What happened when the land grab came to Southeast Asia?

References

• Alton, C., D. Bluhm and S. Sananikone. 2005. Para rubber study: Hevea brasiliens Lao PDR. Vientiane, Lao PDR: GTZ, Lao German Program Rural Development in Mountainous Areas of Northern Lao PDR.
   Google Scholar
• Amanor, K.S. 2012. Global resource grabs, agribusiness concentration and the smallholder: Two West African case studies. The Journal of Peasant Studies 39, no. 3–4: 731–49. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2012.676543
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anseeuw, W., J. Lay, P. Messerli, M. Giger, and M. Taylor. 2013. Creating a public tool to assess and promote transparency in global land deals: The experience of the Land Matrix. The Journal of Peasant Studies 40, no. 3: 521–30. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2013.803071
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anseeuw, W., M. Boche, T. Breu, M. Giger, J. Lay, P. Messerli, and K. Nolte. 2012. Transnational land deals for agriculture in the Global South: analytical report based on the Land Matrix database. Bern: CDE/CIRAD/GIGA.
   Google Scholar
• Baird, I.G. 2011. Turning land into capital, turning people into labor: Primitive accumulation and the arrival of large-scale economic land concessions in the Lao People’s Democratic Republic. New Proposals: Journal of Marxism and Interdisciplinary Inquiry 5, no. 1: 10–26.
   Google Scholar
• Baird, I.G. 2014. The global land grab meta-narrative, Asian money laundering and elite capture: reconsidering the Cambodian context. Geopolitics 19, no. 2: 431–53. doi: 10.1080/14650045.2013.811645
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baird, I.G., and J. Fox. 2015. How land concessions affect places elsewhere: Telecoupling, political ecology, and large-scale plantations in southern Laos and northeastern Cambodia. Land 4, no. 2: 436–53. doi: 10.3390/land4020436
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barney, K. 2009. Laos and the making of a ‘relational’ resource frontier. Geographical Journal 175, no. 2: 146–59. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-4959.2009.00323.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barney, K. 2014. Ecological knowledge and the making of plantation concession territories in southern Laos. Conservation and Society 12, no. 4: 352–63. doi: 10.4103/0972-4923.155579
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barral, S. 2014. Paternalistic supervision of labour in Indonesian plantations: Between dependence and autonomy. Journal of Agrarian Change 14, no. 2: 240–59. doi: 10.1111/joac.12063
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beban, A., and C. Work. 2014. The spirits are crying: Dispossessing land and possessing bodies in rural Cambodia. Antipode 46, no. 3: 593–610. doi: 10.1111/anti.12073
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernard, S., and J.-F. Bissonnette. 2011. Oil palm plantations in Sabah: agricultural expansion for whom? In Borneo transformed: Agricultural expansion on the Southeast Asian frontier, ed. R. De Koninck, S. Bernard, and J.–F. Bissonnette, 120–51. Singapore: National University of Singapore Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bissonnette, J.F. 2012. Envisioning agribusiness: Land, labour and value in a time of oil palm expansion in Indonesia. PhD diss., University of Toronto.
   Google Scholar
• Borras, S.M. Jr. 2013. Foreword. In Pye and Bhattacharya 2013, vii–xii.
   Google Scholar
• Borras, S.M. Jr. and J. Franco. 2011. Political dynamics of land-grabbing in Southeast Asia: Understanding Europe’s Role. Transnational Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Borras, S.M. Jr. and J. Franco. 2012. Global land grabbing and trajectories of agrarian change: A preliminary analysis. Journal of Agrarian Change 12, no. 1: 34–59. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0366.2011.00339.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borras, S.M. Jr., J.C. Franco, S. Gómez, C. Kay, and M. Spoor. 2012. Land grabbing in Latin America and the Caribbean. The Journal of Peasant Studies 39, no. 3–4: 845–72. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2012.679931
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borras, S. M. Jr., R. Hall, I. Scoones, B. White, and W. Wolford. 2011. Towards a better understanding of global land grabbing: An editorial introduction. Journal of Peasant Studies 38 (2): 209–16. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2011.559005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braun, J. von, and R. Meinzen-Dick. 2009. ‘Land Grabbing’ by foreign investors in developing countries: Risks and opportunities. IFPRI Policy Brief 13.
   Google Scholar
• Brosius, J. P. 1999. Green dots, pink hearts: displacing politics from the Malaysian rain forest. American Anthropologist 101 (1): 36–57. doi: 10.1525/aa.1999.101.1.36
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byerlee, D. 2014. The fall and rise again of plantations in tropical Asia: History repeated? Land 3: 574–97. doi: 10.3390/land3030574
   Google Scholar
• Casson, A. 2000. The hesitant boom: Indonesia’s oil palm sub-sector in an era of economic crisis and political change, CIFOR Occasional Paper No. 29.
   Google Scholar
• Chanthasaly, A., F. Lintzmeyer, F., Rock, B. Soulivanh, and P. Suphida. 2005. Land Policy Study 2: Land Markets in Urban and Rural Areas of Lao PDR. Vientiane, Laos: GTZ.
   Google Scholar
• Chao, S., ed. 2013. Agribusiness large-scale land acquisitions and human rights in Southeast Asia. Moreton-in-Marsh: Forest Peoples Programme.
   Google Scholar
• Colchester, M., and S. Chao. 2013. Updates on agribusiness and large-scale land acquisitions in Southeast Asia. In Chao 2013, 1–18.
   Google Scholar
• Colchester, M., N. Jiwan, Andiko, M. Sirait, A.Y. Firdaus, A. Surambo, and H. Pane. 2006. Promised land: Palm oil and land acquisition in Indonesia: Implications for local communities and indigenous peoples. Moreton-in-Marsh, England: Forest Peoples Programme, Perkumpulan Sawit Watch, HuMA and the World Agroforestry Centre.
   Google Scholar
• Cooke, F.M. 2002. Vulnerability, control and oil palm in Sarawak: Globalization and a New Era? Development and Change 33, no. 2: 189–211. doi: 10.1111/1467-7660.00247
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooke, F.M. 2012. In the name of poverty alleviation: Experiments with oil palm smallholders and customary land in Sabah, Malaysia. Asia Pacific Viewpoint 53, no. 3: 240–53. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8373.2012.01490.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cotula, L. 2012. The international political economy of the global land rush: A critical appraisal of trends, scale, geography and drivers. The Journal of Peasant Studies 39 no. 3–4: 649–80. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2012.674940
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cotula, L. 2013. The great African land grab?: Agricultural investments and the global food system. London: Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• Cotula, L., S. Vermeulen, R. Leonard, and J. Keeley. 2009. Land grab or development opportunity? agricultural investment and international land deals in Africa. London and Rome: IIED, FAO and IFAD.
   Google Scholar
• Cramb, R. 2016. The political economy of large-scale oil palm development in Sarawak. In Cramb and McCarthy 2016, 189–246.
   Google Scholar
• Cramb, R., and J.F. McCarthy, eds. 2016. The oil palm complex: Smallholders, agribusiness and the state in Indonesia and Malaysia. Singapore: NUS Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cramb, R., and J.F. McCarthy. 2016a. Introduction. In Cramb and McCarthy 2016, 1–26.
   Google Scholar
• Cramb, R., and J.F. McCarthy. 2016b. Characterising oil palm production in Indonesia and Malaysia. In Cramb and McCarthy 2016, 27–77.
   Google Scholar
• Cramb, R.A. 2007. Land and longhouse: Agrarian transformation in the uplands of Sarawak. Copenhagen: NIAS Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cramb, R.A., and G.N. Curry. 2012. Oil palm and rural livelihoods in the Asia–Pacific region: An overview. Asia Pacific Viewpoint 53 (3): 223–39. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8373.2012.01495.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cramb, R.A., and P.S. Sujang. 2013. “The mouse deer and the crocodile: Oil palm smallholders and livelihood strategies in Sarawak, Malaysia.” Journal of Peasant Studies 40 (1): 129–54. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2012.750241
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dallinger, J. 2013. Brief #3 of 8: Kingdom of Thailand. In Chao 2013, 30–41.
