Search results

ABSTRACTThe transnational agrarian movements (TAMs) which have emerged in recent decades have been actively engaged in the politics and policies of international (rural) development. Intergovernmental and non‐governmental development agencies have welcomed and supported TAMs in the context of promoting international 'partnerships for development'. The analysis in this article revolves around the politics of TAM representation, intermediation and mobilization around the issue of land. It focuses on La Vía Campesina in relation to three other coalitions: the International Federation of Agricultural Producers, IPC for Food Sovereignty and International Land Coalition. It is argued here that 'people linked to the land' are socially differentiated and thus have varied experiences of neoliberal globalization. Their social movements and organizations are just as differentiated, ideologically, politically and institutionally. This differentiation is internalized within and between TAMs, and partly shapes TAMs' political agendas and strategies in their interaction with international development institutions.

The conventional view in the land reform literature does not consider distribution of 'public' lands to landless and near-landless peasants as redistributive land reform. Questioning the (formal) private property bias in land reform theory and practice, this paper rethinks some fundamental concepts and re-examines actual distribution in public lands in the Philippines. It concludes that redistributive reform can, in fact, occur in this type of land and the political process through which this outcome can be achieved could be highly contentious.

AbstractMost policy analyses, especially those on land reform, focus on issues and data that are within the official policy scope. This 'policy scope‐centered' approach has led to only partial understanding of policy choices, implementation and outcomes. A more complete, and so more powerful, analysis requires the inclusion of issues and data that are excluded from the policy scope. This paper is a preliminary inquiry into the inclusion–exclusion question in the official scope of Philippine land reform policy. It is an initial attempt to raise new questions for further research, and suggests a different strategy for approaching land reform data. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.