What Can Be Expected from International Frameworks to Regulate Large-Scale Land and Water Acquisitions in Sub-Saharan Africa?

Abstract

This paper explores the use of international governance frameworks as being one of the ways to regulate large-scale land acquisitions (LSLAs). LSLAs are currently flourishing in both developed and developing countries, in particular in the sub-Saharan Africa region. Although they can potentially have many positive impacts in rural areas, many LSLAs have been shown to mainly produce negative impacts in poor countries with weak national policy and institutional frameworks and poorly defined rights for rural people. To successfully regulate the occurrence of LSLAs and their impacts, it needs to be understood that LSLAs are more complex than they are usually portrayed as being. Some of the complexities pertain to water issues; provenience of investors; legality and legitimacy of acquisitions; as well as the diversity of actors and the people affected. Against this background, five international frameworks are looked at: human rights, voluntary international guidelines, international global water governance regimes and bi-/multilateral river treaties, and voluntary private standards and codes. The paper concludes that the frameworks reviewed provide valuable guidance regarding LSLAs, but no single approach can help in dealing with the multitude of actors, situations, and impacts of LSLAs. Even if they are considered collectively, they can tackle many but not all challenges. Yet, their The Law and Development Review 2014; 7(2): 433-471 Brought to you by | HEC Bibliotheque Maryriam ET J. Authenticated Download Date | 8/4/15 8:29 PMimplementation could substantially improve the process and the impact of LSLAs, including their refusal. A key question is how these frameworks are deployed at the local level. Some rely on translation into national laws and on their implementation, others try to establish a direct linkage between the international and the local level. It is of great interest to study how international frameworks trickle down to local policy arenas, how they are used by stakeholders, and how they are finally shaping conflicts at the local level and affecting their results. In particular, their potential for empowering poor stakeholders should be of interest for research and development.

Nucleus-outgrower schemes as an alternative to traditional smallholder agriculture in Tanzania – strengths, weaknesses and policy requirements

“…We focus on public management because, although investors can tackle many issues at the project level, critical issues should not be left to investors' good will: minimum requirements must be harmonised throughout the country. International regulations and standards have been shown to not suffice to manage these issues (Brüntrup et al 2014). National regulation also protects investors from exaggerated expectations, creates a level playing field and prevents the spread of negative experiences.…”

Corporate Social Responsibility: Institutional Behavior Differences in Extractive Industry

“…Our study tested the hypothesis on foreign owned and domestic owned mining companies working in Ghana utilizing information from the Ghana Investment Promotion Center (GIPC). Concentrating on Ghana was suitable given that it is, in some essential regards, illustrative of sub-Saharan African developing economies ( [22][23][24][25]. The mining company's financial resources availability was measured utilizing returns on sales, return on ordinary shares and corporate profit and measured company's CSR investments utilizing CSR/employees, CSR/firm ordinary share, and the normal log of CSR commitments.…”

Transformative land investment: Trends in transnational governance

“…Still, Margulis and Porter (2013) and Brüntrup et al (2014) argue that transnational arrangements such as the CFS-RAI and VGGT provide opportunities for the poorest farmers to protect their land rights. The authors show how these initiatives can promote and provide a framework for public debate over large-scale landbased agricultural investments.…”