I finished my thesis more than a month ago already but time has not allowed me yet to update my blog for quite a while. It has been an interesting undertaking with some surprising and other not-so-surprising conclusions.
Below the abstract of the thesis, titled foreign farmland acquisition – controlling ‘land grabs’.
If you are interested in obtaining a copy, please contact me.
The phenomenon of agricultural investment is nothing new: China started leasing land for food production already more than 10 years ago and private corporations have long invested in cash crops for export such as bananas, pineapples or coconuts. However, recent events have triggered a new wave of investments that portrait different characteristics than ‘typical’ well-known agricultural investment – this 21st century version of outsourced agriculture is new. These recent deals are commonly described as ‘land grabs’ and occur predominantly in the poorest and most unstable countries of the Global South and have caused a wave of debate and controversy.
This research paper questions both sides of the debate by examining the threats as well as opportunities so-called land grabs bring to a Least Developed Country (LDC). Subsequently the question is raised as to how negative impact can be avoided or mitigated to the largest possible extent as well as how positive impact can be maximised and spread out into every level of society. Currently, there are a number of international initiatives that seek to address these very issues, developing strategies or recommendations in order to allow for a greater share of equity. These initiatives are analysed, resulting in both descriptive and prescriptive policy analysis.
The research question for this paper is thus: based on the threats and opportunities for the LDCs, how well do current international initiatives reflect on-the-ground realities and consequences of land grabbing in their policy recommendations. Ultimately, this paper provides a better understanding of how land grabbing can be effectively controlled in order for its impact not to be detrimental to the sustainable development of the LDCs.
The theoretical approach utilised is the Sustainable Livelihood Approach, the Human Rights Approach, and Post-Development Theory. The methodology utilised is three-fold: literature review, policy analysis and semi-structured interviews. The paper makes use of a more generalised description of processes in LDCs, whereby the number of occurrences of land grabs ‘naturally’ put emphasis on Sub-Saharan Africa.
The study shows that the general lack of awareness of existing human rights and the consequent missing power to execute any of these rights, especially land rights, are one of the most crucial issues concerning land grabs. When customary land rights are taken into account (and land is subsequently not formally titled ‘unused’ or ‘empty’) the largest problems of land expropriation and displacement can be avoided. These in turn increase the chances for the local population of not losing their livelihoods and ensuring the right to food. The case studies, interviews and literature analysed show that numerous threats to the local population are followed by land grabs, whereas development opportunities remain theoretical in nature as most depend on two factors. These are i) socially responsible investments and ii) good governance; a set of factors especially weak in LDCs. An additional threat also comes to light that fails to act as mitigation to existing threats, namely inadequate forms of compensation for land expropriation and displacement. Land grabs are thus detrimental to the local level.
In order for the impact of land grabs not to be detrimental, the study reaches the following conclusions: 1. It has to be ensured that the conditions in which long-term large-scale agricultural investments occur are development-enabling and in favour of the local population. 2. For the long term it is most important to tackle underlying issues related to land grabbing, namely land rights and good governance. 3. In the short run, it is advised to focus on what is available now, as current international initiatives are in a too early stage of development. That means, development actors have to strengthen their foci on 1) human rights (and especially the right to food and land rights with the extension to include TIK systems), 2) the sustainable livelihood approach, and 3) the support of power and endogenous development of local groupings and social movements (Post-Development Theory).