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

Abstract

A growing number of regions in the developing world are targeted by transnational investors who are acquiring large amounts of land and natural resources. Driven by the increasing global demand for agricultural products, such investments are often considered an opportunity for economic development in the target country. However, there are concerns about the social and environmental impacts on local communities. In this brief review, we discuss some key socio‐environmental controversies surrounding large‐scale land acquisitions (LSLAs). LSLAs often target common property systems and lead to privatization and commodification of land through long‐term land concessions. There is a debate between supporters of foreign land investments as a means to attract modern agricultural technology that would decrease the yield gap in underperforming agricultural land and those who question such a development model because it is seldom coupled with policy instruments that would ensure that the benefits improve food security in local populations. Large‐scale land investments displace a variety of systems of production ranging from small‐scale farming to (arguably) “unused” land such as forests and savannas on which local communities often depend. Moreover, LSLAs entail an appropriation of water resources that may negatively impact local farmers or downstream human and natural systems. In most cases, investors keep the land fallow but, when they put it under productive use, they typically change land cover and land use to start intensified commercial farming, often for nonfood crops. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The Global Food‐Energy‐Water Nexus

“…The societal implications of this agrarian transformation include a variety of critical problems (D'Odorico, Rulli, et al, 2017), such as dispossession of traditional users and systems of production (D'Odorico & Rulli, ; De Schutter, ), evictions and forced migrations (Adnan, ; Feldman & Geisler, ; Siciliano, ), ethical concerns related to violations of human and land tenure rights (Anseeuw et al, ; Toft, ) with particularly negative impacts on women (Behrman et al, ; White, ), rise in social conflicts and dynamics of coercion (Dell'Angelo, D'Odorico, Rulli, & Marchand, ), and multidimensional impacts on rural livelihoods in developing countries (Davis et al, ; Oberlack et al, ).Through LSLAs, land can be put under productive use to the benefit of investors and local communities, arguably (De Schutter, ), because of “trickle down” effects on employment, and access to modern technology and markets (e.g., Chakrabarti & Da Silva, ). An often overlooked impact, however, is the land degradation and land use change associated with large‐scale land investors (e.g., D'Odorico, Rulli, et al, ). In fact, forests and savannas may be cleared to accommodate new mines or farmlands (D'Odorico, Rulli, et al, ).…”

“…An often overlooked impact, however, is the land degradation and land use change associated with large‐scale land investors (e.g., D'Odorico, Rulli, et al, ). In fact, forests and savannas may be cleared to accommodate new mines or farmlands (D'Odorico, Rulli, et al, ). Several studies have found that in Indonesia and Cambodia LSLAs are a preferential mechanism for deforestation, with rates of forest loss exceeding those in similar adjacent areas outside land concessions (Carlson et al, ; Davis, Yu, Rulli, et al, ).…”

“…Indeed, recent years have seen a wave of investments in agricultural land in the developing world, with import‐dependent nations seeking to increase the pool of land and water resources under their control and targeted countries pursuing avenues to promote rural development and agricultural technology transfers (Deininger, ). However, there is a growing body of scientific and anecdotal evidence showing that the development and food security goals of these land deals are often not achieved (e.g., GRAIN, ; Klare, ; Kugelman & Levenstein, ) and, instead, often bring substantial social and environmental consequences (see, e.g., D'Odorico, Rulli, et al, ). Such land deals ultimately may result in the displacement of subsistence or small‐holder farmers by large‐scale commercial agriculture, as well as the development of new agricultural land at the expense of savannas, forests, or other ecosystems (e.g., D'Odorico & Rulli, ; Davis, Yu, Rulli, et al, ).…”

Land Grabbing in Europe? Socio-Cultural Externalities of Large-Scale Land Acquisitions in East Germany

“…Lacking a legal guarantee for de-facto land rights can even lead to dispossession of land-explored by scholars as a human rights problem [2,3]. Also negative consequences beyond these areas need to be considered [9,10].…”

Mapping and quantifying perceptions of environmental change in Kilombero Valley, Tanzania

“…Over the past two decades, there has been a rapid increase in large-scale land acquisitions to produce fibre, biofuels, feed and food for international markets, which has impacted ecosystems, agro-ecosystems and societies, predominantly across the Global South (D'Odorico et al 2017). Socio-environmental changes in the context of large-scale land acquisitions are highly complex and associated with several sustainability challenges, like deforestation (Davis et al 2015), water scarcity and pollution (Dell'Angelo et al 2018), soil degradation (Lazarus 2014) and food insecurity (Havnevik et al 2011).…”