Abstract

Proponents of large-scale land investments (LSLI) still promote them as a development opportunity, which can lead, among other benefits, to job creation and enhanced food security for local communities. However, there is increasing evidence that these investments often deprive affected communities of their access to land, with multiple negative impacts on livelihoods, food security and on the environment. This paper relies on empirical data to present an analysis of LSLI and food (in)security – crucially at the level of individuals in two villages in the Ruvuma region, Tanzania, over 10 years after the acquisition of village land within the Southern African Growth Corridor of Tanzania (SAGCOT). We introduce an innovative framework that permits an integration of a rights-based approach with the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework to explore smallholders’ livelihoods and experiences of food insecurity. Our paper demonstrates how this integration, along with attention we have given to the FAO’s PANTHER principles, adds the missing yet crucial dimension of accountability on the part of national governments as duty bearers. Our findings show that in the case of these two villages, the human rights principles of participation, accountability, transparency and empowerment are severely undermined, with women bearing the brunt in all these domains. This overall state of affairs is, we argue, due to inadequate monitoring and evaluation of LSLI processes themselves and low levels of commitment on the part of institutions in Tanzania to monitor the promises made by investors. This in turn demonstrates an accountability deficit on the part of duty-bearers within LSLIs, and limited capacity of affected community members to claim their rights. Individual food insecurity experience in the two communities correlates, among other characteristics, with lack of land ownership, employment and income-generating activities. The rights-based livelihoods framework applied in this study points to serious deficiencies in the LSLI model as presently endorsed in SAGCOT, and emphasises the fact that access to land in Tanzania is a precondition for the realisation of the right to adequate food and thus a critical requirement for achieving and maintaining food and nutrition security. We conclude by arguing that progressive coalitions within and beyond national states must devise policies and institutions that empower individuals and civil society actors to make demands on their governments to respect, protect and fulfil their obligations regarding the legally enforceable right to food.

Highlights

  • In the period following the 2007/2008 global financial crisis, there has emerged evidence of a ‘global land grab’ (TNI, 2013) and consequent to it, a growing body of research on large-scale land investments (LSLIs) in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA)

  • Education primary (=1), Education secondary (=1), Land before Investments (=1), Work on LSLI (=1), Other income generating activities, LN (Daily income), Daily income_ > 3815.50 (=1), LN, Any land conflict since LSLI (=1), Places to seek for help (=1)

  • By adopting an innovative rights-based livelihoods approach which integrates the human rights PANTHER principles and the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework (SLF), this research reflects recent calls to go beyond a needs-based perspective on food security

Read more

Summary

Introduction

In the period following the 2007/2008 global financial crisis, there has emerged evidence of a ‘global land grab’ (TNI, 2013) and consequent to it, a growing body of research on large-scale land investments (LSLIs) in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). This literature is largely critical of the impact of LSLIs on livelihoods and food security (Alamirew et al, 2015; Cotula, 2012). Bues and Theesfeld (2012) report that local communities in Ethiopia were denied their rights to water in favour of a floriculture investment because of the investor’s influence on the local government. Bues and Theesfeld (2012) report that local communities in Ethiopia were denied their rights to water in favour of a floriculture investment because of the investor’s influence on the local government. Alamirew et al (2015) and Yengoh and Armah (2015), examining the impact of LSLIs on food security and employment in Ethiopia and Sierra Leone respectively, show that employment opportunities associated with these investments are both temporary and marginal and that there is a decline in affected households’ food consumption, attributable to LSLI

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call