesfeld, 2018. "Land Grabbing in Europe? Socio-Cultural Externalities of Large-Scale Land Acquisitions in East Germany," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-21, August.
    9. Benjamin, Emmanuel O. & Ola, Oreoluwa & Sauer, Johannes & Buchenrieder, Gertrud, 2021. "Interaction between agroforestry and women's land tenure security in sub-Saharan Africa: A matrilocal perspective," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    10. Haque, A.B.M. Mahfuzul & Visser, Leontine E. & Dey, Madan M., 2011. "Institutional Arrangements in Seasonal Floodplain Management under Community-based Aquaculture in Bangladesh," Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development, Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture (SEARCA), vol. 8(1), pages 1-19, June.
    11. Bergstén, Sabina & Stjernström, Olof & Pettersson, Örjan, 2018. "Experiences and emotions among private forest owners versus public interests: Why ownership matters," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 801-811.
    12. Deslatte, Aaron & Szmigiel-Rawska, Katarzyna & Tavares, António F. & Ślawska, Justyna & Karsznia, Izabela & Łukomska, Julita, 2022. "Land use institutions and social-ecological systems: A spatial analysis of local landscape changes in Poland," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    13. David Aubin & Frédéric Varone, 2013. "Getting Access to Water: Property Rights or Public Policy Strategies?," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 31(1), pages 154-167, February.
    14. Gani, Azmat & Scrimgeour, Frank, 2014. "Modeling governance and water pollution using the institutional ecological economic framework," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 363-372.
    15. Rakotonarivo, O. Sarobidy & Bredahl Jacobsen, Jette & Poudyal, Mahesh & Rasoamanana, Alexandra & Hockley, Neal, 2018. "Estimating welfare impacts where property rights are contested: methodological and policy implications," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 71-83.
    16. Rémy Herrera & Poeura Tetoe, 2013. "The Papua Niugini Paradox. Land property archaism and Modernity of peasant resistance ?," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00786274, HAL.
    17. Toumbourou, Tessa D. & Dressler, Wolfram H. & Werner, Tim T., 2022. "Plantations enabling mines: Incremental industrial extraction, social differentiation and livelihood change in East Kalimantan, Indonesia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    18. Helga Leitner & Eric Sheppard, 2018. "From Kampungs to Condos? Contested accumulations through displacement in Jakarta," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 50(2), pages 437-456, March.
    19. Kassis, Grâce & Bertrand, Nathalie, 2022. "Institutional changes in farmland governance emerging from a collective land preservation procedure upholding local food projects: Evidence from a French case study," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    20. Leibbrandt, Andreas & Lynham, John, 2018. "Does the allocation of property rights matter in the commons?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 201-217.

    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:5:y:2016:i:2:p:11-:d:69176. 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.