she felt was her (unstated) contract with the shelter workers in her ABC interviews: "if ..... The Bank's Operational Policy on Involuntary Displacement (OP 4.12 ¶. 2b) sets, as ..... Berghahn Books, Oxford and Rhode Island, 1996. Turton, David.
R OUTINE AND D ISSONANT C ULTURES : A THEORY ABOUT THE PSYCHO - SOCIO - CULTURAL DISRUPTIONS OF INVOLUNTARY DISPLACE MENT AND WAYS TO MIT IGATE THEM WITHOUT INFLICT ING EVE N MORE DAMAGE 1.
Theodore E. Downing and Carmen Garcia-Downing University of Arizona Categories such as time, space, cause, and number represent the most general relations that exist between things; surpassing all our other ideas in extension, they dominate all the details of our intellectual life. If humankind did not agree upon these essential ideas at every moment, if they did not have the same conception of time, space, cause, and number, all contact between their minds would be impossible….. Emile Durkheim, Les forms elementaires de la vie religieuse Paris, 1912), 22-23. Despite stiff resistance, modest advances have been made to avoid or mitigate the economic impoverishment that threatens involuntarily displaced peoples (Cernea 1999, Scudder 2005, Mejia 1999). Less attention has been paid to the non-economic, psycho-socio-cultural (PSC)
1
In Press. In Anthony Oliver-Smith. 2008 probable publication date. Development and Dispossession: The Anthropology of Displacement and Resettlement. Santa Fe: School for Advanced Research Press.
457
impoverishment inflicted by involuntary displacement (de Wet 2006, Oliver-Smith 1996, Downing 1996, Cernea 2000, Tamongdong-Helin 1996, Barabas and Bartolome 1992).
Mitigation of the economic
damages has focused on restoration of losses, recovery of livelihoods, or – in rare instances – the sharing of project benefits with those displaced (Downing 2002b, see Cernea this volume). In contrast, mitigation of PSC damages has proven much more problematic. Few projects consider or attempt to mitigate this risk. Those who profit from infrastructure projects that force people to relocate - avoid this untidy issue. Four, if not more, fallacies conveniently block further discussions and actions, offering those who should bear responsibility an untenable rationale for not addressing it. The first, the policy-planning fallacy, is that if proper involuntary resettlement plan or policies are in place, the PSC recovery will follow. The second, the economic deterministic fallacy, holds that if the economic restoration or recovery is adequately financed and executed, the PSC issues will work themselves out. Assuming that the policies, politics and economics have been addressed but PSC impoverishment still occurs, a third fallacy is the blame the victims:. they are incapable of understanding or taking advantage of economic opportunities offered them. And a fourth, the someone-else-should-pay- fallacy, holds that the project designers, governments and financiers are neither legally nor economically liable for psycho-socio-cultural changes (Downing 2002a). This paper reframes the psycho-socio-cultural dimension, arguing that involuntary displacement transforms routine culture into dissonant culture and then yields a transformed, different routine culture. In the
458
psycho-socio-cultural realm it is highly improbable that a predisplacement routine culture may be recovered, let alone be restored. While Humpty-Dumpty cannot be put back together; there are ways to mitigate PSC impoverishment. Relative success, we shall argue, is determined by how well the post-displacement routine culture addresses the primary questions of the displaced compared to the pre-displacement culture. Primary questions include: Who are we? Where are we? And how do we relate to one another? The applied question then becomes what can be done to facilitate the re-establishment of a new routine culture so that it adequately addresses the primary cultural questions faced by the displaced peoples? We will highlight actions that might be taken to minimize PSC impoverishment and strengthen the social and cultural capacity of displaced peoples.
I MPOVERISHMENT R ISKS Each year, millions of people are unexpectedly uprooted by war, natural disasters, and infrastructure developments. These events unleash widespread psycho-socio-cultural-economic and political changes. Chief among these is the resettlement effect, which is defined as the “loss of physical and non-physical assets, including homes, communities, productive land, income-earning assets and sources, subsistence, resources, cultural sites, social structures, networks and ties, cultural identity and mutual health mechanisms.” (Asian Development Bank 1998). Failure to mitigate the resettlement effect may generate “new poverty” as opposed to the old poverty of people before displacement (Cernea 2000, 2002, Downing 2002a, 2002b, Scudder 2005).
459
For over a half century, a global struggle has been waged to discover what interventions might reduce the suffering and likelihood of the resettlement effect on the displaced - unfortunate victims of other people’s progress (see Guggenheim 1994 for an annotated bibliography until 1993, Shami 1993). Professionals, academics, non-governmental and human rights activists, and a few social scientists working for key international financial institutions have shown that negative consequences of involuntary displacements extend far beyond the loss of land. They seek ways to prevent impoverishment and reconstruct and improve the livelihoods of displacees. Despite their small numbers, their efforts has encouraged most of the international financial intermediaries in establishing involuntary resettlement guidelines, several national governments – notably China and India – setting national policies, and the promotion of research within the social sciences, including economics. Over 400 professionals working on involuntary displacement and resettlement formed the International Network on Displacement and Resettlement in 2000. Since 2000 it has maintained a website at www.displacement.net and publishes an on-line, quarterly newsletter edited by Hari M. Mathur. Risk is the possibility that a course of social action might trigger adverse effects such as losses, destruction, and deprivation to future generations (Cernea 2000).
The majority of the professionals working on
involuntary displacement and resettlement have focused on the multidimensional impoverishment risks (homelessness, food insecurity, increased morbidity, landlessness, loss of employment, loss of access to common resources, marginalization, loss of human rights, and social disarticulation) (Cernea 1999, 2000, 2002; Downing 2002b, Scudder 2005, Johnston and Garcia-Downing 2004). 460
R OUTINE C ULTURE
AND
P RIMARY Q UESTIONS
The psycho-socio-cultural risks have been the most neglected, the most difficult to study, and the least likely to be mitigated (Cernea 2000, Scudder 2005, Downing 1996, Wallace 1957). A new social poverty may be seen everywhere - in lives wrecked, social relationships realigned, social and economic assets lost, leaders toppled, people – particularly elderly people – growing ill and dying prematurely, and the diminished capacity of a society to withstand non-project related threats (Oliver-Smith 1986, Cernea 1990, 1994, 1995, 2002, de Wet 2006, Behura and Nayak 1993, Downing 1996, 2002). A list of such impacts, however informative, does not provide an understanding of the underlying dynamics so that mitigation may be effectuated. Why are social relations realigned in one way rather than another? Why are particular assets selected or created to replace lost assets? An understanding of what happens when people are involuntarily displaced begins with culture. Culture is a set of constructs and rules for constructing the world, interpreting it, and adapting to it (Selby and Garretson 1981, Bock 1968, Csikszentimihalyi and Rochberg-Halton 1981, Frake 1993, Fabian 1992). The constructs and rules answer what we like to call “primary questions.” Who are we? Where are we? Where are we coming from? Where are we going? Why do people live and die? What are our responsibilities to others and ourselves? Most likely there are more, but these cover a lot of ground. The answers to the primary questions change from culture to culture and within cultures. The constructs are codified in language, symbols, places-endowed with meaning, kinship categories, rituals, dances, music, humor, public works, access rights to certain areas and 461
resources, titles and job descriptions – and other social-cultural expressions (Low 1992, Lightfoot 1976, Downing 1996, Pellow 1994, Riley 1994, Sutro and Downing 1988, Hirsch 1999). For the most part, life is humdrum – or to say this in another way, patterned. Day after day, individuals make tactical decisions as they navigate through routine culture. People repair broken doors, meet friends, mend fences, collect firewood, and get from one place to another. Culture defines how they gain access to restricted places/situations by performing routine events such as going to school, paying admission, or working for income. These are tactical adjustments to life. Kin groups and institutions – schools, businesses, governments, and other organizations also address primary questions and, collectively, navigate and construct routine culture (Douglas 1973). These groups and their leaders continuously grapple, usually in tightly patterned fashions, with recurring questions and tactical issues, such as recruitment, retirement, rewards, budget cycles, goals, arranging the next meeting, announcements, opening and closing facilities, or planning an event in their annual cycle. Routine culture is defined by roughly the same people, or groups, repeatedly reoccupying the same places at the same times. Negotiation is the most common way that individuals and institutions work things out. What is and is not an acceptable construction of space, time and personages undergo constant negotiation. Life becomes, simultaneously, interesting and exacerbating, as people continuously define and redefine their surroundings and their perceived place in those surroundings. And the PSC constructions take on value (de Pina Cabal 1994) – as individual and groups judge certain constructs to be more desirable or undesirable than others.
462
Life may be humdrum, but it is not static.
Not everyone
understands, agrees or accepts their place within the constructs or the constructs themselves. Institutions, individuals or families redefine their constructed-spaces, their times or their personages. Someone moves things around, reschedules an event, makes new friends, changes jobs, and so on. Negotiations never end. Occasionally, individual or institutional relations are more radically rearranged; someone is born, dies, divorces or marries. From a societal perspective, unavoidable demographic changes cause regular micro-disruptions which force individuals and institutions to rearrange their routine (Behura and Nayak 1993, Lightfoot 1979). Field anthropologists take great interest in learning the meanings associated with a new cultural landscape that may at first glance, be devoid of recognizable meaning. Early anthropology focused on these microdisturbances, adjustments that cultures made to changes in birth, initiations, maturations, death, and its spatial-temporal manifestations. A person dies, funerals and memorials reaffirm the primary questions; resources controlled by the deceased are reallocated through inheritance or destroyed, and roles and obligations reassigned or forgotten (see anthropological works on inheritance and succession going back many years such as Downing 1973, Goody 1969, 1970). Memories and losses are felt and real, but life goes on. Comparable rearrangements occur when new members join the society, at birth or initiation. Weddings, funerals and other rites of passage routinely reallocate resources, mending inescapable demographic rifts and redefining the players, but not the playing field. Moreover, these rearrangements strengthen the culture as individuals reaffirm their shared values. In a comparable manner, the needs of the vulnerable - women, children, elderly, the landless and disabled - are met by social institutions and intra-personal reciprocities 463
that supply them with critical life-sustaining resources. The resiliency of peoples can be measured by their ability to continuously mobilize resources to meet the needs of their dependent populations. 2 Psycho-social and cultural landscapes are crowded with the results of previous, often long-forgotten, negotiations. Over time, every nook and cranny, every event, every rule is the product of intense social interactions. The landscapes take many forms, including civic calendars, time zones, property lines, zoning, parks, household gardens, buildings, or bus routes. Negotiations may be as simple as discussions about where events should be located, disputes over space, what to call something. Traditional public areas, for example, are often the product of generations old conflicts and/or compromises invisible to current users (Aronsson 2002). Cultural landscapes often take on non-material form such as titles, positions, “rights”, names, kinship categories, and the like. In the race to build infrastructure, a community may appear to outsiders to be little more than an impoverished place – devoid of the rich meaning found in more affluent surroundings. Not true. Move closer and the layers of cultural onion seem infinite. During the senior author’s four
2
Some cultures spend their spare time playing games that create new, temporary routine cultures in which people can practice tactical moves for rewards. Gaming holds a significant place in culture, permitting individuals and groups to test and improve their agility to responding to the unexpected. 464
years in Arizona as a lawmaker, he spent thousands of hours refining and adding to the State of Arizona’s statutory law. These 12,000+ pages of law are the product of almost 100 years of negotiations over the formal rules for social relationships for 6.5 million people, institutions, companies, and interests. For most Arizonans, however, the rules for routine culture are unrecorded – the product of a shared culture – an unwritten code much larger than statutory laws. The spatial and temporal organization of routines (Downing 1996) gives communities and individuals constructed predictability, where at certain places and times their primary questions are repeatedly addressed and answered. When is it? It’s Christmas. Where am I? I’m at home. Who am I with? I am with my family. What are Christians doing? They are celebrating the birth of Jesus. And so it goes, with time, place and personages redefined according to a culture’s particular constructs. The economic constructs and actions are particularly fundamental to routine culture – assuring both identification and a continuous supply or usage of resources and meeting the material needs of individuals and institutions. It is here that natural cycles (such as seasonal changes) intermesh with cultural constructs. Cyclical variation in food and income are roughly predictable and planned for accordingly. Routine culture gives most people a degree of order, stability, security and predictability in their daily lives, a sense of health and well-being.
D ISSONANT
CULTURE
Involuntary displacement drastically destabilizes routine culture by threatening or rendering routine culture meaningless. Social life becomes chaotic, uncertain, and unpredictable. Routine culture gives way to what we shall call dissonant culture - a temporary reordering of space, time, 465
relationships, norms and psycho-social-cultural constructs. Dissonant culture, like non-harmonious music notes that cause tension – cries out for a resolution. Tactical maneuvers of individuals and institutions become disconnected from future actions. The game cannot be played without a field. Depending on how this threat is handled, involuntary displacement may bring into question the validity of the constructed answers to primary culture. Although the people may physically survive, culturally what was, is no more. Dissonance usually appears long before physical displacement .3 Almost every observer of an involuntary displacement has reported that psycho-socio-cultural changes appear long before infrastructure construction or relocation begins. Scudder and Colson found in their work with the Gwenbe Tonga in connection with the Kariba dam, that the people were in denial when rumors began to circulate about their possible relocation (Scudder 2005). The depth of the dissonance is difficult to imagine. Inga-Lill Aronsson (2002) offers one of the few first hand observations of the appearance of cultural dissonance. Living with her young child with the group to be resettled, she shared with them the disbelief that everything the people knew was about to change until the blasting began. Familiar features of the landscape dynamited –
3
In some instances, dissonant culture may appear because the productive base, a fishing ground, agricultural site, or ritual area is lost without any physical relocation of a peoples. 466
convincing the project affected people that what they could barely or not imagine was coming true. Within the displaced population, the risks of social impoverishment are likely to be unevenly distributed. The vulnerable are likely to lose access to an often overburdened social safety net. Demographics, location and income differences may inadvertently expose some parts of the population more than others. Temporal routines, such as going to work, leaving the kids at school, lunch breaks, getting your hair cut, shopping, morning coffee, and the like are gone.
Socially-
constructed relationships may be temporarily, and sometimes permanently broken. The position of the social unit – be it a household, family, or village - relative to other non-affected social units may change (marginalization). The routine provisioning of food breaks down – not from cyclical scarcity, but from unanticipated events and with an uncertain chance of replenishment. As resettlement nears, dissonance simultaneously spreads across the culture. Productive activities are disrupted. Resources, such as land or jobs, are either irrelevant or gone. Education, formal and socialization activities become difficult to sustain, as what is being taught is disarticulated from present value. Social arrangements that allow sharing of common goods become insignificant because the common resource is insufficient, disappearing or gone. Intensified, involuntary displacement may break a people’s social geometry, the bonds that, in routine culture, were continually recreated by socially constructed time, space and personages (Downing 1996). Research on the psycho-socio-cultural processes is not easy. Economic sciences have not been very useful in explaining the megachanges unleashed by extensive socio-cultural disorganization, especially 467
when it involves forced displacement. Part of the problem is that it is methodological challenging: too much happens to too many people too fast. Only a few who were not displaced have witnessed the full force of the dissonant phase of an involuntary displacement. Another place and time, one of us walked the streets of the new central Mexican town of Bella Vista del Rio a few weeks after its new inhabitants were involuntarily relocated to make way for the Zimapan dam (Guggenheim 1991, 1993, Aronsson 2002, Greaves 1997) . This is usually a time of substantial activities as people prepare for the evening, children played basketball under the newly installed streetlights, but adults were not to be seen. Something was wrong. Each family sat in their house in silence. Elderly stared at the walls or rocked back and forth in chairs, staring into space. No laughter. No radios played. Conversations were truncated. Few tasks were being done. People just sat there, as if they were props in a museum. Returning a year later, the evening streets more closely resembled non-relocated villages. Those fortunate enough to have never experienced dissonant culture, may have come close to observing spatial and temporal dissonance in the live media coverage of natural disasters.4
4
Three weakly articulated scholarly discussions have focused on questions of involuntary displacement, organized on the basis of the force causing the displacement: i.e. conflicts, disasters, or development. Noble efforts have been made to articulate these distinct traditions (Hansen and Oliver-Smith 1982; Cernea 1990, 1996; Turton 2006; Scudder 1993, Oliver-Smith 2005; Muggah 2003).
468
On 9/11/2001 and then again during the Katrina Hurricane in 2005, nonspecialists witnessed the chaos of dissonant culture – even if it were observed through the media. The familiar site of the World Trade Center was part of the routine culture of millions of Americans, including those who had never been to New York City. As was repeated millions of times since “everything change at 9/11.” and it was not as simple as the beginning of the War on Terrorism. What changed, in an instant, was the vulnerability of the American self-defined, routine culture. Thus far, we have identified six patterns appearing in dissonant culture. Interestingly, the patterns reappear cross-culturally and in different kinds of infrastructure development. There are undoubtedly more. First, dissonant culture may involve the temporary emergence of norms that, to those living in routine culture, may appear to be social pathologies or unanticipated social alliances. The news media and their viewers witnessed people caught up in Hurricane Katrina search for food, water, and in some cases, personal survival (See Button, this volume). Some applied non-dissonant culture norms. Were they victims or looters? An American television network's videotape crew followed one of the 200,000 families left homeless by 1992 Hurricane Andrew - the Locketts (ABC 1992). The Locketts are an extended, 65 person matriarchal clan who, before the disaster, occupied 16 homes in Homestead, Florida. Homeless, without belongings, they were temporarily relocated in a High School Auditorium. The Lockett clan's women concentrated on reestablishing a temporary order for their family, focusing on the children. The women stressed that it is important that the children be fed "three meals a day, bath, and get to bed on time." At the shelter, each part of the family organized a small, personal space. The children's 469
behavior in their socially defined space was of considerable concern as the mothers struggled to establish where they perceived the children should and should not go within the school auditorium and yard. They made an unstated contract with the relief officials. The matriarch described what she felt was her (unstated) contract with the shelter workers in her ABC interviews: "if the children don't get out of line...don't go where they're not supposed to...then we won't get kicked out into the streets." Reestablishment of temporal priorities was evident when the entire gymnasium of relocatees joined in celebrating what might normally be an insignificant familial ritual - a birthday party, as a human-scale temporal regularity returned to an incomprehensible large disaster. A second pattern is the overburdening of appropriate cultural responses to meet new risks. In routine culture, people draw temporarily upon their kinship and friendship networks for the extra resources during micro-disturbances. The disturbance from involuntary displacement may be so extensive and prolonged as to overload the traditional mechanism. Worse yet, those from whom one would turn in times of need are also seeking assistance. For example, cultural responses to diseases are critical parts of a cultural inventory and their disruption may increase mortality (see Kedia, this volume). Wolde-Salassie (2000) found that Ethiopians displaced by the 1984-1985 drought and famine faced new diseases including malaria and cattle sickness. Out of 594,190 resettlers, an estimated 32,800 died. Similarly, in Orissa, India 22 villages displaced by the Ramial River Project dam experienced increase in cerebral malaria, typhoid, jaundice, as well as increases in infant and child mortality (Mahapatra and Mahapatra 2000). Developing new cultural strategies to cope with a radically changed community health profile may take generations. 470
Third, those caught in dissonant culture sometimes refer to being in a dreamlike state, a condition that appears to reoccur in different cultures. Following Hurricane Andrews, the Lockett matriarch stumbled through the ruins of what, a week before, was her home. She described her post-relocation situation "like a dream in which you wake up." In June 1994 in Central Mexico, a young wife describing her loss following a visit to a mountaintop where we watched a new reservoir slowly flood what had been for many generations her family's home, using almost identical words, she described her feelings "like a dream. Someday I will wake up." In both cases, the women's expressions are more than metaphors. In human experience, dreams are thoughts disoriented in time and space (Friedlander 1940). Fourth, spatial-temporal access to resources that were defined in routine culture may become more difficult, beginning the impoverishment process. In the Alto Bio Bio, people displaced by the Ralco Dam felt that the displacement had increased the time and distance to their health outposts, known as postas, making access to already limited resources even more difficult. The Pehuenche indigenous peoples had limited access to legal, education or health information, a weak safety net. The increase in distance exacerbated the probability of mitigating or avoiding displacement and resettlement induced impoverishment. Fifth, involuntary resettlement frequently diminishes the economic organizational capacity of a group. Economic actions that are seemingly unrelated to the displacement may decline.
In Orissa, India, Behura and
Nayak (1993) note that development-displaced peoples, irrespective of their previous economic background underwent economic hardship. They note that the “disruption caused by resettlement not only causes economic 471
hardship, but also changed the socioeconomic basis of rural society.” The social disarticulation resulting from an involuntary project-related displacement has also been shown to reduce the capacity of a society to respond to recurring natural disasters (Hutton and Haque 2004). And sixth, a brief period of disbelief is followed by controlled, rational behavior. Again, it appears that people’s reaction to dissonance is comparable to people’s reactions seen in disasters (Drabek 1986). Disaster victims do not wait around for offers of aid by organizations (Quarantelli 1960b:73). The onset of dissonant culture, 1) a brief disbelief period is followed by 2) avoiding obvious dangers, 3) following authorities in response to uncertain situations, 4) seeking what appear to be positive alternatives, and 5) repeating what they feel works best. Reestablishing a new routine, displacees may increase the frequency of rituals that once reaffirmed group identity. In the same Mexican project mentioned earlier, in June of 1994, we observed an increase in ritual behavior by relocatees from the small Catholic community of La Vega. Before their relocation, once a year they moved their village patron saint from one private household to another and then celebrated a special annual mass. Immediately following resettlement, the saint began weekly rather than annual visits, moving from one relocated household to the next as the community struggled to reaffirm and reestablish its identity. Again, like simultaneous music notes that cause tension – the period of non-routine or dissonant culture is highly unstable. These conditions may become so threatening, if not frightening, that it becomes difficult for individuals and institutions to address the primary questions. Durkheim (1912) observed that “agreement upon categories of time, space, cause and number represent the most general relations which exist 472
between things. ” Without agreement, he claims that all contact between minds would be impossible.
Involuntary displacement directly threatens
a people’s agreements on the social geometry – their temporal, spatial and social arrangements. The rearrangement goes beyond cognitive: the Zimapan and New York landscapes are changed.
N EW R OUTINE C ULTURE Establishment of a new routine culture begins as quickly, least people have no answers to their primary questions – not only where am I? and where are we? but more fundamentally, who am I? and who are we? Some elements of a new routine culture begin to rearticulate almost immediately. Relationship by relationship, decision by decision, block by block, group by group, new routines crystallize. New organizations appear. For example, in Orissa, India at the Ramial Resettlement and Rehabilitation operation, Mahapatra and Mahapatra (2000) found that ten years after their relocation, displacees had formed new conflict resolution committees, youth and woman clubs, lending societies, and ritual organizations to cope with relocation challenges. The emergence of what we are calling a new routine culture is not well understood, dependent on the degree of disruption (de Wet 2005, 2006). Temporally, not everything comes together at once. It is as if different rearticulation clocks are ticking in different places for different groups. As people attempt to reestablish a new routine, Scudder reports that displacees favored incremental change over transformational change (Scudder 1981a, 2005), building on their familiar, earlier routines. He observed people replicated former house types, transferring crops and productive techniques to the new area regardless of their compatibility, maintaining ties to kin. The changes, in turn, followed their own patterns. 473
Let’s define the time between the appearance of dissonant culture and return to a new routine culture as the “dissonant interval.” In essence, this measures the lifespan of routine to dissonant to new routine (R-D-R’) transition. Methodologically, there are simultaneous, multiple R-D-R’ cycles. The R-D-R’ model we are proposing compliments an understanding of the temporal sequencing of changes from the celebrated stage model developed by Scudder and Colson (1982, see summary of Scudder’s lifetime work in Scudder 2005 and Scudder, this volume). Scudder (1981) found that his stage two of involuntary resettlement, the adjustment and coping phase, lasted at least a year and usually ended after stage 3. Social disarticulation and the onset of dissonant culture may begin and end at different times within a population. For example, people may reestablish a new routine for their children’s education but remain in dissonance over how they make a living. Some families or communities within the same involuntary resettlement may develop a new routine while others are delayed. The fact that the shift from routine to dissonant to a new routine may begin and end at different times means that our R-D-R’ model is a not a stage model. A new routine may surface and then revert to back to dissonant culture.. For example, in southern Chile, we observed the routine, deeply impoverished herding and gathering economy of Pehuenche Indians disrupted by the construction and relocation of the Ralco and Pangue dams. Their initial dissonance from loss of daily and seasonal agricultural activities was replaced by a new temporary routine for those who found employment at the construction site (Johnson and Downing-Garcia 2004). As construction ended, many Pehuenche plunged once more into a new 474
dissonant culture.
