Hearing the other Voice: Investor perspectives on Protection of

Women’s Land Rights in Large scale Land Acquisition in Uganda

By Juliet KanyesigyeResearch Fellow – Centre for Basic Research

Email: jkanyesigye@gmail.com; cbr.uganda@gmail.com

Presentation at the World Bank Conference 2014 on Land and Poverty

23-27th 2015, Washington DC

Presentation outline • Uganda: Brief country profile• LSLA in the Ugandan Context • Research problem• Methodology • Women's land rights and position in the Legal

and Policy framework• Typical steps in LSLA in Uganda• Investor awareness of the gender provisions and

women’s land rights • Investor practices on gender and women’s

rights in LSLA • Conclusion and recommendations

Uganda: Brief Profile• Uganda is one of the East African countries.• Lies between latitudes 1o S and 4o N and longitudes 29o

E and 35o E• Temperatures range from 7oC in the hilly southwestern

regions to 37oC for the northern region. • Surface area =241,040 sq. km (of which 44,000 sq. km

are covered by freshwater bodies)• Arable land constitutes 43,077sq km (21.57%)• Estimated population =39 million (51.5% women (UBOS

2014)• 90% of the population live in rural areas• 85% of the total population depend on agriculture • Agriculture employs 80% of women (UBOS 2011)

Context of LSLA in Uganda • In Uganda, the 1998 Land Act provides for any

investment on land at least 50 acres (124 ha) and above. All LSLA therefore fall within these provisions

• By 2011, estimates suggest that between 4 -8 % of land in Uganda, is under foreign land deals (GRAIN 2011a)

• Land Portal matrix 2012 estimates in Uganda 121,512 ha are covered by LSLA

• Preliminary mapping by Centre for Basic Research showed that for a period of four years (2006-2009), only (17%) of investors acquired land on large scale but from (2011 -2013), LSLA increased to 57%

Why LSLA in Uganda • Global factors (2008 food crisis) widely

documented in literature• Physical factors (abundant fertile arable land,

reliable climate, secure supplies of fresh water and undulating plains which support large scale mechanized agriculture

• Economic: Uganda's estimated oil reserves of 3.5 billion barrels, including 1.8 billion that are recoverable

• Increased foreign direct investment from $900 million in 2011 to $1.7 billion in 2012(UBOS 2012)

Why LSLA in Uganda contd.• Facilitative legal conditions for the investment

process (Investment code act enacted in 1991 to make provision in the law relating to local and foreign investments in Uganda)

• The government incentives (generous capital recovery terms, annual VAT deferments, deductions, exemptions and depreciation allowances and 10-year tax holiday for investors engaged in export-oriented production

Research Problem • Arguments in favour of LSLA (promising strategy for

national development, poverty eradication and guaranteeing increased food security

• Critics argue that LSLA it will not be able to guarantee sustainable and equitable development and does not favour the peasant communities– Lead to massive displacements and direct dismantling of

traditional land tenure systems– Flawed compensation and mostly targeting men as

heads of households– Failure to protect women’s land rights( loss of access and

usage of land, loss of natural resources

Research problem contd.• There is limited information on the perspectives and

practices of LSLA Investors in promotion and protection of women’s land rights

• Difficult to analyze how Investor operations in practice and use such understanding to draw lessons for improving public accountability and harmonizing approaches for equitable development

• Problematic to correlate whether dispossession of women’s land rights is a deliberate act of intransigence or an issue of lack of capacity to incorporate gender equity in the development process by investors

Methodology • An in-depth inquiry (qualitative methods • Literature review of existing studies and legal and policy framework• A sample of selected companies implementing agricultural related

investments – Review of Newmann Group (2013 website) on the Kaweeri

Coffee Plantation which covers 2,512 ha in Mubende district – BIDCO Uganda- subsidiary company of BIDCO Kenya- palm oil

plantation covers 6000 ha and the out grower scheme 3,000ha in Kalangala district

– Madhivani Group of companies (Proposed Amuru Sugar works project

• Key informant interviews with company staff, district officials (Amuru and Mubende District) , Uganda Investment Authority

• Focus group discussions with communities

Women’s position and land rights: Policy and legal framework

• Article 26 (1) of the 1995 Uganda Constitution: • Every person has a right to own property either individually or in

association with others; • Section (2) 9 “No person shall be compulsorily deprived of

property or any interest in or right over property.” • Section VI: the State to ensure gender balance and fair

representation of marginalized groups on all constitutional and other bodies

• Article 32 (1)provides for affirmative action in favour of groups that may be marginalized on the basis of gender, age, disability or any other reason created by history, tradition or custom, for the purpose of redressing imbalances which exist against them

• Article 180 Section 2b): one-third of the membership of each local government council for women; (2c) provides for affirmative action for all marginalized groups

Women's position Contd.• Section (2) : the national Parliament to make appropriate laws for the protection of the

rights of widows and widowers to inherit the property of their deceased spouses and to enjoy parental rights over their children.”

• The Land Act 1998 -affirmative action in favour of representation of women on the land management structures

• Section 48 (4) requires at least one of the five members on the Uganda Land Commission shall be a woman

• Section 58 (3) one- third of the minimum five members of the DLB to be women • Section 66 requires the composition of the parish committees at least to have a woman

• Section 17 4b) states that elected officers of the communal land associations shall not be more than nine nor less than three persons of whom not less than one-third shall be women

• Uganda has ratified several international human rights instruments on gender equality and the protection of women’s rights

Typical steps in LSLA and policy implications

• The national land policy 2013 sets clear measures to guide land acquisition for investment in the country

• Provides for formulation of a strategy to guide the State and her agencies– Regulate the amount of land investors; follow due

process (evaluation, due diligence and approval of land use change), determining sectors open to foreign direct investment and carrying out cost-benefit analysis on public facilities before pulling them down to allocate the land to private investors

– framework for auditing land based local and foreign investment proposals

Contd. • Recommends promotion of long-term benefit-

sharing arrangements (e.g. out grower schemes, contract farming etc.)

• Provides procedures and standards for local consultation; mechanisms for appeal and arbitration and facilitation of access to land by vulnerable groups etc.

• Review of these pronouncements shows that gender is not explicitly mentioned in the measures delineated

Acquisition contd.

• Investors acquire land from UIA, ULC , DLBs or directly from private owners

• UIA as a government agency is mandated to acquire and hold property (Section 3a UIA code act 1991).

• UIA purchases or leases land from individuals, communities, or cooperatives using government funds and later leases to investors

• DLB is mandated among others to hold and allocate land in the district, facilitate the registration and transfer of interests in land;

• Processes for acquiring land are well laid down• There was no provision for addressing women’s land

rights in any of their processes and even silent on women representation on the Board

Investor awareness of the provisions on gender and women’s land rights

• All the companies visited had never had access to the national gender policy and neither had they been made aware of its necessity

• Awareness of gender related aspects in the national regulatory framework have a major influence over the extent to which local rights including women’s land rights are considered particularly in farmland investments (FAO 2013)

Practices• Investors seemed detached from the process of

consultations since they purchased land directly from UIA• However, investors are required to conduct feasibility

studies and impact assessments• Gender analysis and actions are not part of the mandatory

prerequisites in the above processes• The fact that these processes are mandatory present

potential entry points for engendering LSLA• Even the method of publicizing the investment during the

EIA is through the media but how many women can access the media?

• Investors were not aware of the need to assess women’s land rights in this process and viewed this as the responsibility of the state

Practices contd.

• There was no interest in disaggregation of the impact of LSLA on women

• Investors are interested in the number of jobs created from an investment project and how much the economy would benefit

• Narrowing investments to women’s land rights was seen as minute way of analysis of the impact of an investment project

• This kind of development narrative would not lead to protection of women’s land rights among these key agents facilitating and implementing LSLA

Practices contd.• Some investors viewed women to benefit from

agriculture practiced within the plantationsHowever this raises several concerns:• How much land is available for cultivation, quantity of

crops it can generate which one can equate for the loss women incurred during the process of LSLA

• who holds the right to use and access this land • There was no evidence that its use was embedded in the

company land use framework• Crops are planted on the fringes of roadsides (risk of

theft by road users and chances of being slashed are high in case of any plan for expansion since these marginal lands are ideally left as road reserves.

Practices contd.• Investors reported providing employment to both

men and women, it was not clear how the available employment responds to social, economic and other gender dimensions that typically come to play as a result of loss of land rights

• Observed the usual stereotypical mode (men in relatively higher level and women workers feminine type of jobs

• Women were mostly preferred by ability but because of being loyal

Practices contd. • All investors in the survey had corporate social

responsibility programmes as a way of extending benefits to the community

• Some of these programmes specifically targeted vulnerable women e.g. BIDCO programme targeting children of single mothers with education support

• However, these were not systematically inbuilt in company practices

Conclusion

• Interrogation of the other voice narrative shows that women are not victims in the face of LSLA and responsibility for protection of women’s land rights lies with the state

• The argument is that investors contribute to social and economic development through different pathways; national development as a contribution to GDP, taxes and employment and that they are some benefits that directly accrue to women

• The fact that women’s land rights were not mandatory in the legal and policy framework makes it difficult to feature on the development agenda of investors and implementing agencies like UIA

Recommendations• Capacity building and strengthening collaboration with key

stakeholders is crucial so that women land rights are put on the agenda and engendered the process and governance of LSLA and mitigate the negative effects on women in the affected communities

• The inability of investor and actors facilitating the process of acquisition to protect women’s land rights would require programmatic interventions that would entail policy advocacy and critical engagement. The missing link on the investor perspectives needs to be located within the ongoing debate and research on LSLA

• Some of the Investor practices which are primarily seen as philanthropic behaviours could be up- scaled by actualizing what the policy states in terms of promotion of women's land rights