Monoculture tree plantations must not be considered as climate mitigation measures and should be excluded from any reward system
Climate Justice Now!, an informal network of more than 160 organizations, wish to make government delegates at UNFCCC aware about the social and environmental dangers of monoculture tree plantations related to climate change mitigation measures.
Evidence about the social and environmental impacts of large scale timber plantations is now abundant and well documented. Those impacts include:
• occupation of vast areas of land resulting in dispossession of local peoples
• increased poverty resulting from the loss of means of livelihood not
compensated by the few and badly paid jobs in plantations
• depletion of water resources
• pollution of soils, water and air
• disappearance of local biodiversity
• irreversible impacts on soils
There is also documented evidence in several countries about the differentiated gender impacts of plantations, resulting in an increase in women’s workload, loss of their traditional means of livelihood and disempowerment within their communities.
In spite of that, carbon sink plantations (including the possible use of genetically modified trees) continue to be promoted within the CDM and rules are being simplified to make their approval and implementation easier.
At the same time, research on the production of ethanol from tree cellulose is being carried out in a number of countries (including genetic manipulation of trees and enzymes), and would result in the occupation of yet more food- producing lands by tree plantations aimed at feeding cars.
Evidence about the social and environmental impacts of large scale oil palm monocultures –including CO2 emissions from deforestation, fires and peatlands- is also well documented and apart from those mentioned above, they also include the impacts resulting from the use of a wide range of agrotoxics that impact on the health of local communities and workers and particularly on women employed as pesticide sprayers.
In spite of that, many governments –North and South- are promoting biodiesel from palm oil as a substitute for fossil fuels, thereby encouraging their further expansion. Some of the governments of countries having large oil palm plantations are at the same time publicizing them –with the aim of receiving payments- as carbon sink plantations.
Plantations are also present in the REDD discussions, given that they have been defined by UNFCCC as a type of forest. This means that deforestation would not be counted as such if the area is “converted” to monoculture tree plantations or if forest destruction in one area is “compensated” with tree plantations in another. In terms of “net” deforestation, a country could in fact receive large amounts of funding for actually destroying forests and planting tree monocultures.
Additionally, plantations actually contribute to climate change through deforestation, draining of peat swamps -releasing the carbon stored therein- provoking carbon emissions from grassland soils, being prone to fires resulting in carbon emissions and in the case of pulpwood plantations ending up in a product which has a short life, is thrown away in landfills and rots to produce methane.
In sum, large scale tree monocultures must be excluded from any type of climate mitigation measures because of their social and environmental impacts and because they contribute to climate change.
Monday, December 22, 2008
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Long March Announced for Amendments in Sindh Tenancy Act
Thousands of peasants participated Sindh Harri Convention, organized by South Asia Partnership – Pakistan , Sindh Office on December 4 at Hyderabad . The participants of the event demanded the amendments in Sindh Tenancy Act and carrying out land reforms in the country.
It was announced in the event that SAP-PK [Sindh Office] and other civil society and peasants' organizations will jointly carry out a Long March from February 15 to February 28, 2009 from Hyderabad to Karachi and will stage a sit in at Sindh Assembly Building for the amendments in Sindh Tenancy Act.
The speakers, discoursed about the peasants' issues, included Karamat Ali, PILER, Irfan Mufti, SAP-PK, Zulfiqar Shah, SAP-PK Sindh, Rochiram, Ms. Farheen Mughul, MPA Sindh Assembly, Jami Chandio, CPCS, Mohammad Ali Shah, PFF, Punhal Saryo, SHPC, Hussain Bux Thebo, Ramzan Memon, BHS, Prof. Ejaz Qureshi, Ghaffar Malik, SDS, Ghulam Mustafa Chandio, SHT, Dr. Nazeer Memon and other.
Following resolutions were passed in the event:
1. Amendments should be made in Sindh Tenancy Act and it should be re-drafting according to current socio-economic situation of Sindh
2. Land reforms should be implemented in its originality. The land ceiling should be fixed to 50 acres irrigated land and 100 acres non-irrigated land.
3. All laws and regulations regarding land developed under colonial era should be abandoned and commercialization of land should not be promoted.
