Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
p15). Furthermore, the information compares investment climates and opportunit-
ies for competitive purposes. hus the IFC/FIAS compiled 'A Diagnostic Cheklist
for Land Markets' that itemizes questions about land-holding customs, law, power
struggles, state capacity to protect investments and so on, in addition to a Benh-
marking FDI (Foreign Direct Investment) Competitiveness Report (2007), noting for
Kenya, for example, 'strengths' in the horticulture sector suh as 'abundance of ar-
able land', 'low employment rigidity', 'low air transit costs for shipments to Amster-
dam', and so on. For Tanzania, it pointed out that '(t)he country has an abundance
of arable land [only 5.5 per cent of whih is utilized] from whih horticultural oper-
ations can be established' (quoted in Daniel, 2010, pp17-18). Suh development 'ser-
vices' constitute a broad infrastructural complex supporting land-grabbing - both
material and ideological.
A GRAIN report, relied on by the World Bank in its report on large-scale land
acquisitions, 21 draws on 389 land deals in 80 countries, where the 'bulk (37 per
cent) of the so-called investment projects are meant to produce food (crops and live-
stok), while biofuels come in second place (35 per cent). Unsurprisingly, Africa is the
target of half the land-grab projects, followed by Asia, Latin America and Eastern
Europe' (GRAIN, 2010a). GRAIN's report notes that European Investors claim pro-
tection from the Bank's Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency for 'political risk
insurance for their farmland deals' (GRAIN, 2010a).
Land-grabbing's developmentalist assumptions
The Gates Foundation suggests that enabling the commercial development of Afric-
an agriculture 'will require some degree of land mobility and a lower percentage
of total employment involved in direct agricultural production' - a clear allusion
to eviction (Xcroc, 2009). According to GRAIN (2008), over US$100 billion has been
mobilized since the food crisis summit in Rome in June 2008 for land investments
'not to harvest food but to harvest money'. Given this rush to invest in land, ques-
tions of legitimacy have arisen, addressed in part by the enunciation in 2010 of
seven 'Principles for Responsible Agricultural Investment' by the World Bank; the
FAO; its International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD); and the United
Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) Secretariat. While these
principles claim to benefit investors and affected communities alike, they neverthe-
less provide an unequal comparative advantage to investors, given the relationship
between privatising land and its 'mobility'. 22
Search WWH ::




Custom Search