Large scale land acquisitions and REDD+: a synthesis of conflicts and opportunities

Abstract

Large scale land acquisitions (LSLA), and Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDDþ) are both land based phenomena which when occurring in the same area, can compete with each other for land. A quantitative analysis of country characteristics revealed that land available for agriculture, accessibility, and political stability are key explanatory factors for a country being targeted for LSLA. Surprisingly LSLA occur in countries with lower accessibility. Countries with good land availability, poor accessibility and political stability may become future targets if they do not already have LSLA. Countries which high levels of agriculture-driven deforestation and LSLA, should develop interventions which reduce forest loss driven either directly or indirectly by LSLA as part of their REDDþ strategies. Both host country and investor-side policies have been identified which could be used more widely to reduce conflicts between LSLA and REDDþ. Findings from this research highlight the need for and can inform the development of national and international policies on land acquisitions including green acquisitions such as REDDþ. Land management must be considered with all its objectivesincluding food security, biodiversity conservation, and climate change mitigation-in a coherent strategy which engages relevant stakeholders. This is not currently occurring and might be a key ingredient to achieve the targets under the Sustainable Development Goals 2 and 15 and 16 (related to food security and sustainable agriculture and the protection of forests) among others.

Effective moratoria on land acquisitions reduce tropical deforestation: evidence from Indonesia

“…most common intended land uses of global LSLA is for agriculture and secondarily for forestry, of which 59% and 17% are for transnational deals and 58% and 23% for domestic deals, respectively. Land grabbing flows from the global South to the North and from the South to the South have been characterized in previous studies , Seaquist et al 2014, Carter et al 2017. Yet, we further reveal that domestic and transnational land acquisitions driven by investors in low and low middle income countries also make up a substantial proportion.…”

“…In this study, we extend this research and show that global LSLA networks are mainly characterized by dominant land grabbing flows from the developing to the developed world (75.4%), with small percentages of land grabbing flows contained within the developing world (22.8%) or the developed world (1.8%). Land available for agriculture and accessibility were identified as key factors for counties being targeted for transnational LSLA (Carter et al 2017), and Nolte et al (2016) reported that globally most LSLA deals (∼80%) are for agriculture. When considering all concluded and intended land deals (and after excluding failed ones), we also find that the Abbreviation note.…”

“…Our results, however, should be interpreted in light of certain limitations and uncertainties. First, our results are based on the Land Matrix database, which is increasingly being used in academic research to understand global LSLA networks given its spatial details and attributes of land deal activities (Rulli and D'Odorico 2013, Scoones et al 2013, Seaquist et al 2014, Carter et al 2017. While this database facilitates real-time tracking and monitoring of land deals from regional to global scales, it also has its limitations.…”

“…For example, the production of four commodities (beef, soybeans, palm oil, and wood products) has been responsible for 40% of total tropical deforestation in Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Paraguay, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Papua New Guinea (Henders et al 2015). In the context of supply-and demand-side globalization, the role of large-scale land acquisitions (LSLA) in accelerating tropical deforestation has gained increasing attention (Gibbs et al 2015, Davis et al 2015c, Carter et al 2017. LSLA can be defined as large land transactions (200 ha) that entail a transfer of rights to use, control, or own land through sale, lease or concession (Nolte et al 2016).…”

Focus on cross-scale feedbacks in global sustainable land management

“…Moving towards alternative approaches to sciencepolicy interactions, such as co-production (Mauser et al 2013), could increase the relevance and usability of land-use science for society and decision-making. With respect to global land governance, new emerging processes such as large-scale land acquisition or spilloff and offsite effects (Seppelt et al 2011, Carter et al 2017, Pascual et al 2017 pose challenges to land management which is mostly implemented through law, rule or incentives at the local to regional scale. Surprisingly, large-scale land acquisitions are not an issue in global-scale agro-economic models (Debonne et al 2018).…”