大規模海外農業投資による食農資源問題の先鋭化とアグロ・フード・レジームの再編

The activities of multi-national companies have affected the livelihood of smallholder farmer in the Pru East, though a lot of research work has been done on large scale land acquisition but this study focus on how it affects livelihood asset of smallholder farmers in the Pru East District. Over the past ten years, the Government of Ghana have leased out large tracts of land for investors, mainly foreign investors. Survey research approach was used for the study. A multi-stage sampling technique was employed and a sample size of 332 households was used for the study. The study used five indicators of the Livelihood Effect Index (LEI) espoused by Downing et al., (2001) to determine the effects of large-scale land acquisition on the livelihood of smallholder farming households. Large scale land acquisition has a significant positive moderate effect on the employment, healthcare and food security but, has a significant negative high effect on income levels of smallholder farming households. However, large scale land acquisition has no significant effect on the nutritional status of farming households in the Pru East district of the Bono East region. Kobre and Kadue communities with an LEI of 0.53 suggests that livelihoods of farming households in these two communities are the most effected with large scale land acquisition. The study also recommends that MMDAs must formulate by-laws to ensure that large scale land investors employ people from the host communities of the projects. Keywords: livelihood asset, large scale land acquisition, smallholder farmer, human capital asset, natural capital asset, financial capital asset, social capital asset. DOI: 10.7176/JEES/10-2-08 Publication date: February 29 th 2020

Global demands on agricultural land are increasing due to population growth, dietary changes and the use of biofuels. Their effect on food security is to reduce humans’ ability to cope with the uncertainties of global climate change. In light of the 2008 food crisis, to secure reliable future access to sufficient agricultural land, many nations and corporations have begun purchasing large tracts of land in the global South, a phenomenon deemed “land grabbing” by popular media. Because land investors frequently export crops without providing adequate employment, this represents an effective income loss for local communities. We study 28 countries targeted by large-scale land acquisitions [comprising 87 % of reported cases and 27 million hectares (ha)] and estimate the effects of such investments on local communities’ incomes. We find that this phenomenon can potentially affect the incomes of ~12 million people globally with implications for food security, poverty levels and urbanization. While it is important to note that our study incorporates a number of assumptions and limitations, it provides a much needed initial quantification of the economic impacts of large-scale land acquisitions on rural livelihoods.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11111-014-0215-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

This book examines a large-scale land acquisition project for rice production in Ghana’s Volta Region, which has been purported by some to be a social and ecological showcase of a company entering a "community–private partnership" with affected communities. Celebrated by national and international media, the project has received substantial amounts of funding from various donor organisations and claims to empower women through its much-lauded outgrower project. Although discourses of "development", "sustainability" and "women’s empowerment" are used by the investment company, the state and the customary authorities to legitimise the large-scale land acquisition, this book highlights how the deal benefits mainly the powerful elite, including elite women, and generally increases the depreciation of those already most marginalised, such as poor female-headed households and settler communities that were dependent on resources from the commons now enclosed and transformed into a rice farm. The author adopts a New Institutionalist perspective in social anthropology in order to analyse how this land acquisition has been implemented in a plural institutional context and how different actors use different rules and regulations and associated legitimating discourses to increase their bargaining power and to pursue their own interests in a changing legal context. In addition, this perspective shows how benefits and losses are distributed along different intersecting axes of power, such as class, gender, clan membership and age. By focusing on power, gender and legitimisation strategies in the context of institutional change caused by the large-scale land acquisition, this book fills a gap in the literature on large-scale land acquisitions while contributing to the development of a theoretical perspective on institutional change, power relations and ideological legitimisation. This book will be of great interest to students and scholars of land and resource grabbing, agricultural development and agribusiness, land management and development studies more broadly.

Recent sharp increases in food prices have prompted some food-importing countries to promote the acquisition of farmland abroad as a strategy to secure food supplies at affordable prices. Businesses are recognizing new opportunities for strong returns from agricultural investment, including agri-food, biofuels and other agricultural commodities. Dubbed ‘land grabs’ in the press, large-scale land acquisitions have kindled much international debate, in which strong positions are taken on the impacts of such investments on the environment, rights, sovereignty, livelihoods, development and conflict at local, national and international levels. This article provides an analysis of this complex and shifting situation, focusing on Africa and drawing on quantitative inventories of land acquisitions in four countries and on a small sample of land deals. The article lays out key trends and drivers, and discusses the main features of international land deals before analysing the main risks and opportunities involved, focusing on implications for local, national and global food security. The article concludes by outlining practical steps to make the renewed momentum in agricultural investment work for development, and avoid the pitfalls of exacerbated political tensions.

There has been a recent rise in very large-scale transnational commercial land acquisitions in the global South—notably in sub-Saharan Africa. Such acquisitions, often referred to as land grabs, accelerated sharply after the 2007–8 world food crisis. The issue of land grabs intersects with issues of climate change. Many climate change mitigation efforts—most notably the turn to biofuels—generate a huge demand for land that is then satisfied by land grabs. Land grabs themselves undermine climate change mitigation initiatives as massive commercial agriculture is associated with deforestation as well as a turn towards monoculture, a land use option that generates extensive emissions. With a focus on countries in sub-Saharan Africa, this article considers the possibilities of using customary/traditional law and tenure systems to limit land grabs and mitigate their negative environmental impacts, including impacts on climate. Many of the countries that are targets in the global land rush are postcolonial countries that feature plural legal systems. They have a formal legal system, usually one introduced as part of the colonial enterprise, that is based on a Western civil law or common law system. They also feature a customary legal system that is often subordinate to the formal legal system, though it tends to be in widespread use in some parts of the country, particularly in rural areas. This legal system entails a separate governance framework as well as a customary land tenure regime. Customary land uses tend to have minimal negative impacts on local communities and on the environment relative to the land uses associated with transnational land transactions. Customary legal systems can also be used to resist large-scale land acquisitions and mitigate their negative social and environmental impacts. Two channels by which this can occur are addressed. First is the idea that customary law governance frameworks create a governance counterpoint to central government and so a local institutional framework that facilitates some resistance to power from the political centre. This framework can facilitate resistance to some deleterious land transactions. Second is the notion that customary land tenure systems generally embody a different idea of property, an idea that is relatively communitarian. This idea can be engrafted onto property as understood within the country’s legal system so as to protect some access to essential resources for local communities, even in the wake of large-scale land transactions. More broadly, this conception of property—including its tendencies against private alienation—can also be deployed to exclude some transnational land transactions altogether.

Formalising village land dispossession? An aggregate analysis of the combined effects of the land formalisation and land acquisition agendas in Tanzania

Women farmers make up a majority of small-scale food producers in sub-Saharan Africa. Despite their important role in the food and livelihood security of their households and communities, women continue to face substantial challenges in their rights of and access to land resources in the region. In a number of countries such as Sierra Leone where large-scale land acquisition is ongoing, we posit that women’s predicament may further deteriorate. Using data drawn from a survey of household and livelihood activities, focus groups and interviews we examine the outcomes of large-scale land acquisitions on women at the local level in two districts in Sierra Leone. We found that first, women depend more on land-based natural resources that directly affect the day-to-day welfare of households (such as firewood and medicinal plants) than men. Second, land acquisitions have led to a significant fall in the incomes of women and men. The effects of the fall of women’s income have more direct and profound consequences on household wellbeing compared with men. Third, men tend to rank the effects of land acquisitions on women lower than women do. We conclude that current social and cultural norms and women’s role in rural societies is complex and predisposes women to negative livelihood processes and outcomes associated with large-scale land acquisitions. Policy interventions designed to address local and national challenges to socio-economic and cultural development should recognize the crucial role played by women and be responsive to their special needs.

Part 1 Conceptual overview 1.Introduction Ian Christoplos and Adam Pain. 2. Food security and food crises: evolving realities, evolving debates Niek Koning. Part 2 New Trends and Challenges 3. Scenarios for global agriculture and food security towards 2050: a review of recent studies Dirk Willenbockel. 4. Strengthening food security through human rights: a moral and legal imperative and practical opportunity Wenche Barth Eide. 5. Large scale land acquisitions -- challenges, conflicts and partial solutions in a project lifecycle perspective Michael Bruntrup. 6. Water competition, water governance and food security Helle Munk Ravnborg. 7. Food insecurity in fragile states and protracted crises Adam Pain. Part 2 Case Studies 8. Sudan's permanent food emergency: a historical analysis of food aid, governance and political economy Susanne Jaspars 9. Food insecurity and agricultural rehabilitation in post-conflict northern Uganda Winnie Wangari Wairimu 10. Poverty, food security and local water conflicts in southern Zambia Mikkel Funder, Carol Mweemba and Imasiku Nyambe with Helle Munk Ravnborg and Barbara van Koppen. 11. State capacity and malnutrition: a critical analysis of capacity support to Sierra Leone's nutrition sector Lisa Denney and Richard Mallett. 12. Social inequality and food insecurity in Nepal: risks and responses Adam Pain, Hemant R. Ojha and Jagannath Adhikari. 13. Changing approaches to food security in Viet Nam Ian Christoplos, Le Thi Hoa Sen and Le Duc Ngoan. 14. Food security and insecurity in Afghanistan Adam Pain. 15. Food security and insecurity in India, Amit Mitra. 16. South Korea: food security, development and the developmental state Anders Riel Muller. 17. Food security, Nicaragua: food purchase or food production, which is best for the rural poor? Francisco J. Perez, Arthur H. Grigsby and Sandrine Freguin Gresh. Part 4 Conclusions 18. Towards new approaches Adam Pain and Ian Christoplos

In rural Mozambique, as in other African countries, large-scale land acquisitions are on the rise. This process is usually portrayed by host governments and investors as comprising win–win deals that can simultaneously boost agricultural productivity and combat poverty. This article focuses on one such investment, a large-scale Chinese land acquisition in the lower Limpopo valley, where attempts to modernise agriculture have occurred since colonial times. Based on an analysis of primary quantitative and qualitative data, this study explores livelihoods in the targeted area and local experiences and views regarding land loss and its implications. Our findings reveal a top-down process enabled by disregard for sound legislation, whereby land dispossession was followed by ‘take-it-or-leave-it’ opportunities that were unsuited to the most land-dependent livelihoods, particularly those of single-headed households. As the modernisation of the region is once again attempted through the promotion of large-scale agriculture, important historical continuities prevail. This study adds critical evidence to the discussion on the local development potential of land deals in Mozambique and other areas marked by similar democratic deficits.

It was an extraordinarily emotional moment for an academic conference when the Cambodian human rights activist Hong Chinda1 informed the audience that her family had just been evicted from their land once again by the Cambodian authorities. This time, the incident happened during her absence, while she was attending the conference on Grabbing, Conflict and Agrarian-Environmental Transformations: Perspectives From East and Southeast Asia2 and only shortly before she addressed the 240 international participants of the conference in her speech. Hong Chinda's case is just one of the countless examples of conflict over land in the Southeast Asian region. Her testimony is a reminder of the importance of this conference, which was a follow-up to the related international academic conferences organized by the Land Deal Politics Initiative (LDPI) at University of Sussex (UK) in 2011 and at Cornell University (USA) in 2012. Established in 2010, the LDPI is a network of academic research institutions and individuals that aims to provide in-depth and systematic enquiry into the global land grab in order to have deeper, meaningful and productive debates around causes and implications (LDPI, n.d.).Academic interest in what is now globally known as land grab followed the sudden increase in large-scale, cross border land acquisitions in the Global South that began around 2007 (Hall, 2013, p. 95). A briefing of the international nongovernmental organization GRAIN, titled SEIZED! The 2008 Land Grab for Food and Financial Security, was reportedly one of the first publications highlighting the issue (GRAIN, 2008). While acknowledging that land grab is nothing new and has been ongoing for centuries (most noticeably since the colonial period), GRAIN claimed that the world food crisis and the bigger financial crisis triggered a new boom in investment in land for both outsourced food production and as a new source for profit (GRAIN, 2008). If the conference in Chiang Mai was to draw one single conclusion, it was that the problems over land are rapidly increasing rather than decreasing, offering a rather gloomy outlook.The report from GRAIN already identified China as one major global player involved in land grabbing. China had been outsourcing part of its food production well before the global financial crisis in 2008 as part of its general go abroad strategy (GRAIN, 2008). Unsurprisingly, China's influence also featured prominently at the conference in Chiang Mai where numerous case studies related to China's investment in mainland Southeast Asia were presented3. Prominent examples included country cases such as the Lao PDR and Cambodia where Chinese companies control a major share of agricultural land. Fewer studies were presented on Vietnam and Myanmar, with the latter representing one of the latest investment frontiers for foreign capital (again with China as top investor) - a topic that remains narrowly researched. Remarkable was the lack of contributions on Thailand, reflecting the criticism expressed by Thai activist Prue Odochao during his speech at the conference. He criticized that few Thai academics are committed to helping the thousands of rural communities in Thailand still under threat of eviction from land declared as forest area. This situation, according to Odochao, has not improved since the current military government took over power in a coup in May 2014. To remind the audience of the very dangerous life still faced by activists in Thailand, Prue Odochao reported the case of his friend, Pholachi Rakchongcharoen (also known as Billy) - a Karen human rights activist who went missing in April 2014 after trying to defend his community against Thai National Park authorities (Amnesty International, 2014).With over 80 papers presented at the 24 parallel panels, the conference covered a broad range of issues. Even so, the panels managed to stay focused and concise, providing much room for discussion due to strict time management. …

Land is a scarce resource and its depletion is related to a combination of demographic and economic factors. Hence, the changes in dietary habits and increase in world population that upturn the food demand, are intertwined with a context of increasing oil prices and rise of green capitalism that in turn impacts the demand in biofuel. A visible indicator of these phenomena is the increase, in recent years, of Large Scale Land Acquisitions (LSLAs) by private companies or states. Such land investments often lead to conflicts with local population and have raised issues regarding people’s rights, the role of different production models and land governance. The aim of this work is to show how publicly available data about LSLAs can be modeled into complex network structures, thus showing how the application of advanced network analysis techniques can be used to better understand land trade dynamics. We use data collected by the Land Matrix Initiative on LSLAs to model three land trade networks: a multi-sector network, a network centered on the mining sector and a network centered on the agriculture one. Then we provide an extended analysis of such networks which includes: (i) a structural analysis, (ii) the definition of a score, namely LSLA-score, which allows to rank the countries based on their investing/target role in the land trade network, (iii) an analysis of the land trade context which takes into account the LSLA-score ranking and the correlation between network features and several country development indicators, (iv) an analysis centered on the discover and analysis of network motifs (i.e., recurring patterns in the land trade network), which provides insights into complex and diverse relations between countries. Our analyses showed how the land trade market is massively characterized by a Global North-Global South dynamic, even if the investing power of emerging economies also has a major impact in creating relations between different sub-regions of the world. Moreover, the analyses on the mining and agriculture sectors highlighted how the role of several countries in the trade network may drastically change depending of the investment sector, showing diverse hierarchies between investor, intermediate and target countries.

Improving agricultural productivity is a foundational sustainability challenge in the 21st century. Large-scale land acquisitions (LSLAs) have important effects on both well-being and the environment in the Global South. Their impacts on agricultural productivity and subsequent effects on farm incomes, food-security and the distribution of these outcomes across households remain under-investigated. In particular, prior studies do not sufficiently attend to the mechanistic nature of changes in household agricultural practices that affect LSLA outcomes. To address these challenges, we use a novel household dataset and a quasi-experimental design to estimate household-level changes in agricultural productivity and other LSLA outcomes in Tanzania. We use causal mediation analysis to assess how four common mechanisms—contract farming, land loss, market access and technology adoption around LSLAs—influence agricultural productivity. We find that households near LSLAs exhibit 20.2% (95% CI: 3.1%–37.3%) higher agricultural productivity, primarily due to increased crop prices and farmer selection of high-value crops. Importantly, the direction and magnitude of effect sizes associated with the different mechanisms vary. The presence of contract farming explains 18.1% (95% CI: 0.56%, 47%) of the effect size in agricultural productivity, whereas land loss reduces agricultural productivity by 26.8% (95% CI: −71.3%, −4.0%). Market access and technology adoption explain little to no portion of the effect size on agricultural productivity. Despite higher agricultural productivity mediated by contract farming, we do not find increased household incomes or food security. Plausible explanations include limited market access, higher crop prices restricting food access and elite capture of contract farming concentrating income effects to a few households. Our results stand in contrast to assumptions that technological spillovers occur through LSLAs and are the principal drivers of LSLA-induced agricultural transformation. We find instead that access to contract farming and high-value crops lead to greater agricultural productivity, but also that benefits related to these mechanisms are unequally distributed.

Financialization – the growing presence and influence of financial entities in the global economy – has emerged as a key concept in explaining contemporary socio-economic change. Importantly, it is becoming increasingly utilized in agri-food research, with finance capital being implicated in large-scale land acquisitions ('land grabs'), in the purchasing and asset stripping of companies in the food sector, and in speculative activities relating to agricultural commodities and farmlands. Despite being harnessed in understanding the modern-day dynamics of global capitalism, financialization has drawn considerable criticism. It has been viewed as nebulous and 'chameleon-like' – lacking conceptual clarity. It is said to tell us nothing new. It is blamed for being a-spatial and a-historical. It is seen to be totalising, with the 'financialization of everything' being a logical conclusion from its application. And, it apparently does nothing to help penetrate the 'black box' of mathematics that underpins all modern financial transactions. In this chapter, the key criticisms of the concept of financialization are examined, and its theoretical connection with globalization and neoliberalism explored. We argue that the concept of financialization is an important macro-level concept in its own right, connected in a two-way relationship with the other macro-level concepts of globalization and neoliberalism. Examples from agri-food studies are provided to evaluate financialization's efficacy in explaining changes at both the global and local levels. It is claimed that, through more applied research, the concept of financialization has the potential to provide new insights into agri-food studies.

This study is undertaken to find out the factors influencing the effects of large-scale land acquisition on the livelihood of smallholder farmers in the Pru district. An important driver for large-scale land acquisition in Ghana, and the rest of Africa, is the growing global demand for biofuels and other plantations. Methodologically, mixed method approach was adopted by applying both quantitative and qualitative research designs. Quantitative data was obtained through a cross-sectional survey from smallholder farming households in the study communities of the Pru District with the help of a multi-stage sampling technique and cluster sampling technique. Qualitative data was obtained through Focus Group Discussions (FGD) from farmerbased associations in the Pru district. The Pru district in the Bono East region was purposively selected based on the reason that it isthe most affected district with activities of land grabbing in Ghana. Based on the sample frame of 2,554 households in the communities, a sample size of 346 was used for the study out of which 332 were households and 14 were investors and traditional authorities. The study revealed that household heads’ level of education, sex of household heads, household engagement in off-farm activities, total farm land owned by a household, size of land lost by households to large-scale land investors, households’ participation in decision making, and training of households for other alternative jobs significantly influence large-scale land acquisition on the livelihood of smallholder farming households. The study found out that the higher the level of education of a household head, the lesser the household suffers the adverse effects of losing their farm land to largescale land investors hence their livelihoods. It was revealed that some major factors that influenced large-scale land acquisition in the Pru district were the availability of land for the cultivation of plantations by investors, the soil fertility of the land in the district and the freedom and peace enjoyed by investors to go about their businesses and enjoying good tax exemptions in such an environment thus Pru district.

The tropics have suffered substantial forest loss, and elevated deforestation rates have been closely linked to large-scale land acquisitions (LSLA). Having a timely and accurate understanding of global LSLA pattern will be critically important for concluding related policies and actions. Here, we investigate global LSLA networks and find that land acquisitions are characterized by dominant acquisition flows from the developing to the developed world (75.4%), and less of these flows are retained within the developing world (22.8%) or the developed world (1.8%). Policy-driven moratoria on existing LSLA are a key mechanism used to minimize global forest loss and recently employed in Indonesia, however their effectiveness remains unclear given a lack of quantitative synthesis. Based on a spatially-explicit temporal analysis of forest loss from 2001–2017, we find that, as a whole of Indonesia, the increased forest loss rate of 0.091 Mha yr−1 (2001–2011) slowed down to 0.001 Mha yr−1 (2012–2017) after moratoria established in 2011. Meanwhile, based on a comparison of annual forest loss in logging, timber, and oil palm concessions, we find that land concessions outside the moratorium experienced 35%–396% higher rates of forest loss than in comparable land concessions within the moratorium. Decreased forest loss from full implementation of moratoria on all land concessions could mitigate a maximum aboveground biomass carbon emission of 112 888 ± 24 766 Mg C yr−1, which is a nearly 41.89% reduction relative to the counterfactual scenario of no moratorium. These findings lend support for international cooperation and collective action to put into practice effective land moratoria to reverse decade-long trajectories of tropical forest loss.