What land grabbing is and where it takes place. But above all, what damage it causes to the environment and to the local communities that inhabit the lands of the global south.
Land grabbing is a powerful economic phenomenon that exploded in 2008, giving rise to a flow of investment and capital – coming primarily from developed or emerging countries – aimed at acquiring agricultural land in regions of the global south. The objective of these massive acquisitions, particularly in Africa, Asia and Latin America, is the acquisition of land for the development of monocultures. The actors, the masterminds, can be the governments of other states, the boards of directors of large companies, or private investors. For many, it represents a threat to the sovereignty of developing countries and to the survival of the local communities that have inhabited them for centuries. It is no coincidence, then, that land grabbing has been described by some experts as a new form of colonialism.
Seven years ago, the World Bank, the international institution created to distribute economic aid to states in difficulty, adopted an agricultural policy based on free trade that removed all restrictions on the purchase of land belonging to countries of the global south.
The aim of the Washington, United States-based institution was to stimulate the agricultural sector in emerging or developing countries through an influx of foreign capital and to halve the number of people suffering from hunger by 2015, in line with the Millennium Development Goals established by the United Nations.
From that moment, an unbridled race to purchase low-cost land began, which led governments to cede millions of hectares in an effort to cope with the severe economic and food crisis of recent years. A race that, to many scholars and historians, was reminiscent of the colonial period and the scramble for Africa in terms of land and natural resources, carried out by European states from the end of the nineteenth century onwards.
Global Justice Now, formerly the World Development Movement, a British organisation that fights for social justice, described all of this as "the new scramble for Africa" – the new partition of Africa which, in place of colonising states, sees multinational corporations as the main protagonists, aiming to take control of food markets.
The non-governmental organisation Grain, which supports small farmers and local movements fighting to defend their land, published a list of African countries that were most affected by the land grabbing phenomenon between 2006 and 2012. Chief among them: Liberia, Guinea, Ghana, Congo, Sierra Leone, Nigeria and Senegal, with portions of land ceded ranging from 500,000 up to approximately 1.7 million hectares (Liberia). Former United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan, in a speech delivered in June 2011 at the FAO, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, described it as "truly disturbing that a report found that, in 2009 alone, an area of farmland the size of France was purchased in Africa by investment funds and other speculators."
The first African country to have experienced land grabbing on a considerable scale was Senegal, during the presidency of Abdoulaye Wade. Between 2000 and 2009, the government ceded approximately 650,000 hectares of land. One case that received a great deal of attention from the international media is that of the company Senhuile-Senethanol, which acquired 20,000 hectares of land from the rural community of Fanaye. The project went through several phases and caused social and political tensions that escalated, on 26 October 2011, into clashes and protests against the government, resulting in the deaths of two people and dozens of injuries.
"Land grabbing has maintained a consistent growth trend compared to the past," said Stefano Liberti, author of the first report on the land grabbing phenomenon. "But awareness has also increased. This means the issue is more widely covered by the media in countries where press freedom allows it, and it has become part of the public debate. Thanks to this interest, governments are acting with greater caution. Some deals have even fallen through due to public pressure."
Another African state to have suffered the worst consequences of land grabbing is Madagascar, an island in the Indian Ocean that is home to a rich and unique biodiversity. Its "isolated" position, as it were, has meant that living species have developed on its territory that are found nowhere else in the world. The land grabbing phenomenon, in this case, therefore caused serious problems and moments of great tension in the country, where some of the most controversial and closely studied episodes in the world have taken place. Such as the Daewoo Logistics Corporation case of 2008 and the Tozzi Green case of 2012.
Now, however, the situation appears to have stabilised. Civil society, in fact, is increasingly attentive to and concerned about the phenomenon. "In recent years investments have continued, but without any significant acceleration compared to 2008, when it all began," Liberti continues. "Today the area granted on an annual basis is roughly twice the size of Spain. Most of the land is not sold but leased for very long periods – usually 25, 50 or 99 years, even though the actual investment horizon is shorter, because those seeking profit have an interest in achieving it within the first five years and then typically abandon that same land," explains Liberti, who recently also wrote a report titled I signori del cibo on the role of multinational corporations that are transforming the food sector into an industry, destroying the planet.
"For this reason, given the lack of transparency in the agreements, only estimates can be made, ranging from 60 to 300 million hectares. This means," Liberti continues, "a scale ranging from the size of France to that of the whole of Western Europe. I believe the real estimate lies somewhere in the middle. The most serious problem is that what is being imposed is a model of agricultural production that is entirely different from the family-based model that has existed for centuries in those places. It is a model of production that has an enormous impact and is based on monoculture."
The repeated violations appear to have given rise to another pressing need: regulating the agricultural policy promoted by the World Bank through the drafting of guidelines that introduce forms of accountability for those seeking to acquire land, and that make compliance with fundamental human rights — such as universal access to food — compulsory. The Fao document published in 2012, Voluntary guidelines on the responsible governance of tenure of land, fisheries and forests, while non-binding, moves in this direction and also includes provisions on environmental protection and on the protection of indigenous peoples who have lived on those lands for centuries.
In September 2016, land grabbing was also included among the most serious environmental crimes according to the International Criminal Court (Icc), which is based in The Hague, in the Netherlands. The offences associated with land grabbing are those of starving and displacing — that is, forcing off their land — thousands of farmers and entire communities around the world. For this reason, the Court decided to reserve the right to give its verdict "on a case-by-case basis" and to ensure that the consequences of this practice do not undermine inviolable human rights enshrined by the international community.
The case study that led the Icc to also rule on land grabbing — defining the destruction of the environment more broadly as a crime against humanity — is the one relating to Cambodia, which was first closed (2014) and then reopened. In particular, chief prosecutor Fatou Bensouda commented on the transfer, often illegal, of national land to multinational corporations, which results in the devastation of the environment and the territory. The Cambodian government is now accused of having pushed 350,000 people into poverty after evicting them from their homes.
The challenge for the years ahead is to find a balance that meets the needs of local communities that have unproductive agricultural or forested areas at their disposal. A mechanism also needs to be devised that fairly compensates smallholder farmers, who are often victims of corruption within political systems and of a lack of transparency. Guaranteeing them access to the natural resources found on their land — very often the sole source of income for families.