Identifying stakeholders in the land use management process and related critical factors in ASEAN

• Main Author: Tulus Tambunan
• Other Authors: S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies
• Format: Working Paper
• Language: English
• Published: 2016
• Subjects: Non-Traditional Security; Southeast Asia and ASEAN
• Online Access: https://hdl.handle.net/10356/84020; http://hdl.handle.net/10220/41547
• Institution: Nanyang Technological University

With growing populations and demand for food, farmers in ASEAN member states (except Singapore) are required to produce more and more food from land that continues to decline due to population growth, industrialisation and urbanisation. Consequently, land conflicts – disagreements and disputes over access to, control and use of land or natural resources – have emerged. Among the many causes of land conflicts, one is that many people or parties/organisations impacted directly or indirectly by land (or legitimate stakeholders) are not involved in land use decisions and management. Involving all people impacted by land is an effective (if not the best) way to reduce the risk of land conflicts, resulting in good Land Use Management (LUM). This is, however, easier said than done. This study adopted a stakeholder analysis approach, aiming to identify: (i) the main stakeholders directly and indirectly impacted by land, who have actual or potential influence on LUM; and, (ii) the critical factors determining smooth coordination and cooperation among stakeholders in ASEAN member states. Country cases found that, at the macro (aggregate) level, there are three key stakeholders in LUM – government (departments or agencies), companies and community (individuals or households, including other villagers with different natural needs of land). At the micro (disaggregate) level, there can be a large number of stakeholders. Sustainable LUM acts in a multilevel governance structure between an operational project level and a strategic level of rural/regional/national economic development management, which means dissolving the often-occurring conflict between short-term and long-term orientation within the planning process. However, in reality, practices and results were different among the countries studied for various reasons. The form and intensity of conflicts varied widely by place, and over time within any community. Conflicts manifested themselves in many ways, ranging from breaking rules to acts of sabotage and violence.