** With apologies for x-posting *** 

Dear All,


Given the recently extended conference deadline, we can still take papers 
for this proposed session at the Third Biennial Conference of the Political 
Ecology Network (POLLEN) in Brighton, UK, 24-26 June 2020. More information 
about the conference is available here: https://pollen2020.wordpress.com/


Please send abstracts of 250 words or less (including affiliations and 
contact information) to myself ([email protected]) and Adrian Nel (
[email protected]) by *10 November 2019*. 


All the best,

Connor and Adrian  


Call for Papers: Third Biennial Conference of the Political Ecology Network 
(POLLEN), Brighton, UK, 24-26 June 2020


*Frontiers of property: resurgent ‘collectivist’ governmentalities in 
global land reform*


*Organisers*: Connor Joseph Cavanagh (Noragric, Norwegian University of 
Life Sciences) and Adrian Nel (University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa)
*Abstract submission deadline: *10 November 2019
*Contact*: [email protected] and [email protected] 


Over the “land reform decades” (Bassett, 1993) of the late twentieth 
century, it was commonplace for development practitioners to construe both 
customary and statutory varieties of collective land ownership as 
institutions on the verge of extinction. Proponents of ‘the evolutionary 
theory of property rights’ (Platteau, 1996) in particular maintained that a 
confluence of demand for tenure security ‘from below’ and imperatives to 
optimise processes of capital accumulation ‘from above’ would gradually 
lead to widespread privatisation across much of the ostensibly 
customarily-owned territories of the Global South. Often building upon late 
attempts to restructure property rights within the native reserves or 
‘homelands’ of various European colonies (e.g. Swynnerton, 1955), these 
diverse initiatives would also frequently evince similarly 
more-than-economic concerns with the responsibilisation, civilisation (or 
more recently ‘modernisation’), and even the explicitly counter-insurgent 
‘pacification’ of rural populations (Wasserman, 1972). Differently put, 
land reforms oriented towards the formalisation of property rights and the 
enclosure of various commons have certainly often served as an integral 
component of both late colonial and subsequent postcolonial 
governmentalities in Africa, Southeast Asia, South America and elsewhere 
(e.g. Moore, 2005; Murray Li, 2010, 2014).


Today, however, it has never been more evident that rumours of the 
collective title’s demise have been greatly exaggerated (Alden Wily, 2018). 
>From Kenya, to Cambodia, to Bolivia, South Africa and beyond, new forms of 
statutory common property in land and natural resources are once again 
resurgent, along with corresponding varieties of titling and formalisation 
(Anthias and Radcliffe, 2015; Finley-Brook, 2016). Such broadening interest 
signals, not least, the ways in which efforts to limit the scope of 
privatisation in land may be oriented as much towards “managing 
dispossession” and administering “surplus populations” within uneven 
development’s mounting inequalities as they are toward the protection of 
community access to land and natural resources (Murray Li, 2010). Yet these 
arrangements also speak to the increasingly blurry or hybridised 
relationship between the very categories of the ‘private’ and the ‘common’ 
in statutory property law itself (Chimhowu and Woodhouse, 2006; Peters, 
2009), particularly as the legal substance of *common *property is 
increasingly being reworked as an idiosyncratic variety of *corporate *property 
to unlock the investment potential of lands and resources previously 
illegible to donors, bureaucracies, and financiers.


In contrast to older forms of the (colonial) collectivisation of both land 
use and political identity in the form of native reserves and homelands 
(e.g. Murray Li, 2014), contemporary varieties of collective titling may 
thus effectively extend rather than limit the reach of markets and capital. 
In turn, this appears to be facilitating new forms of both accumulation and 
displacement – though not always dispossession outright – through various 
kinds of novel leasehold and subsidiary partnerships with agribusinesses, 
extractive industry, conservationists, and other actors (e.g. Capps, 2016; 
Tubbeh and Zimmerer, 2019). Consequently, these and similar forms of 
resurgent collectivisation may in fact offer a springboard rather than a 
stumbling block for ongoing processes of economic growth and capitalist 
development, rather than necessarily a neo-Polanyian “counter-movement” of 
sorts against deepening manifestations of accumulation by dispossession. 
Similarly, the political effects of such collectivisation remain deeply 
ambiguous, perhaps offering to once again entangle claims to both territory 
and essentialised collective identities in ways reminiscent of the 
‘decentralised despotism’ of nineteenth and twentieth-century European 
colonialisms (Coulthard, 2014).


