1. Accountability and Remedy Mechanisms for Communities Negatively Affected by Large-Scale Land Acquisitions: A Case Study of Engaging with the Vietnam Rubber Group in Cambodia and Lao PDR Megan MacInnes, Campaign Leader - Land March 2015

2. The global rush to invest in natural rubber Southeast Asia produces 90% world’s rubber By 2020, 10% projected gap between supply and demand No land left in major rubber producing countries (Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam), industry looking to new areas.. Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar

3. “Rubber Barons” – the background Rubber plantation companies as primary target for advocacy and engagement Two largest Vietnamese rubber companies: – Hoang Anh Gia Lai (private) – Vietnam Rubber Group (state owned, semi privatised), owns plantations totalling 161,000 ha in Cambodia and Laos Research findings: – Social impacts – indigenous land rights ignored, food insecurity, burial and spirit forests destroyed – Environmental impacts – forest loss, destruction protected areas and pollution – Non-compliance with national legal framework – use of hidden beneficial ownership – International safeguards being ignored (financial investment and FSC certification) – Affected community complaints and advocacy ignored

4. Changes recommended in Rubber Barons a)Disclose the basic information about plantation holdings b)Resolve disputes with communities and bring operations in line with law c)Implement systemic changes across operations (to avoid such problems in future)

5. Company focused changes Social impacts – land rights, food insecurity and loss burial areas Impacts on environment Legal issues (use of hidden beneficial ownership) Local complaints ignored International safeguards being ignored Disclose basic information ●●● Resolve disputes ●●●● Bring operations in line with law ●●●●● Investor engagement ● Systemic changes agreed by VRG: a) Community consultations ●●●● b) Feedback and complaints mechanism ●●●●

6. Vietnam Rubber Group 1.Community Consultation Process (Decision 1001/CSVN.BCDCPC) Aim of the process: Raise awareness of purpose, importance and need for community consultation amongst VRG member companies Provide clear instructions on how to consult and meet with affected communities, develop mitigation plan and reduce negative impacts from plantations Participants: affected communities, organisations, government Standardised methodology and process 2.Feedback, petition & information mechanism (Decision 314/QD-HDTVCSVN) Launched and operational 16 th July 2014 Aims to improve communication between company and local community – via national and plantation offices Includes disclosure of all plantation holdings Robust tracking and response process within VRG Agreed to ongoing monitoring GW and local CSOs and adaption

7. 1) Community Consultation Process Progress … 12 out of 24 plantations covered during 2014, rest by end 2015 Some communities compensated for loss of resin trees (significant sources of income) VRG now has basic information about the number of affected villages and people across Cambodia and Laos But … Some communities only agreed to compensation under duress Illegal logging within and beyond concession sites continuing Results not publicly disclosed by VRG

8. 2) Feedback, petition & information mechanism Progress … Unprecedented move by a company to improve communications with local communities and civil society groups Cambodian civil society highly sceptical, Lao groups excited But … Agreement to disclose details of the mechanism at local and national levels not yet met, national VRG representatives claim not to know about it – was it just a PR stunt? Only one complaint submitted by CSOs in each country – in Laos the mechanism may not function without formal Government approval Indigenous communities in land dispute with VRG in Cambodia currently being taken to court by the company Community forest patrol activities regularly threatened

9. Broader lessons for company-initiated accountability and remedy mechanisms Senior management agreements and commitments have not yet translated into change on the ground Role of the State vs company? Companies need to take responsibility for ensuring the legality of permits, licenses and other procedural requirements, and independently remedy the impacts of their operations Company mechanisms may still need Government approval (Laos) – what happens if this is not given? Long-term and resource intensive role for civil society to monitor the implementation of these changes, who should pay for these costs? Different levels of responsiveness between VRG (majority state-owned) and HAGL (private)