www.archive-org-2012.com » ORG » O » OAKLANDINSTITUTE

Choose link from "Titles, links and description words view":

Or switch to "Titles and links view".

    Archived pages: 861 . Archive date: 2012-12.

  • Title: BBC Africa Debate: Is ‘Land Grabbing’ Good for Africa? | oaklandinstitute.org
    Descriptive info: BBC Africa Debate: Is ‘Land Grabbing’ Good for Africa?.. February 24, 2012.. Source:.. BBC World Service.. View Original.. Listen to the program.. A dried up river bed near Lodwar, Kenya.. Credit: Getty Images.. Over the last couple of years, large-scale acquisitions of farmland in Africa, Latin America and Asia have made headlines across the world.. According to a US-based think tank - the International Food Policy Research Institute, nearly $20bn to $30bn a year is being spent by rich countries on land in developing countries.. The investors include some of the world's largest food, financial and car companies.. The issue described as "land grabbing" by its critics has been particularly contentious in sub-Saharan Africa because land there is considered central to identity, food security and livelihoods.. Ethiopia, South Sudan, Mozambique, Liberia, the DRC and Sierra Leone have all signed sizeable land deals with foreign investors.. The host governments and investors say that these investments will lead to economic development;  ...   a development opportunity? Is land grabbing actually good for Africa?.. BBC Africa Debate will be discussing the issue in Freetown in Sierra Leone.. THE PANEL.. Andrew Turay, Project Manager - ADDAX Bioenergy Sierra Leone Limited.. A company that has secured land in Makeni for growing sugarcane and cassava for ethanol.. The government describes the project as Sierra Leone's flagship agricultural investment.. Dr Sam Sesay, Minister of Agriculture - Government of Sierra Leone.. Joseph Rahall, Civil Society Activist campaigning against "land grabbing" in Sierra Leone.. The debate will be chaired by Alex Jakana and Justin Rowlatt.. Watch clips from the debate.. Photos from the debate:.. (Steve Martin/BBC).. Joseph Rahall, of the Green Scenery organisation.. Anuradha Mittal, of the Oakland Institute.. Contact.. the oakland institute.. P.. O.. Box 18978.. Oakland, CA 94619.. info@oaklandinstitute.. org.. Donate.. Your tax-deductible donation allows us to conduct independent research, analysis, and advocacy to facilitate democratic participation in critical policy decisions that affect our quality of life..

    Original link path: /bbc-africa-debate-%E2%80%98land-grabbing%E2%80%99-good-africa
    Open archive

  • Title: Ethiopia: The Morality of Development and its Operatives | oaklandinstitute.org
    Descriptive info: Ethiopia: The Morality of Development and its Operatives.. November 30, 2012.. ECADF.. by Teshome Debalke.. From all innovations in 21.. st.. century, international development assistance for Less Developed Countries (LDC) escaped scrutiny through elaborate PR stunt.. International aid agencies in partnership with ruling tyrants’ of LDCs defy every rule in governace doing essentially noting except justify spending more good money after bad regimes.. Professor.. William Easterly.. of.. Development Research Institute at New York University.. and a stanch critic of foreign Aid to authoritarian regimes came up with yet another innovative ways to explain the double standard of morality of foreign aid as surveyed on the Social Media:.. ‘.. Stuff White People Like on Development.. ’.. The survey reinforces part of the cause of poverty; partnering with cause of the poverty (authoritarian regimes) corresponds with their feeling than their rational.. Thus, the cause of poverty must be a function of Western version of morality than the rational of good governance.. The bold statement might not sit well for the new breed of development innovators like Gates/Bono of the world (the funders), the apologist on both sides (the middlemen) and the tyrants of Africa (the recipients).. Therefore, the conventional morality of helping the poor in partnership with the totalitarian regime is fast running out of oxygen; sustained by innovative PR stunt at this givers end and at a gun point at the receiving end, what a record?.. Exploring the nitty-gritty of the unholy aligns between tyranny and Western Aid’ might enlighten us on the incentive system embodied in the morality of ‘partnering with the ‘devil’ to help the poor.. The cause of poverty isn’t a mystery.. It is over researched subject by high caliber experts with six figure salaries as well as ‘poor’ students of the Economics of Poverty.. Therefore, no additional research or investigation is required.. But, noting is repulsive to claim the unholy partnership between authoritarian regimes and foreign aid agencies’ would help the poor and make economic development possible.. It is equivalent to claim; solving the problem of elicits drug use by partnering with drug cartels is possible.. It doesn’t have traction but, purely a public relation stunt instigated by the beneficiary of foreign aid from the provider and recipient end of the equation.. Absence of any tangible evidence the status qua to solve the problem of poverty and underdevelopment in the last 50 years to brag about the new partnership with tyrants would hold water is immoral and bankrupt.. Besides transferring wealth to the ruling elites to sustain modern tyranny disguises as development regime and the managers of foreign aid disguised as innovators to remain employed, crying wolf backed up by cheap PR remains the usual insult to the public intelligence.. In fact, the expenditure of the industry expanded exponentially; a costly proposition to benefit the usual suspects than the poor.. In the middle of the mess are the de-facto spokespersons and middlemen/ entrepreneurs of foreign Aid Jeffrey David Sachs, an.. economist.. and Director of.. The Earth Institute.. at.. Columbia University.. He is also Special Adviser to.. United Nations Secretary-General.. Ban Ki-Moon.. on the.. Millennium Development Goals.. and the author of ‘The End of Poverty’.. And, Prof Joseph Eugene Stieglitz, an economist and a Professor at.. and a recipient of the.. Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences.. (2001).. The former senior vice president and.. Chief Economist.. of the.. World Bank.. among many titles under his belt is another individual with kin interest in economic development in partnership with authoritarian regimes of the world, the late Melse Zenawi of Ethiopia being his favorite.. In the other camp are their indigenous African counterparts that gave the partnership a local face between the funders (mostly Western and white) and the recipient (mostly African and black).. Among them is.. Khalid Bomba,.. the CEO of the newly established.. Ethiopian Agricultural Transformation Agency (ATA.. ).. The Agency he leads is a product Bill Gate Foundation’s Agriculture Development initiative where Bomba worked prior taking the position as the first CEO of ATA.. No  ...   them to join?.. Sachs’ and Stieglitz’s behavior was summed up by their colleague.. Jagdish Bhagwati.. , Professor of Economics and Law at Colombia University.. His bold critic of the two reflects the frustration of many.. Referring to their September 2010 activities during the African Summits at the United Nation; followed by the accolade given to Meles Zenawi by.. Committee on Global Thought (CGE).. led by Prof.. Stieglitz at Columbia University, he wrote to the Columbia Economics faculty:.. … as soon as you dilute these objectives [i.. e.. , teaching and high-quality research, the twin pillars of universities' functioning] by giving unaccountable power and funds to “entrepreneurs” whose objective is to use the University to advance their own agendas, you get into situations like the one you object to.. It seems probable that the President’s office was merely reproducing uncritically the rubbish that was supplied by one of these Columbia entrepreneurs whose objective is to ingratiate himself with influential African leaders regardless of their democratic and human-rights record, to get PR and “goodies” for themselves at African summits, at the UN where these leaders have a vote, etc.. ”.. Professor/ Attorney.. Alemayehu G.. Mariam.. , a lecturer in Political Science at California State University, San Bernardino, andunapologetic critic of tyranny and their Western enablers put it even more boldly:.. ‘According to the Stieglitz-Sachs theory, decisive and benevolent dictators powered by massive amounts of panhandled Western aid could pull Ethiopia and Africa out of the darkness of poverty into the sunshine of development.. All of the human rights stuff is a frivolous distraction that should be ignored in the single-minded pursuit of the Holy Grail of foreign aid to solve the problem of poverty once and for all by 2015, if one is to believe, as does Sachs, in the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).. Such fatuous nonsense has become the credo of the Western foreign aid world thanks to the likes of Stieglitz and Sachs.. In 2010 alone, the U.. S.. has dropped nearly $1 billion in aid to Ethiopia.. The fact of the matter is that the much vaunted foreign aid provides a lifeline to dictators and stokes the furnace of corruption that incinerates the poor and the powerless on a daily basis in countries such as Ethiopia.. Suffice it to say that expecting economic growth from foreign aid is like expecting a harvest from desert rains; only the succulent plants benefit from it.. The humiliation of unholy partnership with tyrants of Africa wasn’t enough lessons for others to learn when Susan Rise, the US Ambassador to United Nation and many others repeated the same mantra a few years later when the official death of Zenawi was announced.. It continued to puzzle many people around the world, particularly in Africa to figure out why Westerners elevate tyrants in disguise of empty development in the name of helping the poor?.. For sure, Westerners pampering tyrants with record of atrocities and corruptions is getting out of hand without proportional challenge.. Whether there is precedence to challenge them in the Court of Law for conspiracy to aid and abide tyrants’ is one area that needs exploration by legal experts.. Identifying the offenders, as.. Oakland Institute.. did; by compiling land grabbers in Africa and exposing them to the world through the Media as reported by Business Insider article ‘.. Meet the Millionaires and Billionaires buying land in Africa.. ’ is one step in the right direction to understand the associated corruption and cronyism in the name of economic development.. Other actions that can be taken by Advocates are a call for boycott of products and services of the offenders and protesting in front of their offices to create public awareness of their transgression.. But, one thing is for sure, the business of pampering tyrants is hanged to dry on a borrowed time.. It is a matter of time before the operatives surrender in shame.. It all depends on how much effort and efficiency is exerted in putting them out of business as they should..

    Original link path: /ethiopia-morality-development-and-its-operatives
    Open archive

  • Title: Interactive Land Matrix – Resource in Documenting Land Grab across Africa | oaklandinstitute.org
    Descriptive info: Interactive Land Matrix – Resource in Documenting Land Grab across Africa.. Humanitarian News.. Over the past five years there has been a staggering increase in.. land for investment.. deals across Africa by foreign governments and private investors.. The Oakland Institute.. has been researching and documenting land grab investments.. While only fractions of arable land in developing regions are being used for agriculture, demand for strategic swats next to irrigation and shipping sites is growing with greater investment..  ...   to the land or access to legal institutions.. As demand for land assets increases and governments and multilateral institutions promote investment in national lands, displacement and affected livelihoods are becoming serious sources of international concern.. The interactive land matrix is an online database that allows anyone to contribute to information and data on land deals.. The video below explains how this works and for more information see their website.. [Published in.. NonProfitBlogs.. - Read.. the original article.. ]..

    Original link path: /interactive-land-matrix-%E2%80%93-resource-documenting-land-grab-across-africa
    Open archive

  • Title: The Second Scramble for Africa | oaklandinstitute.org
    Descriptive info: The Second Scramble for Africa.. November 26, 2012.. Global Food Politics.. The nineteenth century Scramble for Africa marked the pinnacle of European colonial ambitions on the Continent.. In the period of just twenty years, the majority of Africa went from being independent to colonies of the European powers, primarily of France and Britain.. Today, many are calling the recent land rush the “.. Second Scramble for Africa.. ” Driven by increasing food prices and speculative investment in agricultural commodities, corporations, investment funds, and sovereignty wealth funds are gobbling up land across the Continent.. The.. Land Matrix website.. provides a database of recent land deals.. They note that,  ...   the new trade, with 260 deals accounting for nearly 9 million hectares concluded in that region alone.. Collectively, nearly five percent of Africa’s agricultural land has been bought or leased.. An.. Oxfam report.. noted that two-thirds of global land deals have been concluded in countries with serious hunger problems.. Yet most of these land deals have been concluded in order to grow crops for use as biofuels, like soy, sugarcane, and palm oil, rather than for the production of food crops.. Those interested in learning more should visit.. Oxfam’s Stop Land Grabs Now site.. or the.. , both of which are doing outstanding work on the topic..