4. Under Haq-e-Shifa, the agriculture land of about 8 acres should be allotted to the landless agriculture workers and peasants' families.
5. The agriculture land occupied by or allotted to military farms and government departments should be revoked and distributed among the landless peasants under the principle of Haq-e-Shifa.
6. Land allotted through auctions, awarded or given in claims should be revoked and distributed among the landless peasants except for the land actually cultivated by the landholders themselves.
7. The illegal occupation of the land distributed in land reforms should be abandoned and possession should be given to the allottees.
8. Land record (of agriculture and non-agriculture lands) should be computerized and made public through internet.
9. The International Financial Institution funded mega projects in the name of irrigation reforms should be stopped.
10. Privatization in the irrigation and agriculture sectors should be stopped.
11. Communities of Indus Delta, Taunsa and other mega project affectees should be rehabilitated.
12. Agriculture policy should be developed with the consultation of agriculture scientists, peasants, agriculture workers and growers.
13. Legislation should be made against the pollution of crops, on ground and underground land resources.
14. Legislation should be done to stop utility of chemicals, artificial fertilizers and pesticides, laboratories and research institutions should be set up for promoting the natural fertilizers, insecticides and pesticides.
15. State should be responsible to provide agriculture machinery and energy.
16. Adult literacy and necessary trainings should be planned for peasants and agriculture workers.
17. A quota for children of peasants and agriculture workers proportionate to their population should be managed for the institutions of technical or higher education. The educated boys and girls of peasants and workers should be given employment in the agriculture institutions.
18. Health and education should be ensured for peasants and agriculture workers and the rural settlements.
19. State should decide minimum wages for agriculture worker
20. Corporate farming should not be initiated in Sindh where rural poverty is highly associated with the in-equal distribution of land and highest ration of sharecropping and land less tenants.
21. Allotment of forest land to the influential persons should be revoked and re-allotted to the peasants as per agro-forestry policy.
22. The occupied surveyed or un-surveyed lands in Kacho, Kaacho, Kohistan, Kach, Bailpat, Thar, Thal and elsewhere, should be re-surveyed and distributed among the landless tenants and agricultural labor.
23. Support price of crops in line with the international market prices, should be declared before planting and/or harvesting. Sugarcane, rice and wheat crops of Sindh may not be discriminated in that process.
24. Role of middlemen in the crops sale and purchase should be abandoned.
25. Agriculture Markets / Centers and industries be set up and the facility and training of processing and modern packing be provided.
26. Sufficient number of go-downs and cold storage units should be developed so that crop produce could be stored and preserved.
27. Legislation should be done for the peasants rights to develop trade unions, attains social justice and old age benefits.
By : Mr.Herman Kumara
It was announced in the event that SAP-PK [Sindh Office] and other civil society and peasants' organizations will jointly carry out a Long March from February 15 to February 28, 2009 from Hyderabad to Karachi and will stage a sit in at Sindh Assembly Building for the amendments in Sindh Tenancy Act.
The speakers, discoursed about the peasants' issues, included Karamat Ali, PILER, Irfan Mufti, SAP-PK, Zulfiqar Shah, SAP-PK Sindh, Rochiram, Ms. Farheen Mughul, MPA Sindh Assembly, Jami Chandio, CPCS, Mohammad Ali Shah, PFF, Punhal Saryo, SHPC, Hussain Bux Thebo, Ramzan Memon, BHS, Prof. Ejaz Qureshi, Ghaffar Malik, SDS, Ghulam Mustafa Chandio, SHT, Dr. Nazeer Memon and other.
Following resolutions were passed in the event:
1. Amendments should be made in Sindh Tenancy Act and it should be re-drafting according to current socio-economic situation of Sindh
2. Land reforms should be implemented in its originality. The land ceiling should be fixed to 50 acres irrigated land and 100 acres non-irrigated land.
3. All laws and regulations regarding land developed under colonial era should be abandoned and commercialization of land should not be promoted.
4. Under Haq-e-Shifa, the agriculture land of about 8 acres should be allotted to the landless agriculture workers and peasants' families.
5. The agriculture land occupied by or allotted to military farms and government departments should be revoked and distributed among the landless peasants under the principle of Haq-e-Shifa.
6. Land allotted through auctions, awarded or given in claims should be revoked and distributed among the landless peasants except for the land actually cultivated by the landholders themselves.
7. The illegal occupation of the land distributed in land reforms should be abandoned and possession should be given to the allottees.
8. Land record (of agriculture and non-agriculture lands) should be computerized and made public through internet.
9. The International Financial Institution funded mega projects in the name of irrigation reforms should be stopped.
10. Privatization in the irrigation and agriculture sectors should be stopped.
11. Communities of Indus Delta, Taunsa and other mega project affectees should be rehabilitated.
12. Agriculture policy should be developed with the consultation of agriculture scientists, peasants, agriculture workers and growers.
13. Legislation should be made against the pollution of crops, on ground and underground land resources.
14. Legislation should be done to stop utility of chemicals, artificial fertilizers and pesticides, laboratories and research institutions should be set up for promoting the natural fertilizers, insecticides and pesticides.
15. State should be responsible to provide agriculture machinery and energy.
16. Adult literacy and necessary trainings should be planned for peasants and agriculture workers.
17. A quota for children of peasants and agriculture workers proportionate to their population should be managed for the institutions of technical or higher education. The educated boys and girls of peasants and workers should be given employment in the agriculture institutions.
18. Health and education should be ensured for peasants and agriculture workers and the rural settlements.
19. State should decide minimum wages for agriculture worker
20. Corporate farming should not be initiated in Sindh where rural poverty is highly associated with the in-equal distribution of land and highest ration of sharecropping and land less tenants.
21. Allotment of forest land to the influential persons should be revoked and re-allotted to the peasants as per agro-forestry policy.
22. The occupied surveyed or un-surveyed lands in Kacho, Kaacho, Kohistan, Kach, Bailpat, Thar, Thal and elsewhere, should be re-surveyed and distributed among the landless tenants and agricultural labor.
23. Support price of crops in line with the international market prices, should be declared before planting and/or harvesting. Sugarcane, rice and wheat crops of Sindh may not be discriminated in that process.
24. Role of middlemen in the crops sale and purchase should be abandoned.
25. Agriculture Markets / Centers and industries be set up and the facility and training of processing and modern packing be provided.
26. Sufficient number of go-downs and cold storage units should be developed so that crop produce could be stored and preserved.
27. Legislation should be done for the peasants rights to develop trade unions, attains social justice and old age benefits.
By : Mr.Herman Kumara
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Towards Voluntary Guidelines on Responsible Governance of Land and other Natural Resources
The above mentioned process was initiated by Land Tenure and Management Unit of Food & Agriculture Organization of the UN. This was held on 24 & 25 November 2008.
The meeting was attended by FAO officials (mainly Land Tenure Unit, Forestry Department, Right to Food Unit, but unfortunately no one from Fisheries Department due to illness, from Indigenous Peoples focal point, and Gender Unit), IFAD, UN-Habitat, Global Land Tools Network, International Land Coalition, CGIAR. Klaus Deininger, from the World Bank was not able to attend the meeting.
Representatives from the following governments were also there:
- Nepal, Ministry of Land Reform
- Palestina
- Finland, permanent representation to FAO
- Germany, GTZ
- Sweden, SIDA
- Norway, permanent representation to FAO
- Brazil, permanent representation to FAO. The Brazilian representative played a very active role in identifying key questions and in framing the process in a more political way.
The other participants were from the academia, consultants and NGOs. The organizers tried to invite representatives from the private sector but none of them was able to attend. A consultant made a presentation about how to involve the private sector in this process.
Substantial issues were addressed and discussed during the meeting. The most relevant were:
- Nature of the process: are these guidelines supposed to be the outcome of an intergovernmental negotiation process with broad civil society participation like the guidelines on the right to food; or are they rather supposed to be the result of a technical consultation? The idea is to go for the first option but the mind setting of the officials involved is very technical.
- Nature of the instrument: why going for voluntary guidelines? Why not going for a code of conduct?
- Tenure vs. territory: Indigenous representatives expressed unease about the concept land and natural resources tenure because it does not capture their profound relationship with Mother Earth.
- Good governance vs. human rights: why not directly develop an instrument to protect and promote the human rights of marginalized groups related to land and natural resources instead of talking about good governance?
