Highlands of history: Indigenous identity and its antecedents in Cambodia

TitleHighlands of history: Indigenous identity and its antecedents in Cambodia
Annotated RecordAnnotated
Year of Publication2013
AuthorsPadwe J
Secondary TitleAsia Pacific Viewpoint
Volume54
Issue3
Pagination282-295
Key themesFormalisation-titling, MarginalisedPeople
Abstract

The notion that Cambodia’s highland people may claim a distinct ‘Indigenous’ identity has emerged only recently in Cambodia. To date, advocacy for rights under the banner of indigeneity has produced few results for highlanders. Among the problems faced by advocates for Indigenous rights, problems of definition and translation represent an important challenge. Arguing that concepts like ‘Indigeneity’ are not simply adopted ex nihilo in new settings, but are rather incorporated into existing structures of meaning, this paper explores culturally produced understandings of who highlanders are, concentrating in particular on the way that the term ‘Indigenous’ has been translated into Khmer. The use of the Khmer word daeum, or ‘original’, to distinguish between Indigenous and other forms of ethnic belonging in the newly derived translation of ‘Indigenous Peoples’ points to historically sedimented beliefs about highlanders as living ancestors of modern Khmers.
URLhttp://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/apv.12028/abstract
Availability

Copyrighted journal article
Countries

Cambodia
Document Type

Journal Article

Annotations

Overall relevance: 

Central to the struggles for recognition of the rights of indigenous people is defining indigeneity, which is inherently difficult. This article problematizes the category of ‘indigenous peoples’, identifying various moments where universalistic notions of ‘indigenous’ do not necessarily fit the Cambodian context. The article analyses the genealogy of these categories to reveal just how western-centric and restrictive terms like ‘indigenous’, ‘traditional’, ‘ethnic’, and ‘original inhabitants’ can be, and how this proves to be particularly problematic in discussions about rights which require definitive categorisation, and consequently demand certain forms of inclusion and exclusion. The article delves into the complexities of why groups claiming ‘indigenous’ status often struggle to find meaningful recognition in their search for entitlements, yet are caught in a system where such a categorisation is critical to accessing rights to land and self-determination.

Key Themes: 
  • Marginalized people's land rights and access: ethnic minorities, poor and women - Identifying those groups who are most vulnerable to acts of coercion, violence and dispossession is crucial to analysing – and designing interventions to address – key land governance issues. Yet the process of classification automatically assumes a sameness that in reality is never a true representation of the diversity of a group. The identity of ‘ethnic minority’ is particularly prominent in the literature, and is one which frequently falls under the banner of ‘indigeneity’ for development practitioners (and for the State in the case of Cambodia). This classification process acts to restrict the identities under which communities are able to claim specific rights, and to access to particular kinds of formal title – namely communal title in the case of Cambodia. Because the ‘unity’ that such labels demand do not always exist, divisions amongst communities who don’t necessarily see themselves as united in their struggles, often emerge. These divisions can in some instances weaken the position of communities fighting for communal title, suggesting that universal categories such as ‘indigenous’ require ongoing critique and revision.
Research basis: 

The article is a review and critique of existing literature and archival materials. The author has experience as an anthropologist having conducted extensive research in Cambodia over several years.