Labelling large-scale land acquisitions as land grabs: Procedural and distributional considerations from two cases in Ghana

Abubakari Ahmed, Z. Abubakari, Alexandros Gasparatos

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

This paper uses an actor-oriented political ecology approach, and procedural and distributional lenses to explore whether large-scale land acquisitions (LSLAs) exhibit the characteristics of land grabs. We apply these perspectives in two LSLAs in Ghana (oil palm, jatropha) that reflect different drivers/processes of land acquisition, crops and modes of production. For the procedural analysis, we track how LSLAs unfolded on the ground using (a) legal perspectives, (b) narratives of the local communities and other key players (e.g. chiefs, investor, government institutions), and (c) formal documentary evidence. For the distributional analysis, we examine some of the key socio-economic and environmental impacts of these LSLAs through household surveys in the affected communities affected. Through the triangulation of this information, we conclude that even though these LSLAs have some characteristics of land grabs, it is problematic to concretely label them as such. This is because they followed the appropriate legal provisions, even though some of the consultation and compensation processes were questionable. These processes were largely mediated through the unconstructive involvement of chiefs (and their manipulation of customary procedures), rather than unethical practices from the side of investors. These questionable processes have affected transparency and accountability, and have had negative distributional outcomes. This indicates ‘benefit grabbing' by traditional authorities at the expense of local
communities, rather than actual land grabbing by investors. It is therefore imperative to consider chiefs’ involvement in LSLAs and further formalise LSLA processes (especially in terms of consultations and compensation) to avoid instances of land and/or benefit grabbing in Ghana, and elsewhere in Africa.
Original languageEnglish
Number of pages15
JournalGeoforum
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print/First online - 4 Jun 2019

Fingerprint

Ghana
acquisition
investor
legal provision
mode of production
triangulation
household survey
economic impact
environmental policy
transparency
community
manipulation
environmental impact
driver
narrative
responsibility

Keywords

  • Chiefs
  • benefit grabbing
  • Jatropha
  • Oil Palm
  • land transaction
  • Ghana
  • ITC-ISI-JOURNAL-ARTICLE

Cite this

@article{9bd96ed11d474e19928c41759546ee93,
title = "Labelling large-scale land acquisitions as land grabs: Procedural and distributional considerations from two cases in Ghana",
abstract = "This paper uses an actor-oriented political ecology approach, and procedural and distributional lenses to explore whether large-scale land acquisitions (LSLAs) exhibit the characteristics of land grabs. We apply these perspectives in two LSLAs in Ghana (oil palm, jatropha) that reflect different drivers/processes of land acquisition, crops and modes of production. For the procedural analysis, we track how LSLAs unfolded on the ground using (a) legal perspectives, (b) narratives of the local communities and other key players (e.g. chiefs, investor, government institutions), and (c) formal documentary evidence. For the distributional analysis, we examine some of the key socio-economic and environmental impacts of these LSLAs through household surveys in the affected communities affected. Through the triangulation of this information, we conclude that even though these LSLAs have some characteristics of land grabs, it is problematic to concretely label them as such. This is because they followed the appropriate legal provisions, even though some of the consultation and compensation processes were questionable. These processes were largely mediated through the unconstructive involvement of chiefs (and their manipulation of customary procedures), rather than unethical practices from the side of investors. These questionable processes have affected transparency and accountability, and have had negative distributional outcomes. This indicates ‘benefit grabbing' by traditional authorities at the expense of localcommunities, rather than actual land grabbing by investors. It is therefore imperative to consider chiefs’ involvement in LSLAs and further formalise LSLA processes (especially in terms of consultations and compensation) to avoid instances of land and/or benefit grabbing in Ghana, and elsewhere in Africa.",
keywords = "Chiefs, benefit grabbing, Jatropha, Oil Palm, land transaction, Ghana, ITC-ISI-JOURNAL-ARTICLE",
author = "Abubakari Ahmed and Z. Abubakari and Alexandros Gasparatos",
year = "2019",
month = "6",
day = "4",
doi = "10.1016/j.geoforum.2019.05.022",
language = "English",
journal = "Geoforum",
issn = "0016-7185",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

Labelling large-scale land acquisitions as land grabs: Procedural and distributional considerations from two cases in Ghana. / Ahmed, Abubakari; Abubakari, Z.; Gasparatos, Alexandros.

