Mkangawalo人民的正义与公平:以坦桑尼亚Kilombero大规模土地征用项目为例

IF 1.5 Q4 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Ethics Policy & Environment Pub Date : 2020-11-25 DOI:10.1080/21550085.2020.1848187
Ernest Nkansah‐Dwamena, Aireona Bonnie Raschke
{"title":"Mkangawalo人民的正义与公平:以坦桑尼亚Kilombero大规模土地征用项目为例","authors":"Ernest Nkansah‐Dwamena, Aireona Bonnie Raschke","doi":"10.1080/21550085.2020.1848187","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Large-scale land acquisitions (LaSLA), otherwise ‘land grabbing’ in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), raise difficult normative questions the current literature does not sufficiently explore. LaSLA is associated with development opportunities; however, it also threatens the well-being of local people because of displacement and dispossession. To investigate the processes and outcomes for LaSLA to be considered as ‘just and fair,’ we evaluate the impacts of a LaSLA project on local livelihoods in Tanzania. Specifically, we apply John Rawls’ Theory of Justice to the project and compare the results with empirical insights gained from our fieldwork. We find that LaSLA has the potential to improve the living standards of local people, we cannot consider LaSLA as just and fair because it contradicts Rawls’s principles of justice and deteriorates the livelihoods of local people. Our findings suggest that it is critical to scrutinize LaSLA investments, involve local people in decision-making, and build the capacity of host governments to negotiate better LaSLA deals.","PeriodicalId":45955,"journal":{"name":"Ethics Policy & Environment","volume":"98 1","pages":"137 - 163"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Justice and Fairness for Mkangawalo People: The Case of the Kilombero Large-scale Land Acquisition (LaSLA) Project in Tanzania\",\"authors\":\"Ernest Nkansah‐Dwamena, Aireona Bonnie Raschke\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/21550085.2020.1848187\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Large-scale land acquisitions (LaSLA), otherwise ‘land grabbing’ in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), raise difficult normative questions the current literature does not sufficiently explore. LaSLA is associated with development opportunities; however, it also threatens the well-being of local people because of displacement and dispossession. To investigate the processes and outcomes for LaSLA to be considered as ‘just and fair,’ we evaluate the impacts of a LaSLA project on local livelihoods in Tanzania. Specifically, we apply John Rawls’ Theory of Justice to the project and compare the results with empirical insights gained from our fieldwork. We find that LaSLA has the potential to improve the living standards of local people, we cannot consider LaSLA as just and fair because it contradicts Rawls’s principles of justice and deteriorates the livelihoods of local people. Our findings suggest that it is critical to scrutinize LaSLA investments, involve local people in decision-making, and build the capacity of host governments to negotiate better LaSLA deals.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45955,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ethics Policy & Environment\",\"volume\":\"98 1\",\"pages\":\"137 - 163\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-11-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ethics Policy & Environment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/21550085.2020.1848187\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethics Policy & Environment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21550085.2020.1848187","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

在撒哈拉以南非洲(SSA),大规模土地征用(LaSLA),或者“土地掠夺”,提出了当前文献没有充分探讨的困难的规范问题。LaSLA与发展机会有关;然而,由于流离失所和被剥夺财产,它也威胁到当地人民的福祉。为了调查LaSLA被认为是“公正和公平”的过程和结果,我们评估了LaSLA项目对坦桑尼亚当地生计的影响。具体来说,我们将约翰·罗尔斯的正义理论应用于该项目,并将结果与我们从实地工作中获得的经验见解进行比较。我们发现LaSLA具有提高当地人民生活水平的潜力,我们不能认为LaSLA是公正和公平的,因为它与罗尔斯的正义原则相矛盾,并且恶化了当地人民的生计。我们的研究结果表明,审查LaSLA投资,让当地人参与决策,并建立东道国政府谈判更好的LaSLA交易的能力至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Justice and Fairness for Mkangawalo People: The Case of the Kilombero Large-scale Land Acquisition (LaSLA) Project in Tanzania
ABSTRACT Large-scale land acquisitions (LaSLA), otherwise ‘land grabbing’ in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), raise difficult normative questions the current literature does not sufficiently explore. LaSLA is associated with development opportunities; however, it also threatens the well-being of local people because of displacement and dispossession. To investigate the processes and outcomes for LaSLA to be considered as ‘just and fair,’ we evaluate the impacts of a LaSLA project on local livelihoods in Tanzania. Specifically, we apply John Rawls’ Theory of Justice to the project and compare the results with empirical insights gained from our fieldwork. We find that LaSLA has the potential to improve the living standards of local people, we cannot consider LaSLA as just and fair because it contradicts Rawls’s principles of justice and deteriorates the livelihoods of local people. Our findings suggest that it is critical to scrutinize LaSLA investments, involve local people in decision-making, and build the capacity of host governments to negotiate better LaSLA deals.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ethics Policy & Environment
Ethics Policy & Environment ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
10.00%
发文量
32
期刊最新文献
Revising the Keystone Species Concept for Conservation: Value Neutrality and Non-Nativeness Why Conceptions of Scale Matter to Artificity Arguments in SRM Ethics Animal Dignity: Philosophical Reflections on Non-Human Existence Justice and Sustainability Tensions in Agriculture: Wicked Problems in the Case of Dutch Manure Policy Covert Moral Enhancement: Are Dirty Hands Needed to Save the Planet?
×
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