促进土地共享计划,作为加纳不可避免的旧法达玛驱逐和挑战的替代安置方案

IF 1.1 4区 社会学 Q3 GEOGRAPHY
F. Mensah, Qingnian Yu, Guoqing Shi
{"title":"促进土地共享计划,作为加纳不可避免的旧法达玛驱逐和挑战的替代安置方案","authors":"F. Mensah, Qingnian Yu, Guoqing Shi","doi":"10.1080/03736245.2021.1966492","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The study aims to explain the essence of an alternative approach to the Old Fadama inevitable eviction and to justify the merits & feasibility of a land-sharing scheme to the community. Previous studies used principles to explain the feasibility of land-sharing, but the present study adopted both principles and theories. The injustice and social inequality from evictions are ironed out by applying Amartya Sen’s idea on justice that counters transcendentalism theory. The study answers three critical questions: why the community residents demand justice, how advantageous land-sharing is to other methods, and how feasible land-sharing is to the research area. A survey was done in the study area using structured questionnaires, interviews, and observations. A purposive sampling technique selected 600 affected community residents, 30 local government officials, and one coordinator from Amnesty International Ghana. Both qualitative and quantitative analytical methods were used to analyse the primary data. First of all, the study findings revealed four substantive claims for requesting justice from the local authorities; citizenship rights, property rights, temporal permit, and long-term stay. Secondly, land-sharing is preferred to relocation and cash compensation because it poses less risk than the other two. Finally, the study supported the feasibility of a land-sharing scheme to the Old Fadama based on Rabé’s (2005) principles. The study also concluded that information and compensation are critical to the resettlement process; hence, local authorities should.","PeriodicalId":46279,"journal":{"name":"South African Geographical Journal","volume":"35 1","pages":"397 - 426"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fostering land-sharing scheme as alternative resettlement to the inevitable Old Fadama evictions and challenges in Ghana\",\"authors\":\"F. Mensah, Qingnian Yu, Guoqing Shi\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/03736245.2021.1966492\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The study aims to explain the essence of an alternative approach to the Old Fadama inevitable eviction and to justify the merits & feasibility of a land-sharing scheme to the community. Previous studies used principles to explain the feasibility of land-sharing, but the present study adopted both principles and theories. The injustice and social inequality from evictions are ironed out by applying Amartya Sen’s idea on justice that counters transcendentalism theory. The study answers three critical questions: why the community residents demand justice, how advantageous land-sharing is to other methods, and how feasible land-sharing is to the research area. A survey was done in the study area using structured questionnaires, interviews, and observations. A purposive sampling technique selected 600 affected community residents, 30 local government officials, and one coordinator from Amnesty International Ghana. Both qualitative and quantitative analytical methods were used to analyse the primary data. First of all, the study findings revealed four substantive claims for requesting justice from the local authorities; citizenship rights, property rights, temporal permit, and long-term stay. Secondly, land-sharing is preferred to relocation and cash compensation because it poses less risk than the other two. Finally, the study supported the feasibility of a land-sharing scheme to the Old Fadama based on Rabé’s (2005) principles. The study also concluded that information and compensation are critical to the resettlement process; hence, local authorities should.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46279,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"South African Geographical Journal\",\"volume\":\"35 1\",\"pages\":\"397 - 426\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"South African Geographical Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/03736245.2021.1966492\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GEOGRAPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African Geographical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03736245.2021.1966492","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

本研究旨在解释老法达玛不可避免的驱逐的替代方法的本质,并为社区证明土地共享计划的优点和可行性。以往的研究采用原则来解释土地共享的可行性,但本研究采用了原则和理论相结合的方法。运用阿马蒂亚·森与先验主义理论相对立的正义观,消除了驱逐所带来的不公正和社会不平等。该研究回答了三个关键问题:为什么社区居民要求正义,土地共享与其他方法相比有多大优势,以及土地共享对研究区域的可行性如何。在研究区域进行了一项调查,采用结构化问卷调查、访谈和观察。有目的的抽样技术选择了600名受影响的社区居民、30名当地政府官员和一名来自大赦国际加纳的协调员。采用定性和定量两种分析方法对原始资料进行分析。首先,研究结果揭示了向地方当局要求司法公正的四项实质性要求;公民权、财产权、临时许可和长期居留。其次,土地共享比搬迁和现金补偿更受欢迎,因为前者风险更小。最后,该研究支持了基于rab(2005)原则的旧法达玛土地共享方案的可行性。研究还得出结论,资料和补偿对重新安置过程至关重要;因此,地方政府应该这样做。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Fostering land-sharing scheme as alternative resettlement to the inevitable Old Fadama evictions and challenges in Ghana
ABSTRACT The study aims to explain the essence of an alternative approach to the Old Fadama inevitable eviction and to justify the merits & feasibility of a land-sharing scheme to the community. Previous studies used principles to explain the feasibility of land-sharing, but the present study adopted both principles and theories. The injustice and social inequality from evictions are ironed out by applying Amartya Sen’s idea on justice that counters transcendentalism theory. The study answers three critical questions: why the community residents demand justice, how advantageous land-sharing is to other methods, and how feasible land-sharing is to the research area. A survey was done in the study area using structured questionnaires, interviews, and observations. A purposive sampling technique selected 600 affected community residents, 30 local government officials, and one coordinator from Amnesty International Ghana. Both qualitative and quantitative analytical methods were used to analyse the primary data. First of all, the study findings revealed four substantive claims for requesting justice from the local authorities; citizenship rights, property rights, temporal permit, and long-term stay. Secondly, land-sharing is preferred to relocation and cash compensation because it poses less risk than the other two. Finally, the study supported the feasibility of a land-sharing scheme to the Old Fadama based on Rabé’s (2005) principles. The study also concluded that information and compensation are critical to the resettlement process; hence, local authorities should.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
7.10%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: The South African Geographical Journal was founded in 1917 and is the flagship journal of the Society of South African Geographers. The journal aims at using southern Africa as a region from, and through, which to communicate geographic knowledge and to engage with issues and themes relevant to the discipline. The journal is a forum for papers of a high academic quality and welcomes papers dealing with philosophical and methodological issues and topics of an international scope that are significant for the region and the African continent, including: Climate change Environmental studies Development Governance and policy Physical and urban Geography Human Geography Sustainability Tourism GIS and remote sensing
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信