Analyze

This text builds from earlier conceptions of the term “land dispossession” and “land grab”. As defined by the 2011 International Land Coalition, land grabbing specifically refers to large scale land acquisitions that are “ in violation of human rights, without prior consent of the preexisting land users, and with no consideration of social and environmental impacts”. Characterization of land grabs and their resulting harms most commonly considers the effect of physical displacement and harms within the articulated “grabbed” area (Nyantakyi-Frimpong, 2017;Ogwand, 2018;  huaserman, 2018). Li and Pan seek to expand the frame of analysis for land grabs beyond the site of grabbed land to consider the full extent of harms associated with land grabs both geographically (via pollution spillover to areas outside of “grabbed land”) and temporally (via latent “expulsion by pollution). 

 “While the villagers are not passive victims and have adopted various resistance strategies, the space for them to struggle and achieve success is confined and shaped by the existing power asymmetry in which local villagers, capital and local government are embedded.”  (Li and Pan, 2021, p 418). 

“...this framing of land dispossession is problematic in two aspects. Firstly, it obscures an invisible form of land dispossession in which people still maintain control of their land but its use value is damaged by pollution. This kind of indirect land dispossession could lead to expulsion, not due to the direct loss of control over land but by it being rendered useless by pollution.” Li and Pan, 2021, p 409). 

 This text employs a case study approach to characterize how villagers in a village in China have been displaced “in-place” as a result of new industrial activities within the area  (all specific details have been hidden within the publication, wherein the names of villager groups and the site of study itself is referenced only by coded letters). The scale of analysis primarily centers at the village level, though analysis of the case study itself extends towards the country level specifically when analysis of state actors are involved. 

Authors Hua Li and Lu Pan are scholars from China. Li is  affiliated with the College of Humanities and Law at Taiyuan University of Technology, wherein her research focuses specifically on water politics, environmental justice, and rural development and agrarian change. Pan is affiliated with the College of Humanities and Development at China Agricultural University. Her research interests include marginalized communities, rural development, and agrarian change.

Because this document is the first chapter of a book, there was no source list provided, therefor no conclusions could be drawn.

Didier Fassin is a French anthropologist and a sociologist in the school of science at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, NJ. He has conducted fieldwork in Senegal, Ecuador, South Africa, and France. Fassan is also trained as a physician in internal medicine and holds a degree in public health. Some of his early research focused on medical anthropology, the AIDS epidemic, mortality disparities, and global health. 

The author, Didier Fassin, is a French anthropologist and sociologist with training in medicine and public health. He has worked in the field of medical anthropology for decades through research and field experience. He currently works as a professor of social science at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton. 

The article focuses on the adapting regulations for ill immigrants to remain in France in order to receive treatment unavailable in their countries. Through the changes in protocol over nearly a decade the author shows how the system changed from case by case process in which many immigrants were denied a residence permit while suffering from serious illnesses, to an organized protocol that aimed to provide an equal opportunity to applicants regardless of location and department.

The argument is supported through a combination of personal stories, historical changes in protocol, and analysis of the reasons why applicants resort to a medical argument for residence permits. The use of personal stories of applicants highlights the inconsistencies in the process largely due to compassionate bias on the part of officials reading the applications, as well as the resources available in different cities. As the protocols were changed the article shows that while some of the inconsistencies were resolved, the process of determining who can and cannot receive medical treatment necessitates personal judgment which inevitably affects the outcome.

• “Sometimes the foreigner, too, is no more than his body, but this body is no longer the same: useless to the political economy, it now finds its place in a new moral economy that values suffering over labor and compassion more than rights.”
• “The compassion protocol is thus a procedure of the last resort that derives from a form of sympathy evoked in the face of suffering. It demands the right to keep alive individuals who have nothing except their mere existence.”
• “the medical officers were caught between the duties mandated to them by the public institution that employed them and those their profession required them to respect”