Agricultural land acquisitions unlikely to address the food security needs of African countries
Приобретение сельскохозяйственных земель, вероятно, не позволит удовлетворить потребности африканских стран в продовольственной безопасности
2021-01-23
SCID: 54.1/gjbcp5rq
Discuss with AI
African countriesdeforestationfood securityland conflictslarge-scale land acquisitions
Figures from the paper
Abstract (AI)
In recent years, Large Scale Land Acquisitions (LSLA), direct land tenure changes have been gaining momentum in developing countries. In this study, we evaluate the potential extent to which agricultural land deals in Africa are able to address the host countries’ food security needs, a commonly cited motivation for their establishment. First, we develop a framework to evaluate the priority food security needs of 38 African countries in 2000 based on indicators of food availability, accessibility, stability, and utilization. Second, we estimate whether the crops from land deals would be sold on export or local food markets based on the origin of investments (domestic, foreign or mixed), type of investors (eg. agribusiness, finance, or government) and the intended crops (eg. food, cash crop, or biofuel). This enables us to estimate how likely the investment is to improve in-country food security, versus serving other purposes (e.g., speculation, enclosure of natural resources). Third, we account for the characteristics of the locations where the deals happen (population density, land cover and distance to markets) in order to estimate the level of conflict and deforestation that they could exacerbate. We find that LSLA are only likely to address the identified food security needs of 7 countries. LSLA are also at risk of increasing land pressures and conflicts or deforestation on 83% of the acquired area, including in countries where they could meet food security needs. We also find that the more productive lands are most often allocated to flex crops, while food crops are produced on more marginal lands. We thus argue that even when their purpose is agricultural production, most LSLA are not likely to improve food security; rather, they often serve the financial interests of transnational companies and local elites with the support of host governments. Finally, we recommend agricultural investments to be elaborated in consultation with local communities and marginalized groups to sustainably support their socio-ecological systems.
Key Findings
1
Approximately 83% of acquired land is at risk of increasing land pressures, conflict, or deforestation, including areas where food security needs could be met.
2
Large-scale land acquisitions are likely to address identified food security needs in only 7 African countries.
3
More productive land is disproportionately allocated to flexible crops, while food crops are cultivated on more marginal land.
4
Most large-scale land acquisitions are unlikely to improve food security and instead may primarily serve transnational companies and local elites, supported by host governments.
5
The study evaluates large-scale land acquisitions across 38 African countries using food availability, accessibility, stability, and utilization indicators.
Research Object
Large-scale agricultural land acquisitions (LSLAs) in African countries
Research Subject
The extent to which LSLAs address in-country food security needs and their associated risks of land pressure, conflict, and deforestation
Publication Details
Publication Date
2021-01-23
Journal
Publisher
ISSN
Cited by
41
Open access PDF
Access Type
Author Information
Download PDF
Subscribe to digest