Home Page |
Home Page for Mobile
africafocus by e-mail - analysis that goes beyond the news
africafocus.org - your first stop for Africa policy issues on the web
http://www.africafocus.org/docs10/ag1010c.php
AfricaFocus Bulletin
"While there is a perception that land is abundant in certain
countries, these claims need to be treated with caution. In many
cases land is already being used or claimed - yet existing land
uses and claims go unrecognised because land users are marginalised
from formal land rights and access to the law and institutions. And
even in countries where some land is available, large-scale land
allocations may still result in displacement as demand focuses on
higher value lands." - joint report from FAO, IFAD, and the
International Institute for Environment and Development.
This AfricaFocus Bulletin contains excerpts from a report by the UN
Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, with suggested principles
for large-scale agricultural investment, and from the executive
summary of a 2009 study of recent land deals in Ethiopia, Ghana,
Madagascar, Mali, Sudan, Mozambique, and Tanzania, by a team from
FAO, IFAD, and the International Institute for Environment and
Development.
Two other AfricaFocus Bulletins released today have related
information on this issue, as well as links to additional sources.
For previous AfricaFocus Bulletins on issues related to
agriculture, see http://www.africafocus.org/agexp.php
++++++++++++++++++++++end editor's note++++++++++++++++++++
Report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food, Olivier De
Schutter
A/HRC/13/33/Add.2, 28 December 2009
[Full text of this and other related documents available at
http://www.srfood.org]
In this addendum to his report, the Special Rapporteur analyses a
trend that has accelerated following the 2008 global food price
crisis: large-scale acquisitions and leases of land.
It is estimated that between 15 and 20 million hectares of farmland
in developing countries have been subject to transactions or
negotiations involving foreign investors since
On the basis of this analysis, the Special Rapporteur proposes a
set of core principles and measures for host States and investors.
These principles are intended to inform current initiatives such as
the adoption of guidelines on land policies and governance by
international and regional organizations. Their main aim is to
ensure that negotiations leading to land acquisitions and leases
comply with a number of procedural
...
Principle 1: The negotiations leading to investment agreements
should be conducted in a fully transparent manner, and with the
participation of the local communities whose access to land and
other productive resources may be affected as a result of the
investment agreement. In considering whether or not to conclude an
agreement with an investor, the host government should always
balance the advantages of entering into such an agreement against
the opportunity costs involved, in particular when other uses could
be made of the land available, which could be more conducive to the
long-term needs of the local population concerned and the full
realization of their human rights.
Principle 2: In general, any shifts in land use can only take place
with the free, prior and informed consent of the local communities
concerned. This is particularly important for indigenous
communities, in view of the discrimination and marginalization to
which they have historically been subjected. Forced evictions
should only be allowed to occur in the most exceptional
circumstances. They are only allowable under international law when
they are in accordance with the locally applicable legislation,
when they are justified as necessary for the general welfare, and
when they are accompanied by adequate compensation and alternative
resettlement or access to productive land. Prior to carrying out
any evictions or shifts in land use which could result in depriving
individuals of access to their productive resources, States should
ensure that all feasible alternatives are explored in consultation
with the affected persons, with a view to avoiding, or at least
minimizing, the need to resort to evictions. In all cases,
effective legal remedies or procedures should be provided to those
who are affected by eviction orders.
Principle 3: In order to ensure that the rights of local
communities will be safeguarded at all times, States should adopt
legislation protecting these and specifying in detail the
conditions according to which shifts in land use, or evictions, may
take place, as well as the procedures to be followed. Moreover,
States should assist individuals and local communities in obtaining
individual titles or collective registration of the land they use,
in order to ensure that their rights will enjoy full judicial
protection. Such legislation should be designed in accordance with
the basic principles and guidelines on development-based evictions
and displacement presented in 2007 by the former Special Rapporteur
on the right to adequate housing as a component of the right to an
adequate standard of living, and with general comment No. 7 (1997)
of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights on the
right to adequate housing (article 11 (1) of the Covenant): forced
evictions.
Principle 4: The local population should benefit from the revenues
generated by the investment agreement. Investment contracts should
prioritize the development needs of the local population and seek
to achieve solutions which represent an adequate balance between
the interests of all parties. Depending on the circumstances,
arrangements under which the foreign investor provides access to
credit and improved technologies for contract farming, against the
possibility to buy at predefined prices a portion of the crops
produced, may be preferable to long-term leases of land or land
purchases, although contract farming itself should comply with the
conditions set out in the report of the Special Rapporteur on
agribusiness and the right to food (A/HRC/13/33, paragraphs 43-45).
Principle 5: In countries facing important levels of rural poverty
and in the absence of employment opportunities in other sectors,
host States and investors should establish and promote farming
systems that are sufficiently labour-intensive to contribute to
employment creation. Labour-intensive modes of production can be
highly productive per hectare. Investment agreements should
contribute to the fullest extent possible to reinforcing local
livelihood options and in particular provide access to a living
wage for the local population affected, which is a key component of
the human right to food.
Principle 6: Host States and investors should cooperate in
identifying ways to ensure that the modes of agricultural
production respect the environment, and do not accelerate climate
change, soil depletion, and the exhaustion of freshwater reserves.
Depending on local conditions, they may have to explore low
external input farming practices as a means to meet this challenge.
Principle 7: Whatever the content of the arrangement, it is
essential that the obligations of the investor be defined in clear
terms, and that these obligations be enforceable, for instance by
the inclusion of predefined sanctions in case of non-compliance.
For this mechanism to be effective, independent and participatory
ex post impact assessments should be made at predefined intervals.
The obligations of the investor should not be limited to the
payment of rents, or -- in the case of land purchases -- to a
monetary sum. They should include clear and verifiable commitments
related to a number of issues which are relevant to the longterm
sustainability of the investment and to its compliance with human
rights. In particular, such commitments may relate to the
generation of local employment and compliance with labour rights,
including a living wage as far as waged employment is concerned; to
the inclusion of smallholders through properly negotiated outgrower
schemes, joint ventures or other forms of collaborative production
models; and to the need to make investments in order to ensure that
a larger proportion of the value chain can be captured by the local
communities, for instance by the building of local processing
plants.
Principle 8: In order to ensure that they will not increase food
insecurity for the local population, particularly as the result of
increased dependence on international markets or food aid in a
context of higher prices for agricultural commodities, investment
agreements with net food-importing countries should include a
clause providing that a certain minimum percentage of the crops
produced shall be sold on local markets, and that this percentage
may increase, in proportions to be agreed in advance, if the prices
of food commodities on international markets reach certain levels.
Appropriate support schemes may also have to be put in place to
increase the productivity of local farmers, in order to ensure that
they will not suffer income losses as a result of low-priced
produce arriving on the local markets, which has been produced
under more competitive conditions on the large-scale plantations
developed by foreign investors.
Principle 9: In order to highlight the consequences of investment
on the enjoyment of the right to food, impact assessments should be
conducted prior to the completion of the negotiations on (a) local
employment and incomes, disaggregated by gender and, where
applicable, by ethnic group; (b) access to productive resources by
local communities, including pastoralists or itinerant farmers; (c)
the arrival of new technologies and investments in infrastructure;
(d) the environment, including soil depletion, the use of water
resources and genetic erosion; and (e) access, availability and
adequacy of food. Only through such impact assessments, which
should include a participatory dimension, can it be ensured that
the contracts providing for the lease or sale of land will
distribute the benefits equitably between the local communities,
the host State, and the investor.
Principle 10: Under international law, indigenous peoples have been
granted specific forms of protection of their rights to land.
