BEGIN:VCALENDAR VERSION:2.0 PRODID:-//EuroSEAS 2021//EN X-WR-CALNAME:EuroSEAS 2021 BEGIN:VTIMEZONE TZID:Europe/Prague X-LIC-LOCATION:Europe/Prague BEGIN:DAYLIGHT TZOFFSETFROM:+0100 TZOFFSETTO:+0200 DTSTART:19700329T020000 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYMONTH=3;BYDAY=-1SU END:DAYLIGHT BEGIN:STANDARD TZOFFSETFROM:+0200 TZOFFSETTO:+0100 DTSTART:19701025T030000 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYMONTH=10;BYDAY=-1SU END:STANDARD END:VTIMEZONE BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20211021T044900 UID:euroseas-2021-comparing-regimes-of-dispossession-states-and-corporate-land-acquisition-in-southeast-asia SUMMARY:(P17) Comparing Regimes of Dispossession: States and Corporate Land Acquisition in Southeast Asia LOCATION:K10 | 1.25 DESCRIPTION:Across Southeast Asia economic growth is spurring conflicts ove r land. Much of that economic growth is highly land-intensive, as the expan sion of corporate activities in the sectors such as mining, hydropower, big agro-business (like palm oil or sugar cane), infrastructure or real estate development generate complex processes of land-use change. This expansion is having a massive impact on patterns of land tenure as private corporatio ns as well as government agencies acquire control over land previously used by rural communities. As a growing literature on ‘land grabbing’ details, these processes of land\nacquisition often proceed without informed consent nor adequate compensation of affected people.\n\nBy bringing together stud ies of land dispossession from a range of different countries, this panel a ims to engage in a comparative discussion of the relationship between state s and private capital in the acquisition of rural land. So far, the growing literature on land grabbing has paid limited comparative attention to regi onal and sectoral variation. Yet there\nare many indications that the ‘regi mes of dispossession’ (Levien 2018) through which private capital acquires land differs markedly between countries and sectors. State dispossession is , to start, facilitating diverse economic sectors and trajectories of growt h in different regions: in some places focused on agriculture and mining, i n others urban-industrial land uses. The\nlaw is similarly playing a varied , ambivalent role: while protecting communal land rights in some contexts, legal provisions elsewhere are facilitators of land dispossession. Laws and policies affecting compensation are similarly varied, often reflecting bot h existing land tenure arrangements, proposed land use changes and the dept h of political opposition. And finally, while state-led expropriation is do minant in many contexts, elsewhere corporate actors are more directly invol ved, sometimes through coarse forms of coercion and fraud, and sometimes in connivance with various decentralized agents (mafias, paramilitaries, and so on). Such variation calls for a comparative analysis of the role of the state in land dispossession. In particular we aim to generate reflection on the causes and consequences of this variation, and its implications for re sistance to land grabbing URL: DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Prague:20210910T090000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/Prague:20210910T103000 END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR