IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iaae06/25426.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Land Privatization and Livelihood Diversification: An Examination from the Southern Uplands of Vietnam

Author

Listed:
  • Vien, Ha Thuc

Abstract

This paper examines the process of implementing land privatization and its effects on household livelihoods in the Uplands of Vietnam. The research was undertaken with three upland villages situated in the buffer zone of Cat Tien National Park in the southern uplands of Vietnam where have recently been adopted a land privatization program according to the 1993 Land Law and some other frontier development programs, such as nature conservation, remotely mountainous community development programs supported by the central government. Such policies and programs have ultimately aimed at improving both upland livelihoods and environmental sustainability of the uplands, simultaneously. The research demonstrates unequivocally that though the land privatization throughout the nationwide has been guided by the unique legal framework, the implementation of land privatization in the uplands, particularly in the buffer zone communities locating around the protected areas has resulted in the notable divergence across communities, even households. The differences in the result of implementing land privatization in the upland communities were mainly caused by different factors embodied in both land legislation and local practices. Unsurprisingly, the divergence of implementing land privatization among communities and households has actually created differentiation in distributing benefits of land privatization among communities and households. In fact, the empirical findings suggest that land privatization (land titling) served only as initial conditions while households´ initial assets play as the determinants factors which determine how households transfer their land title into material benefits. The empirical investigations also suggest that together with land privatization, market liberalization, the government's programs for socio- economic development and nature conservation have strongly influenced on the southern upland livelihoods. Differences in the results of land privatization, households´ initial assets ownership as well benefits from such programs which have been enable households to pursue different patterns and tendencies in livelihood makings. In other words, distributing benefits from land privatization and other government's programs was not equal among households and the ways in which households diversified their livelihoods, differently.

Suggested Citation

  • Vien, Ha Thuc, 2006. "Land Privatization and Livelihood Diversification: An Examination from the Southern Uplands of Vietnam," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25426, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:iaae06:25426
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.25426
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/25426/files/cp061107.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.25426?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bruce, John W., 1998. "Review Of Tenure Terminology," Tenure Briefs 12814, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Land Tenure Center.
    2. Carter, Michael R., 1994. "Sequencing Capital And Land Market Reforms For Broadly Based Growth," Staff Papers 12689, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    3. Deininger, Klaus & Feder, Gershon, 2001. "Land institutions and land markets," Handbook of Agricultural Economics, in: B. L. Gardner & G. C. Rausser (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 6, pages 288-331, Elsevier.
    4. Stanfield, J. David, 1985. "Projects That Title Land In Central And South America And The Caribbean: Expectations And Problems," LTC Papers 292566, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Land Tenure Center.
    5. Maxwell, Daniel G. & Wiebe, Keith D., 1998. "Land Tenure And Food Security: A Review Of Concepts, Evidence, And Methods," Research Papers 12752, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Land Tenure Center.
    6. Michael R. CARTER, 1994. "Sequencing Capital And Land Market Reforms For Broadly Based Growth," Staff Papers 379, University of Wisconsin Madison, AAE.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Massuanganhe, Israel Jacob, 2008. "Policies, Natural Resource Governance and Local Development," Ph.D Degree Theses 53061, University of the Free State, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    2. Van Zyl, Johan & Miller, Bill R. & Parker, Andrew, 1996. "Agrarian structure in Poland : the myth of large-farm superiority," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1596, The World Bank.
    3. World Bank, 2007. "Paraguay - Real Property Tax : Key to Fiscal Decentralization and Better Land Use, Volume 1. Main Report," World Bank Publications - Reports 7713, The World Bank Group.
    4. Gwendoline Promsopha, 2018. "Risk†Coping, Land Tenure And Land Markets: An Overview Of The Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 176-193, February.
    5. Salmerón-Manzano, Esther & Manzano-Agugliaro, Francisco, 2023. "Worldwide research trends on land tenure," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    6. Kirsten, Johann F. & van Zyl, Johan, 1998. "Defining Small-Scale Farmers In The South African Context," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 37(4), pages 1-12, December.
    7. van Zyl, Johan, 1995. "The Farm Size-Efficiency Relationship In South African Commercial Agriculture," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 34(4), December.
    8. Arellano Gonzalez, Jesus, 2018. "Estimating climate change damages in data scarce and non-competitive settings: a novel version of the Ricardian approach with an application to Mexico," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274010, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    9. 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.
    10. Juliano Junqueira Assunção, 2005. "Non-agricultural land use and land reform: theory and evidence from Brazil," Textos para discussão 496, Department of Economics PUC-Rio (Brazil).
    11. Jan Fałkowski & Maciej Jakubowski & Paweł Strawiński, 2014. "Returns from income strategies in rural Poland," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 22(1), pages 139-178, January.
    12. Klaus Deininger & Denys Nizalov & Sudhir K Singh, 2013. "Are mega-farms the future of global agriculture? Exploring the farm size-productivity relationship for large commercial farms in Ukraine," Discussion Papers 49, Kyiv School of Economics.
    13. Kubitza, Christoph & Krishna, Vijesh V. & Urban, Kira & Alamsyah, Zulkifli & Qaim, Matin, 2018. "Land Property Rights, Agricultural Intensification, and Deforestation in Indonesia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 312-321.
    14. Deininger, Klaus & Nizalov, Denys & Singh, Sudhir K, 2013. "Are mega-farms the future of global agriculture ? exploring the farm size-productivity relationship," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6544, The World Bank.
    15. Ogada, Maurice Juma, 2012. "Forest Management Decentralization in Kenya: Effects on Household Farm Forestry Decisions in Kakamega," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126319, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    16. Daymard, Arnaud, 2022. "Land rental market reforms: Can they increase outmigration from agriculture? Evidence from a quantitative model," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    17. Chaoran Chen & Diego Restuccia & Raul Santaeulalia-Llopis, 2022. "The Effects of Land Markets on Resource Allocation and Agricultural Productivity," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 45, pages 41-54, July.
    18. Gersbach, Hans & Siemers, Lars-H. R., 2010. "Land Reforms And Economic Development," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(4), pages 527-547, September.
    19. Jia, Lili, 2012. "Land fragmentation and off-farm labor supply in China," Studies on the Agricultural and Food Sector in Transition Economies, Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO), volume 66, number 66.
    20. Gharad Bryan & Jonathan de Quidt & Tom Wilkening & Nitin Yadav, 2017. "Land Trade and Development: A Market Design Approach," CESifo Working Paper Series 6557, CESifo.

    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:ags:iaae06:25426. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iaaeeea.html .

    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.