Sovereignty Human Rights and the Global Land Grab

7/28/2019 Sovereignty Human Rights and the Global Land Grab

1/23

SOVEREIGNTY, HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE

GLOBAL LAND GRAB

SHITTU JUBRIL A.

2013


2/23

Shittu Jubril is a graduate with a Bachelors of Science degree in International Law and Diplomacy from

Babcock University, Nigeria. He is a member of Nigerian Society of International Law, and associated

with the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, UK (Nigerian Branch). Please forward all correspondence to

[email protected]

ABSTRACT

The phenomenon of land grab in recent years has drawn the attention of variousinterests including international organizations, government and civil society. This isbecause of the speed at which such large scale acquisition are taking place, the nature ofmost deals and more importantly the unjustness in which most land deals do not takeinto consideration the right of the local communities and also small holder farmers. Theera of globalization has made it impossible for nations to exist without engaging in sometrade or contractual agreement with other state or private investor. States in legitimateexercise of their sovereignty attract foreign investors, but with such right is theresponsibility to respect the investor and protect their interests. States also exercisetheir sovereignty through membership of international organizations, establishment ofsovereign wealth funds and direct/indirect support to investors. States pursuecommitments at these levels, usually in terms of their national interest.

Human rights concerns and their protection guaranteed by numerous internationallegal instruments are a partial cause of the current trend in global land rush. Before the

advent of human rights protection most land acquisitions were based on agreementsbetween parties concerned or were based on the use of force. However, the Charter ofthe United Nations has frowned against unlawful threat or the use of force against anysovereign state. While land grabs are condemned because of the impact they have on thelocal population and the environment, it does not change the fact that most land dealsare legitimate. It is therefore argued that human rights capture important dimension ofthe values that are at stake when we discuss or modify the land rights and land use ofwomen, men and children and their should be the focus of states and internationalorganizations in addressing the issue of land grabs.


3/23

Shittu Jubril is a graduate with a Bachelors of Science degree in International Law and Diplomacy from

Babcock University, Nigeria. He is a member of Nigerian Society of International Law, and associated

with the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, UK (Nigerian Branch). Please forward all correspondence to

[email protected]

TABLE OF CONTENTS1.0. INTRODUCTION 1

2.0. THE CONCEPT OF LAND GRAB 2

3.0. STATE SOVEREIGNTY AND NATIONAL INTEREST 5

4.0. HUMAN RIGHTS CONCERNS AS A CAUSE OF THE CURRENT TREND IN THE

GLOBAL LAND RUSH 8

5.0. ADDRESSING THE ISSUES 10

6.0. CONCLUSION 16

REFERENCE


4/23

1

1.0. INTRODUCTIONThe global rush for land in developing countries is a growing concern among various

stakeholders and groups including international organizations, government and civil

society. Many scholars have identified the reasons for increased interest in huge

hectares of land by foreign countries and domestic investors alike to include the global

economic crisis, need to secure food access for the burgeoning population and the

search alternative sources of energy in the form of biofuels.

Various writers in the literature agree that the global land grab is different from other

land grabs which have occurred in times past. Jgerskog, A., Casco, A., Hrsmar, M.

and Kim, K. (2012) and GRAIN(2012) have stated that the global rush for land is

characterized by the need for green and virtual water, while others such as Landesa

(2011) and Deutsch (2012) have cited global crisis and need to secure food production

for their growing populations.

While it is agreed that there are implications of the current wave of global land

acquisition of overseas territory, most of the writings have failed to link the issue of

human rights as a factor responsible for the rush experienced mostly in the global south.

It is important to note that the current trend of land acquisition is a legitimate exercise

of sovereignty by the various nations involved in such acquisition and also those who

attract foreign investment. It is also to be emphasized that such deals are carried out in

the interest of the nations involved. States have sovereignty in economic relationships

especially in areas relating to FDI but with such rights come obligations which erode on


5/23

2

the sovereignty of states even in the legitimate exercise of their sovereignty. However,

acquisitions which respect the rights of the sovereign state and protect the rights of the

investor while giving attention to the concerns of the population is to be encouraged.

This article shall, following a brief overview of the concept of land grab examine the

concept of sovereignty and national interest in the context of land grab while

highlighting human rights protections as a major cause of the current rush for land and

land based resources, before discussing how the issue of land grab can effectively be

tackled.

2.0. THE CONCEPT OF LAND GRABLand grabbing is the acquisition of overseas territory by foreign business in ways that

are deemed unjust because of the nature of the acquisition and human rights violations

which are involved in such acquisitions. It occurs in situations where there is usually no

free prior and informed consent of the communities concerned/ affected by the

acquisition.

Land grabbing is essentially control grabbing. It refers to the capturing of power to

control land and other associated resources like water, minerals or forests, in order to

control the benefits of its use. (TNI Agrarian Justice Program, 2013) Thus when foreign

investor acquires large tracts of land for the purposes of cultivation, ignoring traditional

land tenure rights with written or tacit consent and support of the host government it is

a land grab (Hberli C., and Smith F., 2013) and according to Merian Research and


6/23

3

CRBM, (2010) many acquisitions involve more than 10,000 - 500,000 hectares

worldwide.

According to Oxfam (2012), land acquisitions which involve violation of human rights,

in which communities affected are not consulted prior to the execution of the project,

and without a thorough assessment of socio-economic and environmental impacts and

transparency in the nature of the contract as a result of lack of proper oversight by the

government are in essence land grabs. However land grabbing is not restricted to land

acquisition as some agreements do not involve direct land acquisition, but seek to secure

food supplies through contract farming and investment in rural and agricultural

infrastructure, including irrigation systems and roads.

Land grabbing in massive proportions is happening all over the world, threatening not

only the survival of small farms but the very food sovereignty of nations. The current

estimate of the number of land acquisitions according to GRAIN (2012) total about 56

million hectares, a majority of the deals being found in Africa. The acquisitions of land

and government involvement in such acquisitions/ deals come in form of direct

acquisitions by government agencies, Sovereign Wealth fund investments, State owned

enterprises and even through support given to private sector in investor and host

countries and include various areas such as mining, dairy products, biofuels agriculture,

among others. (Cotula L, Vermeulen S., Leonard R., Keeley J., 2009)

It is also important to note that behind every land grab is a water grab. Water grab is a

control for water resources needed to produce high yield crops. It must be said that most


7/23

4

land acquired are near water sources such as lakes, dams and rivers and the deals do not

take into consideration the water resources to be used. Thus according to GRAIN

(2012:3):

Hidden behind the current scramble for land is a world-wide struggle for control over

water. Those who have been buying up vast stretches of farmland in recent years,

whether they are based in Addis Ababa, Dubai or London, understand that the access to

water they gain, often included for free and without restriction, may well be worth more

over the long-term, than the land deals themselves All of the land deals in Africa

involve large-scale, industrial agriculture operations that will consume massive amounts

of water. Nearly all of them are located in major river basins with access to irrigation.

They occupy fertile and fragile wetlands, or are located in more arid areas that can draw

water from major rivers.

With special emphasis on Sub-Saharan Africa, numerous examples of land acquisitions

that are located near water sources can be cited including the MaLibya concession of

about 100,000ha which involves a diversion of water from the Niger river via a canal

30metres wide stretching a distance of 40km, the Pro-Cana acquisition in Mozambique

linked to the nearby Massingir Dam, and also the Saudi Star 10, 000ha acquisition

located near the Alwero river in Ethiopia.

While land acquisitions attract foreign investment which can lead to increased exports

and creation of employment opportunities, there are major disadvantages in terms of

access to and control of resources by the local population, reduced socio-economic

conditions, and increased potential for conflict. Such land grabs could also impact the


8/23

5

biodiversity of an area. This could be as a result of use of industrial modes of

agricultural production, use of high yield fertilizers, or by conversion of forests into

arable lands. (Graham A., et al, 2010)Various databases covering details about the

number, scope, and effects of land acquisition have been provided by GRAIN and FIAN

and Land Matrix.

3.0. STATE SOVEREIGNTY AND NATIONAL INTERESTSovereignty as defined in the Island of Palmas Arbitration (Island of Palmas Case

(Netherlands/USA), RIAA II, 870. P.) is a definitive starting point for exploring the

relationship which exists between states and other entities in the international system.

It is the ability of state to the exclusion of other states in the international system to

perform the functions of a state. While the post-Westphalia world system established

the sovereignty of the state in relation to entities in the international system, the

existence of globalization and technological advancement made it impossible for a state

to retain such control over its territory without some form of external interference either

in the form of acquisition of territory by foreign firms and governments who owned such

technology and sought such territory for various purposes or the various multilateral

organizations who seek to impose their jurisdiction in order to enforce treaty

commitment. The establishment of the sovereignty of a state gave it the ability to enter

into any form of contractual relationship, albeit with such right came the responsibility

to respect the investor and protect their interests. Such commitments have been codified

quite succinctly in the various bilateral investment treaties which exist between various

states and even multilateral conventions.


9/23

6

The notion of sovereignty was birthed at the conclusion of the Westphalia peace treaty,

but became firmly rooted in the Charter of the United Nations. With particular reference

to international trade and investment, one may cite the Treaty on Friendship,

Commerce and Navigation signed between various States creating rights and

responsibilities for states, and also the various BITs and FTAs signed between various

countries. In tracing the evolution of a nations sovereignty over her natural resources,

one may be informed that the various UNGA resolutions such as the Resolution 1803 of

1962 (Permanent Sovereignty over natural resources, Resolutions 3201; 3281(Charter of

Economic Rights and Duties of States, and also international covenants such as the

ICESCR of 1966 which establish the sovereignty of a state over its natural resources

which is to be expressed in the natural and public interest, and provides that

compensation should be prompt effective and adequate.

The era of globalization has made it impossible for nations to exist without engaging in

some trade or contractual agreement with other state or private investor. Thus, nations

have signed various BITS which govern relations between the state and investors and

allow for foreign direct investment. However, it must be said that the rights favour the

investor than the host state, especially through the use of stabilization clauses and

various standards of treatment such as the FET and MFN that govern relationships. In

such relationship, a state cannot invoke its sovereignty as inability to fulfill its

contractual obligations (the principle of pacta sunt servanda Article 27 of the VCLT

1969)


10/23

7

By seeking to discourage nations from engaging in their contractual obligations there is

a gradual erosion/intrusion in sovereignty. Imposing guidelines might not favour

particular states, who seek to engage in certain form of transactions. However an

investment which respects the rights of the state and that of the investor, without

infringing on the benefits of the local community who have such rights to such lands

should be encouraged.

Apart from legislation and administrative oversight of investments in land acquisition

deals, States also exercise their sovereignty through membership of international

organizations, establishment of sovereign wealth funds and direct/indirect support to

investors. States pursue commitments at these levels, usually in terms of their national

interest.

With regards to membership of multilateral organizations, one may cite such

institutions as the World Bank, and FAO, groups such as the AU and EU and G8, and

other mechanisms such as the ICSID which provide for settlement of disputes between

state and arbitrators which are used by states to pursue their sovereign interests.

National interests could be common, complementary or conflictual. The current regime

of land rights governance reveals a conflict of interest between developed nations and

MNEs on the one hand and developing nations on the other hand. The MNE seeks

opportunities where the production costs are lowest and sales where the prices are

highest, resulting in repatriation of profits to the home country." The host country, on

the other hand, seeks to maximize benefits to its economy, which requires the retention

of MNE profits within the host economy. (Burt, 1997) Developed countries and

developing nations also differ on how best to tackle the issue of land grabs. Between the


11/23

8

right of the state to engage in contractual agreement, and that of the investor to a

favorable clime for the growth of his investment lies human rights issues amongst other

issues such as environmental sustainability and food security. We shall focus on Human

rights as a major issue arising out of land grabs before moving on to discuss how the

phenomenon is to be addressed.

4.0. HUMAN RIGHTS CONCERNS AS A CAUSE OF CURRENT TREND IN GLOBALLAND RUSH

Human rights concerns and their protection guaranteed by numerous international

legal instruments are a partial cause of the current trend in global land rush and it is

only by focusing on these can the issue of land grab be effectively controlled. While some

reports (see Rullia M. C., Savioria, A., and DOdoricob, P.(2012) have hinted at possible

human rights violations by the government as fallout, most have neglected such human

rights concerns as a partial cause of the current trend in global land rush. While land

grabs are condemned because of the impact they have on the local population and the

environment, it does not change the fact that most land deals are legitimate.

Before the advent of human rights protection most land acquisition were based on

agreements between parties concerned or were based on the use of force, i.e., conquest,

annexation and occupation. Apart from the colonial era which saw the scrambling for

and partitioning of Africa and her vast resources by European powers, the Japanese

invasion of Manchuria in 1931 could be cited as a good example. The Japanese economic

presence and political interest in Manchuria had been growing ever since the end of the


12/23

9

Russo-Japanese War (190405).The Japanese population was growing and in a bid to

secure land for her people and also to gain access to natural resources such as oil,

rubber, lumber, etc its soil was described as possessing almost exhaustless fertility

amidst potential resources in agriculture timber and minerals. Following the Mukden

incident staged by Japanese army, Japanese forces invaded Manchuria, and established

a puppet government.

However, the Charter of the United Nations has frowned against unlawful threat or the

use of force against any sovereign state; other relevant instruments proscribe

annexation/occupation of foreign territory without consent as experienced in the Gulf

War. In response to Israels self-declared annexation of East Jerusalem, the UN Security

Council affirmed that acquisition of territory by annexation is forbidden and that the

Israeli law declaring East Jerusalem annexed therefore is null and void. Similar

considerations were voiced by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in its Advisory

Opinion on the Wall.

Thus as states are unable to scramble for territory and resources as was the norm before,

they have had to request the consent of the government affected, and this has been done

by acquisition of such territories by foreign direct investment. It is indeed a scramble for

territory because most of the produce is not sold in the country where it is produced but

is exported to the investors country to be sold. Thus, while the use of force was the main

tool of land acquisition in the past with different reasons put forward by the

governments involved, the new tool being used to acquire land resources is in the form

of finance provided by foreign investors and sovereign wealth funds.


13/23

10

Quite similar to what was obtainable in the past; it is merely weak governments that

have been victims of such land grabs. China and Kuwait were too weak to respond to the

land grabs and it was not without the help of the international community they were

able to get their lands back. Presently weak countries have fallen victims of the rush for

land. Mali for instance is characterized by a weak government struggling with an

insurgency. Congo is also experiencing a government which is faced with various rebel

groups including the Seleka rebels who invaded the Central African Republic and

overthrew the President. It must also be said that Congo is one of the poorest countries

in Africa. Thus, it is argued that the global land rush is prevalent in countries with weak

institutions, and structures where there is minimal regard for rights of citizens. In such

states administration of land rights and monitoring of such deals to ensure compliance

with accepted standards may prove abortive. Thus in as much as deals are transparent,

they may not be effective in monitoring or implementation. Moreover, most deals are

recognized after they have been concluded.

5.0. ADDRESSING THE ISSUE OF LAND GRABSWhile land grabs are condemned because of the impact they have on the local

population and the environment, it does not change the fact that most land deals are

legitimate. Acquisitions which respect the rights of the State, protect the rights of the

investor, and give attention to the concerns of the population is to be encouraged.

The best international legal document which addresses the issue of land grab with a

view to the protection of human rights is the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible


14/23

11

Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food

Security adopted by the Committee on World Food Security on 11 May 2012.

According to the FAO (2012):

The Guidelines were developed through a broad global partnership of international,

regional and national organizations of different types that work together to achieve

global changes in governance of tenureInadequate and insecure tenure rights increase

vulnerability, hunger and poverty, and can lead to conflict and environmental

degradation when competing users fight for control of the resources. The governance of

tenure is a crucial element in determining if and how people, communities and others

are able to acquire rights, and associated duties, to use and control land, fisheries and

forests(p.13)

The Voluntary Guidelines are not legally binding but carry a force derived from the

desire of states to create obligations through commitments which could become binding

especially when existing obligations of states in relation to the protection of human

rights are considered. In other words, they could be classified as soft law. (FAO, 2012)

The Guidelines serve as a reference point for set out principles and internationally

accepted standards for practices for the responsible governance of tenure. They provide

a framework that States can use when developing their own strategies, policies,

legislation, programmes and activities The Guidelines are also intended to contribute

to achieving sustainable livelihoods, social stability, housing security, rural

development, environmental protection, and sustainable social and economic


15/23

12

development. The Guidelines are meant to benefit all people in all countries, although

there is an emphasis on vulnerable and marginalized people. (FAO, 2012)

However, one may also notice the conflict of interest between mainly the developed

countries and the developing countries in developing the right approach to land

governance. As of June 2013, the G-8 adopted an initiative on transparency which is

more or less a reflection of their interests in the land based regime. The approach of the

G-8 is to ensure transparency and encourage promotion of legitimate deals through

increased access to land resources in developed countries. Thus according to the G8:-

Lackof transparency around land deals can create a barrier to responsible investment,

weaken livelihoods and ignore rights of local communities, create space for corruption

and money laundering, reduce space for legitimate business activityEncouraging

responsible and sustainable investment in land is essential for economic growth and

food security.(UK government, 2013)

However, such move has been condemned by various NGOs and Civil society groups

who see the move as a ploy to ensure unrestricted access to natural resources and

markets. According to a report, the G8 program of action also known as the alliance

ensures unrestricted access for multinational companies and to access cash in form of

donor funding from such countries, and governments have had to make far reaching

changes to their land seed and farming policies not minding the displacement of

livelihoods and food security of communities. For instance in January 2012,

approximately 70,000 indigenous people that were in the Gambella region in Ethiopia

were forcefully evicted/relocated under a villagization program to new villages that lack


16/23

13

adequate food, farmland, healthcare, and educational facilities. (Human Rights Watch,

2012).

Another instance was in the mid 1970s when Cte d'Ivoire was self-sufficient in rice, but

under pressure from international donors, the national rice company was privatized,

public support for production was dismantled and the market was opened up to

imports. Within two decades, two thirds of the rice consumed in the country came from

Asia. These imports generated immense profits for the handful of international grain

traders and powerful local businessmen who dominate the market. Yet they've been

deadly for local production. There are no policy commitments in the framework for

Ethiopia or any of the other countries involved to protect peasants and pastoralists

from the growing number of land grabs taking place. (Al-Jazeera, 16 September 2012)

According to the UN's Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO, 2012), in low- and

middle-income countries farmers invest about $170bn a year three times as much as

all other sources of investment combined. In addition, about 70% of the world is fed by

smallholders farmers as opposed to corporate farming. Thus, there is an urgent need to

focus on protection of human rights, not just the rights of the communities. This is

because Human rights therefore provide standards for evaluating processes and

outcomes of transnational land acquisitions and, thus, for determining whether they are

ethically unacceptable land grabs. (Wisborg, 2013)

While business transactions and creation of legislation governing contractual

relationships is mainly of domestic concern, issues of human rights are viewed with

greater scrutiny. It is argued that issues of forced displacement have potentialities for


17/23

14

conflict and might create situation of refugees not to talk less of destabilization of

regions which are economically fragile. A study by the Rights and Resources Initiative

says developing country governments that fail to protect the rights of those using

communally held land could spark civil unrest. (Guardian, 2012) Also according to the

CICR, the marginalization of indigenous communities during concession negotiations

and project implementation has resulted in high tensions around a number of FDI

projects. This tension has occasionally led to violence and other forms of social unrest,

which could feasibly lead to conditions that might threaten peace in the country. (CICR,

2011)

It has been argued that human rights capture important dimension of the values that

are at stake when we discuss or modify the land rights and land use of women, men and

children. (Wisborg, 2013) Various international instruments contain such protection.

For instance, the twin covenants on human rights provide that: All peoples may, for

their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to

any obligations arising out of international economic co-operation, based upon the

principle of mutual benefit, and international law. In no case may a people be deprived

of its own means of subsistence (ICCPR 1.2, and the International Covenant on

Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, ICESCR 1.2)

Human rights principlesparticipation, accountability, non-discrimination,

transparency, human dignity, empowerment and the rule of laware valid for

interventions in agriculture and food production (FAO 2007). Everyone has a human

right to own property alone as well as in association with others and not to be


18/23

15

arbitrarily deprived of this property (UDHR 17). ACHPR (14) confirms that the right

to property may only be encroached upon in the interest of public need or in the

general interest of the community and in accordance with the provisions of appropriate

laws. Thus, individual, family and community land rights may only be changed on the

basis of law that is consistent with human rights (UDHR 17; ACHPR 3, 14, 18).

(Wisborg, 2013)

The 1966 UN Covenants committed States Parties to creating an international order

that recognizes self-determination and free disposal of natural resources; protects

individuals against deprivation of the means of subsistence; promotes international

assistance and cooperation (ICESCR 2.1, ICCPR 1.2, ACHPR 20, 21); and reforms

agrarian systems (ICESCR 11.2). The Voluntary Guidelines require that all

programmes, policies and technical assistance to improve governance of tenure must

be consistent with the full range of civil, political, economic, social and cultural human

rights (1.1, 4.8). (Wisborg, 2013)

In focusing on human rights protection amongst other measures, international,

specialized and regional organizations have a special role to play in ensuring state

compliance with international obligations. The ADVIII recognized that:

Urgent attention is needed to: (a) entrench and recognize the land rights of local

communities in land laws and facilitate security of all bundles of land rights, interests

and claims, especially so for women and other marginalized groups; (b) strengthen land

institutions; and (c) monitor mechanisms for LSLBIs. Building institutions to improve

land governance can improve local land rights. This includes instituting transparent

contractual arrangements and modalities for their enforcementIt is important to also


19/23

16

examine matters related to human rights for local communities and social equity in

policy development and land governance. Issues that pertain to customary rights and

related governance institutions require special attention, especially since African

Governments are still in their early stages of implementing land policies that better

recognize rights of communities in customary land rights jurisdictions.(UNECA, 2012)

6.0. CONCLUSIONLand grabs are occurring on a large scale not just because of the uncertainties in

resource stability and food security but mainly because of the weak framework of

protection afforded communities affected, and also weak or non existing frameworks

of monitoring and administrative oversight of the implementation of such deals. States

and investors will continue to invest in overseas territory in the scramble for resource

control because it is in their interest to do so. The current efforts in developing an

effective framework to tackle the problems of land grabs merely reflects the interest of

states involved and thus a more effective approach will be to focus on issues of common

concern such as human rights, food security and also the environment.

Human rights concern is a key issue to be addressed if the problem of land grabs is to be

addressed. In the present global era of sovereignty and human rights protection, states

and international organizations and other stakeholders have a duty to ensure the

protection of these rights by ensuring the rights of communities and smallholders

farmers to their land are protected.


20/23

17

REFERENCE

African Development Forum (ADF-VIII) (2012) Land and Africas DevelopmentFuture: Governing the Risks and Opportunities of Large-scale Landbased InvestmentsIssues Paper 2 ECA/ADF/8/3

Al-Jazeera (2012) Counting the cost: Food for thought" 16 September 2012, available athttp://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/countingthecost/2012/09/20129167591879452.html

Anseeuw, W., L. Alden Wily, L. Cotula, and M. Taylor. (2012). Land Rights and theRush for Land: Findings of the Global Commercial Pressures on Land ResearchProject. (Rome: ILC)

Burt M. E. (1997), Developing Countries and the Framework for Negotiations onForeign Direct Investment in the World Trade Organization American UniversityInternational Law Review Vol. 12, Issue 6

CICR (2011) Smell no taste-the impact of foreign direct investment in Liberia NewYork: Center for International Conflict Resolution Columbia University - School ofInternational and Public Affairshttp://www.cicr-columbia.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Smell-No-Taste.pdf

Cotula L,Vermeulen S., Leonard R., Keeley J., (2009), Land grab or developmentopportunity? Agricultural investment and international land deals in Africa,London/Rome: IIED/FAO/IFADIIED) available athttp://www.ifad.org/pub/land/land_grab.pdf

Cotula L., (2007), Legal Empowerment for resource control: Securing local resourcerights within foreign investment projects in Africa, UK: International Institute forEnvironment and Development (IIED) ISBN: 978-1-84369-667-4

FAO (2012) Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land,Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Securityhttp://fao.org/nr/tenure/voluntary-guidelines/en/

FAO (2012), Voluntary guidelines on the governance of tenureat a glance available athttp://www.fao.org/docrep/016/i3016e/i3016e.pdf

FAO, (2012) FAO calls for farmer-centred approach to investment in agriculturehttp://www.fao.org/news/story/jp/item/165816/icode/

Future Agricultures (2011) Land Grabbing in Africa and the New Politics of Food, PolicyBrief 041 | June 2011 available athttp://www.future-agricultures.org/workshop-resources/doc_download/1427-land-grabbing-in-africa-and-the-new-politics-of-food
http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/countingthecost/2012/09/20129167591879452.htmlhttp://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/countingthecost/2012/09/20129167591879452.htmlhttp://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/countingthecost/2012/09/20129167591879452.htmlhttp://www.cicr-columbia.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Smell-No-Taste.pdfhttp://www.cicr-columbia.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Smell-No-Taste.pdfhttp://www.cicr-columbia.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Smell-No-Taste.pdfhttp://www.cicr-columbia.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Smell-No-Taste.pdfhttp://www.ifad.org/pub/land/land_grab.pdfhttp://www.ifad.org/pub/land/land_grab.pdfhttp://fao.org/nr/tenure/voluntary-guidelines/en/http://fao.org/nr/tenure/voluntary-guidelines/en/http://www.fao.org/docrep/016/i3016e/i3016e.pdfhttp://www.fao.org/docrep/016/i3016e/i3016e.pdfhttp://www.fao.org/news/story/jp/item/165816/icode/http://www.fao.org/news/story/jp/item/165816/icode/http://www.future-agricultures.org/workshop-resources/doc_download/1427-land-grabbing-in-africa-and-the-new-politics-of-foodhttp://www.future-agricultures.org/workshop-resources/doc_download/1427-land-grabbing-in-africa-and-the-new-politics-of-foodhttp://www.future-agricultures.org/workshop-resources/doc_download/1427-land-grabbing-in-africa-and-the-new-politics-of-foodhttp://www.future-agricultures.org/workshop-resources/doc_download/1427-land-grabbing-in-africa-and-the-new-politics-of-foodhttp://www.future-agricultures.org/workshop-resources/doc_download/1427-land-grabbing-in-africa-and-the-new-politics-of-foodhttp://www.future-agricultures.org/workshop-resources/doc_download/1427-land-grabbing-in-africa-and-the-new-politics-of-foodhttp://www.fao.org/news/story/jp/item/165816/icode/http://www.fao.org/docrep/016/i3016e/i3016e.pdfhttp://fao.org/nr/tenure/voluntary-guidelines/en/http://www.ifad.org/pub/land/land_grab.pdfhttp://www.cicr-columbia.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Smell-No-Taste.pdfhttp://www.cicr-columbia.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Smell-No-Taste.pdfhttp://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/countingthecost/2012/09/20129167591879452.htmlhttp://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/countingthecost/2012/09/20129167591879452.html


21/23

18

Global Land Project (2010) Land grab in Africa: Emerging land system drivers in ateleconnected world, Copenhagen: GLP International Project Office, University ofCopenhagen

Graham A., Aubry S., Knnemann R. and Surez M. S. (2010)CSO Monitoring 2009-

2010 Advancing African Agriculture (AAA): The Impact of Europes Policies andPractices on African Agriculture and Food Security, FIAN

GRAIN (2010), Stop land grabbing now: Say NO to the principles of responsible agro-enterprise investment promoted by the World Bank; available athttp://www.grain.org/bulletin_board/entries/4224-stop-land-grabbing-now

GRAIN (2012), Squeezing Africa Dry: Behind every land grab is a water grab(Barcelona: GRAIN) available athttp://www.grain.org/e/4516

Guardian (2012), Global land grab could trigger conflict, report says

http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/2012/feb/02/global-land-grab-trigger-conflict-report

Hberli C., and F.Smith (2013) Land Grab v Food Security: Can Global RegulationCope?http://www.iisd.org/itn/2013/03/22/land-grab-v-food-security-can-global-regulation-cope/international institute for sustainable development

Held D., (2003), The Changing Structure of International Law: SovereigntyTransformed? in D. Held and Mc Grew A.G. (eds.), The Global Transformations readerCambridge: Polity) 162-76, also available athttp://www.polity.co.uk/global/pdf/GTReader2eHeld.pdf

Human Rights Watch (2012) Waiting for death available athttp://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/ethiopia0112webwcover_0.pdf

Jgerskog, A., Casco, A., Hrsmar, M. and Kim, K. (2012). Land Acquisitions: Howwill they Impact Transboundary Waters? Report Nr 30., Stockholm: SIWI

Jgerskog, A., Casco, A., Hrsmar, M. and Kim, K. (2012). Land Acquisitions: Howwill they Impact Transboundary Waters? Report Nr 30. SIWI, Stockholm.

Kapfer S. (2006), Multinational Corporations and the Erosion of State Sovereigntybeing a paper presented for Illinois State University Conference for Students of Political

Science, Illinois State University

Landesa (2011), Land rush: A Fact Sheet on Commercial Land Acquisitions inDeveloping Countries, Issue Brief available athttp://www.landesa.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Land-Rush-Issue-Brief.pdf

Liversage H. (2010), Responding to Land Grabbing and Promoting ResponsibleInvestment in Agriculture, International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD)
http://www.grain.org/bulletin_board/entries/4224-stop-land-grabbing-nowhttp://www.grain.org/bulletin_board/entries/4224-stop-land-grabbing-nowhttp://www.grain.org/e/4516http://www.grain.org/e/4516http://www.grain.org/e/4516http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/2012/feb/02/global-land-grab-trigger-conflict-reporthttp://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/2012/feb/02/global-land-grab-trigger-conflict-reporthttp://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/2012/feb/02/global-land-grab-trigger-conflict-reporthttp://www.iisd.org/itn/2013/03/22/land-grab-v-food-security-can-global-regulation-cope/http://www.iisd.org/itn/2013/03/22/land-grab-v-food-security-can-global-regulation-cope/http://www.iisd.org/itn/2013/03/22/land-grab-v-food-security-can-global-regulation-cope/http://www.iisd.org/itn/2013/03/22/land-grab-v-food-security-can-global-regulation-cope/http://www.polity.co.uk/global/pdf/GTReader2eHeld.pdfhttp://www.polity.co.uk/global/pdf/GTReader2eHeld.pdfhttp://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/ethiopia0112webwcover_0.pdfhttp://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/ethiopia0112webwcover_0.pdfhttp://www.landesa.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Land-Rush-Issue-Brief.pdfhttp://www.landesa.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Land-Rush-Issue-Brief.pdfhttp://www.landesa.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Land-Rush-Issue-Brief.pdfhttp://www.landesa.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Land-Rush-Issue-Brief.pdfhttp://www.landesa.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Land-Rush-Issue-Brief.pdfhttp://www.landesa.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Land-Rush-Issue-Brief.pdfhttp://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/ethiopia0112webwcover_0.pdfhttp://www.polity.co.uk/global/pdf/GTReader2eHeld.pdfhttp://www.iisd.org/itn/2013/03/22/land-grab-v-food-security-can-global-regulation-cope/http://www.iisd.org/itn/2013/03/22/land-grab-v-food-security-can-global-regulation-cope/http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/2012/feb/02/global-land-grab-trigger-conflict-reporthttp://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/2012/feb/02/global-land-grab-trigger-conflict-reporthttp://www.grain.org/e/4516http://www.grain.org/bulletin_board/entries/4224-stop-land-grabbing-now


22/23

19

Mabey N. and McNally R. (1999) Foreign Direct Investment and the Environment:From Pollution Havens to Sustainable Development WWF

Marchick D. M. Slaughter M. J., (2008) Global FDI Policy: Correcting a ProtectionistDrift, Council on foreign relations, CSR NO. 34

Merian Research and CRBM, (2010) The vultures of Land grabbing: the involvement ofEuropean Financial companies in large-scale land acquisition abroad. Available athttp://farmlandgrab.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/VULTURES-completo.pdf

Oxfam (2012), OUR LAND, OUR LIVES: Time out on the global land rush, Oxfamavailable athttp://policy-practice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/our-land-our-lives-time-out-on-the-global-land-rush-246731

Page S. Willem te Velde D., (2004), Foreign Direct Investment by African Countries

Overseas Development Institute, London, InWent / UNCTAD meeting on FDI in Africa

Pan African Parliament, (2011), Making Investment Work for Africa: A parliamentarianresponse to land grabs. South Africa: Report from the seminar on foreign investmentin agricultural land and water, organized by the Pan African Parliament in collaborationwith the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) and the Institutefor Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies (PLAAS). Available athttp://www.iisd.org/pdf/2012/land_grabs_africa_en.pdf

Schaffnit-Chatterjee C., (2012), Foreign investment in farmland: No low-hanging fruit,Deutsche Bank available athttp://www.dbresearch.com/PROD/DBR_INTERNET_EN-

PROD/PROD0000000000296807/Foreign+investment+in+farmland%3A+No+low-hanging+fruit.PDF

Smaller C., Mann H., (2006), A Thirst for Distant Lands: Foreign investment inagricultural land and water, Canada: International Institute for SustainableDevelopmentStanley L. (2008) Natural Resources & Foreign Investors: A tale of three Andeancountries, Working group on development and the environment in the Americas,Discussion paper no. 16

TNI Agrarian Justice Program (2013), The Global Land grab available athttp://www.tni.org/sites/www.tni.org/files/download/landgrabbingprimer-feb2013.pdf

UK government (2013) Guidance G8 factsheet: transparency (HTML)https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/g8-factsheet-transparency/g8-factsheet-transparency
http://farmlandgrab.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/VULTURES-completo.pdfhttp://farmlandgrab.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/VULTURES-completo.pdfhttp://policy-practice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/our-land-our-lives-time-out-on-the-global-land-rush-246731http://policy-practice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/our-land-our-lives-time-out-on-the-global-land-rush-246731http://policy-practice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/our-land-our-lives-time-out-on-the-global-land-rush-246731http://policy-practice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/our-land-our-lives-time-out-on-the-global-land-rush-246731http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2012/land_grabs_africa_en.pdfhttp://www.iisd.org/pdf/2012/land_grabs_africa_en.pdfhttp://www.dbresearch.com/PROD/DBR_INTERNET_EN-PROD/PROD0000000000296807/Foreign+investment+in+farmland%3A+No+low-hanging+fruit.PDFhttp://www.dbresearch.com/PROD/DBR_INTERNET_EN-PROD/PROD0000000000296807/Foreign+investment+in+farmland%3A+No+low-hanging+fruit.PDFhttp://www.dbresearch.com/PROD/DBR_INTERNET_EN-PROD/PROD0000000000296807/Foreign+investment+in+farmland%3A+No+low-hanging+fruit.PDFhttp://www.dbresearch.com/PROD/DBR_INTERNET_EN-PROD/PROD0000000000296807/Foreign+investment+in+farmland%3A+No+low-hanging+fruit.PDFhttp://www.dbresearch.com/PROD/DBR_INTERNET_EN-PROD/PROD0000000000296807/Foreign+investment+in+farmland%3A+No+low-hanging+fruit.PDFhttp://www.tni.org/sites/www.tni.org/files/download/landgrabbingprimer-feb2013.pdfhttp://www.tni.org/sites/www.tni.org/files/download/landgrabbingprimer-feb2013.pdfhttp://www.tni.org/sites/www.tni.org/files/download/landgrabbingprimer-feb2013.pdfhttps://www.gov.uk/government/publications/g8-factsheet-transparency/g8-factsheet-transparencyhttps://www.gov.uk/government/publications/g8-factsheet-transparency/g8-factsheet-transparencyhttps://www.gov.uk/government/publications/g8-factsheet-transparency/g8-factsheet-transparencyhttps://www.gov.uk/government/publications/g8-factsheet-transparency/g8-factsheet-transparencyhttps://www.gov.uk/government/publications/g8-factsheet-transparency/g8-factsheet-transparencyhttp://www.tni.org/sites/www.tni.org/files/download/landgrabbingprimer-feb2013.pdfhttp://www.tni.org/sites/www.tni.org/files/download/landgrabbingprimer-feb2013.pdfhttp://www.dbresearch.com/PROD/DBR_INTERNET_EN-PROD/PROD0000000000296807/Foreign+investment+in+farmland%3A+No+low-hanging+fruit.PDFhttp://www.dbresearch.com/PROD/DBR_INTERNET_EN-PROD/PROD0000000000296807/Foreign+investment+in+farmland%3A+No+low-hanging+fruit.PDFhttp://www.dbresearch.com/PROD/DBR_INTERNET_EN-PROD/PROD0000000000296807/Foreign+investment+in+farmland%3A+No+low-hanging+fruit.PDFhttp://www.iisd.org/pdf/2012/land_grabs_africa_en.pdfhttp://policy-practice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/our-land-our-lives-time-out-on-the-global-land-rush-246731http://policy-practice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/our-land-our-lives-time-out-on-the-global-land-rush-246731http://farmlandgrab.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/VULTURES-completo.pdf


23/23

20

UNECA (2010), Land Policy in Africa: A Framework to Strengthen Land Rights,Enhance Productivity and Secure Livelihoods, (Addis Ababa: AUC-ECA-AfDBConsortium) 22-24 November 2004, UNECA, Addis Ababa

UNECA (2012), Land and Africas Development Future: Governing the Risks andOpportunities of Large-scale Landbased Investments Issues Paper 2 Available athttp://www.uneca.org/sites/default/files/uploaded-documents/adfviii-land-issues-paper_en.pdf

Von Braun J., Meinzen- Dick R. (2009), Land Grabbing by Foreign Investors inDeveloping Countries: Risks and Opportunities, IFPRI policy Brief, Washington DC:IFPRI available athttp://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/bp013all.pdf.

Wisborg P., (2013), Human Rights Against Land Grabbing? A Reflection on Norms,Policies, and Power Springer Journal of Agriculture Environment and Ethics availableathttp://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs10806-013-9449-8.pdf
http://www.uneca.org/sites/default/files/uploaded-documents/adfviii-land-issues-paper_en.pdfhttp://www.uneca.org/sites/default/files/uploaded-documents/adfviii-land-issues-paper_en.pdfhttp://www.uneca.org/sites/default/files/uploaded-documents/adfviii-land-issues-paper_en.pdfhttp://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/bp013all.pdfhttp://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/bp013all.pdfhttp://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/bp013all.pdfhttp://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs10806-013-9449-8.pdfhttp://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs10806-013-9449-8.pdfhttp://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs10806-013-9449-8.pdfhttp://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs10806-013-9449-8.pdfhttp://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/bp013all.pdfhttp://www.uneca.org/sites/default/files/uploaded-documents/adfviii-land-issues-paper_en.pdfhttp://www.uneca.org/sites/default/files/uploaded-documents/adfviii-land-issues-paper_en.pdf

Documents

Sovereignty Human Rights and the Global Land Grab