Sweet and bitter: trajectories of sugar cane investments in Northern Luzon, the Philippines, and Aceh, Indonesia, 2006-13

This chapter aims to understand the complex process of investment and land deal making through the in-depth study of three cases of sugar cane investment in the Philippines and Indonesia. It focuses on three different trajectories of sugar cane schemes—one in northern Luzon, the Philippines, and two in Aceh, Indonesia. By means of a processual approach, the chapter identifies critical junctures—defined as crucial moments of dealmaking and interactions in which relations among actors are renegotiated—at which the investments took decisive turns. These are the collaboration of investors and bureaucratic cooperation between different levels of government; control of the development agenda; land deal making and control over land; control of labour; and curbing resistance. The chapter thus shows that investments in sugar cane and bioethanol—which often involve land deals—usually turn out differently than originally envisaged. Implementation problems arise due to the competing strategies and interests of investors, government departments, workers, landowners, and brokers, and due to specific historical and institutional constellations. Therefore, it can be argued that the implementation of investment schemes cannot simply be understood as the implementation of a contract or an already-planned programme; it should rather be understood as a constant process of negotiation and adaptation. In such a context, the identification of critical junctures is crucial for the conduct of monitoring activities and the adoption of adaptive policies during land deal processes

Smallholder bargaining power in large-scale land deals: a relational perspective

What capacity do smallholders have to influence key decisions in large-scale land deals to their own advantage, in particular in their own localities? Though the cards are stacked against them, micro processes on the ground show great variations. We put the magnifying glass on local power dynamics to explore both opportunities and constraints to the bargaining power of smallholders as they resist land deals or struggle for (better terms of) inclusion. We propose a relational perspective, in the sense that we focus on the social relations through which smallholders may ‘produce’ power, access power resources and profit from leverage vis-à-vis investors – constrained by wider power configurations. Drawing on our research in Indonesia and the Philippines augmented with other case studies on Southeast Asia, we highlight (1) relations of interdependency with investors; (2) ‘horizontal’ relations of shared interests and identity; (3) tactical relations with state officials; (4) relations with specialists in violence; and (5) relations with supra-local civil society groups. Explorative in nature, this contribution suggests an analytical lens to study sources of smallholder bargaining power and vulnerability in large-scale land deals

Smallholder bargaining power in large-scale land deals: a relational perspective

What capacity do smallholders have to influence key decisions in large-scale land deals to their own advantage, in particular in their own localities? Though the cards are stacked against them, micro processes on the ground show great variations. We put the magnifying glass on local power dynamics to explore both opportunities and constraints to the bargaining power of smallholders as they resist land deals or struggle for (better terms of) inclusion. We propose a relational perspective, in the sense that we focus on the social relations through which smallholders may ‘produce’ power, access power resources and profit from leverage vis-à-vis investors – constrained by wider power configurations. Drawing on our research in Indonesia and the Philippines augmented with other case studies on Southeast Asia, we highlight (1) relations of interdependency with investors; (2) ‘horizontal’ relations of shared interests and identity; (3) tactical relations with state officials; (4) relations with specialists in violence; and (5) relations with supra-local civil society groups. Explorative in nature, this contribution suggests an analytical lens to study sources of smallholder bargaining power and vulnerability in large-scale land deals