Safeguarding resettlement: global expectations and local experiences in Cambodia Jessie Connell Human Geography, School of Geosciences Faculty of Science University of Sydney A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy December 2015 1 Statement of authorship This thesis remains the copyrighted work of the author, Jessie Connell, and The University of Sydney. Any errors or omissions contained within are the responsibility of the author. This work has not been previously submitted for a degree or diploma in any other university. To the best of my knowledge and belief, this thesis contains no material previously published or written by another person except where due reference is made in the thesis itself. The material in the thesis has not been formally published elsewhere by me, with the exception of the following material: Connell, Jessie and Connell, John (2014). “Development-Induced Displacement, Adaptation and Mobility in Cambodia”. Migration and Development. (DOI 10.1080/21632324.2014.984900). Connell, Jessie and Grimsditch, Mark (2014). World Bank PforR in Practice, Results-Based Rural Water Supply and Sanitation under the National Target Program Vietnam, for the Bank Information Center. Connell, Jessie (2015). “Is ‘Good’ Resettlement Policy Unimplementable? Learning from Advocacy in Cambodia”. Development in Practice, 25:5, pp. 655-672. Connell, Jessie (2015). “Statelessness and Environmental Displacement”. Forced Migration Review 49 – Disasters and Displacement in a Changing Climate. Connell, Jessie (2016). “Resettlement and Borderlands: Adapting to Planned Population Resettlement on the Cambodian-Thai Border”. In S. Price and J. Singer (Eds.), Global Implications of Development, Disasters and Climate Change: Responses to Displacement from Asia Pacific (pp. 142-158). London and New York: Routledge. Connell, Jessie and Grimsditch, Mark (2016). “Forced Relocation in Cambodia”. In K. Brickell and S. Springer (Eds), Routledge Handbook of Contemporary Cambodia, (forthcoming edition). 2 Human ethics approval Human research ethics approval was granted for the thesis prior to commencing fieldwork through the University of Sydney Human Ethics Committee. Project number: 2012/176. © Copyright: Jessie Connell 2016 Citation: Connell, J. (2016). Safeguarding Resettlement: Global Expectations and Local Experiences in Cambodia, A PhD Thesis in Human Geography submitted to the School of Geosciences, Faculty of Science, University of Sydney. 3 Abstract Planned community relocation or “resettlement” is not new, however the contexts in which people are being relocated and the safeguards in place to protect them are changing. Multilateral development banks are under competing pressures to minimise the negative impacts of community resettlement without over-burdening the governments of borrowing countries. Intensive debates are underway about what rights should be afforded to resettled people and what safeguards are most effective. Similar concerns are being voiced by policy- makers working on climate change adaptation, who are looking to the World Bank and Asian Development Bank (ADB) to identify ways to safeguard communities being resettled in response to climate change. One of the most important tensions shaping these debates, is how resettlement safeguards developed at an international or “global” level can cater to the needs and aspirations of affected people in different local settings. As a contribution to this debate, this thesis explores a resettlement scheme for an ADB co- financed railway project in Cambodia in which advocacy interventions resulted in significant improvements in the resettlement sites over the eight years of the project from 2006 to 2014. Drawing on the railway project as a case study, the research focuses on understanding how safeguards, developed at a “headquarter level”, aligned and misaligned with community needs and aspirations at different points in time. It investigates how advocacy interventions altered the course of the project and considers the implications of relying on resettlement safeguards in a country where domestic legal protections are otherwise not well-established. The research is founded on an appreciation of the valuable literature that exists to understand resettlement. It uses legal geography and theories of scale to build on the conceptual frameworks already available. It does this through analysing the socio-legal dimensions of the resettlement process from multiple stakeholder perspectives over time. This approach enables a close field-based analysis of how different actors (communities, NGOs, governments and financiers) experienced and understood resettlement tensions at different scales: at a community level in five locations in Cambodia, and at national, international and institutional scales. Through a qualitative analysis of different stakeholder perspectives, the research goes behind the scenes and behind the paper work to investigate how the risks and impacts of the project were rationalised by decision-makers as they unfolded. It draws on 4 interviews with NGOs, consultants, safeguards and resettlement specialists in Cambodia and other sites of decision-making and institutional influence: especially within the ADB, World Bank and Australian Government. From a community perspective, the resettlement process was an uneven and arbitrary experience, but the reactions were different across the five resettlement sites. Like many resettlement schemes, the rights and benefits available to affected people were determined by the precise physical space in which they lived prior to the project. Rather than following the natural contours of how communities were living, the scheme drew new lines of social organisation based on the ADB resettlement policy guidelines. Intensive NGO interventions using creative trans-national strategies brought international scrutiny to the project. Yet, as additional compensation was provided and services and infrastructure slowly improved in the resettlement sites, the resettlement dynamics began to change. The appeal of resettlement increased for many community members who were left behind. Over time resettlement standards improved in some of the sites so much that they became “islands of governance”, demarcated or ring-fenced from the otherwise limited support provided to people partially- affected by the project but not given the option of relocation. While efforts were made by NGOs to advocate for those who were partially affected, but not relocated, clear limitations in the scope of the safeguards policy emerged. NGOs were required to navigate complex community tensions, revealing how conflicting community interests and aspirations, which inevitably characterise resettlement, are also inherently difficult to incorporate into advocacy campaigns. The experiences described provide rich insights into the realities of being embroiled in so- called “community-driven accountability processes”,1 as well as the adaptation strategies community members employed to navigate resettlement. The research explores how community awareness of resettlement safeguards was built through contact with NGOs, and also through the gradual engagement of ADB staff once the project’s impacts were publicised. Over time, community members developed a sophisticated understanding of the rights and benefits afforded by the project and the ADB safeguards and accountability framework in place. 1 Community-driven or citizen-driven accountability is an approach adopted by the World Bank. For discussion and critique see: Clark, Fox & Treakle (2003); Ebrahim & Herz (2007). 5 From the perspectives of financiers, the interviews also reveal how debates about the “right” way to address resettlement problems were occurring within the ADB, Cambodian and Australian Governments, and there were many points of controversy among staff members and consultants. There were also many disagreements behind the scenes about the adequacy of the resettlement processes in place, due diligence and accountability. The case of the Cambodian railway project conveys how resettlement impacts are not easily overcome through internal monitoring, supervision and technical assistance at a project level, even where these aspects of a project are well resourced. These challenges are particularly complex in places where there is a significant disparity between national government standards for resettlement and international, project-specific safeguards, as is the case in Cambodia. The research conveys the extent of influence that international financiers have on the quality of resettlement within the bounds of a given project, as well as the limits of this influence on other aspects of governance external to these projects. The research supports a move away from simple approaches to resettlement premised on the notion that it is possible to mitigate negative social and environmental impacts of infrastructure projects only through the establishment of safeguards and monitoring systems. Instead it supports an approach which more explicitly includes local civil society actors and international advocacy NGOs, recognising the valuable roles they play. 6 សេចក្តីេសខេប ᾶស ៀខរាល់ᯒនាំ មនុេសរាប់លាននាក្់សៅសលើពិភពសលាក្ត្រវូ ផ្លា េ់បត ូ ក្ន្នាខ េ់សៅសោយសា ន្រζ អភិវឌ្ឍសេោា ចនាេមព័នធ។ ζ ផ្លាេ់បត ូក្ន្នាខសនេះបខកស ើខសោយផ្លាល់ និខសោយត្បសោលពី នគ ូបនីយក្មម ζ ក្សាខ埒ល ូវថ្នល់ សាពន អណ្ត ូខន្ ៉ែ និខគសត្ោខ 玶 ីអគគិេនី។ ζ ផ្លាេ់បត ូទីតាំខ បេ់េេគមន៍តមន្埒នζ ឬ “ζ តាំខទីលាំសៅᾶថ្មី” បានអនុវរតស ើខស ើមបីសោេះត្សាយឥទធិពល