Voluntary and involuntary resettlement in China: a false dichotomy?

The success of involuntary resettlement is contingent on recasting the involuntary as voluntary. To explore this proposition, this article presents two projects in China - one "voluntary" (Poverty Alleviation Resettlement or PAR) and relatively "successful" and one "involunt...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Development in practice 2015-07, Vol.25 (5), p.612-627
Main Authors: Wilmsen, Brooke, Wang, Mark
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Aid - development policies
China
Conflict and reconstruction - Forced displacement
Development
East Asia
Labour and livelihoods - Poverty reduction
Planning systems
Practice
Project evaluation
Resettlement
Voluntary work
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The success of involuntary resettlement is contingent on recasting the involuntary as voluntary. To explore this proposition, this article presents two projects in China - one "voluntary" (Poverty Alleviation Resettlement or PAR) and relatively "successful" and one "involuntary" (Three Gorges Project Resettlement or TGPR) and less so. The research finds the voluntary-involuntary dichotomy a false one. It is not volition that leads to better outcomes, but people-centred practices that are embedded in policy, planning, and implementation of PAR. Perhaps the most important lesson drawn is that all resettlements should be based on a commitment to settlement and not just resettlement.
ISSN:0961-4524
1364-9213
DOI:10.1080/09614524.2015.1051947