In: Geoforum, 04.06.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Labelling large-scale land acquisitions as land grabs: Procedural and distributional considerations from two cases in Ghana

AU - Ahmed, Abubakari

AU - Abubakari, Z.

AU - Gasparatos, Alexandros

PY - 2019/6/4

Y1 - 2019/6/4

N2 - This paper uses an actor-oriented political ecology approach, and procedural and distributional lenses to explore whether large-scale land acquisitions (LSLAs) exhibit the characteristics of land grabs. We apply these perspectives in two LSLAs in Ghana (oil palm, jatropha) that reflect different drivers/processes of land acquisition, crops and modes of production. For the procedural analysis, we track how LSLAs unfolded on the ground using (a) legal perspectives, (b) narratives of the local communities and other key players (e.g. chiefs, investor, government institutions), and (c) formal documentary evidence. For the distributional analysis, we examine some of the key socio-economic and environmental impacts of these LSLAs through household surveys in the affected communities affected. Through the triangulation of this information, we conclude that even though these LSLAs have some characteristics of land grabs, it is problematic to concretely label them as such. This is because they followed the appropriate legal provisions, even though some of the consultation and compensation processes were questionable. These processes were largely mediated through the unconstructive involvement of chiefs (and their manipulation of customary procedures), rather than unethical practices from the side of investors. These questionable processes have affected transparency and accountability, and have had negative distributional outcomes. This indicates ‘benefit grabbing' by traditional authorities at the expense of localcommunities, rather than actual land grabbing by investors. It is therefore imperative to consider chiefs’ involvement in LSLAs and further formalise LSLA processes (especially in terms of consultations and compensation) to avoid instances of land and/or benefit grabbing in Ghana, and elsewhere in Africa.

AB - This paper uses an actor-oriented political ecology approach, and procedural and distributional lenses to explore whether large-scale land acquisitions (LSLAs) exhibit the characteristics of land grabs. We apply these perspectives in two LSLAs in Ghana (oil palm, jatropha) that reflect different drivers/processes of land acquisition, crops and modes of production. For the procedural analysis, we track how LSLAs unfolded on the ground using (a) legal perspectives, (b) narratives of the local communities and other key players (e.g. chiefs, investor, government institutions), and (c) formal documentary evidence. For the distributional analysis, we examine some of the key socio-economic and environmental impacts of these LSLAs through household surveys in the affected communities affected. Through the triangulation of this information, we conclude that even though these LSLAs have some characteristics of land grabs, it is problematic to concretely label them as such. This is because they followed the appropriate legal provisions, even though some of the consultation and compensation processes were questionable. These processes were largely mediated through the unconstructive involvement of chiefs (and their manipulation of customary procedures), rather than unethical practices from the side of investors. These questionable processes have affected transparency and accountability, and have had negative distributional outcomes. This indicates ‘benefit grabbing' by traditional authorities at the expense of localcommunities, rather than actual land grabbing by investors. It is therefore imperative to consider chiefs’ involvement in LSLAs and further formalise LSLA processes (especially in terms of consultations and compensation) to avoid instances of land and/or benefit grabbing in Ghana, and elsewhere in Africa.

KW - Chiefs

KW - benefit grabbing

KW - Jatropha

KW - Oil Palm

KW - land transaction

KW - Ghana

KW - ITC-ISI-JOURNAL-ARTICLE

UR - https://ezproxy2.utwente.nl/login?url=https://library.itc.utwente.nl/login/2019/isi/abubakara_lab.pdf

UR - https://ezproxy2.utwente.nl/login?url=https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2019.05.022

U2 - 10.1016/j.geoforum.2019.05.022

DO - 10.1016/j.geoforum.2019.05.022

M3 - Article

JO - Geoforum

JF - Geoforum

SN - 0016-7185

ER -