108
In defense of land rights: A monitoring report on land conflicts in six Asian countries
Conceptual framework
Conflict in this study is defined as “a situation wherein two or more
stakeholders compete for control over resources, decision-making and truth.”
More specifically, this study looks into land and resource conflicts, which is
defined as a “situation where two or more stakeholders compete for control
over the use, decision-making, and transfer of land and resource rights.” Land
and resource conflicts threaten the enjoyment of tenure rights of stakeholders
particularly those with less power, such as rural poor communities. Some land
conflicts hinder the transfer of land rights, others deny the full range all land
rights, while still others reduce rights to lower levels of enjoyment.
Use rights enable a rights holder to have access to land, extract resources
from the land, and exploit resources for economic purposes. Decision-making
rights empower a rights holder to plan the future uses of land and to control
the entry of people into the land. Finally, transfer rights enable a rights holder
to relinquish and pass the rights on said land and natural resources through
lease/rental, bequeathment and/or sale. These land rights are not absolute,
and are inter-related in a continuum.
In the Philippines, there are a number of tenure instruments issued by
the government. The table on page 109 shows various Philippine tenure
instruments relevant to this study, plotted against the continuum of land rights.
THE NATURE OF CONFLICT
ANGOC
The interaction of stakeholders determines how a conflict situation unfolds
through time. All conflicts start as latent conflict – “a situation wherein
stakeholders are unaware or are aware, but not taking action on how their
aspirations, goals and interests are competing over resources, decision-making
and/or truth.” When stakeholders become aware of a conflict situation, they
can choose from a wide range of responses. Inaction and withdrawal make the
conflict stay latent, while the pursuit of integrative solutions and compromise
provides space for issues to be addressed peacefully. One form of peaceful
response that facilitates an integrative solution or compromise is the use of
a third party facilitator or “an individual, group or entity that has authority
and is respected by stakeholders in a conflict situation, tasked to facilitate the
de-escalation of the conflict situation and to seek an integrative solution or
compromise.”
When third party facilitators are unavailable, or when stakeholders are not
able to secure acceptable outcomes from engaging with each other or with
third party facilitators, stakeholders may be pushed to engage in violence or
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents