Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10397/112342
PIRA download icon_1.1View/Download Full Text
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributorDepartment of Applied Social Sciencesen_US
dc.creatorKan, Ken_US
dc.creatorSun, Jen_US
dc.date.accessioned2025-04-09T00:50:48Z-
dc.date.available2025-04-09T00:50:48Z-
dc.identifier.issn0743-0167en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10397/112342-
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherElsevier Ltden_US
dc.rights© 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).en_US
dc.rightsThe following publication Kan, K., & Sun, J. (2024). Dispossession and beyond: Politics of rural land conversion in China's tourism villages. Journal of Rural Studies, 112, 103429 is available at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2024.103429.en_US
dc.subjectChinaen_US
dc.subjectDispossessionen_US
dc.subjectGlobal southen_US
dc.subjectLand expropriationen_US
dc.subjectLand transferen_US
dc.subjectRural tourismen_US
dc.titleDispossession and beyond : politics of rural land conversion in China's tourism villagesen_US
dc.typeJournal/Magazine Articleen_US
dc.identifier.volume112en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jrurstud.2024.103429en_US
dcterms.abstractAcross the peripheries of global South cities, projects to convert rural land for development purposes have brought dramatic impact on rural communities and environments. Many of these initiatives involve aggregating land, mobilizing investments, and resettling populations, with direct implications for villagers’ land rights and livelihoods. In existing studies, rural land conversions have often been examined through frameworks of “land grabbing” and “dispossession”. This paper argues for the need to go beyond these frameworks in conceptualizing the varied pathways and outcomes of rural land takings. It presents a comparative case study of two villages in China, whose land has been redeployed for tourism development. In one village, state-led expropriation led to the loss of land rights and the resettlement of villagers in new housing complexes. In another, villagers held onto land ownership and their property but saw intra-community inequalities amplified as residents were differentially incorporated into the tourism economy. By demonstrating how the nuanced mechanisms of land conversion could facilitate variegated livelihood and distributive outcomes between and within communities, this paper problematizes universalist conceptualizations of dispossession and calls for theorizing both “with” and “beyond” dispossession to account for the multifaceted dynamics of land development in global South contexts.en_US
dcterms.accessRightsopen accessen_US
dcterms.bibliographicCitationJournal of rural studies, Dec. 2024, v. 112, 103429en_US
dcterms.isPartOfJournal of rural studiesen_US
dcterms.issued2024-12-
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85207120087-
dc.identifier.eissn1873-1392en_US
dc.identifier.artn103429en_US
dc.description.validate202504 bcchen_US
dc.description.oaVersion of Recorden_US
dc.identifier.FolderNumberOA_Scopus/WOS, a3606-
dc.identifier.SubFormID50451-
dc.description.fundingSourceRGCen_US
dc.description.pubStatusPublisheden_US
dc.description.oaCategoryCCen_US
Appears in Collections:Journal/Magazine Article
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
1-s2.0-S074301672400233X-main.pdf6.59 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Open Access Information
Status open access
File Version Version of Record
Access
View full-text via PolyU eLinks SFX Query
Show simple item record

Page views

3
Citations as of Apr 14, 2025

Downloads

4
Citations as of Apr 14, 2025

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.