Discourses on East German land property concentration Studying the investor - controversy from the perspective of practice theory Master‘s Thesis by Alessa Heuser II Cover picture: "Land grabbing in East Germany - we are in the midst of a sale", drawing by Nyko. Cover of a self-made magazine by Jael, vegetable grower and food activist in Brandenburg/Germany. Master’s Thesis: “Discourses on East German land property concentration – Studying the investor-controversy from the perspective of practice theory” Thesis code: LAW-80433 Author: Alessa Heuser Wageningen University Department of Social Sciences MSc International Development Studies / Specialization: Communication, Technology and Policy Supervisors Dik Roth (Sociology of Development and Change Group) Severine van Bommel (Strategic Communication Group) External examiner Paul Hebinck (Sociology of Development and Change Group) Wageningen, October 20, 2015 III “[…] you cannot sue an acre; a boundary dispute is not a dispute with a boundary. The study of property rules in general, and land tenure in particular, is the study of relationships between people” (Davis, 1973; quoted in Hann 1998, 5). IV Acknowledgements First of all, I would like to thank my supervisors Severine and Dik for their support during the process of preparing and writing this thesis. You were great coaches, providing me with inspiring food for thought and at the same time giving me space to develop my own ideas. Thank you also for your flexibility to keep on supervising this work beyond the formerly planned time span – it enabled me to finalize it in a satisfying way despite taking up the challenge of starting my first job in the meanwhile. A big thanks goes to all my interviewees and informants who took their time and shared their opinions with me. My thesis “lives” from what your realities are about and it is fascinating to see how diverse they are. To my friends and family – I am grateful for your support during the last months. It was good to know that you believe in me and that you were there when I needed you. A special thank goes to my Lernwerkstatt -mates for having delicious lunches together and to Wanja who as a co-thinker of this thesis made it possible to talk about (my) research far away from Wageningen. I could always count on your advice. Last but not least I want to thank Stefan for your unconditional love, patience and motivation. Schön, dass es dich gibt. V Contents Executive summary ....................................................................................... VII List of abbreviations .................................................................................... VIII 1 Introduction ............................................................................................... 1 1.1 Problem statement and research questions .............................................. 3 1.2 Theoretical framework ............................................................................ 6 1.2.1 Performing political controversies: practice theory as a lens of investigation ........................................................................................ 6 1.2.2 Constituting reality: discourses and discursive practices .................. 10 1.2.3 More than person-thing-relations: property relations from the anthropological perspective ............................................................... 17 2 Methodology ............................................................................................ 23 2.1 Research design ..................................................................................... 23 2.2 Data collection techniques .................................................................... 27 2.3 Data analysis ......................................................................................... 32 3 The history of East German land property .......................................... 35 3.1 Redistribution of landholdings in the course of the post-war land reform (1945-1949) ........................................................................................... 36 3.2 Land collectivization for the constitution of a socialist property regime (1949-1989) ........................................................................................... 38 3.3 Post-socialist re-organization of land property (1989-today) ............... 42 4 The investor-controversy as a case ........................................................ 55 4.1 Mapping the actors ................................................................................ 55 4.2 “(Non-agricultural) investors” as emblematic issue .............................. 68 5 Discursive property practices ................................................................. 76 5.1 Ideology and culture .............................................................................. 77 5.1.1 The land and how it should be used .................................................. 77 5.1.2 The land and to whom it belongs ...................................................... 83 5.1.3 “Best” types of land property ............................................................ 92 5.2 Property regulations and institutions ..................................................... 98 VI 5.2.1 The legal framework: a toothless tiger? ............................................ 99 5.2.2 Law-making and the construction of categories and concepts ........ 106 5.2.3 BVVG contested ............................................................................. 110 5.3 Social relationships ............................................................................. 119 5.3.1 The (un)making of land property knowledge .................................. 120 5.3.2 From power and participation ......................................................... 125 5.3.3 Discourse coalitions ........................................................................ 129 6 Conclusion .............................................................................................. 132 7 Discussion ............................................................................................... 136 7.1 Theoretical and methodological reflections ........................................ 136 7.2 Scientific reflections ............................................................................ 139 7.3 Societal reflections .............................................................................. 142 References ...................................................................................................... 145 Annex .............................................................................................................. 158 VII Executive summary Several land rights changes since 1945 and the transition from a socialist to a capitalist land property regime lay the basis for how East Germany’s rural areas are characterized today: by a large-scale agricultural structure which now seems to open the gateway for the concentration of huge amounts of farmland by a few. During the last years, “land grabbing in East Germany” has been proclaimed by oppositional farmers’ associations, politicians or grassroots initiatives as a critical response to this development, thereby vernacularizing the term from the global to the local scale. As means of political struggle the frame suggests a failure of state-led land governance. However, this is not the only interpretation of the status quo; the diversity of involved actors, practices and – often conflicting – realities make today’s post-socialist land property relations a highly complex force field. Employing the lens of practice theory, this thesis investigates the ways in which involved actors give meaning to the phenomenon of East German land property concentration. By drawing on qualitative data, the study generates two main findings: First, representations occur within the current political controversy on “(non-agricultural) investors” who seem to enter the regional land markets. Second, the analysis of discursive practices at the property layers of ideologies, legal provisions and social relationships discloses the knowledge formations which are underlying the controversy; they emerge as two conflicting discourses: the regulation- and the non-regulation-discourses. Whilst practices within the regulation-discourse suggest that the activities of “(non-agricultural) investors” can and/or need to be regulated differently than to-date, the non-regulation-discourse constitutes knowledge presuming that land-acquiring investors cannot and/or do not have to be regulated differently. The study concludes that land property has more to offer than just functioning as a monetary resource, as suggested in the liberal paradigm of property. It provokes strong social positioning among the actors, leading to competing post-socialist claims over East German land and creating an atmosphere which is characterized by a high degree of uncertainty in terms of what is happening in East Germany’s regions. So far, the non-regulation-discourse dominates the controversy. A change of the status quo will depend on the extent to which the force field of land property relations will be shaken up. Keywords: practice theory, land property, discourse, East Germany, post-socialism VIII List of abbreviations Abbreviation Full name AbL Arbeitsgemeinschaft bäuerliche Landwirtschaft e.V. ADA Argumentative Discourse Analysis AG Aktiengesellschaft (type of business entity; joint stock company) BMEL Bundesministerium für Ernährung und Landwirtschaft (Federal