Progress in Human Geography

Towards a critical geography of resettlement

Journal: Progress in Human Geography

Manuscript ID PiHG-2017-0133.R2

Manuscript Type: Submitted Paper

Forgovernmentality, Peer forced Review migration, development-induced displacement, Keywords: subjectification, territorial practices

Resettlement is a governmental program with inherent spatial effects in that it drives the rearrangement of capital, labour, and land, and seeks to render people and space more governable. This article examines the extent to which this disruptive phenomenon has been theorised. We first review the existing literature, finding a distinct polarisation between Abstract: mainstream studies and more critical scholarship. We then propose a critical geography of resettlement centred on its multiple logics, agents and expertise, and subject-making and spatial practices. An invigorated critical geography of resettlement is needed to challenge the legitimisation of an expanding resettlement industry.

http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Page 1 of 43 Progress in Human Geography

1 2 3 Towards a critical geography of resettlement 4 5 Abstract 6 7 8 9 Resettlement is a governmental program with inherent spatial effects in that it drives the 10 11 rearrangement of capital, labour, and land, and seeks to render people and space more 12 13 governable. This article examines the extent to which this disruptive phenomenon has been 14 15 theorised. We first review the existing literature, finding a distinct polarisation between 16 17 18 mainstream studies and more critical scholarship. We then propose a critical geography of 19 20 resettlement centred on its multiple logics, agents and expertise, and subject-making and 21 For Peer Review 22 spatial practices. An invigorated critical geography of resettlement is needed to challenge the 23 24 25 legitimisation of an expanding resettlement industry. 26 27 28 I Introduction 29 30 31 The World Bank describes resettlement1 as “the process by which those adversely affected 32 33 [by development projects] are assisted in their efforts to improve, or at least restore, their 34 35 36 incomes and living standards” (World Bank, 2015). Resettlement is a distinctive form of 37 38 mobility in that why, where, and how people move are determined by authorities ahead of 39 40 displacement. The degree of external planning, preparation, and investment distinguishes 41 42 resettlement from reactive movements in response to disasters or conflict, or more self- 43 44 45 directed forms of mobility in response to slow onset economic and environmental change. 46 47 48 While a near-universal phenomenon, resettlement is more prevalent in the Global South, and 49 50 has occurred most often as a result of large dams and other infrastructure projects. Indeed, it 51 52 is large dam projects like Ghana’s Akosombo Dam, Egypt’s Aswan Dam and China’s Three 53 54 55 Gorges Dam that have shaped enduring images and understandings of resettlement. And it is 56 57 in response to such hydropower projects that the World Bank developed the first guidelines 58 59 and standards for involuntary resettlement. No reliable figures exist to indicate the scale of 60

1 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Progress in Human Geography Page 2 of 43

1 2 3 global resettlements: the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre is currently collating 4 5 6 figures to provide an up-to-date estimate of global resettlements, but until released, one 7 8 estimate is about 20 million people annually (Cernea and Maldonado, 2018). We posit that 9 10 one of the reasons for this lack of clarity is that the practice of resettlement has expanded well 11 12 beyond dams and well beyond World Bank-related projects; and as such, a re-evaluation of 13 14 15 the nature of contemporary resettlement is timely. 16 17 18 Resettlement now occurs for conservation purposes, for poverty alleviation, to facilitate 19 20 urban expansion, and in response to climate change impacts. China, for instance, is resettling 21 For Peer Review 22 23 2.4 million people in just one province (Shaanxi) under a poverty and environmental 24 25 protection project between 2011 and 2020 (SNWTP Construction Committee Office, 2015). 26 27 Unlike other forms of internal displacement, therefore, resettlement is not only an unfortunate 28 29 by-product of an event or project, but has become a development project in its own right. The 30 31 32 question of how resettlement has come to be normalised in this way provides much of the 33 34 motivation for this article. 35 36 37 For decades the World Bank has shaped resettlement praxis in various donor and recipient 38 39 countries. Its first resettlement policy was released in 1980, recognising the disastrous 40 41 42 impacts of projects it had funded on those displaced (for instance the violence of Guatemala’s 43 44 Chixoy Dam resettlements - (Clark, 1997)). This policy and subsequent iterations2 have been 45 46 hugely influential in defining social and environmental safeguards for resettlement projects 47 48 49 with the aim of better protecting those displaced (Cernea, 1993; Cernea, 2016; Vandergeest et 50 51 al., 2007). However, the first principle of the original policy – that involuntary resettlement 52 53 should be avoided wherever feasible – does not seem to have had the effect of curtailing 54 55 56 resettlement. In recent decades resettlement projects and the justifications for them have only 57 58 proliferated. In what follows we argue that a central driver is the extensive use of resettlement 59 60 in China as a development project in its own right, and the growing prominence of China as a

2 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Page 3 of 43 Progress in Human Geography

1 2 3 source of resettlement knowledge and expertise. Another driver is the accelerating impacts of 4 5 6 climate change, and the ongoing legitimisation of resettlement in academic and policy 7 8 discourse as an adaptation strategy for certain places in the Global South (see for example de 9 10 Sherbinin et al. 2011; Hino et al. 2017). 11 12 13 On this shifting ground, there is a need to revisit the conceptual roots of resettlement to 14 15 16 understand the ideas and practices on which its expansion and legitimisation rest. The 17 18 considerable body of literature that examines resettlement is yet to be systematically 19 20 reviewed to consider its theoretical reach. In this article we address this gap and advance 21 For Peer Review 22 23 critical scholarship on resettlement through two key contributions. Firstly, we review the 24 25 literature3 and outline three primary approaches to understanding resettlement: a state 26 27 planning or mainstream approach, and two critical approaches – political-economic and 28 29 Foucauldian. We argue that a mainstream lens has extensively documented the impacts of 30 31 32 resettlement and led to better policies and practice, but is less able to explain the 33 34 normalisation of resettlement as a development project in its own right. Critical scholarship, 35 36 on the other hand, which delves into questions of resettlement’s temporal and spatial 37 38 39 complexity, its subjectivities, and the actors, interests or technologies of government that 40 41 coalesce around resettlement projects, provides a foundation for a critical geography of 42 43 resettlement that can both document and challenge this normalisation. While we broadly 44 45 46 categorise this scholarship into either (Marxist) political-economic or Foucauldian 47 48 approaches based on the main focus of the particular studies in question, we recognise that 49 50 these are not mutually exclusive categories, and further, that many studies are also informed 51 52 by political ecology. 53 54 55 56 Secondly, we provide a synthesis of this critical scholarship with the aim of constructing a 57 58 critical geography of resettlement that will drive forward our understanding of this disruptive 59 60 phenomenon. Within the two strands of critical literature, the multiple sites where they

3 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Progress in Human Geography Page 4 of 43

1 2 3 intersect, and their omissions, we find the building blocks for a critical geography of 4 5 6 resettlement, one that explains not just how resettlement happens, but also why it happens. 7 8 Expanding on these building blocks we outline a critical geography of resettlement that 9 10 centres on the multiple logics of resettlement, its agents and expertise, and its subject-making 11 12 and spatial practices. We argue that a distinct critical geography of resettlement is needed 13 14 15 because 1) the logics of resettlement continue to multiply and have been inadequately 16 17 interrogated; 2) the production of knowledge and expertise about resettlement is in flux, 18 19 which critical development literature is yet to account for; and 3) the spatial practices of 20 21 For Peer Review 22 resettlement have been insufficiently theorised. To advance such a critical geography we 23 24 redefine resettlement as a governmental program with multiple logics, one that seeks to 25 26 render people and space more governable. 27 28 29 II Review 30 31 32 33 Before delving into key studies in mainstream approaches, it is important to give a sense of 34 35 the breadth of the resettlement literature and its current concerns. To very briefly summarise 36 37 its reach, this scholarship has centred on specific projects in India (Parasuraman, 1999; Jain 38 39 and Bala, 2006; Mathur, 2013), Southeast Asia, particularly upland resettlements in Laos 40 41 42 (Evrard and Goudineau, 2004; Blake and Barney, 2018; Sims, 2017; Baird and Shoemaker, 43 44 2008), Latin America (Escobar, 2003; Hanna et al., 2016), and China (see below). There is a 45 46 smaller subset of literature on resettlement in the Global North, beginning with an early 47 48 49 account of rural communities relocated off marginal land in the United States (Wehrwein, 50 51 1937), but more commonly focused on the dispossession and forced removal of Indigenous 52 53 people in settler states (see for instance Billson, 1990; Marcus, 1995; van Meijl, 2012; 54 55 56 Windsor and McVey, 2005). 57 58 59 60

4 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Page 5 of 43 Progress in Human Geography

1 2 3 It must be said that case studies of Chinese resettlement projects and their impacts have 4 5 6 proliferated, catalysed by the high-profile Three Gorges Dam resettlements but now 7 8 extending across the country (see Heggelund, 2003; Tan et al., 2005; Tan, 2008; Wilmsen, 9 10 2016; Brown and Xu, 2010; Habich, 2016; Li et al., 2017; Rogers and Wang, 2006; Webber 11 12 and McDonald, 2004; Yan et al., 2016; Bauer, 2015; Du, 2012; Ptackova, 2012; Tan et al., 13 14 15 2013; Wu, 2015; Xue et al., 2013). A number of overviews of China’s resettlement practice 16 17 can be found in Li et al (2001), Shi et al (2012) and Wang and Lo (2015). What our reading 18 19 of these studies highlights is the expanding set of justifications for resettlement, including 20 21 For Peer Review 22 land degradation and deforestation, the sedentarisation of herding communities, water 23 24 pollution control, climate change impacts, and entrenched poverty, and the sheer scale at 25 26 which resettlement occurs, including millions of people in this decade for poverty reduction. 27 28 29 This literature details how over time, China has developed a particular set of institutions, 30 31 policies, finance instruments, and networks of expertise, that allow resettlement projects to be 32 33 implemented at scale and for shifting justifications. 34 35 36 While much of the resettlement literature has focused on dams and to a lesser extent 37 38 39 conservation and poverty-related resettlement, in recent years a body of work has begun to 40 41 coalesce around using planned resettlement as adaptation to climate change, typically 42 43 proposed for small-island states and large deltas in the Global South, or marginal (often 44 45 46 Indigenous) communities in the Global North (Johnson and Krishnamurthy, 2010; Johnson, 47 48 2012; McNamara and Des Combes, 2015; Arnall, 2018; Maldonado and Peterson, 2018). A 49 50 number of studies attempt to draw out principles or lessons from past experience for climate- 51 52 related resettlement (de Sherbinin et al., 2011; Mathur, 2015; Tadgell et al., 2017), but 53 54 55 critiques of past resettlement practice that raise concerns about maladaptation are also 56 57 emerging (Wilmsen and Webber, 2015b; Rogers and Xue, 2015). 58 59 60 1 State planning and mainstream approaches

5 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Progress in Human Geography Page 6 of 43

1 2 3 Within this expansive literature, there is a dominant approach which we describe as a state 4 5 6 planning approach. Developing from early case studies of dam resettlements and their effects, 7 8 this approach is focused on understanding and proposing solutions to the problems caused by 9 10 resettlement (Adu-Aryee, 1993; Bartolomé, 1993; Guggenheim, 1993; Guggenheim and 11 12 Cernea, 1993; McDowell, 1996). In Guggenheim’s (1993: 227) words: “Even the best 13 14 15 planned programs carry with them risks for the people who must move. But adequate 16 17 research, planning and resources can help relocated communities reconstruct and develop”. 18 19 While there is recognition that resettlement involves basic political choices about who gains 20 21 For Peer Review 22 and suffers from development and that it will always remain a “traumatic process” (Cernea, 23 24 1993: 34), the focus of these studies is on reforming policy, legal, and evaluation frameworks 25 26 for better outcomes. 27 28 29 A number of prescriptive resettlement frameworks have been proposed in this vein, the most 30 31 32 influential being Cernea’s Impoverishment Risks and Reconstruction (IRR) model (see 33 34 Cernea, 1996; Cernea, 1997). IRR is described as a tool for guiding action as it “anticipates 35 36 displacement’s major risks, explains the behavioural responses of displaced people, and can 37 38 39 guide the reconstruction of resettlers’ livelihoods” (Cernea, 1997: 1570). There is an 40 41 assumption here that resettlement can be controlled by planners to achieve favourable and 42 43 relatively predictable outcomes. IRR continues to be an influential model, and has been used 44 45 46 in a number of studies to frame the impacts of resettlement (see for instance Tan et al., 2005; 47 48 Rogers and Wang, 2006; Tan et al., 2013). But it has been less useful in explaining the 49 50 uneven nature of these impacts, and, by positioning a homogenous state as in conflict with 51 52 development “victims” (Cernea, 1997: 1576), IRR does not provide a framework for 53 54 55 understanding the workings of power in resettlement projects (see alsoWilmsen et al., 2018). 56 57 58 59 60

6 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Page 7 of 43 Progress in Human Geography

1 2 3 Besides IRR two temporal models have been developed (Downing and Garcia-Downing, 4 5 6 2009; Scudder and Colson, 1982) that account for the socio-cultural responses of resettled 7 8 people to specific phases of the relocation process. We also identify two further mainstream 9 10 approaches: a sustainable livelihoods framing of the impacts of resettlement (see McDowell, 11 12 2002; Tan et al., 2009; Rogers and Xue, 2015; Wilmsen, 2016; Chen et al., 2017; Owen et al., 13 14 15 2018), and a focus on protecting the human rights of resettled people (Barutciski, 2006; 16 17 McDowell and Morell, 2007; Modi, 2009; WCD, 2000). 18 19 20 While many of these studies are critical of resettlement and its impacts, they position the 21 For Peer Review 22 23 resettlement process as knowable, predictable, and manageable as long as there is better 24 25 research, planning, participation, and evaluation through the project cycle. For instance, some 26 27 attribute failure to a lack of an “orderly and uncorrupted passage from policy to 28 29 implementation” (de Wet, 2006: 4), while others argue that better results can be achieved 30 31 32 through greater inclusion and dialogue or strengthened institutional capacity (Gongbo Tashi 33 34 and Foggin, 2012: , 149; Singer et al., 2014; Mathur, 2013). To some extent then, by focusing 35 36 on individual projects and how they can be improved, and not addressing the circumstances 37 38 39 that result in dispossession and displacement in the first place, mainstream approaches help to 40 41 normalise resettlement as a necessary cost of development. Ever more elaborate models are 42 43 developed for accomplishing “good resettlement” (Vandergeest et al., 2007: 25), rather than 44 45 46 understanding it as a process of coercive redistribution (Dwivedi, 2002; Aiken and Leigh, 47 48 2015; Levien, 2017). 49 50 51 2 Political-economic approaches 52 53 54 Resettlement facilitates land dispossession, enables capital accumulation, increases the 55 56 availability of cheap labour, and produces new forms of commodification and consumption. 57 58 59 The true costs of mega-projects are externalised and unfairly borne by local populations. 60

7 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Progress in Human Geography Page 8 of 43

1 2 3 These are the conclusions of the studies outlined below and others that take a political- 4 5 6 economic approach to resettlement such as Chakrabarti and Dhar (2010), Chatterjee (2008), 7 8 Chung (2017), and Sanyal (2007). This is not simply a repurposing of primitive accumulation 9 10 to understand the proliferation of land dispossession through resettlement projects: by being 11 12 attuned to place, to specific arrangements of class, gender, ethnicity, and power, and to 13 14 15 specific technical practices such as compensation, these studies develop a nuanced 16 17 understanding of the capitalist logic driving contemporary resettlement. 18 19 20 In China, for instance, Yeh observes how the urbanisation of Tibetans “fuels capital 21 For Peer Review 22 23 accumulation for coalitions of real estate development companies and local governments” 24 25 (Yeh, 2013: 212). Also in China, Webber (2012) views land dispossession as one of three 26 27 principle means of accumulation in rural areas (the other two being the transformation of 28 29 state and collective enterprises into capital and the voluntary migration of farmers from 30 31 32 agricultural to industrial pursuits), while Chuang (2015) notes the uneven impacts of 33 34 accumulation by dispossession, with some villagers profiting and others losing out. The need 35 36 to drive higher household consumption through resettlement is quite explicit in China: 37 38 39 according to Premier Li Keqiang, every rural resident who moves to the city will consume an 40 41 additional 10,000 RMB per year (Wilmsen, 2017). In Laos, Barney (2009) examines the 42 43 state’s upland resettlements that achieve coercive enclosures and attempt to engineer the 44 45 46 transition of upland Lao communities from swidden to commodified production. In short, 47 48 through resettlement, people and places are made more amenable to incorporation within the 49 50 capitalist economy (Wilmsen and Webber, 2015a). 51 52 53 Political-economic studies also highlight the key role of compensation in furthering the 54 55 56 capitalist logic of resettlement. Compensation may be a package of cash or in-kind provisions 57 58 and increasingly includes post-resettlement infrastructure and livelihood restoration. The 59 60 terms of exchange are based on inventoried and commodified land (and sometimes crop)

8 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Page 9 of 43 Progress in Human Geography

1 2 3 assets. Nielsen and Nilsen (2015: 203) describe such negotiations as a “compromise 4 5 6 equilibrium” between dominant groups with an interest in exploiting spaces of accumulation, 7 8 and subaltern groups whose consent is needed. In Laos, Green and Baird (2016) show how 9 10 compensation facilitates the expansion of capitalist social relations by producing new 11 12 commodified relationships to land, assets, and some natural resources, while simultaneously 13 14 15 decommodifying other resources. Rather than protecting the rights of the displaced, these 16 17 arrangements favour the interests of elites by keeping costs to a minimum, whilst ensuring 18 19 that resettlement is done just well enough so as not to impede construction (Wilmsen and 20 21 For Peer Review 22 Webber, 2015a). 23 24 25 Political-economic approaches also highlight the precursor to dispossession: exclusionary 26 27 politics. In cases of resource extraction resettlements, a resource frontier is produced where it 28 29 30 did not exist before (Barney, 2009). In developmental resettlements those to be resettled 31 32 might first be cast as “backwards” or “lacking”, in need of development intervention. For 33 34 instance, Sargeson (2013: 1063) observes the characterisation of China’s rural residents as 35 36 “institutionally insecure, disorderly, economically under-productive and incompatible with 37 38 39 modernity”. This production of marginality (of people or of space) might begin long before 40 41 displacement is even conceived. Examples of politically-produced difference preceding 42 43 resettlement can be seen in Milgroom and Spierenburg (2008), Ptakova (2012), Feldman and 44 45 46 Geisler (2012), Xun and Bao (2008) and Chatterjee (2014). While the main thread of such 47 48 political-economic studies is how the production of marginal people and peripheral places 49 50 facilitates the expansion of capital, the social and cultural dynamics underlying this 51 52 53 production are also explored, just not in the same terms as the Foucauldian studies outlined 54 55 below. 56 57 58 59 60

9 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Progress in Human Geography Page 10 of 43

1 2 3 What a political economy lens does is expand the gaze beyond a narrow, prescriptive focus 4 5 6 on resettlement as a spatially and temporally bounded event, drawing attention to the key 7 8 drivers and modalities of land dispossession and resettlement. For example, private capital – 9 10 both foreign and domestic – and a reconfigured neoliberal state are identified as the key 11 12 drivers of the Maheshwar hydropower project that displaced some 35,000 people in India 13 14 15 (Nilsen, 2008). In this case, resettlement was induced by processes of privatisation of public 16 17 utilities and liberalisation of the financial sector; resettlement did not begin and end with a 18 19 project. Levien (2017) goes further by tracing changing ‘regimes of dispossession’ in India, 20 21 For Peer Review 22 from state-led projects for industrial and agricultural transformation, to private and 23 24 decreasingly productive investments. He argues that these changing regimes draw variously 25 26 on coercion, material compensation, and normative persuasion to achieve compliance, and 27 28 29 can no longer be adequately explained as primitive accumulation. 30 31 32 We offer two key reflections on this body of work. First, subsumed within categories of class, 33 34 peasant, and marginality, people and the ways in which they respond to resettlement projects 35 36 by forging different futures do not always feature prominently. This is not simply about local 37 38 39 agency in compensation negotiations (see Green and Baird, 2016; Habich, 2016), but about 40 41 how resettled people experience and challenge the rearrangements of labour and the 42 43 commodification of local resources facilitated by resettlement projects. Second, there could 44 45 46 be deeper engagement with the production of space and uneven development through 47 48 resettlement, be that through spatial integration or capital mobility/immobility (Smith, 1984). 49 50 For instance, is resettlement in China’s western provinces a spatial fix for surplus capital, and 51 52 if it is, what kinds of geographical landscapes are being created and what kinds are being 53 54 55 rendered obsolete (Arrighi, 2007)? If at some point labour becomes surplus to capital’s 56 57 requirements, what happens to these people and where do they go (Li, 2010)? In what follows 58 59 we consider the extent to which Foucauldian approaches take up such questions, and return to 60

10 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Page 11 of 43 Progress in Human Geography

1 2 3 them again in the second section of the paper in our discussion of the multiple logics of 4 5 6 resettlement and its spatial practices. 7 8 9 3 Technologies of government and subject-making 10 11 12 The body of work outlined in this section draws on Foucauldian notions of the art of 13 14 government and capillary power to highlight the ways in which resettlement is used as a 15 16 technique to produce particular kinds of subjects and spaces, and the role of discourse in this 17 18 19 subject-making. These studies are significant in that they draw attention to a number of 20 21 elements of resettlement Forpractice thatPeer are largely Review ignored by mainstream studies, and not 22 23 necessarily centred in political-economic studies: how a problem is defined for which 24 25 26 resettlement is the solution (and by whom), and the means through which governable subjects 27 28 and spaces are produced. Similar to political-economic studies, resettlement is not conceived 29 30 of as bounded by a project in time and space. Rather, resettlement is one of many overlapping 31 32 33 and ongoing governmental programs that seek to manage a population, to “arrange things in 34 35 such a way that, through a certain number of means, such and such ends may be achieved” 36 37 (Foucault, 1991: 95). 38 39 40 An early example is Gellert and Lynch (2003) who consider the epistemic communities – 41 42 43 elite groups or groups from state agencies, international lending and donor institutions, and 44 45 the private sector – that shape mega-projects in ways that foster displacement. Central to 46 47 these epistemic communities are ideas of the public good, progress, rationality, and long held 48 49 racial biases, which play a central role in producing displacement. Another key study is from 50 51 52 Yeh (2005), who examines Chinese government grazing bans in western regions as an 53 54 emergent form of green governmentality. These practices are part of a broader definition of 55 56 western China as “a coherent territory characterised by degraded landscapes and 57 58 59 impoverished people” and of the people of western China as “underdeveloped, impoverished 60

11 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Progress in Human Geography Page 12 of 43

1 2 3 and a potential threat to social stability” (Yeh, 2005: 12-13). While there is conflicting data 4 5 6 on the extent and causes of such degradation (see for instance Webber, 2012: on the role of 7 8 the household responsibility system), discourses linking herding communities with 9 10 environmental degradation are used by the Chinese state to justify the large-scale resettlement 11 12 of ethnic minorities. There are also environmental resettlement projects in Han Chinese areas 13 14 15 (see for instance Rogers and Wang, 2006) that similarly attribute environmental degradation 16 17 to the practices of herders and farmers. In these cases, environmental sustainability becomes 18 19 a new technology of government, within which resettlement is one tactic used to shape the 20 21 For Peer Review 22 conduct of marginalised farmers and herders. 23 24 25 The formation of more governable citizens is explored further by Gaerrang (2015: 267), who 26 27 argues that resettlement projects for Tibetan herders in Sichuan produce “new forms of 28 29 subjectivity shaped by market forces, the state’s development agenda and the transformation 30 31 32 of cultural landscapes”. By living settled lives in new houses, shifting from herding to wage 33 34 labour or small business, and becoming consumers, this process of subjectification also lays 35 36 the groundwork for further interventions by the state. Through resettlement, Tibetans become 37 38 39 objects of the state’s efforts to modernise, educate and raise their “quality” (Huatse Gyal, 40 41 2015). In Tibetan areas a distinct concern for social stability is also bound up in this discourse 42 43 of modernity (Nyima, 2010). Thus an economic imperative (accumulation by dispossession) 44 45 46 and subject-making work hand in hand. 47 48 49 It is this small sub-set of studies that has begun to highlight how resettlement produces space. 50 51 Yeh (2013), for instance, describes the urbanisation of Tibetans through resettlement and 52 53 reflects on the spatial techniques and implications of such interventions. This is a process that 54 55 56 “through concentration and spatial rearrangement reshapes the embodied experiences and 57 58 social-spatial practices of everyday life” (Yeh, 2013: 211). The orderliness of the new living 59 60 arrangements “lays down a new grid of legibility and discipline” (Yeh, 2013: 211).

12 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Page 13 of 43 Progress in Human Geography

1 2 3 Resettlement is therefore a process of deterritorialisation tied to a separation from a set of 4 5 6 relations between villagers and their land (such as local deities), and reterritorialisation in that 7 8 newly urban villagers are rendered more governable by the Chinese state. In a Tibetan 9 10 context, it enables an extension of state control over territory (Yeh, 2005). This 11 12 deterritorialisation has also been recognised in Han majority areas: Hsing (2010) argues that 13 14 15 relocation projects deterritorialise by prompting economic deterioration, accelerating social 16 17 disintegration, and opening rifts among villagers. The Foucauldian-inspired literature takes 18 19 up the question of how resettlement produces space to a greater degree than the political 20 21 For Peer Review 22 economy literature, but as we discuss below, there is more work to be done. 23 24 25 Beyond China, Katus and others (2016), while not drawing explicitly on a Foucauldian 26 27 framework, nonetheless view hydropower development in Laos as a technology of power, 28 29 examining local power geometry in the resettlement process, including local elites and more 30 31 32 or less powerful actors within villages. Gransow (2015) also frames social assessment as a 33 34 governmental technology, one that aims to make the social risks of resettlement identifiable, 35 36 predictable and calculable. These authors do not necessarily delve into how these 37 38 39 technologies work, but at least one study does look more intently at the tools and techniques 40 41 that are used to shape the conduct of resettlers: Serje (2015) describes the practices of 42 43 resettlement in Colombia as an initial social diagnosis (classificatory devices used in the 44 45 46 design of resettlement projects), bureaucratic procedures (norms and regulations, validation 47 48 of asset and entitlements etc), and the physical design of new settlements. These practices 49 50 identify, classify, and regulate the everyday lives of people pre- and post-resettlement. Again, 51 52 while this critical scholarship gives us a far greater understanding of how resettlement works 53 54 55 as a technology of government, its somewhat disparate threads need to be drawn together and 56 57 further developed. 58 59 60 4 Review summary

13 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Progress in Human Geography Page 14 of 43

1 2 3 Our reading of the resettlement literature leads us to two conclusions. The first is that there is, 4 5 6 unsurprisingly, a strong polarisation between mainstream studies and more critical 7 8 scholarship. The former is concerned with what happens in the resettlement process (losses, 9 10 compensation, and reconstruction of livelihoods) and on changes to policy and practice that 11 12 will make resettlement projects better. The latter concentrates on the why (logics) and how 13 14 15 (techniques) of resettlement, and in doing so, begins to make sense of the normalisation of 16 17 resettlement. The scale and timeframes also vary. While mainstream scholarship is defined by 18 19 the project boundary and construction timelines, critical scholarship considers multiple scales 20 21 For Peer Review 22 and extended timeframes. The second conclusion is that while overall, two broad and 23 24 sometimes contradictory theoretical traditions frame the critical literature, there are important 25 26 sites of convergence which we expand on below. If we read these two strands as 27 28 29 complementary, in general (recognising that there is great complexity in this empirical and 30 31 theoretical work), the political economy work describes the logic(s) of resettlement (the why 32 33 of resettlement), while the Foucauldian work delves into discourse, subject-making, practices, 34 35 and the production of space (the how of resettlement). 36 37 38 39 40 III Toward a critical geography of resettlement 41 42 43 Having reviewed the existing resettlement literature, both mainstream and critical, this 44 45 46 section discusses what we consider to be the most important sites where the critical literatures 47 48 converge and should be developed further: the multiple logics of resettlement; agents and 49 50 expertise; and subject-making and spatial practices. Through a discussion of these three sites, 51 52 their interconnections, their relevance to key debates among geographers, and some examples 53 54 55 from China, we begin to construct a critical geography of resettlement that challenges the 56 57 normalisation and expansion of resettlement practice that has to some degree been facilitated 58 59 by the steady build-up of mainstream “knowledge about” resettlement. Like Li (2007), we 60

14 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Page 15 of 43 Progress in Human Geography

1 2 3 tolerate the tension introduced by different theoretical traditions because of the tools they 4 5 6 offer to guide a more explicitly geographical research agenda to challenge this legitimisation. 7 8 And while the theoretical traditions that have most shaped the resettlement literature are 9 10 centred, we certainly do not wish to preclude other perspectives. Indeed, it is hoped that the 11 12 three sites – the multiple logics of resettlement, agents and expertise, and subject-making and 13 14 15 spatial practices – open up space for greater dialogue with for instance, feminist political 16 17 ecology, feminist economic geography, mobilities, and postcolonial perspectives. 18 19 20 21 1 The multiple logics ofFor resettlement Peer Review 22 23 24 Ferguson’s (1994) classic analysis of Lesotho reminds us that while development projects 25 26 routinely fail, they do have important effects, political or otherwise, which may reveal a logic 27 28 29 that goes beyond the project’s stated intentions. These side effects “are at one and the same 30 31 time instruments of what “turns out” to be an exercise of power” (Ferguson, 1994: 255). The 32 33 resettlement literature catalogues how resettlement projects routinely fail: they do not 34 35 36 properly compensate those affected; they are unable to engineer the successful re- 37 38 establishment of livelihoods; and they are unable to protect against impoverishment. 39 40 Resettlement is rarely, if ever, a development opportunity: even minimal livelihood 41 42 restoration is not usually achieved several years after displacement (Cernea and Mathur, 43 44 45 2008). So, looking beyond the immediate goals of a particular project, what does resettlement 46 47 actually achieve? 48 49 50 Political economy provides an entry point into a critical geography of resettlement by laying 51 52 bare the underlying capitalist logic of resettlement. While couched in terms of development 53 54 55 and progress, resettlement has been used to facilitate the enclosure of forests, farmland, and 56 57 pastures, to almost completely eliminate herding as a viable livelihood in western China, and 58 59 to proletarianise smallholder farmers. But, as the critical literature clearly shows, it is not 60

15 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Progress in Human Geography Page 16 of 43

1 2 3 enough to simply say “capitalist exploitation”. Resettlement as climate change adaptation 4 5 6 introduces new tropes of security and resilience (Artur and Hilhorst, 2014), extending earlier 7 8 uses of resettlement to protect environments in “crisis”. And dam resettlements do not just 9 10 displace, they also create: as well as hydroelectricity, the role of big dams in building nation 11 12 and modernity has long been recognised (Kaika, 2006). Tropes of social stability, cultural 13 14 15 transformation, environmental fragility, and the modern subject are often overlaid onto and 16 17 complement the logic of capital. In central China, the massive push to end absolute poverty 18 19 by 2020 relies heavily on resettlement, and is rationalised through a discourse of progress, 20 21 For Peer Review 22 and the need to eliminate “backward” thinking and make space for new “professional” 23 24 farmers (a rationalisation by no means unique to China – see Li (2011)). In Laos, clientilist, 25 26 neoliberal, bureaucratic and extractive-accumulation rationalities overlap in upland 27 28 29 resettlements (Barney, 2009). That resettlement often takes place within authoritarian states 30 31 suggests that more attention needs to be paid to how projects can be inflected with socialist 32 33 (or other) mentalities such as mass campaigns, model villages, and Party supervision. 34 35 36 What a focus on the multiple logics of resettlement would do is open up analysis of the many 37 38 39 things that resettlement as a governmental program seeks to achieve, and of the broader 40 41 social, political, and economic processes that shape these objectives. By countering 42 43 mainstream approaches that are bounded by a project, such analyses would help make sense 44 45 46 of the expansion and normalisation of resettlement and bring resettlement studies into closer 47 48 dialogue with key debates in geography. Building on existing work, a critical geography of 49 50 resettlement as a governmental program will amplify questions of capital, uneven 51 52 development, power, and the state in particular places. For instance, China’s extensive use of 53 54 55 resettlement for all manner of social and environmental ills provides fertile ground for 56 57 exploring the (re)production of uneven economic geographies through “socialism with 58 59 Chinese characteristics”. If, as Lim (2014) argues, China pursues neoliberal logics but also 60

16 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Page 17 of 43 Progress in Human Geography

1 2 3 employs massive redistributive mechanisms to ameliorate uneven economic development, 4 5 6 does the practice of resettlement reflect only one or both of these, or perhaps something else? 7 8 In other words, what can resettlement tell us about the nature of Chinese capitalism amid 9 10 enduring socialist logics? 11 12 13 Well outside political economy, another line of inquiry is the effects of the multiple logics of 14 15 16 resettlement on non-human actors. While some of the critical scholarship we have reviewed 17 18 is informed by political ecology and asks questions about environmental practices that are 19 20 marginalised or disallowed by resettlement, non-human actors do not typically feature. 21 For Peer Review 22 23 Poverty resettlement in China, for instance, often takes the form of manufactured 24 25 urbanisation – what Gomersall (2018) calls “the urban ideal” - breaking links between 26 27 people, land, plants, animals, and ecological knowledge, and producing new urban 28 29 environments in which there is limited space made for non-human life. Further, when 30 31 32 resettlement happens in tandem with sedentarisation or agricultural scaling-up, diversified 33 34 smallholder livestock production and seasonal herding are marginalised in favour of 35 36 industrialised meat production. A critical geography of resettlement should encompass how 37 38 39 logics of conservation and poverty alleviation remake human/non-human relations and 40 41 wellbeing. 42 43 44 2 Agents and expertise 45 46 47 48 49 Multiple logics are possible because the practice of resettlement relies not just on the state, 50 51 but on a complex network of agents who engage in knowledge production and whose goals 52 53 become intertwined with those of the state. Building on Levien (2017), these networks are 54 55 56 regimes of dispossession, but much else besides: they develop new resettlement communities, 57 58 they train and provide jobs for resettlers, they mobilise an army of consultants, they produce 59 60 new knowledge on resettlement practice and technologies, and they render this knowledge

17 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Progress in Human Geography Page 18 of 43

1 2 3 mobile. To account for the logics of resettlement, these networks and their objectives need to 4 5 6 be understood. Beyond an acknowledgement that non- or semi-state agents such as property 7 8 developers, construction firms, agribusinesses, and hydropower companies play a role in 9 10 resettlement, the existing literature has not adequately described these agents, their reach, 11 12 their interconnections or the flows of finance between them. 13 14 15 16 We suggest that what is needed is both description of resettlement networks and analysis of 17 18 how resettlement expertise is reproduced through such networks. The agents and networks 19 20 that coalesce around a particular resettlement project will differ depending on the country and 21 For Peer Review 22 23 on the stated goals of the project (dam construction, poverty alleviation, climate adaptation, 24 25 environmental protection). Much like Webber and Han (2017) have done recently for China's 26 27 “Water Machine”, a description of these networks that money, resources, people, and ideas 28 29 would include their composition, their emergence, their maintenance, their links to other 30 31 32 networks, and their effects. Emphasis should be given to the collection of organisations, 33 34 individuals, and indeed practices that move in and out of these networks to produce expertise 35 36 about resettlement. These are the associations that train and socialise consultants and 37 38 39 academics, that then become a community of resettlement practitioners, who shape individual 40 41 projects and the broader norms and tools (models, impact assessment, regulations, monitoring 42 43 and evaluation) that coalesce around resettlement; all of which provide impetus to what is in 44 45 46 effect a resettlement industry. Emerging geographical work on how experts in other fields 47 48 such as climate change adaptation cultivate agendas, authority, projects, and new 49 50 markets (see Keele (2017)) can provide further theoretical and methodological guidance. 51 52 53 While traditionally this industry has been largely housed in and perpetuated by the World 54 55 4 56 Bank and to a lesser extent the Asian Development Bank , China is playing an increasingly 57 58 influential role. Its National Research Center for Resettlement is an intellectual apparatus that 59 60 produces new knowledge, theories, models, and strategies for resettlement, and trains

18 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Page 19 of 43 Progress in Human Geography

1 2 3 graduate students and scholars in resettlement “science”. As a consulting organisation, it is 4 5 6 regularly appointed by the World Bank and Asian Development Bank to design, monitor, and 7 8 evaluate Chinese resettlements (Shi, 2018). Based on China’s extensive practice of 9 10 resettlement, this apparatus promotes “best practice” for resettlement, thus rendering 11 12 resettlement “naturalized, legitimate and durable” (Goldman, 2005: 5). It plays a very active 13 14 15 role in problematisation (how a problem is defined for which resettlement is the solution); 16 17 helping to render alternatives unworkable, undesirable, or just off the map (Li, 2016). As the 18 19 Director of the National Research Center recently wrote: 20 21 For Peer Review 22 The PRC must regard the need to displace people as the propitious opportunity to create the conditions 23 24 for the overall advancement of the uprooted population as well, since lifting people from poverty is the 25 26 ultimate objective of the country’s policies (Shi, 2018: 148) [emphasis added] 27 28 29 By rendering resettlement natural and legitimate it can be more easily taken up in new arenas 30 31 and combined with other forms of expertise, most obviously in depoliticising discourses of 32 33 34 climate change and migration (Kothari, 2005; Barnett and O'Neill, 2012). 35 36 37 By mapping these Chinese networks, the knowledge production they engage in, and the ways 38 39 in which they intersect with and perhaps challenge well documented networks from the 40 41 Global North, resettlement scholarship will intersect with a discussion about the production 42 43 44 of distinctly Chinese models of “big-D” development (Mol, 2011; Yeh and Wharton, 2016; 45 46 Harlan, 2017). As Mawsdley (2017) argues, in the past decade there has been a rupture in the 47 48 North-South axis of international development, which can be traced through material, 49 50 51 ideational, and ontological flows. We might consider that critiques of norms and practices 52 53 within an earlier North-South hierarchy, including of pro-poor politics, participatory 54 55 development, and micro-finance (Hickey, 2009; Green, 2010; Roy, 2010) can be extended to 56 57 58 this new landscape. But we might also argue that quite different questions need to be asked 59 60 about how illiberal, non-Western norms and practices travel. China does resettlement in

19 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Progress in Human Geography Page 20 of 43

1 2 3 particular ways, shaped by Party supervision, collective ownership of farmland, campaign- 4 5 6 style programs, a constricted civil society, and powerful discourses perpetuated by state- 7 8 owned media. The extent to which these norms and practices are made mobile by Chinese 9 10 networks (particularly as China rolls out its infrastructure-heavy Belt and Road Initiative) is 11 12 yet to be documented. 13 14 15 16 3 Subject-making and spatial practices 17 18 19 In the face of a resettlement industry that has a ready solution for so many problems, how do 20 21 those impacted by these projectsFor fare?Peer There areReview a plethora of case studies detailing the costs 22 23 of resettlement and the long-term process of regaining security over one’s livelihood post- 24 25 26 resettlement. There are also examples of outright resistance to resettlement projects, 27 28 particularly in India where farmers have mobilised to defeat imposed projects (Oliver-Smith, 29 30 2010; Nilsen, 2010), and in China’s many stubborn “nail” households (Hess, 2010). And of 31 32 33 course, people desire a better life, so their objectives may overlap considerably with the 34 35 material compensation and normative persuasion offered through particular projects. While 36 37 not wishing to diminish these effects and responses, we argue that a critical geography of 38 39 resettlement must be attuned to how people’s lives become entangled in the transformations 40 41 42 of self and community sought through resettlement as a governmental program. It is through 43 44 resettlement that certain types of subjects are made: small-island inhabitants become climate 45 46 resettlers, herders become sedentarised agriculturalists or urban labourers, smallholder 47 48 49 farmers become wage labourers, people become “project-affected”, and existing communities 50 51 become “host” communities. However, the existing literature does not adequately explain the 52 53 extent to which these transformations are actually achieved: do people come to experience 54 55 56 themselves through these qualities and statuses? What counter expertise – what messiness – 57 58 can be identified? We might turn to existing geographical approaches to green 59 60 governmentality and other critical scholarship on subject-making as guides to how these

20 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Page 21 of 43 Progress in Human Geography

1 2 3 subjectivities manifest in local places in partial, varied ways, with not all people being 4 5 6 incorporated into systems of rule in the same way (Cruikshank, 1999; Rutherford, 2007; 7 8 Dressler, 2014; Forsyth and Walker, 2014; Li, 2016). 9 10 11 In understanding these transformations to be attempts to render subjects and space more 12 13 governable, we might ask two further questions: how does resettlement attempt to normalise 14 15 16 a particular temporality, and how does it attempt to impose a particular spatiality? We 17 18 consider these questions to be at the heart of how governmental practices create and maintain 19 20 disciplinary or prescribed spaces for capitalism’s further extension into people’s everyday 21 For Peer Review 22 23 lives (Prince and Dufty, 2009; Jones and Murphy, 2011; Lasslett, 2015). In China, dispersed 24 25 smallholder farmers are being extensively resettled into high-rise communities and rendered 26 27 landless, and therefore solely reliant on urban wage labour. Resettlement is not necessarily a 28 29 transition from subsistence to capitalist modes of production – most smallholders already 30 31 32 work as temporary labourers in the urban economy – but it does accelerate a transition to the 33 34 rhythms and tasks of wage labour and consumption, removes farmland as a social safety net 35 36 and a source of food, and rearranges labour and capital in space. “Inefficient” smallholders 37 38 39 are expected to become low-saving, high-spending and often highly indebted urban 40 41 consumers, as large-scale farms or agribusinesses appropriate their land. In reality, they 42 43 (particular the elderly) are more likely to become urban residents reliant on transfer payments 44 45 46 to survive (Li, 2010; Wilmsen, 2017). As Marsden (1999) argues, it is through disciplinary 47 48 power (training, establishing rhythms, imposing tasks), that labour is organised into a 49 50 productive force in the interests of capital accumulation. We consider the kind of 51 52 ethnographic work done by Chuang (2015) with dispossessed farmers and their new bosses in 53 54 55 the construction industry to be critical to detailing the temporal changes to labour, 56 57 consumption, and reproduction that occur through resettlement. Training programs offered by 58 59 60

21 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Progress in Human Geography Page 22 of 43

1 2 3 local governments with the aim of preparing resettled farmers for new urban jobs would be a 4 5 6 particularly productive site for delving into such questions of labour and subjectivity. 7 8 9 Vandergeest (2003: 47) argues that “all development projects involve reorganising the 10 11 meaning and control of space”, while Blake and Barney (2018) show how hydropower 12 13 resettlements in Laos discipline and territorialise populations on party-state-defined logics. 14 15 16 Resettlement is a fundamentally spatial project, and yet the literature only incidentally 17 18 examines the spatial practices that enable these interventions and the modalities of power that 19 20 these reflect. We argue that a critical geography of resettlement should be attuned to land as a 21 For Peer Review 22 23 political-economic relation (linked to the changing temporalities and spatialities discussed 24 25 above), but also territory as a political technology (Elden, 2010). In this vein, how does 26 27 resettlement as a governmental program enable territory to be represented, appropriated and 28 29 controlled; how does it enable boundary-making? 30 31 32 33 This is where the physicality of resettlement villages matters: the orderliness identified by 34 35 Yeh (2013) as laying down new grids of legibility, the spatial reordering briefly discussed by 36 37 Blake and Barney (2018), and the logic of site selection. Architecture is not built simply to be 38 39 seen, “but to permit an internal, articulated and detailed control – to render visible those who 40 41 42 are inside it” (Foucault, 1977: 172). Compared to a nomad camp, or a dispersed farming 43 44 village, resettlement villages enable a far greater degree of surveillance and control through 45 46 the circumscription and enclosure of space. Of course people modify or abandon these 47 48 49 spaces, a further rich line of inquiry, and one that must recognise that “resistance” may take 50 51 the form of evasion, subversion, containment, or modification (Oakes, 2016). Nonetheless, 52 53 scaled up to the hundreds (possibly thousands) of such villages China has constructed over 54 55 56 the past decades throughout its inland territories, resettlement can be understood as a central 57 58 tool in mapping, knowing, and controlling the (rural) periphery, and remaking the boundaries 59 60 between rural and urban, and Han majority and ethnic minority space. The selection of sites

22 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Page 23 of 43 Progress in Human Geography

1 2 3 that bring labour closer to centres of industrial production and the consolidation of farmland 4 5 6 for industrialised agriculture following resettlement might also be seen as part of a broader 7 8 project to “optimise” the use of space (Braun, 2000). Resettlement can be understood 9 10 therefore, as a governmental program that rests on territorialising ideas and practices. Future 11 12 scholarship should delve into the different modalities of power (not just coercion, but 13 14 15 seduction, negotiation, persuasion etc) reflected in these territorial practices and the ways in 16 17 which these might be differently constituted in space (Allen, 2004). 18 19 20 IV Conclusion 21 For Peer Review 22 23 In reviewing the literature on resettlement we have found it to be an understandably quite 24 25 26 polarised body of work. On the one hand there are mainstream, state planning approaches that 27 28 have sought to improve the process of resettlement by tracing its implementation, 29 30 documenting and modelling its impacts, and reforming policy. Our intention is not to 31 32 33 diminish this work, which we ourselves have at times contributed to, but to draw attention to 34 35 its blind spots, namely, why and how the practice of resettlement has expanded and 36 37 resettlement has gained legitimacy as a development project in its own right. On the other 38 39 hand is a disparate collection of studies that critique resettlement largely through political- 40 41 42 economic and/or Foucauldian lenses. The purpose of this article has been to synthesise and 43 44 amplify the contributions of this work in order to provide a way forward for a critical 45 46 geography of resettlement. 47 48 49 There is a sense of urgency to this intellectual project. The detrimental impacts of 50 51 52 resettlement have been documented time and time again. The efforts of those in the academy, 53 54 in governments, in development banks, and in consultancy firms to better design and 55 56 implement resettlement so that these impacts are not endlessly reproduced have been 57 58 59 productive – at least most resettlements now include impact assessment, participatory 60

23 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Progress in Human Geography Page 24 of 43

1 2 3 mechanisms, and ongoing monitoring. But these efforts have important unintended effects. 4 5 6 They reduce a profoundly political phenomenon to teleological models and the logic of state 7 8 planning. Further, attempts to render resettlement predictable and a belief (particularly in 9 10 China) that it can be perfected have engendered a resettlement industry that no longer 11 12 positions resettlement as a last resort. The proliferation of training in best practice, the rise of 13 14 15 resettlement “science”, and hasty and possibly maladaptive proposals to resettle communities 16 17 affected by climate change impacts are all providing momentum to an apparatus that 18 19 facilitates land dispossession, impoverishment, and socio-cultural marginalisation. Chinese 20 21 For Peer Review 22 capital is breathing new life into the kinds of mega infrastructure projects that drive large- 23 24 scale resettlement and that traditional donors had begun to step away from. The just- 25 26 announced Mambilla dam project in Nigeria, for instance, to be built by a Chinese 27 28 29 consortium and funded by China’s Export-Import Bank, will require the resettlement of 30 31 100,000 people (Monks, 2017). We suggest that best-practice resettlement might be one of 32 33 the ways in which China is remaking the global Development landscape. 34 35 36 Drawing on existing critical scholarship we understand resettlement to be a governmental 37 38 39 program with multiple logics, one that seeks to render people and space more governable. 40 41 Resettlement projects cannot be perfected because, much like Ferguson’s (1994) anti-politics 42 43 machine, resettlement is an exercise of power that relies on a broad apparatus, reproduces 44 45 46 power relations, and has multiple intended and unintended effects. A critical geography that 47 48 further examines resettlement’s multiple logics, its networks of agents and expertise, and its 49 50 subject-making and spatial practices is needed to both document and contest the expansion of 51 52 this industry. An understanding of why resettlement happens, and how it happens is central to 53 54 55 this undertaking and emerges at the messy intersections of different theoretical traditions. 56 57 58 Notes 59 60

24 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Page 25 of 43 Progress in Human Geography

1 2 3 1 Another commonly used term is ‘development-induced displacement and resettlement’ (DIDR), but 4 throughout this article we use the broader term ‘resettlement’ to highlight that it is not only large development 5 projects that induce this particular kind of mobility, and that ‘displacement’ is an assumed precursor to 6 resettlement. Displacement is always a feature of resettlement even if resettlement does not always follow 7 8 displacement. 9 2 OP 4.30 (1990), OP 4.12 (2001) and most recently the Social and Environmental Framework (Standard 5). 10 11 3 The scope of this review is limited to English-language studies of planned, state-driven resettlements 12 (hydroelectric, environmental, poverty-related etc): we do not consider reactive resettlements (conflict- or 13 14 disaster-induced); nor do we consider other forms of displacement such as temporary internal displacement or 15 the resettlement of refugees. 16 4 17 The IFC’s performance standards and the Equator Principles might also be considered here as extending the 18 reach of the World Bank’s policies to the private sector. 19 20 21 For Peer Review 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

25 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Progress in Human Geography Page 26 of 43

1 2 3 References 4 5 Adu-Aryee VQ. (1993) Resettlement in Ghana: From Akosombo to Kpong. In: Cernea MM 6 7 and Guggenheim SE (eds) Anthropological Approaches to Involuntary Resettlement: 8 Policy, Practice and Theory. Boulder: Westview Press, 133-152. 9 Aiken SR and Leigh CH. (2015) Dams and indigenous peoples in Malaysia: Development, 10 displacement and resettlement. Geografiska Annaler, Series B: Human Geography 11 97: 69-93. 12 Allen J. (2004) The whereabouts of power: Politics, government and space. Geografiska 13 14 Annaler, Series B: Human Geography 86: 19-32. 15 Arnall A. (2018) Resettlement as climate change adaptation: what can be learned from state- 16 led relocation in rural Africa and Asia? Climate and Development: 1-11. 17 Arrighi G. (2007) Adam Smith in Beijing: Lineages of the Twenty-First Century, London and 18 New York: Verso. 19 Artur L and Hilhorst D. (2014) Floods, resettlement and land access and use in the lower 20 Zambezi, Mozambique. Land Use Policy 36: 361-368. 21 For Peer Review 22 Baird I and Shoemaker B. (2008) People, Livelihoods and Development in the Xekong River 23 Basin of Laos, Bangkok: White Lotus Press. 24 Barnett J and O'Neill SJ. (2012) Islands, resettlement and adaptation. Nature Climate Change 25 2: 8-10. 26 Barney K. (2009) Laos and the making of a 'relational' resource frontier. The Geographical 27 Journal 175: 146-159. 28 Bartolomé LJ. (1993) The Yacreta experience with urban resettlement: Some lessons and 29 30 insights. In: Cernea MM and Guggenheim SE (eds) Anthropological Approaches to 31 Involuntary Resettlement: Policy, Practice and Theory. Boulder: Westview Press, 32 109-132. 33 Barutciski M. (2006) International law and development-induced displacement and 34 resettlement. In: de Wet C (ed) Development-Induced Displacement: Problems, 35 Policies and People. New York and London: Berghahn Books, 71-104. 36 Bauer K. (2015) New homes, new lives - the social and economic effects of resettlement on 37 38 Tibetan nomads (Yushu prefecture, Qinghai province, PRC). Nomadic Peoples 19: 39 209-220. 40 Billson JM. (1990) Opportunity or tragedy: The impact of Canadian resettlement policy on 41 Inuit families. American Review of Canadian Studies 20: 187-218. 42 Blake DJH and Barney K. (2018) Structural injustice, slow violence? The political ecology of 43 a “best practice” hydropower dam in Lao PDR. Journal of Contemporary Asia Online 44 45 First: 1-27. 46 Braun B. (2000) Producing vertical territory: Geology and governmentality in late Victorian 47 Canada. Ecumene 7: 7-46. 48 Brown PH and Xu K. (2010) Hydropower development and resettlement policy on China's 49 Nu river. Journal of Contemporary China 19: 777-797. 50 Cernea M. (2016) The state and involuntary resettlement: Reflections on comparing 51 legislation on development-displacement in China and India. In: Padovani E (ed) 52 53 Development-Induced Displacement in India and China: A Comparative Look at the 54 Burdens of Growth. Lanham: Lexington Books. 55 Cernea M and Maldonado J. (2018) Challenging the Prevailing Paradigm of Displacement 56 and Resettlement: Risks, Impoverishment, Legacies, Solutions. Abingdon and New 57 York: Routledge. 58 Cernea M and Mathur HM. (2008) Can Compensation Prevent Impoverishment? Reforming 59 Resettlement Through Investment, Oxford: Oxford University Press. 60

26 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Page 27 of 43 Progress in Human Geography

1 2 3 Cernea MM. (1993) Anthropological and sociological research for policy development on 4 population resettlement. In: Cernea MM and Guggenheim SE (eds) Anthropological 5 6 Approaches to Resettlement: Policy, Practice and Theory. Boulder: Westview Press, 7 13-38. 8 Cernea MM. (1996) Understanding and preventing impoverishment from displacement - 9 reflections on the state of knowledge. In: McDowell C (ed) Understanding 10 Impoverishment: The Consequences of Development-Induced Displacement. 11 Providence and Oxford: Berghahn Books, 13-32. 12 Cernea MM. (1997) The risks and reconstruction model for resettling displaced populations. 13 14 World Development 25: 1569-1587. 15 Chakrabarti A and Dhar AK. (2010) Dislocation and Resettlement in Development: From 16 Third World to the World of the Third, Oxon: Routledge. 17 Chatterjee I. (2014) Displacement, Revolution, and the New Urban Condition, New Delhi: 18 SAGE Publications. 19 Chatterjee P. (2008) Democracy and economic transformation in India. Economic and 20 Political Weekly 43: 53-62. 21 For Peer Review 22 Chen Y, Tan Y and Luo Y. (2017) Post-disaster resettlement and livelihood vulnerability in 23 rural China. Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal 26: 65- 24 78. 25 Chuang J. (2015) Urbanization through dispossession: Survival and stratification in China's 26 new townships. Journal of Peasant Studies 42: 275-294. 27 Chung BY. (2017) Engendering the new enclosures: Development, involuntary resettlement 28 29 and the struggles for social reproduction in coastal Tanzania. Development and 30 Change 48: 98-120. 31 Clark D. (1997) The World Bank and development-induced displacement in South Asia. The 32 Brown Journal of World Affairs 4: 215-231. 33 Cruikshank B. (1999) The Will to Empower: Democratic Citizens and Other Subjects, Ithaca 34 and London: Cornell University Press. 35 de Sherbinin A, Castro M, Gemenne F, et al. (2011) Preparing for resettlement associated 36 37 with climate change. Science 334: 456-457. 38 de Wet C. (2006) Introducing the issues. In: De Wet C (ed) Development-Induced 39 Displacement: Problems, Policies and People. New York and Oxford: Berghahn 40 Books, 1-12. 41 Downing TE and Garcia-Downing C. (2009) Routine and dissonant culture: A theory about 42 the psycho-social-cultural disruptions of involuntary displacement and the ways to 43 44 mitigate them without inflicting even more damage. In: Oliver-Smith A (ed) 45 Development and Dispossession: The Anthropology of Displacement and 46 Resettlement. Santa Fe: School for Advanced Research Press. 47 Dressler W. (2014) Green governmentality and swidden decline on Palawan Island. 48 Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 39: 250-264. 49 Du F. (2012) Ecological resettlement of Tibetan herders in the Sanjiangyuan: A case study in 50 Madoi county of Qinghai. Nomadic Peoples 16: 116-133. 51 52 Dwivedi R. (2002) Models and methods in development–induced displacement. Development 53 & Change 33: 709-732. 54 Elden S. (2010) Land, terrain, territory. Progress in Human Geography 34: 799-817. 55 Escobar A. (2003) Displacement, development, and modernity in the Colombian Pacific. 56 International Social Science Journal 55: 157-167. 57 Evrard O and Goudineau Y. (2004) Planned resettlement, unexpected migrations and cultural 58 trauma in Laos. Development & Change 35: 937-962. 59 60

27 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Progress in Human Geography Page 28 of 43

1 2 3 Feldman S and Geisler C. (2012) Land expropriation and displacement in Bangladesh. 4 Journal of Peasant Studies 39: 971-993. 5 6 Ferguson J. (1994) The Anti-Politics Machine: "Development", Depoliticization and 7 Bureaucratic Power in Lesotho, Minneapolis and London: University of Minnesota 8 Press. 9 Forsyth T and Walker A. (2014) Hidden alliances: Rethinking environmentality and the 10 politics of knowledge in Thailand's campaign for community. Conservation and 11 Society 12: 408-417. 12 Foucault M. (1977) Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, London: Penguin Books. 13 14 Foucault M. (1991) Governmentality. In: Burchell G, Gordon C and Miller P (eds) The 15 Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 16 87-104. 17 Gaerrang. (2015) Housing projects in the nomadic areas of China's eastern Tibetan plateau: 18 representation, market logic, and governmentality. Nomadic Peoples 19: 261-280. 19 Gellert PK and Lynch BD. (2003) Mega-projects as displacements. International Social 20 Science Journal 55: 15-26. 21 For Peer Review 22 Goldman M. (2005) Imperial Nature: The World Bank and Struggles for Social Justice in the 23 Age of Globalization, New Haven and London: Yale University Press. 24 Gomersall K. (2018) Resettlement practice and the pathway to the urban ideal. Geoforum 96: 25 51-60. 26 Gongbo Tashi and Foggin JM. (2012) Resettlement as development and progress? eight years 27 on: Review of emerging social and development impacts of an 'ecological 28 29 resettlement' project in Tibet autonomous region, China. Nomadic Peoples 16: 134- 30 151. 31 Gransow B. (2015) Turning risks into opportunities? Social assessment as governmental 32 technologies. In: Price S and Robinson K (eds) Making a Difference? Social 33 Assessment Policy and Praxis and its Emergence in China. New York: Berghahn 34 Books, 164-184. 35 Green M. (2010) Making development agents: Participation as boundary object in 36 37 international development. The Journal of Development Studies 46: 1240-1263. 38 Green WN and Baird IG. (2016) Capitalizing on compensation: Hydropower resettlement and 39 the commodification and decommodification of nature-society relations in Southern 40 Laos. Annals of the American Association of Geographers 106: 853-873. 41 Guggenheim SE. (1993) Peasants, planners and participation: Resettlement in Mexico. In: 42 Cernea MM and Guggenheim SE (eds) Anthropological Approaches to Involuntary 43 44 Resettlement: Policy, Practice and Theory. Boulder: Westview Press, 201-228. 45 Guggenheim SE and Cernea MM. (1993) Anthropological approaches to involuntary 46 resettlement: Policy, practice and theory. In: Cernea MM and Guggenheim SE (eds) 47 Anthropological Approaches to Resettlement: Policy, Practice and Theory. Boulder: 48 Westview Press, 1-12. 49 Habich S. (2016) Dams, Migration and Authoritarianism: The Local State in Yunnan, 50 London and New York: Routledge. 51 52 Hanna P, Vanclay F, Langdon EJ, et al. (2016) The importance of cultural aspects in impact 53 assessment and project development: Reflections from a case study of a hydroelectric 54 dam in Brazil. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 34: 306-218. 55 Harlan T. (2017) A green development model: Transnational model-making in China's small 56 hydrowpower training programmes. Area Development and Policy Early View: 1-21. 57 Heggelund G. (2003) Environment and Resettlement Politics in China: The Three Gorges 58 Project, Burlington: Ashgate. 59 60

28 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Page 29 of 43 Progress in Human Geography

1 2 3 Hess S. (2010) Nail-houses, land rights, and frames of injustice on China's protest landscape. 4 Asian Survey 50: 908-926. 5 6 Hickey S. (2009) The politics of protecting the poorest: Moving beyond the ‘anti-politics 7 machine’? Political Geography 28: 473-483. 8 Hsing YT. (2010) The Great Urban Transformation: Politics of Land and Property in China, 9 Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10 Huatse Gyal. (2015) The politics of standardising and subordinating subjects: the nomadic 11 settlement project in Tibetan areas of Amdo. Nomadic Peoples 19: 241-260. 12 Jain S and Bala M. (2006) The Economics and Politics of Resettlement in India, Delhi: 13 14 Pearson Education India. 15 Johnson CA. (2012) Governing climate displacement: The ethics and politics of human 16 resettlement. Environmental Politics 21: 308-328. 17 Johnson CA and Krishnamurthy K. (2010) Dealing with displacement: Can “social 18 protection” facilitate long-term adaptation to climate change? Global Environmental 19 Change 20: 648-655. 20 Jones A and Murphy JT. (2011) Theorizing practice in economic geography: Foundations, 21 For Peer Review 22 challenges, and possibilities. Progress in Human Geography 35: 366-392. 23 Kaika M. (2006) Dams as symbols of modernization: The urbanization of nature between 24 geographical imagination and materiality. Annals of the Association of American 25 Geographers 96: 276-301. 26 Katus S, Suhardiman D and Senaratna Sellamutu S. (2016) When local power meets 27 hydropower: Reconceptualizing resettlement along the Nam Gnouang River in Laos. 28 29 Geoforum 72: 6-15. 30 Keele S. (2017) Outsourcing adaptation: Examining the role and influence of consultants in 31 governing climate change adaptation, PhD thesis: Melbourne: University of 32 Melbourne. 33 Kothari U. (2005) Authority and expertise: The professionalisation of international 34 development and the ordering of dissent. Antipode 37: 425-446. 35 Lasslett K. (2015) The state at the heart of capitalism: Marxist theory and Foucault's lectures 36 37 on governmentality. Critical Sociology 41: 641-658. 38 Levien M. (2017) From primitive accumulation to regimes of dispossession: Theses on 39 India's land question. In: D'Costa AP and Chakraborty A (eds) The Land Question in 40 India: State, Dispossession, and Capitalist Transition. Oxford: Oxford University 41 Press. 42 Li C, Li SZ, Feldman MW, et al. (2017) The impact on rural livelihoods and ecosystem 43 44 services of a major relocation and settlement program: A case in Shaanxi, China. 45 Ambio Online First: 1-15. 46 Li HM, Waley P and Rees P. (2001) Reservoir resettlement in China: Past experience and the 47 Three Gorges Dam. Geographical Journal 167: 195-212. 48 Li TM. (2007) The Will to Improve: Governmentality, Development and the Practice of 49 Politics, Durham and London: Duke University Press. 50 Li TM. (2010) To make live or let die? Rural dispossession and the protection of surplus 51 52 populations. Antipode 41: 66-93. 53 Li TM. (2011) Centering labor in the land grab debate. Journal of Peasant Studies 38: 281- 54 298. 55 Li TM. (2016) Governing rural Indonesia: convergence on the project system. Critical Policy 56 Studies 10: 79-94. 57 Lim KF. (2014) 'Socialism with Chinese characteristics': Uneven development, variegated 58 neoliberalization and the dialectical differentiation of state spatiality. Progress in 59 60 Human Geography 38: 221-247.