- Scope: Only land? Land, water, fisheries and forest but excluding minerals and biodiversity? Altogether? Only tenure? Or tenure and use/management?
- ICARRD vs. commoditization of land and natural resources: IPC strongly advocated for understanding this initiative as follow up to ICARRD in order to make operative the ICARRD principle of adopting a rights-approach to land and natural resources. The government of Brazil and some FAO officials supported this view. Academics from Eastern Europe and Central Asia and some consultants were the strongest advocates of privatization and commoditization.
- Rural and urban land tenure issues should be dealt with during the process. Therefore, it will be a joint initiative FAO-UN Habitat.
- Importance of involvement of civil society, highlighting the particular importance of social movements was reiterated. Importance of establishing a clear and transparent mechanism for CSO participation.
Next steps in the process:
- FAO's Land Tenure Unit will revise the discussion paper according to the outcome of the meeting.
- Briefing to all permanent representations in February next year in order to seek the support from governments to the initiative.
- Initiative will be presented to the Committee of Agriculture (COAG) in order to get a mandate to start officially the process. The Brazilian representative suggested presenting the initiative both to COAG and the Committee on Food Security (CFS). COAG and eventually CFS will decide then about the nature, scope and content of the initiative.
- Regional consultations. The original idea is to hold them in the course of 2009 but this schedule might be too tight. It is not decided yet if the regional consultations with civil society will be held linked in time and venue to the official ones, or if they will be separated. Resources were mentioned as a constraint to the breadth of civil society consultation.
Next steps for IPC participants:
- Discuss about the open questions related to the substantive issues above in order to decide what kind of process we want.
- Lobby national governments from now on to April so that they take into account our proposals in their decision during COAG and CFS.
Some experts were represented the interest of Market Economic Policies and promoted the privatization as a means of better option for the land tenure process.
Also, we felt with the Eatern European analysis, the Liberalization of the land and Natural resources contribute to the resonsible governance of those resources.
Although the WB did not represent the meeting physically, the presented paper from WB had the trend setting towards the privatization of the land and natural resources as responsible governance.
By: Mr. Herman Kumara
General secretary of WFFP
Convener of National Fisheries Solitarity.
The meeting was attended by FAO officials (mainly Land Tenure Unit, Forestry Department, Right to Food Unit, but unfortunately no one from Fisheries Department due to illness, from Indigenous Peoples focal point, and Gender Unit), IFAD, UN-Habitat, Global Land Tools Network, International Land Coalition, CGIAR. Klaus Deininger, from the World Bank was not able to attend the meeting.
Representatives from the following governments were also there:
- Nepal, Ministry of Land Reform
- Palestina
- Finland, permanent representation to FAO
- Germany, GTZ
- Sweden, SIDA
- Norway, permanent representation to FAO
- Brazil, permanent representation to FAO. The Brazilian representative played a very active role in identifying key questions and in framing the process in a more political way.
The other participants were from the academia, consultants and NGOs. The organizers tried to invite representatives from the private sector but none of them was able to attend. A consultant made a presentation about how to involve the private sector in this process.
Substantial issues were addressed and discussed during the meeting. The most relevant were:
- Nature of the process: are these guidelines supposed to be the outcome of an intergovernmental negotiation process with broad civil society participation like the guidelines on the right to food; or are they rather supposed to be the result of a technical consultation? The idea is to go for the first option but the mind setting of the officials involved is very technical.
- Nature of the instrument: why going for voluntary guidelines? Why not going for a code of conduct?
- Tenure vs. territory: Indigenous representatives expressed unease about the concept land and natural resources tenure because it does not capture their profound relationship with Mother Earth.
- Good governance vs. human rights: why not directly develop an instrument to protect and promote the human rights of marginalized groups related to land and natural resources instead of talking about good governance?
- Scope: Only land? Land, water, fisheries and forest but excluding minerals and biodiversity? Altogether? Only tenure? Or tenure and use/management?
- ICARRD vs. commoditization of land and natural resources: IPC strongly advocated for understanding this initiative as follow up to ICARRD in order to make operative the ICARRD principle of adopting a rights-approach to land and natural resources. The government of Brazil and some FAO officials supported this view. Academics from Eastern Europe and Central Asia and some consultants were the strongest advocates of privatization and commoditization.
- Rural and urban land tenure issues should be dealt with during the process. Therefore, it will be a joint initiative FAO-UN Habitat.
- Importance of involvement of civil society, highlighting the particular importance of social movements was reiterated. Importance of establishing a clear and transparent mechanism for CSO participation.
Next steps in the process:
- FAO's Land Tenure Unit will revise the discussion paper according to the outcome of the meeting.
- Briefing to all permanent representations in February next year in order to seek the support from governments to the initiative.
- Initiative will be presented to the Committee of Agriculture (COAG) in order to get a mandate to start officially the process. The Brazilian representative suggested presenting the initiative both to COAG and the Committee on Food Security (CFS). COAG and eventually CFS will decide then about the nature, scope and content of the initiative.
- Regional consultations. The original idea is to hold them in the course of 2009 but this schedule might be too tight. It is not decided yet if the regional consultations with civil society will be held linked in time and venue to the official ones, or if they will be separated. Resources were mentioned as a constraint to the breadth of civil society consultation.
Next steps for IPC participants:
- Discuss about the open questions related to the substantive issues above in order to decide what kind of process we want.
- Lobby national governments from now on to April so that they take into account our proposals in their decision during COAG and CFS.
Some experts were represented the interest of Market Economic Policies and promoted the privatization as a means of better option for the land tenure process.
Also, we felt with the Eatern European analysis, the Liberalization of the land and Natural resources contribute to the resonsible governance of those resources.
Although the WB did not represent the meeting physically, the presented paper from WB had the trend setting towards the privatization of the land and natural resources as responsible governance.
By: Mr. Herman Kumara
General secretary of WFFP
Convener of National Fisheries Solitarity.
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Human Right's day celebration of Praja Abhilasha Network
A campaign at the Centre on Society and Religion (CSR), Colombo, was held on December 10th, 2008, with an exhibition of pictures and photos of displacement, placards and banners against the barbaric war, and a calling for cessation of violence. The meeting started at 10.00am. Praja Abhilasha Network partners , Sri Vimukthi Womens' Organization, National Fisheries Solidarity Movement, and Savisthri Women's Organization took part at the rally and meeting.
The theme was "The Social and Economic Impact on Grassroot People by Human Rights Violations".
The first speech was given by Mr.Vincent Bulathsinhala, who explained the current situation (hidden truth) of the country. This was followed by a discussion on the impact of the fisheries sector by Praja Abhilasha partner, Mr. Priyankara Costa. He suggested that the Sri Lankan government and people should think about the Vanni people who are affected by war and living under trees, who were in dire need of our prayers.
"It is the unresolved ethnic problem and the prolonged military conflict that have created the conditions for abhorrent human rights violations and unbearable sufferings of the internally displaced people." Mr.Priyankara Costa said.
The theme was "The Social and Economic Impact on Grassroot People by Human Rights Violations".
The first speech was given by Mr.Vincent Bulathsinhala, who explained the current situation (hidden truth) of the country. This was followed by a discussion on the impact of the fisheries sector by Praja Abhilasha partner, Mr. Priyankara Costa. He suggested that the Sri Lankan government and people should think about the Vanni people who are affected by war and living under trees, who were in dire need of our prayers.
"It is the unresolved ethnic problem and the prolonged military conflict that have created the conditions for abhorrent human rights violations and unbearable sufferings of the internally displaced people." Mr.Priyankara Costa said.
Case filed for fundamental right to get Electricity by affected people In Karuwalagas Wewa
Case filed for fundamental right to get electricity by affected people in Karuwalagas Wewa
February 02nd, 1999, the Housing Development Authority and Ministry of Housing and Urban Development started a housing scheme project in Karuwalagas wewa. Here the government planned to build 300 houses to settle the Karuwalagas wewa people, providing land for them in the same location and 15,000 - 40,000 loans to build these houses. In 2002, the government designated this area as sanctuary, creating many problems for these people during the nighttime, including living in darkness because they do not have electricity. When the people requested the Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB) to grant electricity for their area, the CEB refused and said "the area is located inside the sanctuary boundary line so we cannot provide electricity for this area". Therefore, the people have now filed the case regarding this problem in the High Court, as according to the Sri Lankan Law, everyone has a right to receive electricity. The people gathered money among the affected people who are living in the same community. When there was a shortage of money, Praja Abhilasha became involved by taking up this case and providing legal and financial support for them. The affected people went to court on 11th December, 2008. Lawyer Mr.Sunil Coorey and Mrs.Muthitha Premachandra are appearing on behalf of the people.
By: Raajan
Monday, December 8, 2008
Land Grabbing In Anuradhapura
More than 22 families have been living at "Nawa Elakadu Para" in Anuradhapura, near the German Bridge in Anuradhapura. One villager, named Sunil, said the people have been living for more than 25 years in this area, which is comprised mostly of poor people and widows. Recently, the Urban Development Authority (UDA) gave 10 perches land and told the people to leave from the current residencies. UDA has filed a case against these people in the magistrate court in Anuradhapura. The people had to attend in November, then again on 5th and 17th December. The case is still pending so the people again have to appear on 05th January , 2009, at the magistrate court in Anuradhapura. Now the people are requesting a six month time period and some compensation to build houses. They are helpless because of these evictions. People have begun gathering 200 Rupees per family from among the affected community (each family 200/=). Some families are unable to give even a rupee so they are suffering more than others. Due to this, the Praja Abhilasha Network has become involved and is providing legal and financial support for the affected people.
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Twelve families were affected by Sea Erosion in Muhuda Bada Para, Angulana, Moratuwa. These families are fisher people and have been affected by the Tsunami, but the Sri Lankan government has not provided any compensation for these people. After the sea erosion, they are facing even more problems. Now they do not have a proper place to reside, which has affected their livelihood. Now the Divisional Secretary has said "Those people are living in illegal houses, so the government can not provide any compensation for them".
But these people say that they have been paying taxes for their residences, and question how the government is stating "It is an illegal settlement."
These affected people are seeking a sustainable solution. Let's join hands with them.
By : F.Raajan
Local Coordinator
Praja Abhilasha Network
Land Issues of Muslim Community in East
Sammanthuraipattru area was a 359 square mile land area until it was separated into two parts, named Wewagampttru and Sammanturaipattru. Two hundred sixty square miles of land area was given to 6585 Sinhala people, while only 99 square miles of land area was given to 40704 Tamil speaking people (Tamils and Muslims). Even now, boundary problems are going on between two Pradesiya Sabas.
At this time, 36% Sinhala people own 66% of the land area in Ampara District, while 34% Sinhala people own 70% of the land area in Trincomalee District.
Recently in this case, the Land Commissionaire of Eastern Provincial Council has given an advertisement regarding land provided for the people who are landless. The advertisement was published according to the decision based on the ministerial meeting which was held on 21st November, 2008.
This advertisement focused on the North and East Muslim people, as some requirements and rules were put forward. In the past 30 years, the minorities have faced many tribulations, due to the impacts of war, displacement by war, and evictions by marginalizing settlements. People who are unable to regain land after getting the favorable decision from the Court will be affected through this advertisement.
Kaththankudi, Ninthavoor, Sainthamaruthu, and Kalmunai are areas which do not have even a foot of government land. This area, which is predominantly a Muslim population, will be marginalized indirectly through this plan. The people who are living as joint families and are following the religious and cultural norms will also be affected, therefore, the increased rules and regulations, which were stated in the advertisement, will be a big question mark for the Muslim community.
Source: Veerakesary dated 29th November, 2008
At this time, 36% Sinhala people own 66% of the land area in Ampara District, while 34% Sinhala people own 70% of the land area in Trincomalee District.
Recently in this case, the Land Commissionaire of Eastern Provincial Council has given an advertisement regarding land provided for the people who are landless. The advertisement was published according to the decision based on the ministerial meeting which was held on 21st November, 2008.
This advertisement focused on the North and East Muslim people, as some requirements and rules were put forward. In the past 30 years, the minorities have faced many tribulations, due to the impacts of war, displacement by war, and evictions by marginalizing settlements. People who are unable to regain land after getting the favorable decision from the Court will be affected through this advertisement.
Kaththankudi, Ninthavoor, Sainthamaruthu, and Kalmunai are areas which do not have even a foot of government land. This area, which is predominantly a Muslim population, will be marginalized indirectly through this plan. The people who are living as joint families and are following the religious and cultural norms will also be affected, therefore, the increased rules and regulations, which were stated in the advertisement, will be a big question mark for the Muslim community.
Source: Veerakesary dated 29th November, 2008
Rich countries launch great land grab to safeguard food supply
• States and companies target developing nations
• Small farmers at risk from industrial-scale deals
Rich governments and corporations are triggering alarm for the poor as they buy up the rights to millions of hectares of agricultural land in developing countries in an effort to secure their own long-term food supplies.
The head of the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation, Jacques Diouf, has warned that the controversial rise in land deals could create a form of "neo-colonialism", with poor states producing food for the rich at the expense of their own hungry people.
Rising food prices have already set off a second "scramble for Africa". This week, the South Korean firm Daewoo Logistics announced plans to buy a 99-year lease on a million hectares in Madagascar. Its aim is to grow 5m tonnes of corn a year by 2023, and produce palm oil from a further lease of 120,000 hectares (296,000 acres), relying on a largely South African workforce. Production would be mainly earmarked for South Korea, which wants to lessen dependence on imports.
"These deals can be purely commercial ventures on one level, but sitting behind it is often a food security imperative backed by a government," said Carl Atkin, a consultant at Bidwells Agribusiness, a Cambridge firm helping to arrange some of the big international land deals.
Madagascar's government said that an environmental impact assessment would have to be carried out before the Daewoo deal could be approved, but it welcomed the investment. The massive lease is the largest so far in an accelerating number of land deals that have been arranged since the surge in food prices late last year.
"In the context of arable land sales, this is unprecedented," Atkin said. "We're used to seeing 100,000-hectare sales. This is more than 10 times as much."
At a food security summit in Rome, in June, there was agreement to channel more investment and development aid to African farmers to help them respond to higher prices by producing more. But governments and corporations in some cash-rich but land-poor states, mostly in the Middle East, have opted not to wait for world markets to respond and are trying to guarantee their own long-term access to food by buying up land in poorer countries.
According to diplomats, the Saudi Binladin Group is planning an investment in Indonesia to grow basmati rice, while tens of thousands of hectares in Pakistan have been sold to Abu Dhabi investors.
Arab investors, including the Abu Dhabi Fund for Development, have also bought direct stakes in Sudanese agriculture. The president of the UEA, Khalifa bin Zayed, has said his country was considering large-scale agricultural projects in Kazakhstan to ensure a stable food supply.
Even China, which has plenty of land but is now getting short of water as it pursues breakneck industrialisation, has begun to explore land deals in south-east Asia. Laos, meanwhile, has signed away between 2m-3m hectares, or 15% of its viable farmland. Libya has secured 250,000 hectares of Ukrainian farmland, and Egypt is believed to want similar access. Kuwait and Qatar have been chasing deals for prime tracts of Cambodia rice fields.
Eager buyers generally have been welcomed by sellers in developing world governments desperate for capital in a recession. Madagascar's land reform minister said revenue would go to infrastructure and development in flood-prone areas.
Sudan is trying to attract investors for almost 900,000 hectares of its land, and the Ethiopian prime minister, Meles Zenawi, has been courting would-be Saudi investors.
"If this was a negotiation between equals, it could be a good thing. It could bring investment, stable prices and predictability to the market," said Duncan Green, Oxfam's head of research. "But the problem is, [in] this scramble for soil I don't see any place for the small farmers."
Alex Evans, at the Centre on International Cooperation, at New York University, said: "The small farmers are losing out already. People without solid title are likely to be turfed off the land."
Details of land deals have been kept secret so it is unknown whether they have built-in safeguards for local populations.
Steve Wiggins, a rural development expert at the Overseas Development Institute, said: "There are very few economies of scale in most agriculture above the level of family farm because managing [the] labour is extremely difficult." Investors might also have to contend with hostility. "If I was a political-risk adviser to [investors] I'd say 'you are taking a very big risk'. Land is an extremely sensitive thing. This could go horribly wrong if you don't learn the lessons of history."
Source : www.gaurdian.co.uk
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)