Evaluating Alternative Land Schemes in Malaysia
Felda and FELCRA
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 11156342 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Ozay Mehmet (0000-0002-3179-1699, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1982 |
| Volume | 3 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 340-360 |
| Publication date | 1982-03-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Contemporary Southeast Asia (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0129-797X |
| Publisher | ISEAS - Yusof Ishak Institute (PUBLISHER • SG) |
| DOI | 10.1355/cs3-4b |
| OpenAlex | W2048700048 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 3 |
| References cited | 1 |
In recent years rural development has become an increasingly attrac tive alternative to urban-based industrialization. This shifting emphasis reflects the general failure of the trickledown theory of growth to generate improvement in the levels of living among the majority of the citizens of Third World countries who, by and large, are rural communities.1 In Malaysia, the chief instrument of rural development policies has been land development and settlement, and the long record of the country with land development makes it a particularly attractive case to study.2 In addition, Malaysia has been experimenting with alterna tive strategies and methods of development; as a result, it is feasible to do comparative ex post facto evaluations to determine which particular land development strategies, if any, offer the most effective solutions to rural poverty. This study offers an economic comparison of two competing federal agencies, FELDA and FELCRA, which are involved in land development and settlement. FELDA, by far the larger agency, has emphasized individual ownership of land, while FELCRA has relied on a more co-operative approach. To anticipate the overall finding of the study, both of the land development strategies are judged to be of high-cost and are unlikely to offer a cost-effective and ecologically feasible method of solving Malaysia's rural poverty problem. The paper is organized into six sections. Following this introduc tion is a brief discussion of the historical evolution of land develop ment as an anti-poverty policy instrument. Next, the Federal Land Development Agency (FELDA) model is examined, followed by the same for the youth schemes of the Federal Land Consolidation and Rehabilitation Agency (FELCRA). Details of the particular FELDA and FELCRA schemes are then evaluated, together with a summary
Geography · Computer Science · Environmental Science · Land Rights and Reforms · Urban and Rural Development Challenges
| Citations per year | 0.07 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 1985 - 2016 (32) |
| Highly cited | No |