The Politics of Misalignment: NGO Livelihood Interventions and Exclusionary Land Claims in an Indonesian Oil Palm Enclave

IF 1.7 2区 社会学 Q1 AREA STUDIES Critical Asian Studies Pub Date : 2023-11-03 DOI:10.1080/14672715.2023.2272736
Tessa D. Toumbourou, Wolfram H. Dressler
{"title":"The Politics of Misalignment: NGO Livelihood Interventions and Exclusionary Land Claims in an Indonesian Oil Palm Enclave","authors":"Tessa D. Toumbourou, Wolfram H. Dressler","doi":"10.1080/14672715.2023.2272736","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Across Southeast Asia’s extractive frontier, Indigenous people increasingly negotiate an influx of nonstate actors pushing partnerships and projects to steer livelihoods away from extractivism and toward forest conservation. Yet, NGOs and their donors often struggle to grasp Indigenous peoples’ changing needs and expectations that may prioritize sustaining an income, often via the promises extractive industries propose, over preserving fragmented forests for posterity. This paper examines three interventions by conservation NGOs in East Kalimantan, Indonesia, which leveraged custom (adat) and “alternative” livelihoods through territorial practices to dissuade a Dayak Modang community from releasing ancestral lands for palm oil plantations and coal mines. Drawing on the state’s definition of adat to demarcate Modang territory, NGOs and some Modang engaged in counter-mapping and livelihood initiatives as hopeful expressions of indigeneity and making a living through acts of territorialization. We explore how NGO territorial practices unfolded as simplified spatial expressions that leveraged adat identity, enclosures, and livelihoods, neglecting the contemporary realities of living in a fragmented forest frontier. Although NGO-Modang strategies temporarily slowed dispossession and deforestation, their misaligned livelihood and conservation programs may have reinforced social differentiation between and across Dayak and migrant groups to ultimately facilitate extraction’s expansion.","PeriodicalId":46839,"journal":{"name":"Critical Asian Studies","volume":"30 34","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Asian Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14672715.2023.2272736","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Across Southeast Asia’s extractive frontier, Indigenous people increasingly negotiate an influx of nonstate actors pushing partnerships and projects to steer livelihoods away from extractivism and toward forest conservation. Yet, NGOs and their donors often struggle to grasp Indigenous peoples’ changing needs and expectations that may prioritize sustaining an income, often via the promises extractive industries propose, over preserving fragmented forests for posterity. This paper examines three interventions by conservation NGOs in East Kalimantan, Indonesia, which leveraged custom (adat) and “alternative” livelihoods through territorial practices to dissuade a Dayak Modang community from releasing ancestral lands for palm oil plantations and coal mines. Drawing on the state’s definition of adat to demarcate Modang territory, NGOs and some Modang engaged in counter-mapping and livelihood initiatives as hopeful expressions of indigeneity and making a living through acts of territorialization. We explore how NGO territorial practices unfolded as simplified spatial expressions that leveraged adat identity, enclosures, and livelihoods, neglecting the contemporary realities of living in a fragmented forest frontier. Although NGO-Modang strategies temporarily slowed dispossession and deforestation, their misaligned livelihood and conservation programs may have reinforced social differentiation between and across Dayak and migrant groups to ultimately facilitate extraction’s expansion.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
错位的政治:非政府组织生计干预和印度尼西亚油棕飞地的排他性土地主张
在东南亚的采掘业前沿,土著人民越来越多地与大量涌入的非国家行为体进行谈判,推动合作伙伴关系和项目,以引导生计从采掘业转向森林保护。然而,非政府组织及其捐助者往往难以把握土著人民不断变化的需求和期望,这些需求和期望可能优先考虑维持收入,通常是通过采掘业提出的承诺,而不是为子孙后代保护支离破碎的森林。本文考察了印度尼西亚东加里曼丹的保护非政府组织的三个干预措施,它们利用习俗(adat)和“替代”生计,通过领土实践劝阻达亚克莫唐社区放弃祖传土地用于棕榈油种植园和煤矿。根据国家对土地的定义来划分摩当领土,非政府组织和一些摩当人参与了反测绘和生计倡议,作为对土著和通过领土化行为谋生的充满希望的表达。我们探讨了非政府组织的领土实践是如何以简化的空间表达方式展开的,这些空间表达方式利用了adat的身份、圈地和生计,而忽视了生活在碎片化森林边界的当代现实。尽管非政府组织-摩当的策略暂时减缓了土地剥夺和森林砍伐,但他们不协调的生计和保护计划可能加剧了达雅克和移民群体之间的社会分化,最终促进了采伐的扩大。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Critical Asian Studies
Critical Asian Studies AREA STUDIES-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
3.80%
发文量
29
期刊介绍: Critical Asian Studies is a peer-reviewed quarterly journal that welcomes unsolicited essays, reviews, translations, interviews, photo essays, and letters about Asia and the Pacific, particularly those that challenge the accepted formulas for understanding the Asia and Pacific regions, the world, and ourselves. Published now by Routledge Journals, part of the Taylor & Francis Group, Critical Asian Studies remains true to the mission that was articulated for the journal in 1967 by the Committee of Concerned Asian Scholars.
期刊最新文献
A “Forgotten” Massacre: The Battle of Thakhek in Laos, 1946 From Bizarre Encounters to Native Strangeness: Indigenous Otherness and Insider-Outsider Interactions in Indonesia Hindutva, OBCs and Koli Selfhood in Western and Central India Forest Reserves as Frontiers of Indigeneity: Semai Orang Asli Investments of Work, Cultural Use and Identity in the Bukit Tapah Forest Reserve The Politics of Misalignment: NGO Livelihood Interventions and Exclusionary Land Claims in an Indonesian Oil Palm Enclave
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1