   Google Scholar
• Dao, N. 2015. Rubber plantations in the northwest: Rethinking the concept of land grabs in Vietnam. The Journal of Peasant Studies 42 (2): 347–69. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2014.990445
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dauvergne, P. 1997. Shadows in the forest: Japan and the politics of timber in Southeast Asia. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Deininger, K. 2011. Challenges posed by the new wave of farmland investment. The Journal of Peasant Studies 38 (2): 217–47. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2011.559007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deininger, K., and D. Byerlee. 2011. Rising global interest in farmland: Can it yield sustainable and equitable benefits? Washington, DC: The World Bank.
   Google Scholar
• De Koninck, R. 1996. The peasantry as the territorial spearhead of the state in Southeast Asia: The case of Vietnam. Journal of Social Issues in Southeast Asia 11, no. 2: 231–58. doi: 10.1355/SJ11-2C
   Google Scholar
• De Koninck, R., S. Bernard, J.-F. Bissonnette. 2011. Agricultural expansion in Southeast Asia: Borneo in the eye of the storm. Singapore: NUS Press.
   Google Scholar
• De Schutter, O. 2011. How not to think of land-grabbing: Three critiques of large-scale investments in farmland. The Journal of Peasant Studies 38 (2): 249–79. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2011.559008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diepart, J.-C., and D. Dupuis. 2014. The peasants in turmoil: Khmer Rouge, state formation and the control of land in northwest Cambodia. The Journal of Peasant Studies 41 (4): 445–68. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2014.919265
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diepart, J.-C., and L. Schoenberger. 2016. Concessions in Cambodia: Governing profits, extending state power and enclosing resources from the colonial era to the present. In The handbook of contemporary Cambodia, ed. K. Brickell and S. Springer, 157–68. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Diepart, J.-C., and T. Sem. 2016. Fragmented territories: Incomplete enclosures and agrarian change on the agricultural frontier of Samlaut district, north-west Cambodia. Journal of Agrarian Change Online Version of Record.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dwyer, M.B. 2007. Turning land into capital: A review of recent research on land concessions for investment in Lao PDR. Part 1 of 2 - Existing Literature. A report commissioned by the Working Group on Land Issues. Vientiane, Laos.
   Google Scholar
• Dwyer, M.B. 2013. Building the politics machine: Tools for ‘resolving’ the global land grab. Development and Change 44, no. 2: 309–33. doi: 10.1111/dech.12014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dwyer, M.B. 2014. Micro-Geopolitics: Capitalising security in Laos’s golden quadrangle. Geopolitics 19, no. 2: 377–405. doi: 10.1080/14650045.2013.780033
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dwyer, M.B. 2015. The formalization fix? Land titling, land concessions and the politics of spatial transparency in Cambodia. The Journal of Peasant Studies 42, no. 5: 903–28. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2014.994510
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edelman, M. 2013. Messy hectares: Questions about the epistemology of land grabbing data. Journal of Peasant Studies 40, no. 3: 485–501. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2013.801340
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eilenberg, M. 2014. Frontier constellations: Agrarian expansion and sovereignty on the Indonesian-Malaysian border. The Journal of Peasant Studies 41, no. 2: 157–82. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2014.885433
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FAO, IFAD, UNCTAD, and The World Bank Group. 2010. Principles for responsible agricultural investment that respects rights, livelihoods and resources (Extended version): A discussion note prepared by FAO, IFAD, UNCTAD and the World Bank Group to contribute to ongoing global dialogue. 25 January.
   Google Scholar
• Fold, N. 2000. Oiling the palms: restructuring of settlement schemes in Malaysia and the new international trade regulations. World Development 28, no. 3: 473–86. doi: 10.1016/S0305-750X(99)00134-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friis, C., and J. Østergaard Nielsen. 2016. Small-Scale land acquisitions, large-scale implications: Exploring the case of Chinese banana investments in Northern Laos. Land Use Policy 57: 117–29. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.05.028
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gellert, P.K. 2015. Palm oil expansion in Indonesia: land grabbing as accumulation by dispossession. In State and citizens: Accommodation, facilitation and resistance to globalization, ed. J. Shefner, 65–99. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Gillespie, P. 2012. Participation and power in Indonesian oil palm plantations. Asia Pacific Viewpoint 53, no. 3: 254–71. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8373.2012.01494.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gillespie, P. 2016. “People, Participation, Power: The Upstream Complexity of Indonesian Oil Palm Plantations.” In The Oil Palm Complex, eds. R. Cramb and J.F. McCarthy, 301–326. Singapore: NUS Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goldman, M. 2009. Constructing connectivity: Conservation corridors and conservation politics in East African rangelands. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 99, no. 2: 335–59. doi: 10.1080/00045600802708325
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldstein, J.E. 2016. Knowing the subterranean: Land grabbing, oil palm, and divergent expertise in Indonesia’s peat soil. Environment and Planning A 48, no. 4: 754–70. doi: 10.1177/0308518X15599787
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GRAIN. 2008. Seized! The 2008 land grab for food and financial security. Barcelona: GRAIN.
   Google Scholar
• GRAIN. 2012. Grain releases data set with over 400 global land grabs. Barecelona: GRAIN.
   Google Scholar
• GRAIN. 2016. The global farmland grab in 2016: How big, how bad? Against the Grain. Barcelona: GRAIN.
   Google Scholar
• Hall, D. 2003. The international political ecology of industrial shrimp aquaculture and industrial plantation forestry in Southeast Asia. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 34, no. 2: 251–64. doi: 10.1017/S0022463403000249
   Google Scholar
• Hall, D. 2011. Land grabs, land control, and Southeast Asian crop booms. Journal of Peasant Studies 38, no. 4: 837–57. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2011.607706
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall, D. 2013. Primitive accumulation, accumulation by dispossession and the global land grab. Third World Quarterly 34, no. 9: 1582–1604. doi: 10.1080/01436597.2013.843854
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall, D, P. Hirsch, and T.M. Li. 2011. Powers of exclusion: Land dilemmas in Southeast Asia. Singapore and Honolulu: NUS Press and University of Hawaii Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hart, G., A. Turton, and B. White. 1989. Agrarian transformations: Local processes and the state in Southeast Asia. London: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hirsch, P. 1993. Political economy of environment in Thailand. Manilla: Journal of Contemporary Asia Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Hirsch, P., and L. Lohmann. 1989. Contemporary politics of environment in Thailand. Asian Survey 29, no. 4: 439–51. doi: 10.2307/2644886
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ito, T., N.F. Rachman, and L.A. Savitri. 2014. Power to make land dispossession acceptable: A policy discourse analysis of the Merauke Integrated Food and Energy Estate (MIFEE), Papua, Indonesia. The Journal of Peasant Studies 41, no. 1: 29–50. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2013.873029
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, S., ed. 2004. States of knowledge: The co-production of science and social order. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, S., 2004a. The idiom of co-production. In S. Jasanoff 2004, 1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, S., 2004b. Ordering knowledge, ordering society. In S. Jasanoff 2004, 13–45.
   Google Scholar
• Jiwan, N. 2013. The political ecology of the indonesian palm oil industry: A critical analysis. In Pye and Bhattacharya 2013, 48–75.
   Google Scholar
• Josol, M., R. Cristy, and M.J.F. Montefrio. 2013. Understanding the resilience of swidden agroecosystems interacting with rubber and oil palm production regimes in the Philippines. Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems 37, no. 7: 812–33. doi: 10.1080/21683565.2013.775540
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Julia, and B. White. 2012. Gendered experiences of dispossession: Oil palm expansion in a Dayak Hibun community in West Kalimantan. The Journal of Peasant Studies 39, no. 3–4: 995–1016. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2012.676544
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaag, M., and A. Zoomers. 2014a. Introduction: the global land grab hype – and why it is important to move beyond. In Kaag and Zoomers 2014, 1–13.
   Google Scholar
• Kaag, M., and A. Zoomers, eds. 2014b. The global land grab: Beyond the hype. Halifax and London: Fernwood Publishing and Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• Keene, S., M. Walsh-Dilley, W. Wolford, and C. Geisler. 2015. A view from the top: Examining elites in large-scale land deals. Canadian Journal of Development Studies / Revue Canadienne D’études Du Développement 36, no. 2: 131–46. doi: 10.1080/02255189.2015.1044503
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kenney-Lazar, M. 2012. Plantation rubber, land grabbing and social-property transformation in Southern Laos. The Journal of Peasant Studies 39, no. 3–4: 1017–37. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2012.674942
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keyes, C. 2012. ‘Cosmopolitan’ villagers and populist democracy in Thailand. South East Asia Research 20, no. 3: 343–60. doi: 10.5367/sear.2012.0109
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kugelman, M. 2013. Introduction. In Kugelman and Levenstein 2013, 1–20.
