Is “good” resettlement policy unimplementable? Learning from advocacy in Cambodia

Abstract

Accountability advocacy is an increasingly common approach to working with displaced communities. This article explores a resettlement scheme for an Asian Development Bank project in Cambodia in which advocacy interventions resulted in significant improvements in resettlement sites over the eight years of the project. Resettlement standards improved in some of the sites so much that they might now be called “islands of governance”, tightly ring-fenced from the otherwise limited support provided ordinarily to displaced or landless Cambodians. Given these extremes, the article considers whether “good” resettlement policy is implementable. It also argues that best practice resettlement principles, such as the requirement to minimise displacement – no matter how sensible or well-intended when designed at an international level – have the potential for negative unintended consequences in implementation. These impacts cannot necessarily be mitigated through formal monitoring, oversight, and technical assistance. Building on the knowledge already available, it identifies five considerations relevant to resettlement programmes as they continue to evolve.