    Original link path: /second-scramble-africa
    Open archive

  • Title: Shady Deals, Shady Campaign Funds, Private Jets & Helicopter Flights--A Corrupt President Seeks Re-Election | oaklandinstitute.org
    Descriptive info: Shady Deals, Shady Campaign Funds, Private Jets Helicopter Flights--A Corrupt President Seeks Re-Election.. November 16, 2012.. The New People Newspaper.. Ernest on private jets funded by corrupt bsiness people.. In a BBC interview with BBC correspondent, Mark Doyle, President Ernest Koroma strenuously denied that there was corruption in Sierra Leone on his watch in spite of the dozens of financial scandals involving his family members, Vice President, Ministers, associates, and senior members of his political party the All People’s Congress (APC).. He challenged Mark Doyle that if he smelled a whiff of corruption, he should personally contact him with information.. The hypocrisy and irony of the moment was evident.. As Ernest Koroma goes into elections on Saturday, November 17, dark clouds hang over numerous shady deals with mining companies, shady funds, and private helicopter and jet flights.. SHADY FUNDS.. In spite of President Koroma’s claims to have constructed the muddy, potholed, and gullied rural roads into first class roads, he has recently not travelled on those same roads especially after a number of bitter road experiences travelling to the east of the country.. He and his campaign team have therefore taken to the air.. Numerous insider APC sources confirm that Declan Resources, a gold mining company operating in the Kono and northern parts of Bo Districts, has, through its Financial Comptroller in Freetown, Eddie Shallop, made its helicopter available to President Ernest Koroma and his campaign team.. Equally so, the local management team of the Alberta-based Talisman Energy which has partnered Russian oil giant, Lukoil and Malaysia-based Petronas and UK’s Protinal Ltd in developing oil blocks has been ferrying the APC presidential candidate, some of his ministers and the APC campaign team to various parts of the country.. Both Declan Resources and Talisman Energy, by ferrying government officials and campaign staff, have blatantly sided with a political party and interfered with the internal politics of Sierra Leone.. SHADY OIL DEALS AND PRIVATE JETS.. But these shady deals are not just limited to elections helicopter flights.. On the 23.. rd.. of July 2011, President Ernest Koroma’s Attorney General and Minister of Justice, Franklyn Kargbo, signed a settlement agreement with Oranto Petroleum  ...   paid for such helicopter flights as President Koroma hops from one part of the country to another avoiding the horribly dangerous roads he says he had constructed in his infrastructural program.. BIOFUEL COMPANIES.. Such is the shady nature of relationships between the President and mining and other foreign resource and land acquisition (biofuels) investors that there are persistent rumors of huge campaign funds being paid personally to President Koroma.. Recently, in Malen chiefdom, President Koroma also publicly fraternized with executive heads of SOCFIN who are also said to have contributed significant amounts of money towards the President’s re-election campaign.. The Oakland Institute recently slammed SOCFIN in an April 2012 report titled “UNDERSTANDING LAND INVESTMENT DEALS IN AFRICA: SOCFIN LAND INVESTMENT IN SIERRA LEONE" for colluding with national and local political authorities to suppress the voices of resistance against the forceful acquisition of 50 year leases of prime land in the Malen chiefdom.. The document concluded that “Numerous legal flaws, the lack of transparency, adequate documentation, and proper consultation demonstrate that Socfin’s land deal in Sierra Leone has gone ahead without free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) of land owners.. ” Yet, President Koroma is said to have received substantial funding from the Bollore group to which he has also ceded control of operations of the profitable national port.. The attorney general and Minister of Justice concluded and was the attorney of record for ADDAX as it acquired over 100 million hectares of arable land in a 99 year lease that rankled international land rights organizations.. But there are still old and outstanding scandals especially with AFRICA MINERALS of Frank Timis paying for the reconstruction of the Presidential villa, installing swimming pools, squash courts, and helicopter landing pads.. There is also bickering that Frank Timis has funded most of the media campaign and through a business associate, Junior Navo, has pumped significant funds into Ernest Koroma’s re-election campaign.. This blatant funding and shady deals to promote Ernest Koroma’s campaign is said to come amidst fears that an SLPP government would significantly review mining rights and leases and reduce the opaque deals that have characterized that sector for a very long time..

    Original link path: /shady-deals-shady-campaign-funds-private-jets-helicopter-flights-corrupt-president-seeks-re-election
    Open archive

  • Title: The Great Africa Land Grab | oaklandinstitute.org
    Descriptive info: The Great Africa Land Grab.. November 13, 2012.. The Ecologist.. Oxfam’s Phil Bloomer reports on the shocking scandal of (mostly) secretive land-grabbing, usually from those least able to defend their rights.. Land grabbing has fast become a major threat to poor communities in Africa, Asia and South America.. Poverty-stricken women and men are being driven from their homes and the land they rely on to grow food to eat and make a living, usually without compensation.. In many cases this is often in violation of national laws and international standards for investment.. Many end up destitute, living under plastic at the sides of roads, or migrating to urban slums to eke out a living.. The shift from thriving rural communities to landless labourers brings untold misery and suffering to these displaced families.. This scandal has worsened in the last decade.. The most extensive recent research points to a staggering 203 million hectares changing hands in around 2,000 mainly secretive land deals.. The drivers of this new land rush are numerous but come down to three major factors: foreign governments increasingly anxious to secure their food supplies, triggered by the two food-price spikes of 2008 and 2011; speculators who see African land as a one-way bet – prices can only go up in the next decade as demand for food, and food-price volatility increase; and companies who see guaranteed market opportunities in Europe through the ‘biofuels mandate’ that promises a major market but diverts grain from food into fuel tanks.. In fact, the latest research points to biofuels being a major driver for around two-thirds of large land deals between 2000 and 2010.. What links them all is rising competition over finite natural resources.. There is now a steady dawning amongst politicians, investors, business leaders and the public that we are at, or have now passed, a number of critical planetary boundaries – land use, freshwater use and climate change being amongst the most critical.. We either now pursue a ‘winner takes all’ approach as exemplified by land grabs, or we seek a future of shared prosperity with greater equality and better care of our natural resources.. More is also now being revealed about the disappointing results of large-scale land investment, with some African governments actively encouraging secretive land acquisition in the hope that commercial farming will bring food security, energy security, jobs and tax revenues.. Under the right conditions, of course, large-scale agriculture might be of some benefit to poor countries.. In combination with smallholders, large-scale farms can enhance productivity.. Unfortunately, the World Bank and civil society studies point to very few benefits so far from the great majority of recent  ...   gaining increasing media attention, and this in turn is raising the reputational and political risks for unscrupulous governments, speculators and businesses.. Oxfam, Action Aid, the Oakland Institute and the International Institute for Environment and Development, together with a host of other extraordinarily brave national organisations, are exposing cases in order to call for stronger national laws and international standards for investors.. And in May 2012, the Africa Progress Report of Kofi Annan and other African leaders highlighted the growing threat to African food security and prosperity from unfettered land grabs.. A number of African governments are now looking for ways to address this problem, and the African Union last year signed up to the Nairobi Action Plan to tackle some of the problems associated with large land deals in Africa.. Equally, in May this year, governments around the world signed up to the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure, which strengthens the obligation to consult communities in relation to land deals and ensure their participation prior to decisions being taken.. This was ground-breaking because free, prior and informed consent has the potential to empower communities to demand that any investment will work for their interests, as well as for those of the investors.. These improved measures have been welcomed by responsible international investors who are now working with international institutions to develop principles that distinguish good and bad land investment, and to provide incentives for and accountability from fund managers.. The UN Principles for Responsible Investment, and the Performance Standards of the World Bank’s business investment arm (the IFC) are examples of standards that – if followed by investors – will help avoid the damage to people living in poverty, and seek to promote shared prosperity and sustainability (although too often implementation of these standards falls short of the ideal).. Oxfam’s own reflection on our recent land work is that, despite recent efforts, the global and national governance of land, especially in poor countries, remains simply too weak, diffuse and without teeth.. And given the scale and speed of large land deals, there is an urgent need for action by governments, responsible business and civil society to protect poor and vulnerable people from the resulting eviction and destitution.. It is the 500 million smallholder farmers who feed the great majority of the poorest 2 billion people on our planet.. They deserve better, and have the potential to be a vibrant, thriving sector delivering food security to over a third of the world’s population.. To achieve this they need investment in their productivity, not the theft of their lands.. Phil Bloomer is the Director of Campaigns and Policy at Oxfam GB..

    Original link path: /great-africa-land-grab
    Open archive

  • Title: Ernest Bai Koroma and the APC Fail Key US Millenium Challenge Corporation Tests | oaklandinstitute.org
    Descriptive info: Ernest Bai Koroma and the APC Fail Key US Millenium Challenge Corporation Tests.. November 7, 2012.. In a desperate bid to pass key governance and economic management evaluations, President Ernest Koroma had singularly appointed Caroline Thomas, a British National, to a special State House office to gather and manage data, massage figures, and do projections in order to insure that the APC government passes the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) test and qualify for a $340 million grant from the United States treasury.. But figures which will be released tomorrow, Wednesday, November7, by the independent United States foreign aid agency – the MCC - show that President Ernest Koroma has failed Sierra Leoneans.. ERNEST KOROMA’S ECONOMIC FAILURES EMPHASIZED.. Of great significance is Ernest Koroma’s failure to manage the economy by failing to control inflation (11%), poor fiscal policy (40% - mirroring International Monetary Fund and World Bank assessments that the Ernest Koroma government has failed Sierra Leoneans in the area of the managing the economy.. The Oakland Institute’s concerns about the involvement of President Koroma and his key henchmen in shady land grab deals are reflected in Ernest Koroma’s failure in the critical indicator of land rights access – scoring only 33%.. The report further pronounced that President Ernest Koroma and his All People’s Congress (APC) have consistently deceived Sierra Leoneans and the international community that his government is business friendly.. In the key area of business start-ups, Ernest Koroma again failed with only 41%.. More importantly, Ernest Koroma has also barely maintained a decent regulatory climate for investment in Sierra Leone and his government made an abysmal pass mark of 55%.. ERNEST KOROMA FAILS CHILDREN IN HEALTH AND HIS HEALTHCARE SPENDING IS A SHAM.. Increased healthcare spending of 70% which is shown as a pass mark is NOT BECAUSE Ernest Koroma has allocated Sierra Leone government funds or  ...   had invested heavily and therefore succeeded in the area of primary education.. The MCC indicators point that he fails the overall primary education indicator with only 49% even after embellishing information presented to the MCC.. The Girls primary education indicator over which President Ernest Koroma recently claims to have invested heavily barely squeaked through with a 57% pass mark.. POOR AND INEFFECTIVE GOVERNANCE.. In the areas of ruling justly and good governance, the MCC indicts President Koroma for his government’s ineffectiveness scoring only 29%.. This underlines various observations by international governance monitoring bodies about the size and complete lack of effectiveness in the APC government.. For a President who has stalled to pass the Freedom of Information law, the 78% result on the Freedom of Information indicator points tacitly to Ernest Koroma misrepresenting the extent to which the ordinary Sierra Leonean has access to government and public information.. Sierra Leoneans are broadly acknowledged for jealously protecting their political rights (84%) and civil liberties (85%).. The biggest shock to Sierra Leoneans are the figures for rule of law (55%) and control of corruption (53%) especially for a government seen widely by Sierra Leoneans as rabidly corrupt.. The results (although influenced by largely embellished figures by Ernest Koroma’s British appointee, Caroline Thomas) point to Ernest Koroma’s government barely passing in 11 core areas and failing the crucial 9 indicators in the core areas of economic freedom and investing in people.. Clearly, Ernest Koroma has a very poor record on the economy, government effectiveness, and investing in people.. Beyond the publication of results tomorrow, Wednesday, November 11, the MCC Board will meet to crosscheck and accept results and only then decide whether to send an MCC director to Sierra Leone to cross-check President Ernest Koroma’s APC figures before deciding whether to fund poverty alleviation projects and schemes directly from US treasury funds..

    Original link path: /ernest-bai-koroma-and-apc-fail-key-us-millenium-challenge-corporation-tests
    Open archive