In short, the nuances, complexities, and ambiguities of this ongoing 
“territorial” (Finley-Brook, 2016) or “collectivist turn” in global land 
reform demand further scrutiny from political ecologists and other critical 
scholars. Accordingly, we invite contributions that engage and empirically 
document emerging political, environmental, and other dynamics of the 
latter both within grounded local contexts and across world regions, thus 
fostering “trans-regional” dialogue across particular continental or area 
studies literatures. Relevant foci might include one or more of the 
following:

   - Case studies or comparative analyses of specific titling initiatives 
   across national and world-regional contexts. 
   - Differences and similarities between past and present varieties of 
   collectivisation (colonial vs. postcolonial, capitalist vs. ‘communist’, 
   ‘indigenous’ or otherwise). 
   - Extensions of collective title beyond property in ‘land’, for instance 
   in collectively-owned forests, water resources, or conservation areas and 
   political-ecological consequences thereof. 
   - Internal or multi-scalar dynamics of governance, contestations, and 
   diverse mobilisations within and beyond collectively-titled properties or 
   territories (e.g. Finley-Brook, 2016). 
   - “Vernacular” or *de facto *land privatisation, accumulation, rental, 
   or exchange within collectively-owned properties (Chimhowu and Woodhouse, 
   2006), and the “informal formalisation” (Benjaminsen and Lund, 2002) of 
   land rights within customary systems of governance. 
   - Effects of titling and formalisation on tenure (in)security, existing 
   inequalities, and patterns of socio-economic differentiation (e.g. Peters 
   and Kambewa, 2007; Peters, 2009). 
   - Capital investments or partnerships with the private sector following 
   common property formalisation – consequences of the private accumulation of 
   rent and profit derived from common property in land (Capps, 2016). 
   - Dynamics and perceptions of use values (e.g. access to land and 
   resources) versus exchange values (e.g. access to new rents or profits) in 
   collectively-titled properties. 

Please send abstracts of maximum 250 words to Connor Joseph Cavanagh (
[email protected]) and Adrian Nel ([email protected]) by 10 November 
2019. Authors will be notified of their acceptance for the session as soon 
as possible thereafter. 


*References *

Alden Wily, L. (2018). Collective land ownership in the 21st century: 
Overview of global trends. *Land*, *7*(2), 68.

Anthias, P., & Radcliffe, S. A. (2015). The ethno-environmental fix and its 
limits: Indigenous land titling and the production of not-quite-neoliberal 
natures in   Bolivia. *Geoforum*, *64*, 257-269.

Bassett, T. J. (1993). Introduction: the land question and agricultural 
transformation in Sub-Saharan Africa. In T. J. Bassett, & D. E. Crummey 
(Eds.), *Land in African agrarian systems*. Madison: University of 
Wisconsin Press.

Benjaminsen, T. A., & Lund, C. (2002). Formalisation and informalisation of 
land and water rights in Africa: An introduction. *The European Journal of 
Development Research*, *14*(2), 1-10.

Capps, G. (2016). Tribal‐Landed Property: The Value of the Chieftaincy in 
Contemporary Africa. *Journal of Agrarian Change*, *16*(3), 452-477.

Chimhowu, A., & Woodhouse, P. (2006). Customary vs private property rights? 
Dynamics and trajectories of vernacular land markets in Sub‐Saharan Africa. 
*Journal 
of agrarian change*, *6*(3), 346-371.

Coulthard, G. (2014). *Red skin, white masks: rejecting the colonial 
politics of recognition. *Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Finley-Brook, M. (2016). Territorial ‘fix’? Tenure insecurity in titled 
indigenous territories. *Bulletin of Latin American Research*, *35*(3), 
338-354.

Moore, D. (2005). *Suffering for territory: race, place, and power in 
Zimbabwe. *Durham: Duke University Press.

Murray Li, T. (2010). Indigeneity, capitalism, and the management of 
dispossession. *Current Anthropology*, *51*(3), 385-414.

Murray Li, T. (2014). Fixing non-market subjects: Governing land and 
population in the global south. *Foucault Studies*, (18), 34-48.

Peters, P. E. (2009). Challenges in land tenure and land reform in Africa: 
Anthropological contributions. *World Development*, *37*(8), 1317-1325.

Peters, P. E., & Kambewa, D. (2007). Whose security? Deepening social 
conflict over ‘customary’ land in the shadow of land tenure reform in 
Malawi. *The Journal of  Modern African Studies*, *45*(3), 447-472.

Platteau, J. P. (1996). The evolutionary theory of land rights as applied 
to sub‐Saharan Africa: a critical assessment. *Development and Change*, 
*27*(1), 
29-86.

Swynnerton, R. J. (1955). *A plan to intensify the development of African 
agriculture in Kenya. *Nairobi: Government printer. 

Tubbeh, R. M., & Zimmerer, K. S. (2019). Unraveling the Ethnoterritorial 
Fix in the Peruvian Amazon: Indigenous Livelihoods and Resource Management 
after Communal Land Titling (1980s-2016). *Journal of Latin American 
Geography*, *18*(2), 33-59.

Wasserman, G. (1973). Continuity and Counter-Insurgency: The Role of Land 
Reform in Decolonizing Kenya, 1962–70. *Canadian Journal of African Studies*
, *7*(1), 133-148. 

--

*Dr. Connor Joseph Cavanagh*

Post-Doctoral Research Fellow

Department of International Environment and Development Studies

Norwegian University of Life Sciences (NMBU)

NMBU Staff Profile <https://www.nmbu.no/emp/connor.cavanagh> | Google 
Scholar  <http://goo.gl/KXP03j>| ResearchGate <http://goo.gl/EIuhdR> | 
Twitter  <http://goo.gl/D2vozx>
*Latest publications:* 

*Cavanagh, C.J. *(2019). Dying races, deforestation and drought: the 
political ecology of social Darwinism in Kenya Colony’s western highlands 
<https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhg.2019.09.005>. *Journal of Historical 
Geography. *DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhg.2019.09.005

Weldemichel, T. and T.A. Benjaminsen, *C.J. Cavanagh* and H. Lein. 2019. 
Conservation: 
Beyond population growth 
<https://science.sciencemag.org/content/365/6449/133.1>. *Science* 365 
(6449): 133. 

Neimark, B., and J. Childs, A.J. Nightingale, *C.J. Cavanagh*, S. Sullivan, 
T.A. Benjaminsen, S. Batterbury, S. Koot, and W. Harcourt. (2019). Speaking 
power to ‘post-truth’: critical political ecology and the new 
authoritarianism 
<https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/24694452.2018.1547567?journalCode=raag21>
. *Annals of the American Association of Geographers* 109: 613-623.

 Sandbrook, C. and *C.J. Cavanagh *and D. Tumusiime (eds). (2018). 
*Conservation 
and Development in Uganda* 
<https://www.routledge.com/Conservation-and-Development-in-Uganda/Sandbrook-Cavanagh-Tumusiime/p/book/9781138710924>
*. *New York and London: Routledge/Earthscan.

*Cavanagh, C.J. *(2018). Political ecologies of biopower: diversity, 
debates, and new frontiers of inquiry 
<https://journals.uair.arizona.edu/index.php/JPE/article/view/23047>.*Journal 
of Political Ecology *25(1): 402-425.

*Cavanagh, CJ. *(2018). Enclosure, dispossession, and the ‘green economy’: 
new contours of internal displacement in Liberia and Sierra Leone?  
<http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19376812.2017.1350989>*African 
Geographical Review *37(2): 120-133.​

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"gep-ed" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gep-ed/d040b5df-e5c8-4c45-b0ce-3136dc315d15%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to