Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If You Use a Screen Reader

This content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.

Multiple Embeddedness and Systemic Implications: Struggles over Natural Resources in Minangkabau since the Reformasi

Franz von Benda-Beckmann and Keebet von Benda-Beckmann
Asian Journal of Social Science
Vol. 38, No. 2 (2010), pp. 172-186
Published by: Brill
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23654931
Page Count: 15
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Download ($34.00)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Cite this Item
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
Preview not available

Abstract

This article deals with struggles over natural resources in West Sumatra, the homeland of the Minangkabau after the end of the Suharto regime in 1998. In these processes, actors often follow ambiguous strategies in pursuing their interests. We argue that these ambiguities to a large extent derive from a combination of factors: One is the multiple embeddedness of property rights at different layers of social organisations, in particular in social and general legal relationships. The second is the systemic implication of property rights in other domains of social organisation, for instance, authority and power relations. The third is the specific complexity and concomitant legal insecurity within plural legal orders. Actors who draw on rules from different legal orders — for designing regulations, for validating transactions, and for making decisions in disputes — have to deal with the problem that property relations are embedded differently in different legal orders and have different logics and systemic implications. This often leads actors to a strange combination of highly legalistic reasoning and a very pragmatic search for solutions.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
[172]
    [172]
  • Thumbnail: Page 
173
    173
  • Thumbnail: Page 
174
    174
  • Thumbnail: Page 
175
    175
  • Thumbnail: Page 
176
    176
  • Thumbnail: Page 
177
    177
  • Thumbnail: Page 
178
    178
  • Thumbnail: Page 
179
    179
  • Thumbnail: Page 
180
    180
  • Thumbnail: Page 
181
    181
  • Thumbnail: Page 
182
    182
  • Thumbnail: Page 
183
    183
  • Thumbnail: Page 
184
    184
  • Thumbnail: Page 
185
    185
  • Thumbnail: Page 
186
    186