TY - JOUR
T1 - ‘Sustainability of what, for whom? A critical analysis of Chinese development induced displacement and resettlement (DIDR) programs
AU - Xu, Hongzhang
AU - Pittock, Jamie
AU - Daniell, Katherine
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 Elsevier Ltd
PY - 2022/4
Y1 - 2022/4
N2 - Most studies and influential agencies propose a shift to sustainability thinking and regard it as an important means of coordinating economic, social and environmental development. However, much less research focusses on conflicts over resources, the issue of asymmetrical power, and value-and-cultural conflicts behind the trajectories of sustainable development. For countries speeding up transitions such as China, it can be asked how and why might accelerating sustainability transitions through resettlement become a new utopia or a poverty trap? To examine the significance of this question for sustainability, we explore three development-induced displacement and resettlement (DIDR) programs in China: dam-induced resettlement, poverty-alleviation oriented relocation (including ecological migration) and agglomeration of villages. This research examines normative issues of Chinese policies for sustainability. We find that building sustainability via DIDR will not be as easy as projected and could lead to new poverty traps that disadvantage some groups of people, such as resettlees. We highlight three themes, the change of resettlees’ financial conditions, land access and local governance, to explore how competition is skewed between resettlees and local governments while speeding up to pursue more ambitious goals. We find that with the increased pace of implementation of quick sustainability policies that power lies with local governments to the detriment of resettlees. DIDR can become a just governance tool to build sustainability, but only if there is sufficient agreement among all stakeholders on a transparent, accountable and collaborative approach. Without inclusion and equality in transitions, potential risks and challenges can eclipse sustainable development.
AB - Most studies and influential agencies propose a shift to sustainability thinking and regard it as an important means of coordinating economic, social and environmental development. However, much less research focusses on conflicts over resources, the issue of asymmetrical power, and value-and-cultural conflicts behind the trajectories of sustainable development. For countries speeding up transitions such as China, it can be asked how and why might accelerating sustainability transitions through resettlement become a new utopia or a poverty trap? To examine the significance of this question for sustainability, we explore three development-induced displacement and resettlement (DIDR) programs in China: dam-induced resettlement, poverty-alleviation oriented relocation (including ecological migration) and agglomeration of villages. This research examines normative issues of Chinese policies for sustainability. We find that building sustainability via DIDR will not be as easy as projected and could lead to new poverty traps that disadvantage some groups of people, such as resettlees. We highlight three themes, the change of resettlees’ financial conditions, land access and local governance, to explore how competition is skewed between resettlees and local governments while speeding up to pursue more ambitious goals. We find that with the increased pace of implementation of quick sustainability policies that power lies with local governments to the detriment of resettlees. DIDR can become a just governance tool to build sustainability, but only if there is sufficient agreement among all stakeholders on a transparent, accountable and collaborative approach. Without inclusion and equality in transitions, potential risks and challenges can eclipse sustainable development.
KW - Dam
KW - Development-induced displacement and resettlement
KW - Eco-civilization
KW - Environmental governance
KW - Poverty alleviation
KW - Rural development
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85124597098&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106043
DO - 10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106043
M3 - Article
SN - 0264-8377
VL - 115
JO - Land Use Policy
JF - Land Use Policy
M1 - 106043
ER -