   Google Scholar
• Kugelman, M., and S.L. Levenstein, eds. 2013. The global farms race: Land grabs, agricultural investment, and the scramble for food security. Washington, DC: Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• Larsson, T. 2012. Land and loyalty: Security and the development of property rights in Thailand. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. 1987. Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. 1990. Drawing things together. In Representation in scientific practice, eds. M. Lynch and S. Woolgar, 19–68. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Laungaramsri, P. 2000. The ambiguity of ‘watershed: The politics of people and conservation in northern Thailand. SOJOURN: Journal of Social Issues in Southeast Asia 15, no. 1: 52–75.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Le Billon, P. 2000. The political ecology of transition in Cambodia 1989–1999: War, peace and forest exploitation. Development and Change 31: 785–805. doi: 10.1111/1467-7660.00177
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levang, P., W.F. Riva, and M.G. Orth. 2016. Oil palm plantations and conflict in Indonesia: Evidence from West Kalimantan. In Cramb and McCarthy 2016, 283–300.
   Google Scholar
• Li, T.M., ed. 1999. Transforming the Indonesian uplands. Singapore: ISEAS.
   Google Scholar
• Li, T.M. 2000. Articulating indigenous identity in Indonesia: Resource politics and the tribal slot. Comparative Studies in Society and History 42, no. 1: 149–79. doi: 10.1017/S0010417500002632
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, T.M. 2007. The will to improve: Governmentality, development, and the practice of politics. Durham: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Li, T.M. 2011. Centering labor in the land grab debate. Journal of Peasant Studies 38, no. 2: 281–98. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2011.559009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, T.M. 2014a. Land’s end: Capitalist relations on an indigenous frontier. Durham: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Li, T.M. 2014b. What Is land? assembling a resource for global investment. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 39: 589–602. doi: 10.1111/tran.12065
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LICADHO. 2016. Cambodia’s concessions. LICADHO. http://www.licadho-cambodia.org/land_concessions/.
   Google Scholar
• Mahanty, S., and S. Milne. 2016. Anatomy of a boom: Cassava as a ‘gateway’ crop in Cambodia’s north eastern borderland. Asia Pacific Viewpoint 57, no. 2: 180–93. doi: 10.1111/apv.12122
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manahan, M.A. 2011. Is Asia for sale? Trends, issues, and strategies against land grabbing. Kasarinlan: Philippine Journal of Third World Studies 26, no. 1–2: 466–81.
   Google Scholar
• Margulis, M.E., N. McKeon, S.M. Borras Jr. 2013. Land grabbing and global governance: Critical perspectives. Globalizations 10, no. 1: 1–23. doi: 10.1080/14747731.2013.764151
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matthews, N. 2012. Water grabbing in the Mekong Basin: An analysis of the winners and losers of Thailand’s hydropower development in Lao PDR. Water Alternatives 5, no. 2: 392–411.
   Google Scholar
• McAllister, K. 2015. Rubber, rights and resistance: The evolution of local struggles against a Chinese rubber concession in northern Laos. Journal of Peasant Studies 42, no. 3–4: 813–37. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2015.1036418
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCarthy, J.F., and R. Cramb. 2016. Conclusion. In Cramb and McCarthy 2016, 442–64.
   Google Scholar
• McCarthy, J.F., and Z. Zen. 2016. Agribusiness, Agrarian change, and the fate of oil palm smallholders in Jambi. In Cramb and McCarthy 2016, 109–54.
   Google Scholar
• McCarthy, J. F., J.A.C. Vel, and S. Afiff. 2012. Trajectories of land acquisition and enclosure: Development schemes, virtual land grabs, and green acquisitions in Indonesia’s outer islands. Journal of Peasant Studies 39, no. 2: 521–49. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2012.671768
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McLinden Nuijen, M., P. Men, and G. van Westen. 2014. ‘Land grabbing’ in Cambodia: land rights in a post-conflict setting. In Kaag and Zoomers 2014b, 152–69.
   Google Scholar
• McMichael, P. 2012. The land grab and corporate food regime restructuring. The Journal of Peasant Studies 39, no. 3–4: 681–701. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2012.661369
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menguita-Feranil, M.L. 2013. Contradictions of palm oil promotion in the Philippines. In Pye and Bhattacharya 2013, 97–119.
   Google Scholar
• Montefrio, M.J.F. 2012. Privileged biofuels, marginalized indigenous peoples: The coevolution of biofuels development in the tropics. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society 32, no. 1: 41–55. doi: 10.1177/0270467612444584
   Google Scholar
• Montefrio, M.J.F. 2013. The green economy and land conflict. Peace Review 25, no. 4: 502–9. doi: 10.1080/10402659.2013.846149
   Google Scholar
• Montefrio, M.J.F. 2016. Cooperation and resistance: Negotiating rubber in upland Philippines. Journal of Rural Studies 46: 111–20. doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2016.06.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montefrio, M.J.F., and W.H. Dressler. 2016. The green economy and constructions of the ‘idle’ and ‘unproductive’ uplands in the Philippines. World Development 79: 114–26. doi: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2015.11.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montefrio, M.J.F., and D. Sonnenfeld. 2011. Forests, fuel, or food? Competing coalitions and biofuels policy making in the Philippines. The Journal of Environment & Development 20, no. 1: 27–49. doi: 10.1177/1070496510394321
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montefrio, M.J.F., and D.A. Sonnenfeld. 2013. Global–local tensions in contract farming of biofuel crops involving indigenous communities in the Philippines. Society & Natural Resources 26, no. 3: 239–53. doi: 10.1080/08941920.2012.682114
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montefrio, M.J.F., D.A. Sonnenfeld, and V.A. Luzadis. 2015. Social construction of the environment and smallholder farmers’ participation in ‘low-carbon’, agro-industrial crop production contracts in the Philippines. Ecological Economics 116, August: 70–77. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.04.017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montemayor, R.Q. 2013. Regional perspectives: Asia. In Kugelman and Levenstein 2013, 135–52. Washington, DC: Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nagata, J., and S.W. Arai. 2013. Evolutionary change in the oil palm plantation sector in Riau Province, Sumatra. In Pye and Bhattacharya 2013, 76–96.
   Google Scholar
• Neef, A., S. Touch, and J. Chiengthong. 2013. The politics and ethics of land concessions in rural Cambodia. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 26, no. 6: 1085–103. doi: 10.1007/s10806-013-9446-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nevins, J., and N.L. Peluso. 2008. Taking Southeast Asia to market: Commodities, nature, and people in the neoliberal age. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ngidang, D. 2002. Contradictions in land development schemes: The case of joint ventures in Sarawak, Malaysia. Asia Pacific Viewpoint 43, no. 2: 157–80. doi: 10.1111/1467-8373.00171
   Google Scholar
• Nolte, K., W. Chamberlain, and M. Giger. 2016. International land deals for agriculture. Fresh insights from the Land Matrix: Analytical report II. Bern: CDE/CIRAD/GIGA/BOP.
   Google Scholar
• Nooteboom, G., and L. Bakker. 2014. Beyond the Gulf State investment hype: The case of Indonesia and the Philippines. In Kaag and Zoomers 2014b, 170–84.