  • Title: A Legal Rejoinder to the Rebuttal of the CEO of Herakles Farm Mr. Bruce Wrobel on Herakles Land Deals in Cameroon | oaklandinstitute.org
    Descriptive info: A Legal Rejoinder to the Rebuttal of the CEO of Herakles Farm Mr.. Bruce Wrobel on Herakles Land Deals in Cameroon.. November 3, 2012.. Modern Ghana.. By Barrister Malle Adolf.. As an active participant in this matter I read with some interest and consternation some of the statements made by Mr.. Bruce Wrobel, the CEO of Herakles Farms which has a subsidiary in Cameroon called SG Sustainable Oils Cameroon Ltd.. that has the ambition of establishing an oil palm plantation in the South West Region of Cameroon in a purported response to what is contained in a report recently published by the Oakland Institute concerning the project.. In particular, I am more concerned with his statements concerning the legality of the activities of SG SOC in Cameroon and the position of the litigation against the company instituted by me as Counsel for Struggle to Economize Future Environment (S.. E.. F.. E ) which occupy such a prominent place in Mr.. Bruce's so-called response and its so-called deceptive ambitious social policy.. a) Violation of Cameroon Law: Without the necessity of going into the issue of the legality of the establishment convention which SG SOC signed with the Cameroon government on 17 September, 2009 (this will be addressed at the appropriate time in the appropriate manner), we have no doubt in our minds that all of the SG SOC activities in Cameroon are tainted with illegality.. In the first place, they do not have a lease properly granted under Cameroon law.. Secondly, they started cutting down forest and degrading the environment when they started to develop their nurseries in three locations in South West without even complying with the minimum legal requirement of carrying out a satisfactory environmental and social impact assessment.. These are some of the reasons which led us into filing an action against SG SOC at the High Court of Ndian Division on 04-08-2011 and thereafter, an application for an interlocutory injunction to be placed on the activities of the company in until the case filed on 04-08-2011 was disposed of by the court.. For the purpose of clarity I reproduce here in extensor, the questions which we put before the Court to answer:- Whether or not the Defendants (i.. SG SOC and Dr.. Timti) can legally enter upon land in Mundemba and Toko Subdivision, indiscriminately plant survey beacons purporting to demarcate areas of land without due authorization and without regard to existing farms and village settlements?.. 1) Whether or not the Defendants can legally commence their operations of establishing an oil palm plantation in Mundemba and Toko Subdivisions of Ndian Division without having satisfactorily carried out a social and environmental impact assessment pursuant to the provisions of Law No.. 96/12 of 5 August, 1996 relating to environmental management and its decree of application No.. 2005/0577/PM of 23 February 2005 laying down modalities for carrying out environmental impact assessment?.. 2) Whether or not the 1st Defendant (i.. SG SOC) is a company legally incorporated in Cameroon in accordance with the OHADA General Commercial law and the OHADA Uniform Act relating to commercial companies and economic interest groups?.. SG SOC never filed a defense either to this substantive action in which the above stated major issues were raised or to challenge our application for an interlocutory injunction, which application was, of course, granted.. Instead of SG SOC seizing the opportunity at this initial stage to demonstrate that it was acting in conformity with Cameroon law, they chose to hide behind a petition against the presiding judge alleging nebulous reasons.. Mr.. Bruce has said somewhere before that they had petitioned against the judge for, “his affiliations that could have produced a biased outcome”.. I wonder whether Mr.. Bruce is also a soothsayer to have foreseen the outcome of the case (see Mr.. Bruce responses to inquiries regarding the sustainability and intentions of Heracles Farms SG Sustainable oils project in the South West Region of Cameroon published on 20 March 2012).. Unfortunately for SG SOC, the judge who replaced the first judge ruled on the matter on 27/02/2012 as follows:-.. 1.. That the Applicants herein (i.. SG SOC) who are the Defendants in the substantive action are temporarily prohibited from proceeding with their acts on the lands found in Mundemba and Toko Subdivisions until the mandatory environmental impact assessment is carried out with a view to evaluate the impact of their acts on the natural and human environment of these areas, establish all reasonable measures to avert them.. 2.. Compensate those directly affected by their farms and village settlements on their basis of the relevant law which is the Prime Ministerial text on the subject.. 3.. Compensate those affected by taking of their ancestral possessory rights over the land.. 4.. Reach a clear understanding with the indigenous people by way of a memorandum of understanding for the project to avert any future conflicts.. This is the decision of the Court given in the matter on 27/2/2012 but Mr.. Bruce also said in his publication of 20 March, 2012 that our case was dismissed.. And these are what Mr.. Bruce styles “nuisance suits”.. Many more of these are on the way.. In the mean time, soon after we sued SG SOC to Court they hurriedly put up a document which they said was a report of a social and environmental impact assessment they has carried out in the project area and presented it to the then Ministry of Environment and Nature Protection so as to pre-empt the orders which the Court was likely going to make.. The said ESIA was submitted to the Ministry in charge of the Environment on the 5th August, 2011 when our case was already in Court.. On August 23,2011, the Ministry of Environment and Nature Protection in violation of the provisions of Article 12(i) of Decree No.. 2005/0577/ pm of 23/02/2005 which stipulates that notice of public hearing of an ESIA must be given to the public at least 30 days in advance in a press release of that day fixed public hearings in Mundemba and Nguti from August  ...   this document have the interests of the local populations been taken care of? Any objective person who reads the establishment convention would agree with me that it appeared as if those who drew it up assumed that there were no people living in the area for they were completely forgotten.. Bruce's assertion, therefore, that in the development of their oil palm plantation it will not be necessary to move people or take over their farms is laughable.. How is that practically possible in an area which he himself admits has many villages? What plan has Herackles Farms put in place to handle the situation if it becomes necessary to move people or take over their farms? In the “establishment convention” it is even provided that the company may rely on the coercive force of the state to remove people who refuse to move voluntarily.. Has Mr.. Bruce even bothered to have a survey conducted to know exactly how many individual farm holdings are in the project area, to whom they belong and where they are located?.. As their social corporate responsibly is concerned Herakles Farm have taunted people before with the so-called memoranda of understanding with the local populations.. Bruce himself says that they have a memorandum of understanding with each village which is false.. There are only two documents - one allegedly signed for the people of the Nguti segment of the project and the other for Mundemba and Toko Sub Divisions.. Even a beginner in the study of the law of contract will have no difficulty in dismissing the documents as being invalid contracts.. When I first read these documents, I could hardly associate them with Herakles Farms which had produced a document such as the “establishment convention”.. And as I have said on several occasions before, these documents were not signed on behalf of SG SOC, and as such, they are not legally binding even if other issues such as the capacity of those who purported to sign the documents on behalf of the communities are ignored.. e.. Irrevocable Environmental Impact: So much has already been said by specialists on the issue of the unsustainability of the SG SOC oil palm project because of its probable negative impacts on the environment of the area.. Herakles Farms claims that they are environmentalists and that they have conducted all necessary studies including HCV.. I do not know if Mr.. Bruce has forgotten so soon that the so called HCV report they purported to have conducted on the SG SOC concession received an unfavourable review by the HCV Resource Network Technical Panel Peer Review of April 2012.. Furthermore, SG SOC in their business plan stated that they intend to build five oil mills in the project area.. Neither the chosen locations of the mills nor their impacts on the environment are mentioned in their environmental and social Impact Assessment report which they published in August, 2012.. Is this what Herackles Farms meant when they claim to be environmentalists?.. d.. Opposition to the Project: I wish also to correct some mistakes made by Mr.. Bruce in his analysis of the events that occurred in Fabe.. He gives Fabe village primacy out of proportion in his calculations of the acceptance and opposition to the SG SOC project.. There is nothing peculiar about Fabe village apart from the fact that it is one of the villages hosting one of the oil palm nurseries.. Bruce is misinterpreting the usual euphoria and excitement shown by people when strangers come into their village as a general acceptance of their project.. That is very misleading.. What happened in Fabe is that not long after the initial excitement started wearing off, the people began to see the SG SOC masquerade - promises made which were never intended to be met, lies and influence peddling.. The people came to realize that their chief had led them by the nose into accepting the establishment of SG SOC nursery in their village.. They, therefore, rose in revolt.. They blocked the road leading to the nursery, placed traditional injunctions thereon and asked that the workers of the company living in the village leave.. This was a spontaneous reaction of the villagers without the influence of any outside person or organization.. What happened on June 6, 2012? A few days before June 6, it was announced that the newly appointed Governor of the South West was going to make a maiden visit to Toko on 06/06/2012.. Toko is the headquarters of Toko Sub Division in Ndian Division.. SEFE decided to seize the occasion of the visit of the august guest to the Sub Division to draw the attention of the government to the fact that the people of the area were not satisfied with the SG SOC oil palm project.. This is what non-governmental organizations do normally to draw government attention to the causes they stand for.. Thus SEFE within the short time mobilized its followers to stage a peaceful demonstration at Toko on the day of the Governor's visit, and since it was most unlikely that the Ndian administration would allow SEFE representatives to have any dialogue with the Governor, it was decided that silent messages by way of banners, T-shirts and placards with the inscriptions mentioned by Mr.. Bruce be used as means of passing across the SEFE message.. So, the demonstrations of 6/6/2012 did not take place at Fabe village which administratively is even within Mundemba Sub Division.. CONCLUSION:.. I would like to advise Herakles Farms that it is not by mudslinging that they will develop their oil palm plantation.. They need to acknowledge that, may be due to improper advice and insufficient knowledge, their concept of the project was wrong from the beginning.. If they still desire to go on with the project, they have to re-design it all over, and they should be grateful to all persons and institutions who have pointed out the things which are wrong with the project, for they would have wasted their investment and only to realize so when too late to make amends..

    Original link path: /legal-rejoinder-rebuttal-ceo-herakles-farm-mr-bruce-wrobel-herakles-land-deals-cameroon
    Open archive

  • Title: Foreign Farmers Undermine Food Security in Zambia | oaklandinstitute.org
    Descriptive info: Foreign Farmers Undermine Food Security in Zambia.. November 1, 2012.. IPS.. Farmers from Mpongwe district in the mineral-rich Copperbelt Province claim they were evicted from this 46,876 hectares of commercial land, by a South African-based agribusiness.. Credit: Nebert Mulenga/IPS.. LUSAKA, Nov 1 2012 (IPS) - Increased agricultural development in Zambia will actually compromise the country’s food security as peasant farmers continue to be driven off their customary land to pave the way for large-scale local and foreign agribusiness, according to the University of Zambia’s dean of the school of agriculture, Dr.. Mickey Mwala.. “Smallholder farmers are the people responsible for food security in Zambia.. So, evicting them could have a long-term effect on the country’s food security situation, if prolonged and extended,” he told IPS.. According to the.. United Nations World Food Programme.. , most households in Zambia are currently food secure, with only 62,842 of the country’s estimated 13.. 4 million people being acutely food insecure.. “Land grabs increase the incidence and prevalence of poverty in the country by increasing the number of people who can’t grow their own food, and who can’t send their children to school,” Mwala said.. The eviction of farmers from their customary land started 12 years ago but assumed prominence after 2005 when the government started calling for increased foreign investment, according to the Zambia Land Alliance, a land rights advocacy organisation.. Land grabs by both foreign and local investors are now considered commonplace in this southern African nation.. In Masaiti district, in the mineral-rich Copperbelt Province, over 2,000 farmers were allegedly evicted from their land in 2011 following the acquisition of over 200 hectares by a Nigerian cement manufacturer.. They were later paid 250 dollars per hectare as compensation.. The establishment of mining businesses in the North-Western, Copperbelt and Luapula provinces has also left thousands of smallholder farmers homeless.. According to a 2011 report by.. GRAIN.. , an international non-governmental organisation that promotes the sustainable management and use of agricultural biodiversity, titled “.. Land grabbing and the global food crisis.. ”, three percent of Zambia’s farmlands are controlled by foreigners for agrifood production.. And according to the.. , an independent policy think tank, agricultural investment here is.. on the rise.. as the government “is quietly marketing and planning the development of at least 1.. 5 million hectares of its land.. Although no study has been conducted to determine the actual number of farmers displaced by the land grabs, the.. Zambia National Farmers Union.. (ZNFU) said affected farmers could be in their thousands.. According to ZNFU’s vice president Graham Rae, the displacement of farmers from their customary land is an issue of concern.. “It has been going on for some time now and many of our farmers, especially in rural areas, are affected.. “Our food security situation could be affected because we are talking of probably thousands of farmers not producing harvests.. In countries like South Africa, food security is primarily based on large-scale farmers, whereas in our case the small-scale sector plays a major role.. So food security could be negatively  ...   sit back and continue farming,” said Machina.. Currently 59 percent of Zambians live below the poverty line, with 65 percent of the population living in rural areas.. Pretorious Nkhata, from Mpongwe district in the Copperbelt Province, is one of those farmers.. The 68-year-old claims that he was evicted from his 21-hectare piece of customary land, which he had been farming for over 10 years, by a South Africa-based agribusiness in 2008.. Nkhata and the other farmers displaced from the 46,876 hectares of now commercial farmland told IPS that they had obtained their land from a traditional leader but did not get deeds of ownership from the government.. “They said we were squatters, we were intruders on that land.. I had 21 hectares … I lost it all….. “They (the South African agribusiness) came with guns and threatened to shoot anyone who resisted moving out.. They burnt all our household properties without any notice.. We were almost 200 households.. They burnt my food barns, clothes, blankets, bedding, television set – they even burnt my fields,” he said.. The agribusiness has since sold the land and closed its operations in Zambia.. IPS’ efforts to locate the company for comment proved futile.. A prominent lawyer, who represents displaced farmers and declined to be named, told IPS that people occupying customary land in Zambia have no legal protection, and even their compensation is mostly on humanitarian grounds.. “Sections 33 and 34 of the Lands and Deeds Registry Act say having a certificate of title is a prima facie evidence of ownership of land.. The basic principle is that one who has a title is the owner of the land and everything on that land.. It doesn’t matter what developments you have put there if you have no title deed,” said the legal representative.. “What we fight for when representing those clients whose land has been repossessed is just some form of compensation for the developments put up on the land – but the new land owners are not under any legal obligation (to pay compensation).. Permanent secretary in the Ministry of Lands Daizy Ng’ambi told IPS that the government is currently developing a working document to offer some form of security for customary tenure.. “At the moment, there is really no provision for people (on customary land) who do not have title deeds.. But it is envisaged that once the working document on security of tenure for customary land has had an input from all stakeholders, issues of customary ownership and proper compensation will be taken into consideration,” Ng’ambi said.. She also said that her ministry was working on improving the technology involved in processing titles, which is expected to cut down on the cumbersome procedures and time taken to obtain one.. Despite these changes, it will not give Nkhata back the land he once thought he owned.. Now Nkhata resides in a tiny village surrounded by wire-fenced commercial farms, some 40 kilometres from his former farm.. “Now I am stranded.. They didn’t give me any compensation or alternative land,” he said..

    Original link path: /foreign-farmers-undermine-food-security-zambia
    Open archive

  • Title: The Global Land Grab: The New Enclosures | oaklandinstitute.org
    Descriptive info: The Global Land Grab: The New Enclosures.. October 24, 2012.. The Wealth of the Commons.. Consider this.. It is 1607.. The English have been taking lands in Ireland for several centuries.. First written down in the 7th century, Irish customary law is sophisticated and still administered by trained traditional magistrates (.. Brehons.. Now rulings in the English courts on Gavelkind (1605) and Tanistry (1607) finally deny that customary law delivers property rights.. Family holdings are made tenancies of by now well established Anglo-Irish elites, and the commons, crucial to grazing and hunting, are made more absolutely the property of the elites and new waves of English and Scottish settlers.. Irish communities may use the commons at the will of these new owners.. Now 1823 in America.. Chief Justice Marshall rules that while Indian natives were rightfully.. in possession.. (“Aboriginal title”) of 43,000 square miles of disputed land – in a case he engineers to be brought before the Supreme Court (and in which he has a private interest) – they illegally sold this tract to developers.. He argues that by virtue of conquest, the British Crown became the owner of North America (“the right of discovery”).. Therefore only the Crown or its administrations may lawfully sell or grant lands.. Possession is no more than lawful occupation and use, and doesn’t count.. Forty-year-old opinions of the Privy Council in London aid Marshall’s argument.. These opinions established in 1772 and 1774 that English law supersedes local law, and that for the purposes of property, land is “uninhabited” (unowned) when empty of.. civilized.. people (McAuslan 2006).. 1845 in England.. The villagers of Otmoor, Oxfordshire in England, as described by Linebaugh in this volume, have lost the fight to keep their commons, as have hundreds of other communities across the realm.. In fact, feudal land law in England (and the rest of Europe) has dictated for some centuries (since 1285) that only those granted land by the king, i.. the lords, own the land.. Local populations hold no more than use rights.. These legal realities have come harshly into focus only with industrialization and with private capital hungry for lands and the financial killings which may be made from selling the commons to railways and factories.. Parliament, made up of wealthy landlords, is on their side, passing law after law since 1773 to legalize the dispossession of commoners.. The Inclosure Act 1845 [.. sic.. ] administers the.. coup de grace.. , speeding up the process.. Of course private gains under these “parliamentary enclosures” are “in the public interest.. 1895 in Africa.. A decade earlier the Plenipotentiaries of European Powers (as they refer to themselves) agreed to establish respective “spheres of economic influence” throughout the continent and make key entry points like the Niger and Congo Rivers free trade zones.. As the newest industrial power and especially anxious to extend trade, Germany hosts the meeting in Berlin in 1884-85.. Europe is in economic crisis (the Great Depression 1873-1896).. Factory owners desperately need new markets for unsold textiles and other manufactures.. Fabulously wealthy entrepreneurs, with “vast accumulations of capital burning holes in their owners’ pockets” (Hobsbawn 1987) also seek new enterprises to invest in.. The new working classes, having lost their livelihoods and now dependent upon (failing) factory jobs are also in need of new locales to migrate to.. The matter is so important that the Powers create an early international trade law, the General Act of the Berlin Conference on West Africa, 1885.. In practice, opening markets and enterprise in Africa does not work out so well and free trade goes out the window.. By 1895 the economic scramble for Africa has segued into a political scramble with the creation of colonies and protectorates to protect new markets and tap the increasingly apparent wealth of resources and cheap labor in the African hinterlands.. The problem from the 1890s is, How to acquire such massive lands cheaply? For some time traders, profiteers and missionaries have been buying lands from coastal chiefs to create trading posts, ports, missionary enclaves, and more recently, for anti-slavery monitoring posts.. Companies backed by European governments have been doing the same.. The British Royal Niger Company alone has several hundred land contracts made with West African chiefs guaranteeing access to land for mainly commercial oil palm production, supporting inter aliathe burgeoning soap industry in Europe.. Chiefs are now selling exploration rights to gold mining companies.. Such purchases suggest that European governments are amply aware that Africa is far from.. unowned.. There is also the 1844 Bond to consider.. This is a bilateral investment treaty signed between “sovereigns of equal power” along the Gold Coast and the British Crown.. Nor are such kings and chiefs naive, with a long history of slave and commodity trading behind them and well-established trade missions and embassies in European capitals.. Luckily the old feudal land laws of Europe along with the Marshall Ruling of 1823 mentioned above come to the rescue.. These offer a clutch of routes to legalize dispossession at scale.. Legality is of concern to colonizers and their parliaments, not least to appease humanist groups at home who count the abolition of slavery as a first success.. But the “right of discovery” assures the colonizers undisputed ownership of the soil.. This may not work so well along coastal areas but can be amply applied to hinterland areas.. Natives themselves unwittingly open the way; many of them claim that only God can.. own.. the soil or that their communities, continuing from the past into the present and future, are the owners.. While firm in their respective schemes of possession they admit the land itself cannot be sold, at least not without the consent of communities.. To Europeans, this conceded lack of fungibility and tendency to communalism “proves” that Africans do not own their lands in the manner European property laws acknowledge.. Where bills of sale have queered the pitch, natives may be guaranteed secure occupancy and use – for as long as they actively occupy and farm the land.. It would not, in any event, be wise to make it difficult for natives to feed themselves.. Conditionality of occupation and use leaves the attractive prospect that Europeans may claim ownership of several billon hectares of unsettled and unfarmed lands – in short, the communal property within their customary domains.. Have not Smith, Locke, Mills and others established long ago that private property only comes into existence by the hand of man’s labor? The concept of “wastes” from feudal tenures is neatly applied to the continent by all colonizing powers.. Counterpoint constructs of “effectively occupied lands” in the form of settlements and permanent farms, and “unowned and vacant lands” quickly evolve.. In the absence of acknowledged owners, the commons fall directly to colonial administrations as their private property.. And if there is still any doubt, it is obvious to the white men that the lucrative forests, wetlands and grasslands of Africa cannot amount to property as they are in communal possession; in Europe, private property means individual property.. Moreover property obtains legal protection only when an individual person or company has a deed to prove it.. Africans do not.. In oddly mixed ways, these various proofs of.. terra nullius.. are applied.. Legal dispossession of Africans is more or less total.. In practice, the ability of colonizers to settle and “develop” more than a million or so hectares in each new polity is constrained (South Africa aside).. Natives continue to occupy and use lands which they no longer legally own.. Through the 20th century major colonial incursions are made into these lands.. Although cities and towns multiply, they prove more notable for the conflicts they generate than the actual hectares they absorb.. Settler schemes, commercial plantations run by parastatals and private enterprise, take a much greater toll, along with evictions caused by the issuance of concessions to foreign enterprises for oil, mining and timber exploitation.. Laws are also passed declaring certain resources generically the property of the state; minerals (surface mined for centuries or not), waters, beachfronts, marshlands, mountains, forests and woodlands, fall like ninepins to the state, irrespective of local possession.. The 1960s in Africa.. Liberation from Europe begins mid-century.. Curiously, colonial notions of tenure are sustained in most post-independence land laws.. Or perhaps not so curiously, for keeping rural majorities as tenants at will is as useful to new African governments as it had been to colonial masters.. Class  ...   home markets.. Bilateral investment treaties, of which nearly five thousand have been signed between North and South states over the last decade, provide the governing framework for these developments.. In short, economic crises and shifts in the balance of political power once again produce seismic shifts in who owns and controls land, resources and production.. But where are the poor and the commons in all this?.. THE COMMONS AND COMMONERS.. The answer is quite simple.. Much of the lands being sold or leased to entrepreneurs are commons.. This is not surprising because lands defined as commons in the modern agrarian world generally exclude permanent farms and settlements.. Governments and investors prefer to avoid settled lands as their dispossession is most likely to provoke resistance.. They also want to avoid having to pay compensation for huts and standing crops, or for relocation.. Only the unfarmed commons – the forest/woodlands, rangelands and wetlands, can supply the thousands of hectares large-scale investors want.. But most of all, the commons are deemed “vacant and available.. ” For the laws of most host lessor states still treat all customarily-owned lands and unfarmed lands in particular as.. unowned, unoccupied and idle.. As such they remain the property of the state.. This makes their onward sale or lease to private investors perfectly legal.. Indeed, without such legality in domestic land law, and investor-friendly international trade law to take their side in international courts if needed, no international or local investor would proceed.. Of course the commons are neither unutilized or idle, nor unowned.. On the contrary, under local tenure norms virtually no land is, or ever has been,.. , and this remains the case despite the century-long subordination of such customary rights as no more than permissive possession (occupancy and use of unowned lands or lands owned by the state).. In practice, customary ownership is nested in spatial domains, the territory of one community extending to the boundaries of the next.. While the exact location of intercommunity boundaries are routinely challenged and contested, there is little doubt in the locality as to which community owns and controls which area.. Within each of these domains property rights are complex and various.. The most usual distinction drawn today is between rights over permanent house and farm plots, and rights over the residual commons.. Rights over the former are increasingly absolute in the hands of families, and increasingly alienable.. Rights over commons are collective, held in undivided shares, and while they exist in perpetuity are generally inalienable.. This is not least because the owner, the community, is a continuing, intergenerational entity.. This does not mean that in the right circumstances, parts or even all of a community’s commons cannot be leased.. Whether the community wishes to do so or not, is, communities believe, a matter for commoners to decide.. Clearly, most domestic statutory legislation does not agree, let alone consider these critical estates in land to be community assets in the first instance.. The results of this continuing denial that property ownership exists except as recognized by “imported” European laws are clear for all to see in the current land rush.. Not just commons but occupied farms and houses are routinely being lost as investors move in.. In Democratic Republic of the Congo, for example, villagers with homesteads scattered in the forest have lost their entire domains to commercial crop farmers and now squat in a neighboring National Park from whence they will in due course also be evicted (Mpoyi 2010).. In Ethiopia, communities are already being relocated from 10,000 hectares allocated to a Saudi-Ethiopian company with many more relocations anticipated as its lease is extended to 500,000 hectares (Oakland Institute 2011).. Elsewhere communities are merely dramatically squeezed, retaining houses and farms but losing their woodlands and rangelands.. Investors are clearing forests, damming rivers and diverting irrigation from smallholders, causing wetlands crucial to fishing, seasonal fodder production and grazing to dry up and enclosing thousands of hectares of grazing lands for mechanized farming for export.. All this happens in Ethiopia, where local food security is already an issue and the specter of famine looms.. The Ethiopian government is meanwhile expanding areas designated for investors to grow oil and food crops for export by 900,000 hectares in another region.. Sometimes villagers tentatively welcome investors in the belief that jobs, services, education and opportunities will compensate for the loss of traditional lands and livelihoods.. The reality can be very different.. Villagers in central Sierra Leone, Rwanda, and Kenya are among those not told that canal construction for industrial sugar cane production would dry up their wetlands, critical for seasonal rice production, fishing, reed collection, hunting and grazing.. Deng (2011) records the case of a community in South Sudan agreeing to hand over 179,000 hectares to a Norwegian company for an annual fee of $15,000 and construction of a few boreholes; the company aims to make millions on both production and carbon credit deals.. In such cases, traditional leaders and local elites are often facilitators of deals, making money on the side at the expense of their communities.. Reports abound of chiefs or local elites in Ghana, Zambia, Nigeria and Mozambique persuading communities of the benefits of releasing their commons to investors, and even reinterpreting their trusteeship as entailing their due right to sell and benefit from those sales.. Central government officials, politicians and entrepreneurs are routinely on hand to back them up.. Such accounts are repeated throughout Africa, and in some Asian states such as Indonesia and Malaysian Borneo, where 20 million hectares have been scheduled for conversion into oil palm plantations (Colchester 2011).. Everywhere the story is more or less the same: communal rights are being grossly interfered with, farming systems upturned, livelihoods decimated, and water use and environments changed in ways which are dubiously sustainable.. Clearly.. possession.. is no more sufficient today than it was for the English villagers of the 17th and 18th centuries of enclosure.. Only legal recognition of commons as the communal.. property.. of communities is sufficient to afford real protection.. A handful of states in Africa (and somewhat more in Latin America) have taken this crucial step, setting aside fungibility and formal registration as prerequisites to admission as real property.. The land rush instead not only activates the effects of failing to make such changes a thousandfold.. It also raises concern that fragile reformist trends will not be sustained.. Governments appear to find leasing out their citizens’ land too lucrative to themselves and aligned elites, and too advantageous to market-led routes of growth, to let justice or the benefits of the commons stand in their way.. REFERENCES.. Alden Wily, L.. 2011.. “The Law is to Blame: Taking a Hard Look at the Vulnerable Status of Customary Land Rights.. ” In.. Africa Development and Change.. (2)3:733-757.. Brautigam, D.. African Shenzhen: China’s Special Economic Zones.. Journal of Modern African Studies.. (49)1: 27–54.. Colchester, M.. Palm Oil and Indigenous Peoples in South East Asia.. Forest Peoples Programme and International Land Coalition, Rome.. http://landportal.. info/resource/global/new-studies-and-policy-briefs-rel.. Daniel, S.. The Role of the International Finance Corporation in Promoting Agricultural Investment and Large-Scale Land Acquisitions.. http://www.. future-agricultures.. org/index.. php?option+com_docman Itemid=971.. Deng, D.. “Land Belongs to the Community: Demystifying the ‘Global Land Grab’ in Southern Sudan.. php?option=com_docman task=cat_.. Hall, R.. “The Next Great Trek? South African Commercial Farmers Move North.. futureagricultures.. php?option=com_docman task=cat_v.. Hobsbawn, E.. 1987.. The Age of Empire 1875-1914.. London.. Abacus.. Internations Union for Conservation of Nature.. 2010.. “The Impacts of Barriers to Pro-poor Forest Management: Livelihoods and Landscapes Strategy.. ” Markets and Incentives Discussion Paper.. Gland, IUCN.. McAuslan, P.. 2006.. “Property and Empire.. ” Paper presented to Sixth Biennial Conference, The Centre for Property Law, School of Law, University of Reading, UK.. March 21-23, 2006.. Mpoyi, A.. “Social and Environmental Dimensions of Large Scale Land Acquisitions in the Republic of Congo.. ” Presentation to the World Bank Annual Land Policy Administration Conference.. April 26-27, 2010.. “Understanding Land Investment Deals in Africa.. Country Report: Ethiopia.. http://media.. oaklandinstitute.. org/publications.. The World Bank.. “Rising Global Interest in Farmland.. ” Washington, D.. C.. A coalition of agencies and universities published the data on recorded and verified deals in a report, “Land Rights and the Rush for Land,” in October 2011 at.. landcoaltion.. org/cpl/CPL-synthesis-report.. For case studies see.. landcoalition.. org/cplstudies.. and.. php?option=com_docman Itemid=971.. oakland.. institute.. For example, in July 2011 the German Lufthansa became the first airline to use biofuels on regular commercial flights.. See footnote 2 for case studies..

    Original link path: /global-land-grab-new-enclosures
    Open archive

  • Title: Print | oaklandinstitute.org
    Descriptive info: Print.. Ethiopia: The Morality of Development and its Operatives.. Interactive Land Matrix – Resource in Documenting Land Grab across Africa.. The Second Scramble for Africa.. Shady Deals, Shady Campaign Funds, Private Jets Helicopter Flights--A Corrupt President Seeks Re-Election.. The Great Africa Land Grab.. Ernest Bai Koroma and the APC Fail Key US Millenium Challenge Corporation Tests.. Bruce Wrobel on Herakles Land Deals in Cameroon.. Foreign Farmers Undermine Food Security in Zambia.. The Global Land Grab: The New Enclosures.. The Scramble for African Land.. Agri Africa.. Land Grab Controversy Remains  ...   In Africa - Rejoinder.. Giving Women Land, Giving them a Future.. World Bank Refuses to Stop Funding African Land Grabs.. African Globe.. World Bank Refuses Call to Halt Land Deals.. African Land Grabs are Out of Control.. UPI.. BHO Bioproducts of India to Spend $120 Million on Ethiopia Farms.. Bloomberg.. US Firm Under Fire Over Cameroon Palm Oil Project.. AlertNet.. Africa Next: With Investment Outpacing Aid, Is This a New Golden Age for the Poorest Continent?.. Globe and Mail.. Pages.. 5.. 6.. 7.. 8.. 9.. ….. next ›.. last »..

    Original link path: /all_print
    Open archive

  • Archived pages: 861