No land development is achieved without the support of local people. Ongoing politics of land commercialisation and strategic land deals can sometimes underestimate the impact on locals. This article thus examines the dominant concentration of land by emerging actors in Nepal, often resulting in dispossession. It studies its continuum consequences through identifying the nature of contradiction on land induced by dispossession, how it shapes the locals’ perceptions and in turn shaping ways of spatial and cultural resistance in their daily lives. Despite some positive aspects, the article reflects on how resistance stems from outweighed negative consequences, often from the strategic nature of land deals, intrusion of local resources and cultural spaces and irreversible damage of agriculture land.
AabøE.KringT. (2012). The political economy of large-scale agricultural land acquisitions: Implications for food security and livelihoods/employment creation in rural Mozambique. Working Paper, Regional Bureau for Africa, UNDP, Africa.
2.
AdnanS. (2007). Departures from everyday resistance and flexible strategies of domination: The making and unmaking of a poor peasant mobilization in Bangladesh. Journal of Agrarian Change, 7(2), 183–224.
3.
BorrasS.M.FrancoJ.C. (2010). Towards a broader view of the politics of global land grab: Rethinking land issues: Reframing resistance, initiative in critical agrarian studies. ICAS Working Paper Series 001, Land Deals Politics Initiatives (LDPI) and Transnational Institute (TNI).
4.
BorrasS.M.FrancoJ.C. (2012). Global land grabbing and trajectories of agrarian change: A preliminary analysis. Journal of Agrarian Change, 12(1), 34–59.
5.
CotulaL.LeonardR. (Eds). (2010). Alternatives to land acquisitions: Agricultural investment and collaborative business model. London: IIED, SDC, IFAD and CTV.
6.
CotulaL.VermeulenS.LeonardR.KeeleyJ. (2009). Land grab or development opportunity?Agricultural investment and international land deals in Africa. London/Rome: IIED/FAO/IFAD.
7.
CSRC. (2012). Land reform monitoring indicators, Nepal. Kathmandu: Community Self-reliance Centre (CSRC).
8.
DeiningerK.ByerleeD.LindsayJ.NortonA.SelodH.SticklerM. (2011). Rising global interest in farmland: Can it yield sustainable and equitable benefits?Washington, DC: The World Bank.
9.
DonaldS.M. (1998). Subaltern struggles and the politics of place: Remapping resistance in Zimbabwe’s eastern highlands. Cultural Anthropology, 13(3), 344–381.
FriedmanA. (2010). Perception: A cognitive sociological approach. In ClementF.KaufmanL. (Eds), La Sociologie Cognitive.Paris: Ophrys/Maison des Sciences de l’Homme, coll. Cogniprisme.
12.
GaltungJ. (1958). Theories of conflict. New York: Department of Sociology, Columbia University.
13.
GaltungJ. (1969). Violence, peace, and peace research. Journal of Peace Research, 6(3), 167–191.
14.
GuhaA. (2007). Peasant resistance in West Bengal a decade before Singur and Nandigram. Economic and Political Weekly, 42(37), 3706–3711.
15.
HallD. (2011). Land grabs, land control, and Southeast Asian crop booms. Journal of Peasant Studies, 38(4), 837–857.
16.
HallS. (1981). Notes on deconstructing ‘the popular’. In RaphaelS. (Ed.), People’s history and socialist theory (pp. 227–240). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
17.
Hancock-BarnettC. (2012). Colonial resettlement and cultural resistance: The Mbira music of Zimbabwe. Social & Cultural Geography, 13(1), 11–27.
18.
HardinG. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. American Association for the Advancement of Science, 162(3859), 1243–1248.
19.
HarveyD. (2003). The new imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
20.
International Land Coalition (ILC). (2011). The new conquistadores and one very willing colony: A discussion on global land grabbing and the Philippine experience. Rome: ILC.
21.
LoweD. (1982). History of bourgeois perception. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
22.
MalseedK. (2008). Where there is no movement: Local resistance and the potential for solidarity. Journal of Agrarian Change, 8(2–3), 489–514.
23.
MelucciA. (1989). Nomads of the present. London: Radius.
24.
MittelmanJ.H. (2000). The globalization syndrome: Transformation and resistance. New Jersey: Princeton University.
25.
OlsonM. (1965). The logic of collective action: Public goods and the theory of groups. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
26.
PelusoN.L. (1992). Rich forest, poor people: Resource control and resistance in Java. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
27.
PolanyiK. (1944). The great transformation: The political and economic origins of our time. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
28.
PredA. (1986). Place, practice and structure. Cambridge, England: Polity Press.
29.
PyakuryalK.P.UpretiB.R. (Eds). (2011). Land, agriculture and agrarian transformation. Kathmandu: Consortium for Land Research and Policy Dialogue (COLARP).
30.
RackhamT.S. (1968). Cross-cultural incompatibilities complicating economic development. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienned’ agroeconomie, 16(3), 89–101. doi:10.1111/j.1744-7976.1968.tb02453.x
31.
RegmiM.C. (1963). Land tenure and taxation in Nepal. The state as landlord: Raikar tenure. Berkeley: Institute of International Studies, University of California.
32.
RimalB. (2011). Application of remote sensing and GIS, land use/land cover change in Kathmandu Metropolitan City, Nepal. Journal of Theoretical & Applied Information Technology, 23(2), 80–86.
33.
SalernoT. (2011). Transnational land deals in Mindanao: Situating ambivalent farmer responses in local politics. Paper presented at the International Conference on Global Land Grabbing 6–8 April 2011, Land Deal Politics Initiative (LDPI).
34.
SchlagerE.OstromE. (1992). Property rights regimes and natural resources: A conceptual analysis. Land Economics, 68(3), 249–262.
35.
ScottJ.C. (1985). Weapons of the weak: Everyday forms of peasant resistance. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
36.
ScottJ.C. (1990). Domination and the arts of resistance: Hidden transcripts. New Haven: Yale University Press.
37.
SharpJ.P.RoutledgeP.PhiloC.PaddisonR. (2000). Entanglements of power: Geographies of domination/resistance. In SharpJ.P.RoutledgeP.PhiloC.PaddisonR. (Eds), Entanglements of power: Geographies of domination/resistance (pp. 1–42). London and New York: Routledge.
SternerT. (2003). Policy instruments for environmental and natural resource management. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
40.
StoneD. (2001). Policy paradox: The art of political decision making (Revised Edition). New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
41.
TarrowS. (1994). Power in movement: Social movements, collective action and politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
42.
UpretiB.R.SharmaS.R.BasnetJ. (2008). Land politics and conflict in Nepal: Realities and potentials for agrarian transformation. Kathmandu: Centre for Self Reliance Centre, Swiss National Centre of Competence in Research (NCCR) North-South and Kathmandu University.
43.
WiesmannU. (1998). Sustainable regional development in rural Africa: Conceptual framework and case studies from Kenya. Berne: Geographica Bernenesia.
44.
WilyL.A.ChapagainD.SharmaS. (2008). Land reform in Nepal: Where it is coming from and where is it going. Kathmandu: Authors.
