Insecurity, Dispossession, Depletion: Women’s Experiences of Post-War Development in Myanmar

Abstract

This article explores the gendered dynamics of Myanmar's postwar economic reforms through an analysis of women's experiences of development in Kayah (Karenni) state. In Myanmar, ceasefires and a reduction of armed violence combined with state-driven economic liberalization reforms are conditioned by, but also contribute to remake, gendered relations of power, privilege and marginalization. While new land legislation and development projects have contributed to loss of land and livelihoods among rural populations in general, our study demonstrates that women living in conflict-affected border areas are disproportionally affected. Drawing on interviews and participant observation, we show how this is directly related to an overarching gendered political economy defined by legacies of conflict, discrimination and uneven processes of development, which positions women as particularly vulnerable to new forms of insecurity, dispossession and depletion generated by postwar economic transformations. We argue that the political and economic legacies of war in the state has produced a gendered division of labor that positions women as responsible for unpaid and underpaid informal and social reproductive labor, weakens women's access to land, and results in physical, material, and emotional depletion. Through this focus, our study adds to research on development and economic restructuring in postwar contexts in general, and to emergent scholarship on Myanmar's economic reforms in particular. Keywords Postwar economic development • Gender • Feminist political economy • Informal labor • Land rights • Myanmar • Kayah/Karenni state Résumé Cet article explore la dynamique de genre des réformes économiques de l'aprèsguerre au Myanmar à travers une analyse des expériences de développement des

The Routledge Handbook of Smuggling

“…56-57). This also holds true for the places where the actual fighting between warring factions has stopped (Hedström and Olivius 2020). In large parts of Myanmar's border areas, the civil war continues unabated.…”

Dealing With Sri Lanka’s Demons: Using Documentary Film for Peacebuilding

“…Rainford and Satkunanathan (2011, p. 104) note the approach also failed to consider the “overwhelming political nature of both peace and development.” Drawing from post-war development initiatives in the North and East that increased securitisation and unfairly affected Tamils, they argue peace equated with development but devoid of political reform leads to increased tension. Post-war peacebuilding in the country thus exhibits characteristics of illiberal peacebuilding, where development processes, instead of inclusive political structures, are considered the cornerstone of peace (Hedström & Olivius, 2020; Waldorf et al, 2020). The approach allowed the rifts and majoritarian politics fuelling the war to fester.…”

Spatial Struggles and the Politics of Peace: The Aung San Statue as a Site for Post-War Conflict in Myanmar’s Kayah State

“…Whilst several of the smaller armed groups agreed to ceasefires with the government in the 1990s, the KNPP did not conclude a ceasefire deal until 2012, and, although a participant in the transitional government’s peace talks, has not signed the National Ceasefire Agreement. 3 Since the start of the transitional period, armed violence has decreased, but the situation is fragile, poverty is widespread, and tensions around state-led initiatives for economic development and reconstruction of the state are prominent (Hedström & Olivius, 2020; Karenni Social Development Center, 2016).…”

“…In Myanmar, government strategies for peacebuilding in conflict-affected areas, such as Kayah state, have centred on ceasefire agreements seeking to pacify ethnic minority insurgents through economic incentives whilst expanding state territorial and economic control in minority areas. The other key feature of state strategies has been top-down, large-scale economic development projects focusing on energy, infrastructure, and agribusiness, frequently implemented through confiscation of communal land and increased militarisation to provide security for investors (Hedström & Olivius, 2020; McCarthy and Farrelly 2020). Control over territory as well as meaning-making around who belongs to and can inhabit spaces and places are clearly central here but have frequently been left implicit in scholarly analyses.…”