Large-Scale Land Acquisition and Its Effects on the Water Balance in Investor and Host Countries

Abstract

This study examines the validity of the assumption that international large-scale land acquisition (LSLA) is motivated by the desire to secure control over water resources, which is commonly referred to as ‘water grabbing’. This assumption was repeatedly expressed in recent years, ascribing the said motivation to the Gulf States in particular. However, it must be considered of hypothetical nature, as the few global studies conducted so far focused primarily on the effects of LSLA on host countries or on trade in virtual water. In this study, we analyse the effects of 475 intended or concluded land deals recorded in the Land Matrix database on the water balance in both host and investor countries. We also examine how these effects relate to water stress and how they contribute to global trade in virtual water. The analysis shows that implementation of the LSLAs in our sample would result in global water savings based on virtual water trade. At the level of individual LSLA host countries, however, water use intensity would increase, particularly in 15 sub-Saharan states. From an investor country perspective, the analysis reveals that countries often suspected of using LSLA to relieve pressure on their domestic water resources—such as China, India, and all Gulf States except Saudi Arabia—invest in agricultural activities abroad that are less water-intensive compared to their average domestic crop production. Conversely, large investor countries such as the United States, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, and Japan are disproportionately externalizing crop water consumption through their international land investments. Statistical analyses also show that host countries with abundant water resources are not per se favoured targets of LSLA. Indeed, further analysis reveals that land investments originating in water-stressed countries have only a weak tendency to target areas with a smaller water risk.

The Global Food‐Energy‐Water Nexus

“…Studying the issue of land acquisitions through hydrological analytical tools provides insights into contemporary hydropolitical trends. Tools such as water footprints and virtual water transfer applied to the study of transnational land investments show that globalization dynamics strongly affect the water resources of developing countries (Breu et al, ; Rulli et al, ; Rulli & D'Odorico, ). Rulli and D'Odorico () estimate that LSLAs account for the appropriation of about 0.4 × 10 12 m 3 (Figure ).…”

“…Intensification efforts require investments that are increasingly made by large‐scale agribusiness corporations, particularly in the developing world. Such investments may affect the system of production and its inputs, for example, through contract farming or out grower schemes (Da Silva, ; Eaton & Shepherd, ) or land use, access, and tenure rights, as occurs for LSLAs (Breu et al, ; Cotula, ; International Land Coalition, ), which are discussed in section 9.3.…”

“…Reviews of Geophysics investments may affect the system of production and its inputs, for example, through contract farming or out grower schemes (Da Silva, 2005;Eaton & Shepherd, 2001) or land use, access, and tenure rights, as occurs for LSLAs (Breu et al, 2016;Cotula, 2009;International Land Coalition, 2011), which are discussed in section 9.3.…”

The Value of Green Water Management in Sub‐Saharan Africa: A Review

“…A report by UNEP (2016) shows that the continent has 60 percent of the world’s unconverted arable land, indicating not only a great potential for local and external investment in food production on a massive scale, but also showing Africa’s potential to become a major player in the global export of food, biofuels, and fiber. The importance of access to water in large‐scale land investments is often underplayed and not recognized, although it is becoming clearer that water resources are a major attraction for such investments (Williams et al 2012; Breu et al 2016). Matavel et al (2011) noted how sugar cane farming is linked to both land and water grabbing.…”

New frontiers of land and water commodification: socio‐environmental controversies of large‐scale land acquisitions

“…However, this concept can be interpreted in different ways, from the redefinition and reallocation of water rights (e.g., Sosa & Zwarteveen, 2012) to the diversion of rivers and reconfiguration of waterscapes (e.g., Matthews, 2012) and to virtual appropriation of freshwater through agricultural production (Breu et al, 2016;. Indeed, several studies point to commercial farming through LSLAs as the most impactful system of freshwater appropriation in developing countries (Anseeuw et al, 2012b;Mehta et al, 2012;.…”