The Production of Space and Construction of Frontier: Contesting
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Production of Space and Construction of Frontier: Contesting a Cambodian Resource Landscape Sopheak Chann A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Human Geography) School of Geosciences, Faculty of Science The University of Sydney March 2017 I certify that the intellectual content of this thesis is the product of my own work and that all the assistance received in preparing this thesis and sources have been acknowledged. Abstract This research employs Henry Lefebvre’s concept of “the production of space” and the notion of frontiers – empty or unused space – to explore the complex spatial contestations over resource landscapes in Cambodia. The study focuses on the construction of frontiers by examining how socio-spatial relations are produced in relation to how the frontier is constructed. In this research, two groups of actors and processes are involved: (1) the state and its associated elite actors/agencies who employ spatial representations (maps) to organise the landscape; and (2) the local actors who construct and organise space by directly living in it. Regarding the state- based spatial arrangements, this research employs critical cartography to examine formal boundaries made by the state and its associated agencies, including the political elites, conservation organisations and development agencies. In regard to informal local level spatial arrangements, place-making processes are examined to understand how land and resources are organised by local actors. The thesis focuses on one case study site located in Northwest Cardamom – an upland area of the western part of Cambodia near the border of Thailand and a former Khmer Rouge stronghold. This thesis argues that frontier – empty or wasteland – is not an absolute geographical space, but a produced space. Frontier construction is at the centre of land and resource conflicts over the landscape. This produced space is the outcome of dialectical relations of spatial idealisation, the representation of space and direct spatial interaction among different actors whose interests are to access and control the landscape. This research found that being able to use maps, the state and its associated elite actors and agencies are able to formally exclude local communities from accessing land and resources by making landscape appear empty or unused. The local spatial organisation and socio-spatial relations are also constructed within the notion of a frontier, which is the outcome of a traumatic political history and physical traits of the landscape. With the long-term experience of organising local landscapes, the ex-Khmer Rouge (ex-KR) tend to have more control over land and resources compared to new in-migrants i moving to search for land. Two forms of interaction between state-based and local-based spatial representation and organisation can be observed. The first is state enforced abstract boundaries which directly exclude people from accessing land and resources. The second is state-based private land titling which delegitimises local villagers’ land claims. ii Acknowledgements This research would not have been possible without contributions and support from the following people. First and most importantly, I would like to thank local participants whose information and stories are the centre of this thesis. Thus I thank villagers of Chamkar Chrey Tbong and Samlanh. Especially, I would like to thank the families who offered great hospitality during my fieldwork. Thanks for treating me like your own family member while I was staying in your homes. I would like to thank my supervisors Professor Philip Hirsch and Dr Josephine Gillespie for their emotional and academic support since the beginning to the end of this research. Thanks, Professor Philip Hirsch who had supported me before I started this PhD project by encouraging me to apply for a scholarship. I thank Phil for his supervision throughout the four years. I would like to thank Dr Josephine Gillespie for her intensive support and supervision during the fieldwork and writing period. Without her support, I would not be able to accomplish this project. This thesis would not be possible without friends who have provided emotional, social and intellectual support. Thanks Tim Frewer for reading my drafts and providing feedback, Matthew Kiem for sharing interesting intellectual discussions and Greg Harriden for emotional counselling. I would like to also thank friends including Alistair, Anna, Ben, Dave, Emily, Josh, Kate, Kristin, Kristy, Laurence, Mark, Mattijs, Ming, Nat, Nathan, Ness, Nicky, Ranee, Rottanak, Rotha, Sophia, Tubtim, Wenny, and many more whose names I cannot mention here. You guys are amazing people and I am very lucky to come all the way to the other side of the world to meet you. Without you, these four years in Sydney would not have been so exciting and interesting. I would like to also acknowledge academic staff in the Geography department at Sydney University and outside the university who provided intellectual support. I thank Professor John Connell, Associate Professor Kurt Iveson, Dr Robert Fisher, Dr Jeff Neilson, Dr Yayoi Lagerqvist. Also, special thanks to Dr Jean-Christophe Diepart who also provided advice on research iii matters in Northwest Cambodia and the translation of some maps. I thank Mark Grimsditch for advice on land and legal issues in Cambodia. I would like to also thank the Australian Award Office at the University of Sydney. I would like to thank, Bojan, Annie, and Amy for their assistance during the four-year PhD with my Australia Awards Scholarship at the University of Sydney. I would like to also thank my colleagues in Cambodia including Kimkong, Sophat, Chanrith, Nyda, Naret and Sithirith for their support before and during the data collection period. Special thanks to Rebecca Bradford for her thorough editing of this thesis. Last but not least I would like to thank my family and relatives who are always here for me. Thanks, mum and dad for your love and care. Chan, Geg and Huy my brother and sisters, thanks for always being part of my life. I also thank my two little nieces, Lisa and Amelia, for giving me a lot of energy while going through the fieldwork and writing. iv Contents Abstract ...................................................................................................................................................... i Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................................. iii List of figures: ............................................................................................................................................ x List of tables: ...........................................................................................................................................xiii Acronyms ................................................................................................................................................ xiv Chapter 1: Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Resource landscape, frontier and space ....................................................................................... 1 1.2. Research problems ....................................................................................................................... 3 1.3. Rationale and research questions ................................................................................................. 7 1.4. Key arguments .............................................................................................................................. 9 1.5. Thesis structure ........................................................................................................................... 11 Chapter 2: Production of Space and Construction of Frontier ............................................... 14 2.1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 14 2.2. The production of space ............................................................................................................. 16 2.2.1. Conceptualising the production of space ........................................................................... 16 2.2.2. Representation of space and state ..................................................................................... 19 2.2.3. Everyday life and the local production of space ................................................................. 21 2.3. Critical cartography and space .................................................................................................... 22 2.3.1. Maps and space .................................................................................................................. 23 2.3.2. Challenging the power of maps .......................................................................................... 25 2.3.3. Maps, natural resource and territory ................................................................................. 28 2.4. Place-making and spatial practice .............................................................................................. 32 2.4.1. Place-making and the conception of space ........................................................................ 32 2.4.2. Identity, territory and place ...............................................................................................