States shall consult and cooperate in good faith with the
indigenous peoples concerned in order to obtain their free and
informed consent prior to the approval of any project affecting
their lands or territories and other resources, particularly in
connection with the development, utilization or exploitation of
mineral, water or other resources.
Principle 11: Waged agricultural workers should be provided with
adequate protection and their fundamental human and labour rights
should be stipulated in legislation and enforced in practice,
consistent with the applicable ILO instruments. Increasing
protection of this category of workers would contribute to
enhancing their ability, and that of their families, to procure
access to sufficient and adequate food.
June 2009
Cotula, L., Vermeulen, S., Leonard, R. and Keeley, J.
[Excerpts from executive summary. Full report available at
http://www.ifad.org/pub/land/land_grab.pdf]
[This report is the outcome of a collaboration between the Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the
International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) and the
International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED). It
also benefited from links with a parallel study led by the World
Bank and involving IIED and FAO.]
Over the past 12 months, large-scale acquisitions of farmland in
Africa, Latin America, Central Asia and Southeast Asia have made
headlines in a flurry of media reports across the world. Lands that
only a short time ago seemed of little outside interest are now
being sought by international investors to the tune of hundreds of
thousands of hectares. And while a failed attempt to lease 1.3
million ha in Madagascar has attracted much media attention, deals
reported in the international press constitute the tip of the
iceberg. This is rightly a hot issue because land is so central to
identity, livelihoods and food security.
Despite the spate of media reports and some published research,
international land deals and their impacts remain still little
understood. This report is a step towards filling this gap. The
outcome of a collaboration between IIED, FAO and IFAD, the report
discusses key trends and drivers in land acquisitions, the
contractual arrangements underpinning them and the way these are
negotiated, as well as the early impacts on land access for rural
people in recipient countries. The report looks at large-scale land
acquisitions, broadly defined as acquisitions (whether purchases,
leases or other) of land areas over 1,000 ha. While international
land deals are emerging as a global phenomenon, this report focuses
on sub-Saharan Africa.
The report draws on a literature review; on qualitative interviews
with key informants internationally; on national inventories of
approved and proposed land acquisitions since 2004 in five African
countries (Ethiopia, Ghana, Madagascar, Mali and Sudan), as well as
qualitative case studies in Mozambique and Tanzania; and on legal
analysis of applicable law and of a small sample of land deals.
Primary and secondary data on land acquisitions in Africa is scarce
and often of limited reliability.1 This means that evidence and the
conclusions drawn from the study need to be treated with caution.
Nevertheless a picture is emerging of large-scale land acquisitions
in Africa. Key features include:
Several factors seem to underpin these land acquisitions. These
include food security concerns, particularly in investor countries,
which are a key driver of government-backed investment. Food
supply problems and uncertainties are created by constraints in
agricultural production due to limited availability of water and
arable land; by bottlenecks in storage and distribution; and by the
expansion of biofuel production, an important competing land and
crop use.
Increasing urbanisation rates and changing diets are also pushing
up global food demand. The food price hikes of 2007 and 2008 shook
the assumption that the world will continue to experience low food
prices. While grain and other food prices have dropped from the
highs seen in the summer of 2008, some of the structural factors
underpinning rising prices are likely to stay.
Government-backed deals can also be driven by investment
opportunities rather than food security concerns. In addition,
global demand for biofuels and other non-food agricultural
commodities, expectations of rising rates of return in agriculture
and land values, and policy measures in home and host countries are
key factors driving new patterns of land investment.
With regard to biofuels, government consumption targets (in the
European Union, for instance) and financial incentives have been a
key driving force. It is possible that the recent decline in the
oil price from the highs of 2008 may dampen enthusiasm for biofuel
investments. But given the projections of diminishing supplies of
non-renewables, biofuels are likely to remain and increase as an
option in the longer-term, unless policies shift in response to
concerns about the impacts of biofuel expansion on food security.
As for rates of return in agriculture, rising agricultural
commodity prices make the acquisition of land for agricultural
production look like an increasingly attractive option. Some
agribusiness players traditionally involved in food processing and
distribution are pursuing vertical integration strategies to move
upstream and enter direct production.
Although political risk remains high in many African countries,
policy reforms have improved the attractiveness of the investment
climate in several countries - including through a growing number
of investment treaties and codes, and through reform of sectoral
legislation on land, banking, taxation, customs regimes or other
aspects.
For people in recipient countries, this new context creates risks
and opportunities. Increased investment may bring macro-level
benefits (such as GDP growth and improved government revenues), and
may create opportunities for economic development and livelihood
improvement in rural areas.
But as governments or markets make land available to prospecting
investors, large-scale land acquisitions may result in local people
losing access to the resources on which they depend for their food
security - particularly as some key recipient countries are
themselves faced with food security challenges.
While there is a perception that land is abundant in certain
countries, these claims need to be treated with caution. In many
cases land is already being used or claimed - yet existing land
uses and claims go unrecognised because land users are marginalised
from formal land rights and access to the law and institutions. And
even in countries where some land is available, large-scale land
allocations may still result in displacement as demand focuses on
higher value lands (e.g. those with greater irrigation potential or
proximity to markets).
Ultimately, the extent to which international land deals seize
opportunities and mitigate risks depends on their terms and
conditions: how are risks assessed and mitigated - for instance
through considerations in project location? What business models
are favoured in project implementation (from plantations to
contract farming, purchase agreements, policy incentives, or joint
ventures)? How are costs and benefits shared - for example, in
terms of safeguards against arbitrary land takings, or
revenue-sharing arrangements? And who decides on these issues and
how?
Although the terms and conditions of investment display a huge
diversity among countries and even individual projects, the main
findings of this study, based on a small number of international
land deals, include the following:
Although on paper some countries have progressive laws and
procedures that seek to increase local voice and benefit, big gaps
between theory and practice, between statute books and reality on
the ground result in major costs being internalised by local people
- but also in difficulties for investor companies.
Many countries do not have in place legal or procedural mechanisms
to protect local rights and take account of local interests,
livelihoods and welfare. Even in the minority of countries where
legal requirements for community consultation are in place,
processes to negotiate land access with communities remain
unsatisfactory. Lack of transparency and of checks and balances in
contract negotiations creates a breeding ground for corruption and
deals that do not maximise the public interest. Insecure use rights
on state-owned land, inaccessible registration procedures, vaguely
defined productive use requirements, legislative gaps, and
compensation limited to loss of improvements like crops and trees
(thus excluding loss of land) all undermine the position of local
people.
Virtually all the contracts analysed by this study tend to be short
and simple compared to the economic reality of the transaction. Key
issues like strengthening mechanisms to monitor or enforce
compliance with investor commitments, maximising government
revenues and clarifying their distribution, promoting business
models that maximise local benefit (such as employment creation and
infrastructure development), as well as balancing food security
concerns in both home and host countries are dealt with by vague
provisions if at all.
Recommendations for policy and practice can only be tentative at
this stage. In addition, land deals take many different forms and
proceed in a wide diversity of contexts. Large-scale land deals may
involve 1,000 hectares or 500,000 hectares. This diversity means
that recommendations need to be tailored to their contexts. Below
are sets of general recommendations for different stakeholders:
* Investors;
Investors - options for maximising security for investment and
sustainable development gains
Recipient governments - placing sustainable development at the
centre of investment decision-making
Organisations of the rural poor and their support groups - options
for maximising net benefits from land investments, and limiting
exclusionary impacts
International development agencies - catalysing positive change
AfricaFocus Bulletin can be reached at africafocus@igc.org. Please
write to this address to subscribe or unsubscribe to the bulletin,
or to suggest material for inclusion. For more information about
reposted material, please contact directly the original source
mentioned. For a full archive and other resources, see
http://www.africafocus.org
|