In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

328 Collective action and property rights are able to shape people’s livelihoods. The conceptual framework presented in Chapter 2 shows that property rights shape people’s claims to benefit streams out of their owned resources and have an impact on their asset base. When property rights are suited to address people’s needs, they have a better chance to shape their livelihoods and to escape poverty traps. Secure access to resources increases a household’s capital base and broadens (poor) people’s capacities to engage in activities to improve their wellbeing . Effective collective action increases or secures people’s access to resources and can also enable households to improve their livelihoods. Thus, collective action also becomes part of people’s strategies to shape property rights and increase their well-being. Both property rights and collective action were severely challenged in Cambodia by the Khmer Rouge regime. After democratic consolidation, attempts to (re-)create a legal framework that secures access to land and natural resources were made by the Royal Government of Cambodia (RGC) and strongly supported by major donors. Nevertheless, the introduction of laws and decrees created new uncertainties among the rural poor and advantaged the more powerful (Global Witness 2007). Resource degradation and conversion of natural resources into arable land has left Cambodia’s rural poor with ever fewer options to derive income from these resources. Furthermore, a relatively slow rate of land titling in rural areas or unclear parcel boundary demarcations have left less powerful people vulnerable to land grabbing and excluded them from the benefits of common property (Catalla 2001; Sovannarith et al. 2001; Törhönen and Palmer 2004). Collective action also still suffers from the Khmer Rouge legacy, because large segments of traditional social ties such as mutual help networks, religious institutions, and even family ties have been destroyed (Mehmet 1997). Collectivization under the communist regime also left marks on the willingness of the Cambodians to cooperate in agriculture to a larger extent. The objective of the case study reported in this chapter was to identify effective practices and policy interventions at a local level that enhance the way 11 Escaping Poverty Traps? Collective Action and Property Rights in Postwar Rural Cambodia ANNE WEINGART AND MICHAEL KIRK Escaping Poverty Traps? 329 in which cooperation or collective action and property rights have been used and shaped to build up secure assets and income streams for the rural poor in Cambodia. In order to provide policymakers, community groups, civil society organizations, and researchers with a better understanding of the property regimes in place, we assess existing property rights systems in rural Cambodia to identify what benefit streams poor people can rely on for their livelihood. We identify existing forms and mechanisms of economic and social cooperation, how they influence property rights systems, and to what extent the rural poor are part of village networks that contribute to resource protection. Based on this assessment, concrete linkages and feedback mechanisms among property rights, collective action, and poverty are analyzed at a village level. In concrete terms, we show what (common) resources poor households can use, what property rights systems govern these resources, and whether collective action, which is re-emerging after the genocide, helps poor people to address their needs. From these findings some policy implications can be drawn. In terms of the conceptual framework explained in Chapter 2, we focus on three key aspects of the context: the lack of assets and weak asset accumulation for the poor, the vulnerability of people to both natural and political risks, and the legal structures and power relations that disadvantage the poor. A major part of empirical data from the exploratory study on property rights and collective action in rural Cambodia concentrates on the effects of these contextual factors. The action arena in this case is postconflict rebuilding, in which local resource users and the state are key actors that make use of institutions of property rights and collective action, as well as changing these institutions . Education, social groups, and land rights are key action resources, but lack of these prevents many rural Cambodians from engaging in this action arena effectively. The patterns of interaction that emerge indicate that mutual help networks, religious activities, and small-scale associations are regaining ground in Cambodia. However, these types of associations, though they aim to help the rural poor, actually cannot reach them properly. Poor people lack confidence (a key action resource) to take part in associations and sometimes are unable to use...

Share