Participatory Action Research (PAR) in cultural sensitivity and indigenous

wisdom:Land Boundary Conflict in Two Indigenous Communities,

Ratanakiri

Regional Land Forum “Bringing Land Governance into ASEAN economic integration”

Venue: Centre for Women’s Development, 20 Thuy Khue, Tay Ho, Hanoi, Vietnam.

Presented by Keo BoraAnalyzing Development Issues Centre (ADIC)

Contexts Development policies spurred changes over the past decade

positively and negatively on local communities.

On a positive side: better road networks, market integration, material consumption, etc.

On the negative side:• Land conflict as a result of ownership claims, opportunity for land

grabbing• ELCs have taken over large tracks of indigenous land for growing

palm oil, coffee and cashew nuts. In the early 2000s they started planting rubber and teak, and engaged in gem mining.

Indigenous Governance System Traditional customary law practiced is based on consensus. “Adhoc tribunals”

can be established in a community, and the process may be flexible and actors may depend on a case by case basis.

Allowing communities to manage their internal affairs including the management of their land and forest areas would be a sustainable solution.

In recognizing traditional law and governance, it opens up opportunity to protect existing justice which strengthens solidarity and friendship, and in turn strengthens their culture, identity and confidence to deal with their own problems.

The informal cooperation also occurs between the local level state and traditional authorities. For example, cases are brought to different level of government structure ranging from village level and upwards.

Source: Jeremy Ironside (2010), The Outbreak of Peace: Communal Land Management and Traditional Governance in a Remote Cambodian Province

Focus of PAR Approach and Objective

Land boundary conflict between two villages of Peak in Yatung commune and Plong in Pater commune, Oyadav district, Ratanakiri Province emerged since 2007 when land price increased.

Engaging and mobilizing communities to deal with this issue by themselves.

PAR proceeds with repeated cycles. Start with identification of major issues, concerns, and problems, initiate

research, originate action, learn about this action and proceed to new research and action cycle.

Co-researcher is the community members

Participatory Action Research (PAR) in practice- Since January 2013, the ADIC staff

stay in the community permanently and learning from them through listening their story/issue and observation.

- Go to the flow of community (Existing activities, community schedule and agenda, go to everywhere they are doing)

- Critical thinking and analysis through asking questions (Social Investigation)

Target Areas and People We Work With 23 indigenous ethnicities in Cambodia, and belong to 455

communities in 13 of all provinces. Ratanakiri provinces, about 179,000 or about 1.34 per cent of

the national population. Indigenous communities are culturally connected to their land

and depend on it for their livelihoods. The areas are attractive to economic land concessions.

ADIC focused an effort in Peak village of Yatung & Plong village of Pater, Oyadav district, Ratanakiri.

History of the Conflict Peak and Plong village is next to each

other in different commune.

For a long time they have never had the conflict but strong solidarity as they are from the same tribe, Jarai

They have made their living through shifting cultivation and depend on NTFPs. Land and forest were used together regardless of boundary.

History of the ConflictThe solidarity of these villages was broken due to the conflict happened since 2000.

It was required to have commune administrative boundary with clear pole mark for management.

The price of land increased

Market integration - the people started to compete instead of interested in common benefit and solidarity.

Reflect on the Previous Action ADIC started to work in that area since 2013 and collaborated

with Indigenous Community Support Organization (ICSO) focusing communal land titling (CLT) but it has not moved forward because of pending conflict

In 2013, representatives from the two villages negotiated many times but were not successful: Lack of facilitation during community negotiation (from different tribe) The people were not ready for negotiation The negotiation team members were not the right representative Anger burst out and the situation of the conflict deteriorated

Reflect on the Previous Action (Con’t)

Staff did not well understand about these both parties, eg. Seeing their silence but not agree

Pushing without being aware of the limit ability and capacity of stakeholders to facilitate and decide

The field staff of both NGOs were not from the same tribe of the community, make different interpretation, miscommunication

They work with and work separately by the target zone.

New Strategy and Process In the mid of 2014, ADIC changed its

approach, having new Jarai staff with the same tribe

Stayed permanently in these both villages, building relationship and trust.

Learn and went in-depth into this issue, understand the whole story as the chronic issue

Collaborated with other NGOs working in that Community

New Strategy and process… (con’t) Going by the flow of the community life (agenda,

objective, schedule)

Assist and facilitate the community to reach solutions for the emerging issue

Discuss and analysis on the root-cause of the issue and real needs, mapping out the stakeholders, potential person

Meet one by one of all the mapped stakeholders

.

The Findings from meeting discussion The concern and clues from stakeholders

The type of conflict was like a psychology issue (the relatives or siblings)

These two villages already have the elders and the committee of the land management.

The important role of elders to keep the village in peace and solidarity is often replaced by the political structure and was forgotten by outsiders

The affected families showed good wills for solution and they ready to make concession.

The local authority ready to facilitate when the community agree to go to the table of negotiation.

The Results from the Actions Many times of meetings at village,

commune, and district level

On May 7-8, 2015, the official meeting at the district office, with the evidences and witness, yielded a successful output.

Tensions during the negotiate were reduce by the skilful Jarai facilitator through different time with both to discuss about potential options.

After the Solution The agreement was done in paper

but the ground work of boundary pole demarcation is somewhat initially problematic.

Facilitate these two villages to identify their own areas of land, concession to each other and flexible adjustment on commune map for GPS position

The conflict resolution of this has domino effect, other village boundary issues in the communes was also resolved after that.

Conclusion The boundary conflict was finally resolved

only after the trust have been built, constant informal engagement and discussion, using the same dialect of indigenous Jarai.

Well understand the community’s perceptions, community based strategy, influential people, right people of the conflict

The concession toward each other when they realized that the unity amongst their tribal groups could bring synergistic impact on another bigger issue of corporate mining at hand

Lesson Learned Learning by doing process, then make

adjustment and having new strategy is key in PAR.

PAR approach, moving away from the conventional way or extractive research process to following the daily activities or lives of people.

PAR with high sensitivity to local culture, take off all the pressures of time and demand for participation, the natural flow of community interaction and thoughts

Community invite

(Focus on their

agenda)

NGO invites

(Focus on our

agenda)

Thanks for your attention!