In our simple notation, this would be R-D-R’-D-R’’
until a new, more lasting routine takes hold. In a comparable fashion, dissonant culture dreams may morph into economic delusions. Returning to Zimapan, we witnessed three communities being forcefully resettled from highly productive, riverside irrigated farmland to an arid plateau high above their previous villages. In meetings after meetings with the Mexican Federal Electric Commission responsible for the displacement, the displaced demanded an economically impractical irrigation scheme that would pump water thousands of feet onto poor quality land. Their unreachable expectation influenced their decision to forego more economically rational alternatives (Aronsson 2002). They unexpectedly sold highly productive land that they had received in restitution, anticipating a future that would never be. Almost fifteen years later, the displaced communities rest high on an arid plateau, it’s impressive infrastructure is sustained by remittances from the United States and its arid-land agriculture yields a fraction of the rich, river bottom that was submerged. Creative, unstable tension emerges. Does the new routine culture align with the old answers to the primary questions? If not, either the answers to the primary questions must change or dissonance persists. The dynamics of psycho-socio-cultural change during the involuntary resettlement process is quite distinct from the patterns observed in economics. In economics, it is possible to recover lost income or property. Restoration is possible. In contrast, in the psycho-socio-cultural (PSC) realm it is highly improbable that a pre-displacement routine culture may be recovered, let alone be restored. In this realm, Humpty-Dumpty cannot be put back together again. 475
OF A
T HE P LACE OF E XTERNAL A CTORS N EW R OUTINE C ULTURE
IN THE
B UILDING
Displacing people is an act with profound moral implications (see DeWet this volume). If those responsible for initiating or financing involuntary displacement irrevocably change culture, what is the responsibility of external actors to the economic and social wellbeing of displacees? If an infrastructure development project inflicts damages, then might not those who gain be responsible for the victim’s pain? These questions become even more important for those who might benefit from infrastructure development that forces the displacement. Assuming some responsibility is acknowledged, what can be done to facilitate the new routine culture so that it adequately addresses the primary cultural questions faced by the displaced peoples? Moral implications become legal issues. The issues of under what conditions property can and cannot be taken and how it may be taken becomes a key legal issue in all systems of government. Closely beneath the surface lie questions of liability and the delicate issue of who, if anyone, is responsible for the damage inflicted by involuntary displacement. As research on PSC accumulates, these impacts move from, what we have called, possible to probable to acknowledged liabilities, heightening the likelihood of actionable damages for the displaced (Downing 2002). Over the past two decades, the international financial intermediaries (IFI), including the Organization for Economic CoOperation and Development (1991), The World Bank (1990, 1994) the Inter-American Development Bank (1998) and the Asian Development Bank (ADB 1998), have tried to use their syndicated financial leverage to 476
encourage national governments and private partners to move beyond simple, legalistic cash compensation of taken land (Clark, Fox and Treakle 2003, Kardam 1993, see Clark, this volume). Since we started work on involuntary displacement in 1987, a sizable repertoire of actions has emerged to avoid or mitigate the economic impacts of involuntary displacement. The advances have taken the form of international policy improvements, improved guidelines, increased supervision, new impact assessment steps, and hundreds of project memorandum. Specific advances include a) folding the costs of resettlement mitigation into the project’s costs, b) getting the economics of resettlement and reconstruction right, c) creating a normative standard for involuntary resettlement component within project planning and design, d) seeking just compensation, or, more rarely, giving the affected populations a voice in their future. In practice, those responsible for the taking of properties and disrupting livelihoods and communities mistakenly view their acts from the narrow perspective of a market transaction. Assessments as to what something is “worth” ignore the basic tenet of economics that price is set by a willing buyer and willing seller meeting in a marketplace. This is not the case. Slowly, infrastructure projects are stepping beyond simple compensation for property taken and beginning to address impoverishment risks, including restoration of housing, provisions for income – usually during construction, infrastructure reconstruction, and – in rare instances – restoration of damaged livelihoods (Cernea 2000; see Cernea this volume). On the ground, The World Bank, Asian Development Bank, Inter-American Development Bank, and OECD were able to have 477
involuntary resettlement recognized as part of the environmental impacts “check offs” on financing for the projects that they finance. Unfortunately, governments have generally proved reluctant to fold the international frameworks into national policies and practice, viewing it as a threat to powerful, local economic interests or their national sovereignty. While working on displacements in Mexico, Chile, Paraguay, and Argentina, it appeared the IFI check lists were used to exact compliance, but adherence to the overall policy framework is weak. Mitigation of involuntary resettlement, when it occurs, prioritizes the restoration of physical infrastructure as opposed to social infrastructure. Oliver-Smith observes that the process of reconstruction is approached as a material problem (Oliver-Smith 2005). The IFIs have had difficulty focusing on non-material or PSC risks. For example, Kedia (2001, 2003, this volume), Ault (1994) and others have shown measurable erosions of health status among development-induced displacees. Health risks are narrowly defined and mitigated by replacing or improving physical infrastructure rather than mitigating the impacts of new disease profiles associated with displacement. When the World Bank was revising its involuntary resettlement policy framework (4.12) in the late 90s, an early draft cavalierly dismissed decades of evidence, declaring that health impacts were indirect and not to be covered by policy, and by implication, project financing. Mitigation of PSC impoverishment risks is further complicated by the disjuncture of the short-term project construction economics that may not coincide with long-term, PSC dissonance and re-establishment of new routine culture. On the positive side, elements of The World Bank’s safeguard policies add components that may begin to empower the reestablishment 478
of a new routine culture, in addition to the necessary economic foundation. The Bank’s Operational Policy on Involuntary Displacement (OP 4.12 ¶ 2b) sets, as one of its three resettlement objectives the requirement that resettlement activities should be conceived and executed as sustainable development programs, providing sufficient investment resources to enable the persons displaced by a project to share in project benefits. The next sentence of the policy states that displaced persons should be “meaningfully consulted” and should have opportunities to participate in planning and implementing resettlement programs. The policy also requires displaced people to be informed about their options and rights pertaining to resettlement and consulted on, offered choices among technically and economically feasible resettlement alternatives (OP 4.12 ¶6a). And it requires appropriate and accessible grievance mechanisms to be established for displaced people (OP 4.12 ¶13a). These non-economic dimensions of meaningful consultation, participation, and having a voice in their new future begin to empower the displaced in their struggle to reestablish a new routine culture. Unfortunately, those controlling resettlement plans and implementation are more likely to ignore, if not oppose, these non-economic policies. Displaced people are viewed as part of the passive landscape that developers, political leaders, engineers, and economists carve and transform. Assuring these non-economic entitlements from existing policies are meaningfully implemented is a critical first step to avoid, mitigate and help people rebuild after the psycho-social-cultural disruptions of involuntary displacement. Reestablishing new routine culture often extends beyond the abbreviated project construction period and more likely to coincide with the financial lifespan of a project than its construction phase. Action in this domain, particularly financing, should use this longer timeline. 479
Fortunately, after overcoming initial, real concerns about displaced populations becoming dependent on infrastructure owners, new approaches have emerged whereby the displaced peoples may share in the long term project benefits (Cernea 2007, Downing and Garcia 2001, Downing, Garcia-Downing, Moles and McIntosh 2003).
F OUR U NTENABLE R ATIONALIZATIONS
FOR I NACTION
Addressing PSC impoverishment risks through creative, sustainable solutions such as those proposed above is often blocked by four fallacies. These fallacies undermine a mature approach to PSC recovery and are used as excuses for inaction. The first, the policy-planning fallacy, is that if a proper involuntary resettlement plan or set of policies are in place, the PSC recovery will work itself out. This fallacy lends itself to engineering/developer’s project mentality that drives involuntary displacement in the first place. The resettlement was commonly a critical path element among hundreds of other project, time-sensitive tasks; “land acquisition completed” and “resettlement completed” on flow charts. Early work fought to make involuntary displacement a stand-alone policy and planning component. The safeguard policies established by The World Bank and its sister financial intermediaries are forcing project advocates to examine and set plans to mitigate likely impoverishment impacts that they had heretofore ignored. The policy-planning fallacy includes a corollary that resettlement policies may constrain successful recovery (Scudder 2005). It is not simply a matter of getting it right, but also not getting it wrong. Assuming that policies and planning are in place, the second economic deterministic fallacy holds that PSC well-being will be 480
reestablished after displacement if there is adequate financing and execution. Economic restoration and recovery is the bedrock for mitigating displacement-caused impoverishment. However, it is naïve to assume that social recovery occurs once the material needs are met (income, housing, livelihood, productive systems, jobs, compensation, and social infrastructure). Economic recovery is a necessary but not sufficient action to lead to social recovery (Tamondong-Helin 1996, de Wet 2006, Oliver-Smith 2005). Hirschon (2000) found that a refugee settlement in Greece suffered a decline in economic welfare but developed a higher degree of social integration and community than they had before displacement. Assuming that the policies, planning, financing and implementation have been addressed but the PSC recovery falters, a third fallacy is to blame-the victims. That is, the displaced themselves are judged incapable of understanding or taking advantage of economic opportunities offered them. Such a fallacy feeds the stereotypes held by scientific and political elites that portray indigenous, traditional or powerless peoples as irrational, custom bound, obstacles to national development. A fourth, -someone else should pay fallacy, holds that the project designers, governments and financiers are not legally or economically responsible for PSC disruptions and changes. An odd blend of science, law and morality define who is and who is not financially liable. Elsewhere, we distinguished between liabilities that are widely acknowledged, those that appear weakly articulated with a project (possible liabilities) and those that seem probable liabilities (Downing 2002b). Who is and is not liable turns out to be a highly dynamic area of 481
modern jurisprudence in international displacement policy and, to a lesser extent, in national and sub-national laws. The international financial intermediaries and a few countries have shown increased willingness to address PSC issues, increasing due process and consultation rights of those who are losing their assets.
Measuring the Success of the New Routine Culture Economic success, as rare as it may be in involuntary resettlement experience, is not an acceptable surrogate for judging post displacement resettlement (Partridge 1993). Social impoverishment occurs when more people are unable to obtain meaningful answers to the primary cultural questions. Success is evident when the new routine culture once more answers the primary questions of the displaced. Embedded within the PSC recovery process and the creation of a new routine culture are core issues of equity, social justice, representative governance, human rights, assuring people’s capacity to decide their future destiny, social capital and health. In contrast to economic recovery, the closure of dissonance and the reestablishment of a routine culture move forward with or without economic recovery or restoration assistance. A socio-cultural recovery may occur without an improvement in living standards or economic wellbeing – merely reflecting people’s needs to find some answers to the primary questions (Cernea 2000, Hirchon 2000).
C RAFTING M ATURE , D EMOCRATIC S OLUTIONS Crafting mature, democratic solutions to the psycho-social-cultural impoverishment risks demands highly skilled, agile research, analyses, and actions. Responsible parties may facilitate and finance the reestablishment of routine culture. In Shelly's Frankenstein, a graduate 482
student's mistake created a monster, so also can seemingly small mistakes or misguided assistance lead to undesirable outcomes for both the displacees and those attempting to help them. For starters, this is not an engineering problem. Rebuilding routine culture is completely different than rebuilding infrastructure – involving people working with people. The method and form of addressing PSC impoverishment risks defines, in part, the new routine. From a political and sociological perspective, infrastructure projects are not always simply projects – they may become milestone events defining a government or company’s social responsibility, its moral standing, its trustworthiness, its future. Over our many years working on involuntary displacement, we have witnessed corporate boards and government agencies, and even Presidents become hopelessly entangled in thousands of hours of stressful debate over involuntary displacement issues that, from an economic perspective were small. But from a moral and political perspective, they were huge. Russell (2002) offers a clear case study of how a blotched forced resettlement of about 4,000 farmers to make way for the expansion to the Mexico City’s airport resulted in the cancellation of a project that was likely to return 100 billion dollars. Politically, public reactions to Mexican President Vicente Fox’s inability to deal with this problem undermined the remaining years of his presidency. The general steps that external actors may take to nudge the rebuilding of the new routine culture are well known (see Downing and Garcia 2002 for a description of Plan B – what to do when resistance fails):
483
Provide independent, funded legal representation beginning at project identification and continuing through its operation. Integrate actions that will facilitate the restoration of a meaningful, routine culture that satisfactorily addresses the primary questions of the displaced. Empower the displaced peoples to gather and interpret information, identify pitfalls, and consider options by developing their own impoverishment-monitoring and impact assessment research capacity (Hirsh 1999). Develop cultural appropriate, efficient ways for PAPs to express and negotiate their desires, choices, and allocate their own resources. And anticipate that, just as concrete takes time to cure, social processes cannot be rushed. Identify and train the PAPs in new skills and training appropriate to new situation, circumstances and resources. Incorporate benefit-sharing provisions over and above restitution for lost assets. Assure PAPs control sufficient resources for establishment of an economically viable routine culture. Timely access to information affecting all aspects of the displacement. Provide bureaucratic load-lifting support, to protect the displaced from becoming unwilling victims of someone else’s progress. We close with an illustration of an external decision that offered incremental support for the articulation of a new routine culture aligned with a group’s primary questions. Returning to the earlier example of Zimapan dam, in the late 80s, the senior author served as a World Bank consultant in the design and supervision of this involuntary displacement (Greaves 1997). Three villages that were once located along the river were combined into a single settlement located on an arid, riverless plateau. Potable water was piped in from 23 kilometers away and no water was available for 484
irrigation. Early in the project, resettlers were permitted to rename the principal street in their new town. To the surprise of outside observers, they named their principal street River Boulevard. The local resettlement team reported serious conflicts between rival community claims over who had the right to live on the right bank of "River Street," in a position identical to their previous location. A few months later, they selected the new name for their arid, hilltop community: Bella Vista del Rio (Beautiful View of the River). But the river is nowhere in sight! It made no difference. They were creating a new answer to one of their primary questions consistent, in some ways, with their old image. Where are we? We are living in “Beautiful View of the River,” living on River Street.
R EFERENCES ABC News. 1992. Hurricane Andrew: One Family's Struggle. ABC News videotape of Nightline. September 1, 1992. Altman, Irwin and Setha M. Low. 1994. Place Attachment. New York: Plenum Press. Aronsson, Inga-Lill. 2002. Negotiating Involuntary Resettlement: A study of local bargaining during the construction of Zimapan Dam. Uppsala: Uppsala University, Department of Anthropology and Ethnology. Asian Development Bank. 1998. Handbook on Resettlement: A guide to good practice. Manila. Ault, Steven K. 1994. The Environmental Health Impacts of Resettlement: A wealth of systemic problems: A dearth of comprehensive responses. Lecture at the International Congress of Americanists. 7 July. Uppsala, Sweden. Barabas, Alicia Mabel y Miguel Alberto Bartolome. Antropología y relocalizaciones. 1992. Alternidades. 2(4) 5-15. Behura, N.K. and P.K. Nayak. 1993. Involuntary Displacement and the Changing Frontiers of Kinship: A study of resettlement in Orissa. In: Michael M. Cernea and Scott Guggenheim. Anthropological Approaches to Resettlement: Policy, practice and theory. Boulder: Westview Press.
485
Bock, Philip K. 1968. Modern Cultural Anthropology. New York. Alfred A. Knopf. Cernea, Michael M. 1990. Poverty Risks from Population Displacement in Water Resource Development. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard Institute for International Development. 1990. Internal refugee flows and development-induced population displacement. Journal of Refugee Studies 3(4):320-330. 1993. Disaster-related Refugee Flows and Development- Caused Population Displacement. In: Anthropological Approaches to Involuntary Resettlement: Policy, Practice and Theory. Michael M. Cernea and Scott Guggenheim (eds.). Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press. 1994. Poverty Risks from Population Displacement in Water Resource Development. ICA-94. Uppsala. 6 July 1994. 1995. Concept and Method: Applying the IRR Model in Africa to Resettlement and Poverty. In: Itaru Ohta and Ynisco D. Gebre. Displacement Risks in Africa. Kyoto: Kyoto University Press. 1996. Bridging the Divide: Studying refugees and development ousteees. In: T. Allen (ed.) In Search of Common Ground: Ware, flight and homecoming in North-East Africa, pp. 293-317. London, Trenton: James Currey/Africa Word Press. 1999. The Economics of Involuntary Resettlement: Questions and Challenges. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. 2000 “Risks, Safeguards, and Reconstruction: A Model for Population Displacement and Resettlement” In M. Cernea and C. McDowell eds. Risks and Reconstruction: Resettlers' and Refugees' Experiences. Washington D.C.: World Bank. 2002. “For a New Economics of Resettlement: the Sociological Critique of the Compensation Principle. International Social Science Journal, no.175, 2002. UNESCO, Paris. 2007. “Financing for Development: Benefit Sharing Mechanisms in Population Resettlement.” Economic and Political Weekly, vol. 42, no. 12, March 24-30, 2007, pages 1033-1044, India. Clark, Dana L., Fox, Jonathan, and Kay Treakle, eds. 2003. Demanding Accountability: Civil Society Claims and the World Bank Inspection Panel. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield. Csikszentimihalyi, M. and E. Rochberg-Halton. 1981. The Meaning of Things: Domestic symbols and the self. New York: Cambridge. 486
de Pina Cabal, João. 1994. The valuation of time among the peasant population of the Alto Minho, northwestern Portugal. In: Robert Layton (editor). Who Needs the Past? Indigenous values and archaeology. London and New York: Routledge., pp. 59-69. de Wet, Chris. 2006. Risk, Complexity and Local Initiative in Forced Resettlement Outcomes. In: Development-Induced Displacement: Problems, Policies and People. Berghahn Books. 2005. Some Socio-Economic Risks and Opportunities Relating to DamInduced Resettlement in Africa. In: Itaru Ohta and Ynisco D. Gebre. Displacement Risks in Africa. Kyoto: Kyoto University Press. Downing, Theodore E. 1973. Zapotec Inheritance. Stanford University. Department of Anthropology. PhD Thesis. 1996. Mitigating Social Impoverishment when People are Involuntarily Displaced. In: Christopher McDowell (editor).Resisting Impoverishment – Tackling the Consequences of Developmentinduced Impoverishment. Oxford: Bergham Books. 2002a. Creating Poverty: The flawed economic logic of the World Bank’s revised involuntary resettlement policy. Forced Migration Review. Vol.12 (Feb), pp.13-14. 2002b. Avoiding New Poverty: Mining-induced displacement and resettlement. London: International Institute for Environment and Development (on web at www.ted-downing.com) Downing, Theodore E. and Carmen Garcia-Downing. 2001. Plan B: What Is Going To Happen To My People? Plan B: What Is Going To Happen To My People? Plan B: What Is Going To Happen To My People? Cultural Survival Quarterly. Oct 31, Issue 25.3. Downing, Theodore, Carmen Garcia-Downing, Jerry Moles and Ian McIntosh. 2003. Mining and Indigenous Peoples: Stakeholder Strategies and Tactics. In: Finding Common Ground: Indigenous Peoples and Their Association with the Mining Sector, World Business Council for Sustainable Development and the International Institute for Environment and Development (UK). P. 11-46, London. Douglas, Mary. 1973. Rules and Meaning. Harmondsworth: Penguin. Drabek, Thomas E. 1986. Human System Responses to Disaster: An inventory of sociological findings. New York: Springer-Verlag. 487
Fabian, Stephen Michael. 1992. Space-Time of the Bororo of Brazil. Gainesville, Florida: University of Florida Press. Frake, Charles. 1993. Seafaring and the Medieval Construction of Time. Stanford. Stanford University Press. Friedlander, Kate. 1940. On the 'Longing to Die'. International Journal of Psychoanalysis. 16(3):416-468. Goody, Jack. 1969. Inheritance, Marriage and Property in Africa and Eurasia. Sociology 3:55-79. 1970. Sideways or Downwards? Lateral and Vertical Succession, Inheritance and Descent in Africa and Eurasia. Man 5:627-638. Greaves, Patricia. 1997. La intervención del Banco Mundial y la CFE en los proyectos hidroeléctricos de Aguamilpa y Zimapán: Los límites de una política social de reacomodos. Tesis de Maestría en Antropología Social, ENAH, Mexico. Guggenheim, Scott E. 1991. "Salvaging the Damned: Resettlement in Mexico", In: M.C. Cernea y S.E. Guggenheim, Editors, Anthropological Approaches to Involuntary Resettlement: Policy, Practice and Theory, Westview Press, Boulder, 1991. 1993. Peasants, Planners, and Participation: Resettlement in Mexico. In: Michael M. Cernea and Scott E.Guggenheim. Anthropological Approaches to Resettlement: Policy, Practice and Theory. Westview Press. 1994. Involuntary Resettlement: An annotated reference bibliography for development research. Washington, D.C. The World Bank. Hall, Edward T. 1959. The Silent Language.. Fawcett: Greenwich, Conn. Hirsch, Philip. 1999. Dams in the Mekong Region: Scoping Social and Cultural Issues. Cultural Survival Quarterly | Issue 23.3, October 31, 1999 at http://www.cs.org/publications/csq/csqarticle.cfm?id=1371 Hirschon, Renee, 2000. The Creation of Community: Well-Being Without Wealth in an Urban Greek Refugee Locality. In: M. Cernea and C. McDowell (eds.), Risks and Reconstruction: Experiences of Resettlers and Refugees, pp. 393-411. Washington: The World Bank. Hutton, David and Emdad Haque, C. 2004. Human Vulnerability, Dislocation and Resettlement: Adaptation Processes of River-bank 488
Erosion-induced Displacees in Bangladesh. Disasters; March. 2004, Vol. 28 Issue 1, p41-62, 22p. Inter-American Development Bank. 1998. Involuntary Resettlement Policy. GN-1979-3, July. Johnston, Barbara Rose and Carmen Garcia-Downing. 2004. Hydroelectric Development on the Bio-Bio River, Chile: Anthropology and Human Rights Advocacy. In: Mario Blazer, Harvey A. Feit, and Glenn McRae (eds.). In the Way of Development: Indigenous Peoples, Life Projects and Globalization. London: Zed Books and the International Development Research Center in Ottawa. Kardam, Nüket. 1993. Development Approaches and the Role of Policy Advocacy: The case of the World Bank. World Development. 21(11):pp.1773- 1789. Kedia, Satish. 2003. Assessing and Mitigating the Health Impacts of Involuntary Resettlement: The Tehri Hydroelectric Dam Project. Advances in Science and Technology of Water Resources 23, no. 2: 65-68. Kedia, Satish, and John van Willigen. 2001. Effects of Forced Displacement on the Mental Health of Older People in North India. Hallym International Journal of Aging 3, no. 1 (2001): 81-93. Lightfoot, R. Paul. 1979. Spatial distribution and cohesion of resettled communities. In: L.A.P. Gosling (editor). Population Resettlement in the Mekong River Basin. Studies in Geography NO. 10 edition. Chapel Hill, North Carolina: University of North Carolina. Low, Setha. 1992. Symbolic Ties that Bind: Place attachment in the Plaza. In: Irwin Altman and Setha M. Low. Place Attachment. New York: Plenum Press, pp. 165-187. Mahapatra, L. K. and Sheela Mahapatra. 2000. Social re-articulation and community regeneration among resettled displacees. In: Michael M. Cernea and Christopher McDowell, eds., Risks and Reconstruction: Experiences of Resettlers and Refugees. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank. Mejia, Maria Clara. 1999. "Economic Dimensions of Urban Involuntary Resettlement: Experiences from Latin America," In Cernea, M (ed), The Economics of Involuntary Resettlement: Questions and Challenges, Washington, DC: The World Bank.
489
Muggah, Robert. 2003. A Tale of Two Solitudes: Comparing Conflict and Development-induced Internal Displacement and Involuntary Resettlement. International Migration; 2003, Vol. 41 Issue 5, p5-31. Oliver-Smith, Anthony. 1986. The Martyred City: Death and rebirth in the Andes. Albuquerque: The University of New Mexico Press. 1991. Successes and Failures in Post-Disaster Resettlement. Disasters. 15(1):12-23. 2005. Communities after Catastrophe: Reconstructing the material, reconstructing the social. In: Stanley E. Hylan (editor). Community Building in the Twenty First Century. Santa Fe, NM: School for Advanced Research. Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development. 1991. Guidelines for Aid Agencies on Involuntary Displacement and Resettlement in Development Projects. Development Assistance Committee. Paris, CODE/GAD (91) 201. Partridge, William. 1993. Successful Involuntary Resettlement: Lessons from Costa Rica Arenal Hydroelectric Project. In: Michael M. Cernea and Scott E.Guggenheim. Anthropological Approaches to Resettlement: Policy, Practice and Theory. Boulder: Westview Press. Pellow, Debra. 1994. Spaces that Teach. In: Irwin Altman and Setha M. Low. Place Attachment. New York: Plenum Press. Riley, Robert B. 1994. Attachment to the Ordinary Landscape. In: Irwin Altman and Setha M. Low. Place Attachment. New York: Plenum Press, pp. 13-35. Russell, James W. 2002. Land and Identity in Mexico: Peasants Stop an Airport. Monthly Review.Vol. 54. Number 9. At http://www.monthlyreview.org/0203russell.htm. Rutz, Henry J. (editor). 1992. The Politics of Time. Washington, D.C.: American Anthropological Association, American Ethnological Society Monographs, Number 4. Selby, Henry and Lucy Garretson. 1981. Cultural Anthropology. Dubuque: Wm. C. Brown and Co. Scudder, Thayer 2005. The Future of Large Dams: Dealing with social, environmental, and political costs. London:Earthscan.
490
1993. Development-induced relocation and refugee studies: 27 years of change and continuity among Zambia’s Gwembe Tonga. Journal of Refugee Studies 6(3): 123-152. 1981. What it means to be dammed: The anthropological of larges scale development projects in the tropics and subtropics. Engineer and Science, Vol 54, No. 4. Shami, Seteney. The Social Implications of Population Displacement and Resettlement: An overview with a focus on the Arab Middle East. International Migration Review, Vol. 27, no 1, pp.4- . Sutro, Levingston and Theodore E. Downing. 1988. A step toward a grammar of space in Zapotec villages. In: Richard R. Wilk and Wendy Ashmore (eds.). House and Household in the MesoAmerican Past. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press. pp. 29-48. Tamondong-Helin, Susan,D. 1996. "State Power As A Medium of Impoverishment: Case of Pantabangan Resettlement in the Philippines," in Understanding Impoverishment, C. McDowell, ed., Berghahn Books, Oxford and Rhode Island, 1996. Turton, David. 2006. Who is a Forced Migrant? IN Chris de Wet, Risk, Complexity and Local Initiative in Forced Resettlement Outcomes. IN Development-Induced Displacement: Problems, Policies and People. Berhahn Books. Wallace, Anthony F. C. 1957. Mazeway Disintegration: The individual’s perception of socio-cultural disorganization. Human Organization: Vol. 16, Summer, No. 2. Wolde-Selassie, Abutte. 2000. Social re-articulation after resettlement: observing the Beles Valley scheme in Ethiopia. In: Michael M. Cernea and Christopher McDowell, (editors). Risks and Reconstruction: Experiences of Resettlers and Refugees. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank. The World Bank. 1990. Operational Directive 4.30: Involuntary Resettlement. June 1990. 1994. Resettlement and Development. 1989-1993. Washington: The World Bank.
491