   Google Scholar
• Nyíri, P. 2012. The renaissance of concessions. Political Geography 31, no. 4: 195–96. doi: 10.1016/j.polgeo.2012.04.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oya, C. 2013. Methodological reflections on ‘land grab’ databases and the ‘land grab’ literature ‘rush.’ Journal of Peasant Studies 40, no. 3: 503–20. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2013.799465
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pearce, F. 2012. The land grabbers: The new fight over who owns the earth. Boston: Beacon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Peluso, N.L. 1992. Rich forests, poor people: Resource control and resistance in Java. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Peluso, N.L. 1995. Whose woods are these? Counter-mapping forest territories in Kalimantan, Indonesia. Antipode 27, no. 4: 383–406.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peluso, N.L., and C. Lund. 2011. New frontiers of land control: Introduction. Journal of Peasant Studies 38, no. 4: 667–81. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2011.607692
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peluso, N.L., and P. Vandergeest. 2001. Genealogies of the political forest and customary rights in Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand. The Journal of Asian Studies 60, no. 3: 761–812. doi: 10.2307/2700109
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peluso, N.L., and P. Vandergeest. 2011. Political ecologies of war and forests: Counterinsurgencies and the making of national natures. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 101, no. 3: 587–608. doi: 10.1080/00045608.2011.560064
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pichler, M. 2015. Legal dispossession: State strategies and selectivities in the expansion of Indonesian palm oil and agrofuel production. Development and Change 46, no. 3: 508–33. doi: 10.1111/dech.12162
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polack, E. 2012. Agricultural land acquisitions: A lens on Southeast Asia. IIED briefing. London: International Institute for Environment and Development . http://pubs.iied.org/17123IIED
   Google Scholar
• Potter, L. 2012. New transmigration ‘paradigm’ in Indonesia: Examples from Kalimantan. Asia Pacific Viewpoint 53, no. 3: 272–87. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8373.2012.01492.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Potter, L. 2016. Alternative pathways for smallholder oil palm in Indonesia: International comparisons. In Cramb and McCarthy 2016, 155–88.
   Google Scholar
• Potter, L., and J. Lee. 1998. Tree planting in Indonesia: Trends, impacts and directions. CIFOR Occasional Paper No. 18. http://www.cgiar.org/cifor.
   Google Scholar
• Pulhin, J.M., and M.A.M. Ramirez. 2013. National updates on agribusiness large scale land acquisitions in Southeast Asia. Brief #4 of 8: Republic of the Philippines. In Chao 2013, 42–58.
   Google Scholar
• Pye, O. 2010. The biofuel connection: Transnational activism and the palm oil boom. The Journal of Peasant Studies 37, no. 4: 851–74. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2010.512461
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pye, O. 2013. Introduction. In Pye and Bhattacharya, 2013, 1–18.
   Google Scholar
• Pye, O. and J. Bhattacharya eds. 2013. The palm oil controversy in Southeast Asia: A transnational perspective. Singapore: ISEAS Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Ravanera, R.R., and V. Gorra. 2011. Commercial pressures on land in Asia: An overview. Rome: International Land Coalition.
   Google Scholar
• Roth, R.J, and W. Dressler. 2012. Market-Oriented conservation governance: The particularities of place. Geoforum 43, no. 3: 363–66. doi: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2012.01.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rudi, L.-M., H. Azadi, F. Witlox, and P. Lebailly. 2014. Land rights as an engine of growth? An analysis of Cambodian land grabs in the context of development theory. Land Use Policy 38: 564–72. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.12.016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rulli, M.C., and P. D’Odorico. 2013. The science of evidence: The value of global studies on land rush. Journal of Peasant Studies 40, no. 5: 907–9. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2013.853044
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salerno, T. 2014. Capitalising on the financialisation of agriculture: Cargill’s land investment techniques in the Philippines. Third World Quarterly 35, no. 9: 1709–27. doi: 10.1080/01436597.2014.971567
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schönweger, O., and P. Messerli. 2015. Land acquisition, investment, and development in the Lao coffee sector: successes and failures. Critical Asian Studies 47, no. 1: 94–122. doi: 10.1080/14672715.2015.997095
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scoones, I., R. Hall, S.M. Borras Jr., B. White, and W. Wolford. 2013. The politics of evidence: Methodologies for understanding the global land rush. The Journal of Peasant Studies 40, no. 3: 469–83. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2013.801341
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scott, J.C. 1985. Weapons of the weak: Everyday forms of peasant resistance. New Haven: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Semedi, P., and L. Bakker. 2014. Between land grabbing and farmers’ benefits: Land transfers in West Kalimantan, Indonesia. The Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology 15, no. 4: 376–90. doi: 10.1080/14442213.2014.928741
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sikor, T. 2012. Tree plantations, politics of possession and the absence of land grabs in Vietnam. The Journal of Peasant Studies 39, no. 3–4: 1077–101. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2012.674943
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Somnuek, S., M.M.A. Slingerland, and C.M. Grünbühel. 2016. The introduction of oil palm in northeast Thailand: A new cash crop for smallholders? Asia Pacific Viewpoint 57, no. 1: 76–90. doi: 10.1111/apv.12114
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Susanti, A. and S. Budidarsono. 2014. “Land Governance and Oil Palm Development: Examples from Riau Province, Indonesia. In The Global Land Grab. Beyond the Hype, eds. M. Kaag and A. Zoomers, 119–134. London: Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• Sutton, K. 2001. Agribusiness on a grand scale - FELDA’s Sahabat complex in East Malaysia. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography 22, no. 1: 90–105. doi: 10.1111/1467-9493.00095
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taotawin, N., and P. Taotawin. 2015. Crop booms and changing land use and land control in Thailand’s agricultural frontier. Paper presented at Land grabbing, conflict and agrarian - environmental transformations: perspectives from East and Southeast Asia, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, P. 2016. Frontier commoditisation in post-socialist Southeast Asia. Asia Pacific Viewpoint 57, no. 2: 145–53. doi: 10.1111/apv.12125
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teoh, Cheng Hai. 2013. Malaysian corporations as strategic players in Southeast Asia’s palm oil industry. In Pye and Bhattacharya 2013, 19–47.
   Google Scholar
• Tsing, A.L. 2005. Friction: An ethnography of global connection. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Un, K., and S. So. 2011. Land rights in Cambodia: How neopatrimonial politics restricts land policy reform. Pacific Affairs 84, no. 2: 289–308. doi: 10.5509/2011842289
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vandergeest, P. 2003. Racialization and citizenship in Thai forest politics. Society & Natural Resources 16, no. 1: 19–37. doi: 10.1080/08941920309172
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vandergeest, P., and N.L. Peluso. 1995. Territorialization and state power in Thailand. Theory and Society 24: 385–426. doi: 10.1007/BF00993352
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vandergeest, P., M. Flaherty, and P. Miller. 1999. A political ecology of shrimp aquaculture in Thailand. Rural Sociology 64, no. 4: 573–96. doi: 10.1111/j.1549-0831.1999.tb00379.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Varkkey, H. 2012. Patronage politics as a driver of economic regionalisation: The Indonesian oil palm sector and transboundary haze. Asia Pacific Viewpoint 53, no. 3: 314–29. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8373.2012.01493.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vel, J. 2014. Trading in discursive commodities: Biofuel brokers’ roles in perpetuating the Jatropha hype in Indonesia. Sustainability 6: 2802–21. doi: 10.3390/su6052802
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Visser, O., and M. Spoor. 2011. Land grabbing in post-Soviet Eurasia: The world’s largest agricultural land reserves at stake. Journal of Peasant Studies 38, no. 2: 299–323. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2011.559010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, A. 2012. Thailand’s political peasants: Power in the modern rural economy. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
   Google Scholar
• White, B., S.M. Borras Jr., R. Hall, I. Scoones, and W. Wolford. 2012. The new enclosures: Critical perspectives on corporate land deals. The Journal of Peasant Studies 39, no. 3–4: 619–47. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2012.691879
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woertz, E. 2013. Oil for food: The global food crisis and the Middle East. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wolford, W., S.M. Borras Jr., R. Hall, I. Scoones, and B. White. 2013. Governing global land deals: The role of the state in the rush for land. Development and Change 44, no. 2: 189–210. doi: 10.1111/dech.12017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woods, K. 2011. Ceasefire capitalism: Military–private partnerships, resource concessions and military–state building in the Burma–China borderlands. Journal of Peasant Studies 38, no. 4: 747–70. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2011.607699
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Bank. 2010. Rising global interest in farmland: Can it yield sustainable and equitable benefits? Washington, DC: World Bank.
   Google Scholar
• Zen, Z., C. Barlow, R. Gondowarsito, and J.F. McCarthy. 2016. Interventions to promote smallholder oil palm and socio-economic improvement in Indonesia. In Cramb and McCarthy 2016, 78–108.
   Google Scholar
• Zoomers, A. 2010. Globalisation and the foreignisation of space: Seven processes driving the current global land grab. The Journal of Peasant Studies 37, no. 2: 429–47. doi: 10.1080/03066151003595325
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar