IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v75y2018icp127-136.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A divided nation: Rethinking and rescaling land tenure in the Korean (re-)unification

Author

Listed:
  • Lee, Cheonjae
  • de Vries, Walter Timo

Abstract

In the Korean (re-)unification discourse, limited attention is given to how the highly different systems of land tenure can be unified in a comprehensive land governance framework. Possible reasons include the uncertainty of (re-)unification itself, high sensitivity of the land issue as a territorial matter and limited access to North Korean data about land tenure. Moreover, there are insufficient theoretical foundations regarding the role and the significance of land tenure in the (re-)unification process. This paper identifies what (re-)unification is and describes how, where and when land tenure could be significant in a (re-)unification process. These questions are addressed using the Context-Intervention-Mechanisms-Outcomes-Constraints (CIMOC) framework. This systematic approach takes both the time sequence and a number of aspects based on patterns found in literature into account in order to identify and define what (re-)unification is and how it aligns, adapts or merges to land tenure relations. We find that during transformation processes, discussions on land tenure have both an instrumental and reforming function and land tenure resolution facilitate the peace-building in integration processes. In addition, land tenure institutions play significant role in a territorial development process. The key findings of the research synthesis rationalize the significance of land tenure in (re-)unification process. Amalgamation of (re-)unification and land tenure discourses derive intricate relationships to address the multi-dimensional problems in the Korean peninsula. Yet, the discussion of both concepts have so far focused on monolytical and pragmatic problem-solving rather than the start of a more fundamental discussion: how to re-shape land governance institutions. This study can be a starting point for policy-makers to discuss and comprehend an unsolved quandary of the Korean peninsula.

Suggested Citation

  • Lee, Cheonjae & de Vries, Walter Timo, 2018. "A divided nation: Rethinking and rescaling land tenure in the Korean (re-)unification," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 127-136.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:75:y:2018:i:c:p:127-136
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.02.046
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837717308323
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.02.046?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wrobel, Ralph Michael, 2009. "The double challenge of transformation and integration: German experiences and consequences for Korea," Discourses in Social Market Economy 2009-01, OrdnungsPolitisches Portal (OPO).
    2. Klaus Deininger, 2003. "Land Policies for Growth and Poverty Reduction," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 15125.
    3. Philippe De Lombaerde, 2005. "Indicators of Regional Integration: Methodological Issues," The Institute for International Integration Studies Discussion Paper Series iiisdp064, IIIS.
    4. Lindberg, Leon N., 1970. "Political Integration as a Multidimensional Phenomenon Requiring Multivariate Measurement," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 24(4), pages 648-731, October.
    5. Modrego, Félix & Berdegué, Julio A., 2015. "A Large-Scale Mapping of Territorial Development Dynamics in Latin America," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 11-31.
    6. Sikor, Thomas & Müller, Daniel, 2009. "The Limits of State-Led Land Reform: An Introduction," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1307-1316, August.
    7. Haas, Ernst B. & Schmitter, Philippe C., 1964. "Economics and Differential Patterns of Political Integration: Projections About Unity in Latin America," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(4), pages 705-737, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Cheonjae Lee & Walter Timo de Vries & Uchendu Eugene Chigbu, 2019. "Land Governance Re-Arrangements: The One-Country One-System (OCOS) Versus One-Country Two-System (OCTS) Approach," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-26, March.
    2. Um, Dan-Bi, 2020. "Configuring land tenure caused by fixed residence according to the societal control system of North Korea: Focus on forestry carbon trading," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hossein Azadi & Eric Vanhaute, 2019. "Mutual Effects of Land Distribution and Economic Development: Evidence from Asia, Africa, and Latin America," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-15, June.
    2. Sikor, Thomas & Müller, Daniel & Stahl, Johannes, 2009. "Land Fragmentation and Cropland Abandonment in Albania: Implications for the Roles of State and Community in Post-Socialist Land Consolidation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1411-1423, August.
    3. Madalina Epure, 2013. "How Does the Changing Access to Resources Affect the Power and Authority of the Postsocialist Romanian State?," Journal of Economic Development, Environment and People, Alliance of Central-Eastern European Universities, vol. 2(1), pages 32-56, March.
    4. Kvartiuk, Vasyl & Herzfeld, Thomas, 2019. "Welfare effects of land market liberalization scenarios in Ukraine: Evidence-based economic perspective," IAMO Discussion Papers 287762, Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO).
    5. Valkonen, Anni, 2021. "Examining sources of land tenure (in)security. A focus on authority relations, state politics, social dynamics and belonging," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    6. Fitz, Dylan, 2018. "Evaluating the impact of market-assisted land reform in Brazil," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 255-267.
    7. Biddulph, Robin & Hillbom, Ellen, 2020. "Registration of private interests in land in a community lands policy setting: An exploratory study in Meru district, Tanzania," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    8. Helfand, Steven M. & Sielawa, Vilma H. & Singhania, Deepak, 2019. "A matter of time: An impact evaluation of the Brazilian National Land Credit Program," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    9. repec:zbw:iamodp:287762 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Rabah Arezki & Klaus Deininger & Harris Selod, 2015. "What Drives the Global "Land Rush"?," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 29(2), pages 207-233.
    11. Grimm, Michael & Klasen, Stephan, 2007. "Geography vs. Institutions at the Village Level," Proceedings of the German Development Economics Conference, Göttingen 2007 9, Verein für Socialpolitik, Research Committee Development Economics.
    12. Foley-Fisher, Nathan & McLaughlin, Eoin, 2016. "Capitalising on the Irish land question: land reform and state banking in Ireland, 1891–1938," Financial History Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(1), pages 71-109, April.
    13. Lenyeletse V. Basupi & Claire H. Quinn & Andrew J. Dougill, 2017. "Pastoralism and Land Tenure Transformation in Sub-Saharan Africa: Conflicting Policies and Priorities in Ngamiland, Botswana," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-17, December.
    14. Thomas Vendryes, 2014. "Peasants Against Private Property Rights: A Review Of The Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 971-995, December.
    15. Leakey, Roger & Kranjac-Berisavljevic, Gordana & Caron, Patrick & Craufurd, Peter & Martin, Adrienne M. & McDonald, Andy & Abedini, Walter & Afiff, Suraya & Bakurin, Ndey & Bass, Steve & Hilbeck, Ange, 2009. "Impacts of AKST on development and sustainability goals," Book Chapters,, International Water Management Institute.
    16. Bouquet, Emmanuelle, 2009. "State-Led Land Reform and Local Institutional Change: Land Titles, Land Markets and Tenure Security in Mexican Communities," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1390-1399, August.
    17. Miguel A. Márquez & Elena Lasarte & Marcelo Lufin, 2019. "The Role of Neighborhood in the Analysis of Spatial Economic Inequality," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 141(1), pages 245-273, January.
    18. Julián Tole Martínez, 2019. "Colombia entre los TLC y la OMC: ¿liberación o administración del comercio internacional?," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Derecho, number 1139, march.
    19. Bravo-Ortega, Claudio & Lederman, Daniel, 2005. "Agriculture and national welfare around the world: causality and international heterogeneity since 1960," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3499, The World Bank.
    20. Elias Danyi Kuusaana & Nicolas Gerber, 2015. "Institutional Synergies in Customary Land Markets—Selected Case Studies of Large-Scale Land Acquisitions (LSLAs) in Ghana," Land, MDPI, vol. 4(3), pages 1-27, September.
    21. T. K. Dennison & Sheilagh Ogilvie, 2007. "Serfdom and social capital in Bohemia and Russia1," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 60(3), pages 513-544, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:75:y:2018:i:c:p:127-136. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.