29 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Progress in Human Geography Page 30 of 43

1 2 3 Maldonado JK and Peterson K. (2018) A community-based model for resettlement: Lessons 4 from coastal Louisiana. In: McLeman R and Gemenne F (eds) Routledge Handbook 5 6 of Environmental Displacement and Migration. London and New York: Routledge, 7 289-299. 8 Marcus AR. (1995) Inuit Relocation Policies in Canada and Other Circumpolar Countries, 9 1925-60: A Report for the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples Final Report 10 Ottowa: Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, Privy Council Office. 11 Marsden R. (1999) The Nature of Capital: Marx after Foucault, London and New York: 12 Routledge. 13 14 Mathur HM. (2013) Displacement and Resettlement in India, Florence: Taylor and Francis. 15 Mathur HM. (2015) Climate change and displacement: Learning from resettlement in the 16 development context. Social Change 45: 118-130. 17 Mawdsley E. (2017) Development geography I: Cooperation, competition and convergence 18 between 'North' and 'South'. Progress in Human Geography 41: 108-117. 19 McDowell C. (1996) Understanding impoverishment: The consequences of development- 20 induced displacement, Providence, RI: Berghahn Books. 21 For Peer Review 22 McDowell C. (2002) Involuntary resettlement, impoverishment risks, and sustainable 23 livelihoods. Australasian Journal of Disaster and Trauma Studies 2. 24 McDowell C and Morell G. (2007) Development and displacement: Institutionalizing 25 responsibility. Development 50: 33-38. 26 McNamara KE and Des Combes HJ. (2015) Planning for community relocations due to 27 climate change in Fiji. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science 6: 315-319. 28 29 Milgroom J and Spierenburg M. (2008) Induced volition: Resettlement from the Limpopo 30 National Park, Mozambique. Journal of Contemporary African Studies 26: 435-448. 31 Modi R. (2009) Introduction: Displacement and resettlement - the global and the local 32 context. In: Modi R (ed) Beyond Relocation: The Imperative of Sustainable 33 Resettlement. New Delhi: SAGE India, xxi-xxx. 34 Mol APJ. (2011) China's ascent and Africa's environment. Global Environmental Change 21: 35 785-794. 36 37 Monks K. (2017) Nigeria announces $5.8 billion deal for record-breaking power project. 38 Available at: http://edition.cnn.com/2017/09/14/africa/nigeria-china- 39 hydropower/index.html. 40 Nielsen KB and Nilsen G. (2015) Law struggles and hegemonic processes in neoliberal India: 41 Gramscian reflections on land acquisition legislation. Globalization 12: 203-216. 42 Nilsen AG. (2008) Political economy, social movements and state power: A Marxian 43 44 perspective on two decades of resistance to the Narmada dam projects. Journal of 45 Historical Sociology 21: 303-330. 46 Nilsen AG. (2010) Dispossession and Resistance in India: The River and the Rage, New 47 York: Routledge. 48 Nyima T. (2010) Development discourses on the Tibetan plateau: Urbanization and 49 expropriation of farmland in Dartsedo. Himalaya 30: 79-90. 50 Oakes T. (2016) Villagizing the city: Turning rural ethnic heritage into urban modernity in 51 52 southwest China. International Journal of Heritage Studies 22: 751-765. 53 Oliver-Smith A. (2010) Defying Displacement: Grassroots Resistance and the Critique of 54 Development, Austin: University of Texas Press. 55 Owen J, Muriuki G and Kemp D. (2018) Livelihoods, Food Security and Mining-Induced 56 Displacement and Resettlement. Brisbane: Centre for Social Responsibility in Mining, 57 University of Queensland. 58 Parasuraman S. (1999) The Development Dilemma, London: MacMillan Press. 59 60

30 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Page 31 of 43 Progress in Human Geography

1 2 3 Prince R and Dufty R. (2009) Assembling the space economy: Governmentality and 4 economic geography. Geography Compass 3: 1744-1756. 5 6 Ptackova J. (2012) Implementation of resettlement programmes amongst pastoralist 7 communities in Eastern Tibet. In: Kreutzmann H (ed) Pastoral Practices in High 8 Asia: Agency of 'Development' Effected by Modernisation, Resettlement and 9 Transformation. Doredrecht, Heidelberg, New York and London: Springer, 217-234. 10 Rogers S and Wang M. (2006) Environmental resettlement and social dis/re-articulation in 11 Inner Mongolia, China. Population and Environment 28: 41-68. 12 Rogers S and Xue T. (2015) Resettlement and climate change vulnerability: Evidence from 13 14 rural China. Global Environmental Change 35: 62-69. 15 Roy A. (2010) Poverty Capital: Microfinance and the Making of Development, New York 16 and London: Routledge. 17 Rutherford S. (2007) Green governmentality: Insights and opportunities in the study of 18 nature's rule. Progress in Human Geography 31: 291-307. 19 Sanyal K. (2007) Rethinking Capitalist Development: Primitive Accumulation, 20 Govermentality, and Post-colonial Capitalism, New Delhi: Routledge. 21 For Peer Review 22 Sargeson S. (2013) Violence as development: Land expropriation and China's urbanization. 23 Journal of Peasant Studies 40: 1063-1085. 24 Scudder T and Colson E. (1982) From welfare to development: A conceptual framework for 25 the analysis of dislocated people. In: Hansen A and Oliver-Smith A (eds) Involuntary 26 Migration and Resettlement. Boulder: Westview Press. 27 Serje M. (2015) Resettlement projects as spaces of exception. Development-Induced 28 29 Displacement and Resettlement: New Perspectives on Persisting Problems. Florence: 30 Taylor and Francis, 111-124. 31 Shi GQ. (2018) Comparing China's and the World Bank's displacement policies over time: 32 The ascent of the 'resettlement with development' paradigm. In: Cernea M and 33 Maldonado J (eds) Challenging the Prevailing Paradigm of Displacement and 34 Resettlement. Abingdon and New York: Routledge. 35 Shi GQ, Zhou J and Yu QN. (2012) Resettlement in China. In: Tortajada C, Altinbilek G and 36 37 Biswas AK (eds) Impacts of Large Dams: A Global Assessment. Berlin: Springer- 38 Verlag, 219-241. 39 Sims K. (2017) Gambling on the future: Casino enclaves, development, and poverty 40 alleviation in Laos. Pacific Affairs 90: 675-699. 41 Singer J, Pham HT and Hoang H. (2014) Broadening stakeholder participation to improve 42 outcomes for dam-forced resettlement in Vietnam. Water Resources and Rural 43 44 Development 4: 85-103. 45 Smith N. (1984) Uneven Development: Nature, Capital, and the Production of Space, 46 London and New York: Verso. 47 SNWTP Construction Committee Office. (2015) “中国环境报：陕南持续发力清水永续 48 北送” (China environment report: Southern Shaanxi continues to generate 49 50 sustainable fresh water to be delivered north). Available at: 51 http://www.nsbd.gov.cn/zx/mtgz/201512/t20151201_406204.html. 52 Tadgell A, Doberstein B and Mortsch L. (2017) Principles for climate-related resettlement of 53 informal settlements in less developed nations: a review of resettlement literature and 54 institutional guidelines. Climate and Development: 1-14. 55 Tan Y. (2008) Resettlement in the Three Gorges Project, Hong Kong: Hong Kong University 56 Press. 57 58 Tan Y, Chen Y and Hugo G. (2009) Displacement and economic consequences of the Three 59 Gorges Project: A case study of resettlers in Sichuan Province. Asian and Pacific 60 Migration Journal 18: 473-496.

31 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Progress in Human Geography Page 32 of 43

1 2 3 Tan Y, Hugo G and Potter L. (2005) Rural women, displacement and the Three Gorges 4 Project. Development and Change 36: 711-734. 5 6 Tan Y, Zuo A and Hugo G. (2013) Environment-related resettlement in China: A case study 7 of the Ganzi Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture in Sichuan Province. Asian and Pacific 8 Migration Journal 22: 77-107. 9 van Meijl T. (2012) Changing property regimes in Māori society: A critical assessment of the 10 settlement process in New Zealand. The Journal of Polynesian Society 121: 181-208. 11 Vandergeest P. (2003) Land to some tillers: Development-induced displacement in Laos. 12 International Social Science Journal 55: 47-56. 13 14 Vandergeest P, Idahosa P and Bose PS. (2007) Development's Displacement: Ecologies, 15 Economies, and Cultures at Risk. Vancouver: UBC Press. 16 Wang M and Lo K. (2015) Displacement and resettlement with Chinese characteristics: An 17 editorial introduction. Geography Research Forum 35: 1-9. 18 WCD. (2000) Dams and development: A new framework for decision-making. Available at: 19 http://www.rivernet.org/general/wcd/wcd_overview_english.pdf. 20 Webber M. (2012) Making Capitalism in Rural China, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar. 21 For Peer Review 22 Webber M and Han X. (2017) Corporations, governments, and socioenvironmental policy in 23 China: China's water machine as assemblage. Annals of the American Association of 24 Geographers ONLINE FIRST: 1-17. 25 Webber M and McDonald B. (2004) Involuntary resettlement, production and income: 26 Evidence from Xiaolangdi, PRC. World Development 32: 673-690. 27 Wehrwein GS. (1937) An appraisal of resettlement Journal of Farm Economics 19: 190-202. 28 29 Wilmsen B. (2016) After the deluge: A longitudinal study of resettlement at the Three Gorges 30 Dam, China. World Development 84: 41-54. 31 Wilmsen B. (2017) Damming China’s rivers to expand its cities: the urban livelihoods of 32 rural people displaced by the Three Gorges Dam. Urban Geography: 1-22. 33 Wilmsen B, Adjartey D and Van Hulten A. (2018) Challenging the risks based model of 34 involuntary resettlement using evidence from the Bui Dam, Ghana. International 35 Journal of Water Resources Development Online First. 36 37 Wilmsen B and Webber M. (2015a) Displacement and resettlement as a mode of capitalist 38 transformation: Evidence from the People's Republic of China. In: Price S and Singer 39 J (eds) Global Implicationis of Develpment, Disasters and Climate Change: 40 Responses to Displacement from Asia Pacific. Oxon: Routledge, 60-73. 41 Wilmsen B and Webber M. (2015b) What can we learn from the practice of development- 42 forced displacement and resettlement for organised resettlements in response to 43 44 climate change? Geoforum 58: 76-85. 45 Windsor JE and McVey JA. (2005) Annihilation of both place and sense of place: The 46 experience of the Cheslatta T'En Canadian First Nation within the context of large- 47 scale environmental projects. Geographical Journal 171: 146-165. 48 World Bank. (2015) Resettlement Fact Sheet. Washington DC: World Bank Group. 49 Wu JP. (2015) Running away is the best? Ecological resettlement of ethnic minorities in 50 Guizhou, China. Geography Research Forum 35: 95-112. 51 52 Xue L, Wang M and Xue T. (2013) 'Voluntary' poverty alleviation resettlement in China. 53 Development and Change 44: 1-22. 54 Xun LL and Bao ZM. (2008) Government, market and households in the ecological 55 relocation process: A sociological analysis of ecological relocation in S banner. Social 56 Sciences in China 29: 113-128. 57 Yan DC, Shi GQ, Hu ZJ, et al. (2016) Resettlement for the Danjiangkou Dam heightening 58 project in China: planning, implementation and effects. International Journal of 59 60 Water Resources Development Online First.

32 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Page 33 of 43 Progress in Human Geography

1 2 3 Yeh ET. (2005) Green governmentality and pastoralism in Western China: 'Converting 4 pastures to grasslands'. Nomadic Peoples 9: 9-29. 5 6 Yeh ET. (2013) Taming Tibet: Landscape Transformation and the Gift of Chinese 7 Development, Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press. 8 Yeh ET and Wharton E. (2016) Going West and Going Out: Discourses, migrants, and 9 models in Chinese development. Eurasian Geography and Economics 57: 286-315. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 For Peer Review 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

33 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg Progress in Human Geography Page 34 of 43

1 2 3 REVIEWER 1 4 First, I find this sentence on page 1 quite strange: We have amended these sentences on Page 2 to clarify our meaning, 5 6 which is as the reviewer states, about resettlement as a development 7 “What now distinguishes resettlement from other forms of forced mobility, project in its own right. 8 therefore, is that it increasingly takes place explicitly for the benefit of affected 9 people. In other words, resettlement can no longer be understood as an 10 unfortunate by-product of development projects, it is a development project.” 11 12 As is, this sentence makes it sound as though the authors adopt a strong pro- 13 resettlement stance in this manuscript, as they see it to the benefit of affected 14 people. I do not think the statement is supportedFor by evidence Peer and it also Review 15 16 contradicts claims made later in the manuscript, such as “Resettlement is 17 rarely, if ever, a development opportunity” (page 9). I wonder of the authors 18 mean to say is that resettlement is not just/only an unfortunate by-product of 19 development projects, but also a development project in its own right? 20 Second, I think the authors have done a better job at justifying why a critical This is an open question that future research will need to address. 21 geography of resettlement is needed, as well as why they elect to focus on While the consolidation of resettlement expertise within China is 22 China, in this version of the manuscript. However, I am left wondering what clear, as we say on page 20, the extent to which these norms and 23 24 “the growing prominence of China as a source of resettlement knowledge and practices are being made mobile is yet to be documented. As the Belt 25 expertise” (page 2) means for the resettlement industry and resettlement and Road Initiative and other south-south cooperation mechanisms 26 practices as a whole? Does the changing geography of resettlement and of progress, this seems a critical question. 27 resettlement expertise matter for how resettlement is practiced globally? 28 Finally, I really like the authors’ statement (borrowed from Li) about tolerating This is a really important point, and something we will continue to 29 the tensions created by using diverse critical theoretical traditions to guide a reflect on. The paper’s intention is to move resettlement theory and 30 renewed research agenda on resettlement (page 8). Yet, in reality, the research practice in a more critical direction and ultimately to advocate for 31 agenda that is being proposed is shaped by certain critical theoretical traditions greater engagement by geographers. Because we have built on the 32 33 but not others. For example, a noticeable absence of feminist or postcolonial strands of exiting literature, there is a focus on certain theoretical 34 perspectives in existing literature on resettlement. as well as the research traditions, but we certainly do not want to foreclose on feminist and 35 agenda being proposed, is evident. The authors might consider speculating on postcolonial perspectives. Any or all of the multiple logics of 36 why this is the case – particularly giving that certain aspects of resettlement resettlement, agents and expertise, and subject-making and spatial 37 (such as the remaking of ‘home’ or dealing with the fallout when social safety practices could be further pursued from these perspectives – and in 38 nets or food sources are removed) are certainly gendered and would benefit some cases, it is essential that they are. 39 from feminist analysis. 40 41 42 43 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Page 35 of 43 Progress in Human Geography

1 2 3 To better reflect our position, we have added the following sentences 4 to Page 15: 5 6 7 “And while the theoretical traditions that have most shaped the 8 resettlement literature are centred, we certainly do not wish to 9 preclude other perspectives. Indeed, it is hoped that the three sites – 10 the multiple logics of resettlement, agents and expertise, and subject- 11 making and spatial practices – open up space for greater dialogue 12 with feminist political ecology, feminist economic geography, 13 mobilities, and postcolonial perspectives in particular.” 14 For PeerREVIEWER Review 3 15 16 General comments 17 The first section of the paper requires some tightening up of the logical We have rewritten the introduction to ensure that our logic and 18 development of the arguments and coherent paragraph structure. I am also intention is absolutely clear. 19 somewhat concerned with the very broad brush in which some of the literature 20 is summarised. Assertions tend to be made in different places that require In terms of our characterisation of the literature we have amended 21 some textual evidence to convince the reader. And the authors need to be this sentence on page 3 to clarify our intent: “While we broadly 22 careful of constructing straw-person arguments (painting the arguments of a 23 categorise this scholarship into either (Marxist) political-economic or 24 scholar in a narrow light in order to construct an alternative position which you Foucauldian approaches based on the main focus of the particular 25 then contribute to). I think Cernea's work in particular is more nuanced than is studies in question, we recognise that these are not mutually 26 portrayed in the paper. although he worked for the World Bank, he was also an exclusive categories, and further, that many studies are also informed 27 early and influential pioneer in this field who participated in debates with by political ecology.” 28 academics and conferences on resettlement. 29 In this revised version we have taken particular care with our 30 characterisations of the literature, particularly in the section on 31 mainstream literature. We have also focused the argument on the 32 33 normalisation of resettlement as a development project in its own 34 right, which the different strands of literature make very different 35 contributions to. On Cernea, our focus is on the IRR model, what it 36 does and does not do; not on Cernea’s entire oeuvre. IRR seeks to 37 manage the detrimental impacts of resettlement and has been 38 dominant in the mainstream literature. See also response below re 39 explaining power, discourse, and uneven impacts. 40 41 42 43 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Progress in Human Geography Page 36 of 43

1 2 3 4 That said, we would also argue that the comment about straw people 5 6 is a little unwarranted. This co-authored manuscript draws on a 7 decade of engagement with the resettlement literature, with specific 8 resettlement projects, experience working as resettlement 9 consultants, engagement with international resettlement networks, 10 and participation in numerous industry and academic conferences. 11 Our reading of the literature is based on this embedded, long-term 12 perspective. 13 The paper tends to get stronger through the second half. I wonder if the We agree that ‘instrumentalist’ is not the right word and 14 identified "instrumental" tradition could simplyFor be called the Peer "state planning" Reviewmisrepresents our reading of the literature. As such, we have referred 15 16 approach? A state planning approach could also be aligned with/connect to the to mainstream literature or state planning approaches. Whether the 17 "Corporate Social Responsibility" approach to governing resettlement. Not main actor in a resettlement project is private or state though, the 18 much is actually said about CSR but in many countries the CSR standards carry models and approaches for understanding resettlement and its 19 an equal or stronger weight than national legislation. Probably something impacts remain the same (and remain distinct from the critical 20 should also be said about global governance standards such as a the Equator literature). 21 Principles and IFC Performance Standards. This also fits with "good governance" 22 standards adopted by major development banks and so forth. There is a Thank you for referring us to the latest work by Owen et al. 2018. We 23 significant amount of scholarship that examines development-induced have included this reference in our discussion of livelihood 24 25 displacement and resettlement according to these standards and mechanisms. approaches which is the focus of this report (see page 7). 26 The authors may wish to pay more attention to the geography-related 27 literature on mining-induced resettlement as well. See for example the work 28 out of the University of Queensland Centre for Social Responsibility in Mining, 29 e.g. Owen et al. "Livelihoods, Food Security and Mining-Induced Displacement 30 and Resettlement". 31 Comments on manuscript 32 33 Do you need to delineate between migration and displacement this early in the Yes, in defining ‘what is resettlement’, this is an important distinction. 34 paper? 35 I’m not sure it makes sense to start listing countries in which large-scale This paragraph has been amended - see pages 1-2 36 resettlement has taken place. It is a near-universal phenomenon 37 Why less and less? A numerical figure for people affected by resettlement This paragraph has been amended for clarification – see page 2. 38 policies is not supposed to provide an insight into the nature or effects of that 39 resettlement. It’s just a number. I think you need to provide a brief insight into 40 41 42 43 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Page 37 of 43 Progress in Human Geography

1 2 3 your argument in this sentence, even though it will be expanded further in the 4 main section. Otherwise, the reader really doesn’t know why you think the 20 5 6 million figure, the World Bank definition, or the ‘spectre’ of dam displacement 7 provides little insight in the nature of contemporary resettlement. 8 Resettlement still occurs in relation to all sorts of objectives and sectors. There This paragraph has been amended – see page 2 9 is still a lot of resettlement for dam projects. 10 Which one? [just one province] Shaanxi – see page 2 11 You have not defined this term [forced mobility] This paragraph has been amended – see page 2 12 This is not new, resettlement was always ostensible for the ‘benefit’ of the These sentences have been amended as per Reviewer 1’s comments 13 14 targeted population. Which government claims that their resettlement policies (see page 2-3) are specifically aimed at harming their citizens?For Peer Review 15 16 I’m not sure of your meaning here. You are arguing that resettlement is now This paragraph has been amended to clarify our meaning – see page 2 17 completely its own driver, and is not in response to some other issue or logic? If 18 so, I would disagree. Resettlement is always forwarded in relation to another 19 “driver”. No government simply goes around randomly resettling people 20 without some sort of justification. 21 There has always been a dearth of precise numbers on resettlement, which is This paragraph has been changed – see page 2 22 23 also partly due to its scope and how to define it. If resettlement is being 24 normalised, who is doing the normalisation and why? 25 In response to what? This sentence has been changed – see page 3 26 You should develop this idea in relation to the scholarly literature on We do develop this idea later in the paper; here it is simply a marker. 27 ‘governable spaces’ 28 Logical flow issue between paragraphs here The introduction has been significantly rewritten. 29 Cite “disastrous” – did the World Bank use that term? This is not the World Bank’s term. See new reference to Chixoy Dam 30 31 resettlements on page 2. 32 True, but logically that just might be because resettlement could not be The introduction has been significantly rewritten. 33 ‘avoided’. Adjust the logical structure of this sentence 34 Are you suggesting that China engages heavily in resettlement without This sentence has been modified for clarity – see page 2 35 justification, and resettlement that could have been avoided? Clarify 36 You need to first logically develop this idea first, before using it as part of your These introductory paragraphs have been significantly rewritten. 37 argument. Right now, this sentence also does not fit with your paragraph topic 38 39 sentence, which started with the World Bank 40 I think you need to provide evidence that this principle has been effectively This sentence has been modified for clarity – see page 2 41 42 43 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Progress in Human Geography Page 38 of 43

1 2 3 lost, not just assert it 4 It can be more or less assumed that an instrumentalist, managerialist approach We have rewritten these sentences so that they explain why this is a 5 6 would not engage with Foucauldian conceptions such as “technologies of problem/limitation (see page 3): 7 government”. More important is to explain why that is a problem or limitation. “We argue that a mainstream lens has extensively documented the 8 impacts of resettlement and led to better policies and practice, but is 9 less able to explain the normalisation of resettlement as a 10 development project in its own right. Critical scholarship, on the other 11 hand, which delves into questions of resettlement’s temporal and 12 spatial complexity, its subjectivities, and the actors, interests or 13 technologies of government that coalesce around resettlement 14 For Peer Reviewprojects, provides a foundation for a critical geography of 15 16 resettlement that can document and challenge this normalisation”. 17 But political ecology itself has its Marxist and Foucauldian traditions, so you Yes, this is what we have done. 18 should still be able to cluster much of the critical literature into these two 19 broad streams. 20 How would that differ from a critical anthropology of resettlement or a critical It differs in its emphasis on resettlement’s spatial practices and 21 sociology of resettlement? because it intersects with the work done largely by geographers on 22 governable subjects and spaces, and uneven development. 23 24 Needs to be upfronted earlier? [production of knowledge and expertise] We have signalled this in the introduction – that China is a key site of 25 the production of resettlement knowledge and expertise. 26 It strikes me that this could also be called the “state planning” model? Also The CSR literature is vast and, although related, we consider it 27 what about CSR and global governance mechanisms such as Equator Principles tangential to this paper. We have included an endnote on the IFC 28 and IFC Performance Standards? There is a lot of scholarly analysis on this performance standards and Equator Principles. 29 angle. 30 Who uses that term [solving]? Provide citation and page # The term has been removed as this sentence has been rewritten, 31 32 though it was used by Guggenheim & Cernea in 1993. 33 [it is assumed] by who? It would be good to cite the specific phrasing that A full quote has been included on page 6. 34 demonstrates that Guggenheim assumed that “adequate research, policy, 35 planning and resources would help resettled communities to reconstruct and 36 develop” 37 I do not think that is an accurate portrayal of Cernea’s perspective. He deals We do not say that Cernea has avoided these issues. We say that “by 38 very closely with issues of power, discourse and uneven impacts. If you want to positioning a homogenous state as in conflict with development 39 assert this point you will need to show where and how Cernea avoids issues of “victims” (Cernea 1997: 1576), IRR does not provide a framework for 40 41 42 43 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Page 39 of 43 Progress in Human Geography

1 2 3 power, discourse and uneven impacts. understanding the workings of power in resettlement projects” (see 4 page 6) 5 6 One might also call some people working in this area “pragmatists”? i.e. people We agree that ‘instrumentalist’ is not the right word and 7 working to improve outcomes while still realising that development-induced misrepresents our reading of the literature. Throughout this section 8 displacement is in most cases harmful and damaging? we have used the terms mainstream or state planning approaches, 9 and have also tried to emphasise that such approaches have achieved 10 certain things, but are limited in their capacity to explain 11 resettlement’s expansion and normalisation. 12 Why in quotes [“problems”] if you are using this term in an ironic fashion, be This sentence has been amended to “the expanding set of 13 explicit about your reasoning justifications for resettlement” (page 5) 14 This variety of drivers does not seem unique toFor China. Can youPeer say anything ReviewWe have expanded on this discussion of China’s resettlement practice 15 16 more substantive about how DID is conceived and handled in China? (see page 5). 17 You are missing a lot from here, including the work of Baird and Shoemaker for See new citation on page 4 – but these paragraphs are a broad 18 example in Laos. delineation of the literature. 19 Also this section is entitled “instrumental approaches”. Do you consider all We have reorganised these paragraphs so that they better reflect our 20 these approaches as in the instrumentalist camp? These papers [Southeast assessment of the literature – first considering its overall 21 Asia[ do not adopt an instrumentalist approach. characteristics, and then delving into mainstream approaches (see 22 23 page 4-7) 24 This paragraph lacks a topic sentence that would tie it together into a coherent These paragraphs have been rewritten for logical flow of argument. 25 idea. Also, it’s not very useful just to list studies. There are thousands of studies 26 so you need to focus on key analytical traditions or streams, and explain who 27 were the key scholars and why they were influential. 28 You will need to support this very broad claim in some way i.e. that the IRR We have clarified our meaning here – that IRR is not a framework for 29 model does not engage with “power”. I note that you do not cite Cernea 2003 understanding the workings of power in resettlement projects. 30 “For a new economics of resettlement” 31 32 How do these models differ from the IRR approach? These models account for “the socio-cultural responses of resettled 33 people to specific phases of the relocation process” (see page 7) 34 Are you suggesting that SL approach is also instrumentalist? SLA is described as a mainstream approach 35 I disagree that all scholar who use a sustainable livelihoods approach seek to This term has been removed 36 create a perfect resettlement policy 37 So anyone who argues for inclusion and dialogue is being instrumentalist? The language in this section has been modified 38 The problem with your very wide brush stroke is that many scholars who you We have reorganised these paragraphs and modified our language 39 40 lump in with the instrumentalist camp would no doubt agree that it is also where needed. 41 42 43 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Progress in Human Geography Page 40 of 43

1 2 3 important to de-normalise resettlement. I think more nuance and care to more 4 accurately reflect people’s ideas and arguments needs to be taken in the above 5 6 section. You also need to provide more textual evidence for your line of 7 argument. 8 What about ethnicity and identity? A big factor displacement in many contexts Agreed, we have added ethnicity 9 I’m not sure it is the strongest analytical move to develop a focus on particular The language in this paragraph has been modified 10 countries here. It makes more sense to understand how scholars using political 11 economy have conceptualised DID in different ways…as opposed to what has 12 happened in say China or India. At least I would not start the discussion using a 13 methodological nationalism. 14 I don’t think Barney 2009 develops a linear perspective.For The paperPeer is called ReviewSee above 15 16 “Laos and the making of a relational resource frontier” which suggests a 17 dialectical, relationship, hybrid perspective not a linear one 18 One can note that fieldwork for this paper is from a remote island in Indonesia, The reference to Li’s study has been removed from this section 19 outside of the main Asian manufacturing production networks. Also, were Li’s 20 informants resettled? Remember the focus for your paper is on resettlement. 21 If it is accumulation without dispossession how does that fit into this paper’s This is an important point – we have moved the Chuang reference into 22 23 focus on geographies of resettlement? the previous paragraph 24 They [Green & Baird] also introduce the idea of de-commodification This sentence has been modified (see page 9) 25 I think the literature is more nuanced than that. In Laos, scholars have focused This is a good point. We have modified the final sentences in this 26 on ethnic relations and upland-lowland relations, and biases against (minority) paragraph (see page 9) 27 upland agricultural practices as a key driver of resettlement. This does not 28 always map onto a neat political economic logic. See Goudineau 2004, Baird 29 and Shoemaker 2007… Hardy “Red Hills” for Vietnam. 30 Very broad assertion that does not apply to many of the papers cited in this The word ‘limitation’ has led to some misunderstanding here – we 31 32 section [production fo space/uneven development] offer two reflections using more nuanced language (see page 10) 33 Interesting that you place Gellert and Lynch in the Foucauldian box, since As we have noted in the introduction, individual papers are broadly 34 Gellert works mostly in political economy and world systems theory. categorised based on their main thrust 35 How do authoritarian practices and institutions in China fit with their It is not within the scope of this paper to properly explain this – there 36 conception of green governmentality? is an extensive literature on Chinese governmentalities. 37 [Katus and others] Note they do not apply an explicitly Foucauldian approach This has been noted on page 13 38 I think to some extent you have created this polarisation? See modified sentences on page 14: “The former is concerned with 39 40 That’s a straw argument [perfecting resettlement] what happens in the resettlement process (losses, compensation, and 41 42 43 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Page 41 of 43 Progress in Human Geography

1 2 3 reconstruction of livelihoods) and on changes to policy and practice 4 that will make resettlement projects better. The latter concentrates 5 6 on the why (logics) and how (techniques) of resettlement, and in 7 doing so, begins to make sense of the normalisation of resettlement” 8 I’m not convinced. Political economy also engages in how questions and This sentence now reads “if we read these two strands as 9 Foucauldian analysis also engages in why questions complementary, in general (recognising that there is great complexity 10 in this empirical and theoretical work)…the political economy work 11 describes the logic(s) of resettlement (the why of resettlement), while 12 13 the Foucauldian work delves into discourse, subject-making, practices, 14 For Peer Reviewand the production of space (the how of resettlement)." (see page 14) 15 16 Of course there are subtleties in each study, but a review article must 17 necessarily categorise and summarise, and overall, this remains our 18 19 reading of the literature. 20 In what way? [more explicitly geographical] In the ways outlined throughout the second section of the paper - in 21 the sites we identify and the debates we link to 22 This is also the case throughout South and Southeast Asia… how does This has been changed to “in often marginal places”. 23 resettlement integrate with authoritarian state making and state power in 24 China? We have included the following sentence on page 16: “That 25 26 resettlement often takes place within authoritarian states suggests 27 that more attention needs to be paid to how projects can be inflected 28 with socialist (or other) mentalities such as mass campaigns, model 29 villages, and Party supervision.” 30 This is a sweeping generalisation, there is a huge literature which politicises This paragraph on page 16 now reads: “What a focus on the multiple 31 resettlement logics of resettlement would do is open up analysis of the many things 32 that resettlement as a governmental program seeks to achieve, and of 33 the broader social, political, and economic processes that shape these 34 35 objectives. By countering mainstream approaches that are bounded 36 by a project, such analyses would help make sense of the expansion 37 and normalisation of resettlement and bring resettlement studies into 38 productive dialogue with key debates in geography.” 39 So do you think any research has accomplished this? [a window into questions This sentence now reads: “Building on existing work, a critical 40 41 42 43 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Progress in Human Geography Page 42 of 43

1 2 3 of capital, uneven development, power, and the state in particular places] geography of resettlement as a governmental program will amplify 4 questions of capital, uneven development, power, and the state in 5 6 particular places.” 7 What about authoritarian logics and the role of the CCP? Seems rather Yes, we have mentioned this on page 16 and again on page 17. 8 important for the Chinese case? 9 This invokes actor-network approaches or post-humanist approaches, but you This is in line with our call to bring resettlement studies into closer 10 have not introduced this theme yet. dialogue with key debates in geography and earlier statement about 11 not precluding other theoretical traditions. We have not identified a 12 more-than-human approach in the existing literature. 13 14 This is a weak criticism. Levien was not studying resettlement… Sentence on page 17 modified to “Building on Levien (2017), these For Peer Reviewnetworks are regimes of dispossession, but much else besides…” 15 16 Mapped in what sense This sentence now reads: “The existing literature has not adequately 17 described these agents, their reach, or the interconnections and flows 18 of finance between them” (see page 18) 19 You will need to explain what mapping the “water machine” entails This sentence on page 18 now reads: “Much like Webber and Han 20 21 (2017) have done recently for China's “Water Machine”, a description 22 of these networks that money, resources, people, and ideas would 23 include their composition, their emergence, their maintenance, their 24 links to other networks, and their effects.” 25 26 I’m not sure what this means [these networks of agents will determine how This sentence has been removed 27 capital circulates through resettlement projects] 28 And what sort of insights does Keele provide? This sentence on page 18 now reads: “Emerging geographical work on 29 how experts in other fields such as climate change adaptation 30 cultivate agendas, authority, projects, and new markets (Keele (2017) 31 can provide further theoretical and methodological guidance.” 32 It seems to me that in China this issue is inseparable from authoritarian This section on page 19 now reads: “But we might also argue that 33 surveillance and political control through the Party apparatus. Yet you do not quite different questions need to be asked about how illiberal, non- 34 35 explore these dimensions. Western norms and practices travel. China does resettlement in 36 particular ways, shaped by Party supervision, collective ownership of 37 farmland, campaign-style programs, a constricted civil society, and 38 powerful discourses perpetuated by state-owned media. The extent 39 to which these norms and practices are made mobile by Chinese 40 41 42 43 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Page 43 of 43 Progress in Human Geography

1 2 3 networks (particularly as China rolls out its infrastructure-heavy Belt 4 and Road Initiative) is yet to be documented.” 5 6 Why are they called that? [nail households] The Chinese term reflects stubborn nails that are difficult to remove 7 You need to introduce this term and concept [bodies] ‘Bodies’ has been changed to ’people’ 8 In much of SE Asia debt dynamics are also critical Yes - we have added a reference to indebtedness, also important in 9 the Chinese context 10 What do they argue? Chuang 2015 This sentence on page 21, which is a comment on methodology, now 11 reads: “We consider the kind of ethnographic work done by Chuang 12 13 (2015) with dispossessed farmers and their new bosses in the 14 For Peer Reviewconstruction industry to be critical to detailing the temporal changes 15 to labour, consumption, and reproduction that occur through 16 resettlement” 17 Start what? [particularly productive site from which to start] This sentence on page 21 now reads: “Training programs offered by 18 19 local governments with the aim of preparing resettled farmers for 20 new urban jobs would be a particularly productive site for delving into 21 such questions of labour and subjectivity.” 22 Suggest to tighten up phrasing [resettlement starts to look like..] This now reads “resettlement can be understood as” 23 24 Yes but you could provide a more of a generous reading in my view [our We have addressed this concern in earlier sections 25 intention is not to dismiss this work…] 26 Or the logic of state planning? [teleological models and plans] Sentence changed (page 24) 27 You have staked your claim to this mast. But does that mean that planning The critical geography of resettlement we propose is shaped by the 28 approaches and political economy approaches are not also potentially useful? achievements and limitations of all three. Within the framework of a 29 Do we all need to become Foucauldians? ‘governmental program’, amongst other things, we seek to catalyse 30 new research on flows of capital, labour practices, and uneven 31 development. 32 33 i.e. it also reproduces power relations? [has multiple intended and unintended Sentence changed (page 24) 34 effects] 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pihg 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Minerva Access is the Institutional Repository of The University of Melbourne

Author/s: Rogers, S; Wilmsen, B

Title: Towards a critical geography of resettlement

Date: 2020

Citation: Rogers, S. & Wilmsen, B. (2020). Towards a critical geography of resettlement. Progress in Human Geography, 44 (2), pp.256-275. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132518824659.

Persistent Link: http://hdl.handle.net/11343/222006

File Description: Submitted version