Population growth, the increasing consumption of a global elite and an international legal system skewed in favor of large-scale investors are fueling a worldwide rush for land that is unfolding faster than previously thought and is likely to continue, according to the largest study of international land deals to date.
Researchers estimate that more than 200 million hectares of land have been sold or leased between 2000 and last year. However, although the food price crisis of 2007-2008 may have triggered a boom in international land deals, the study says that a much broader set of factors — linked to population growth and the rise of emerging economies — is raising the prospect of “a new era in the struggle for, and control over, land in many areas of the global south.”
Forty civil society and research groups fed into the global commercial pressures on land research project, coordinated by the International Land Coalition (ILC), which draws on a decade of data to identify and analyze trends in large land acquisitions and highlights the role of governments in brokering deals that may marginalize rural communities and jeopardize the future of family farming in favor of big industrial projects. This is the most comprehensive study to date of international land deals, pulling together findings from investigations around the world.
Over the last year a number of reports have focused on cases of foreign investors “grabbing” large tracts of land in poor African countries to grow cheap food for their own populations. However, according to a study published by the ILC on Wednesday, rich national investors play a much larger role than previously thought, food is not the main focus of these deals and African governments are not the only ones signing away large tracts of land.
Data collected by researchers show that about 40 percent of land acquired over the last decade is intended for biofuel production. In comparison, 25 percent is for food crops and another 27 percent for mining, tourism, industry and forestry. However, the focus of land deals also varies by region: In Africa, 66 percent of land deals cross-referenced by researchers are intended for biofuel production, compared with 15 percent for food crops. Meanwhile, food production seems more significant in Latin America (27 percent), along with mineral extraction (23 percent).
The report also notes that regional dealings may be on the rise: In Southeast Asia, for example, 75 percent of reported land deals have been struck by regional players and South African investors have acquired an estimated 40.7 million hectares of African land since 2009. The full data from the Land Matrix research project will be published next year.
Though policymakers seem to have recently warmed to the potential role of family farms, the report says enthusiasm for industrial-scale agriculture continues to sideline small farmers.
Many developing countries, under pressure from the IMF, the World Bank and a number of government aid agencies, are going to great lengths to attract and legally protect foreign investment in agriculture and extractive industries, setting up sophisticated specialized agencies to promote investment opportunities and offering benefits such as tax breaks and low prices, the ILC said.
Last week, the US aid agency USAid hosted an international conference to promote foreign investment in South Sudan. Research by the US-based Oakland Institute suggests that almost 9 percent of South Sudan’s land had already been leased or bought by investors prior to the country’s independence in July.
Wednesday’s study says that international trade regimes are overwhelmingly skewed in favor of international investors, while fewer and less effective international mechanisms exist to safeguard the rights of the rural poor. Meanwhile, the common lack of formal, legal titles to land is heightening the vulnerability of rural communities.
“As governments own the land, it is easy for them to lease large areas to investors, but the benefits for local communities or national treasuries are often minimal,” said Lorenzo Cotula, of the London-based International Institute for Environment and Development. “This highlights the need for poor communities to have stronger rights over the land they have lived on for generations.”
Last year, the G20 summit in Seoul encouraged all countries and companies to uphold a set of principles for responsible agricultural investment, developed by the UN and the World Bank. However, critics say that voluntary international agreements can amount to little more than window-dressing. Earlier this year, African leaders gathered in Lusaka, Zambia, to discuss ways to regulate land-based foreign direct investment.
Resistance to large land deals is growing. In August, residents of Mukaya Payam, in South Sudan’s Central Equatoria state, launched a campaign against what would have been the country’s largest land deal — a 49-year lease of 600,000 hectares by a US company. Last month, hundreds of smallholder farmers and civil society activists converged on Selingue, in southern Mali, for the first international farmers’ conference to tackle the global rush for land.
“Optimistically, it may even be hoped that rural communities in many parts of the world are able to finally achieve secure access to and control over their land through struggles catalysed by the increasing demand for it. It is to be hoped that the rush for land will act as a wake-up call, provoking a reconsideration of the path we are on,” the ILC says.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations