CTA Briefing – Ouagadougou, Oct. 1-2, 2010

Linkages between Change and Large-Scale International

Land Transactions

Madiodio Niasse, ILC Secretariat

• Established in mid-1990s as: Popular Coalition to Eradicate Hunger and Poverty, which became ILC in 2003

• A global alliance to promote secure and equitable access to and control over land for the poor;

• About 80 member organisations, including IGOs and CSOs (farmers’ organisations, research institutes, NGOs and CBOs);

• 20 CSO members in Africa (still growing…)• The phenomenon of large-scale land

transactions at the heart of the Coalition’s mandate

The International Land Coalition

I. Understanding the broader global context

Understanding the broader context of current LSLTs

Stone Age Early civilisation

Modern Era

Planetary phase

105 104 103 102

Organisation Tribe/village City-State; Kingdom

Nation-State Global governance

Economy Hunting-gathering

Settled agriculture

Industrial system

Globalisation

Communication language writing Printing internet

Characteristics of historical eras (Raskin et al. 2002)

Political economy perspective

• Acceleration (each stage shortened by factor of 10 compared to the previous)• Globalisation of the economy increased throughputs of nat. resources• Weakening of nation-state • Emergence of global governance actors and mechanism

Holocence

Anthropocene*Pleistocene (Ice Age)

Natural sciences perspective

Climate change**

* Human activity altering the planet on a scale comparable to major geological events (P. Crutzen)

** GHG (human-induced): Key determinant of current and longer term changing climate conditions

Chemistry, Geology

Climatology

Profound changes taking place require a paradigm change to understand what is happening to “land

Land

The global market

The Earth’s natural resources

Understanding the broader context of current LSLTs

II. Climate change as driver of LSLTs?

Structural Adjust. Progs in the Agriculture sector: removal of subsidies to small holder farmers;

sharp decrease of ODA & public invest in agr; market deregulation

Vulnerability to

volatility of

internal food

market prices

Role of CC/CV in the long-term build-up to LSLTs: case of Sahel and W. A.

Recent causal links : Biofuels as climate change mitigation measure (1/2)

• 1970s: Oil crisis Rush for responses to oil dependency

Promotion of biofuels: Brazil, US, etc.

• Late 1990s: Kyoto Protocol (1997): GHG reduction targets for 2012

EU Biofuels Directive (2003)

• 2006-2007:

(a) IPCC’s 4th Assessment Report;

(b) Gore: The inconvenient Truth

EU Renewable Energy Directive (2008): 10% Biofuels target for transport by 2020

Energy Security Climate Security

BIOFUELS

By mid- 2000 : 25 million ha devoted to Biofuels:– Brazil: 8-9 million ha for ethanol (mainly sugar cane)– US: 16 million ha for ethanol (mainly Maize)– EU: 3 million ha (all biofuels, esp. biodiesel from

rapeseed, ect.)– Other: exp. Palm oil (Indonesia); Soy (Brazil)

Recent causal links : Biofuels as climate change mitigation measure (2/2)

(1) 2007-08. Bad weather conditions poor harvest in key food exporting countries (Aust, Ukr)

(2) (5) Food price hikes

Immediate causal links: Role of climate in the 2007-2007 Food price hikes (1/2)

(4) Record high Oil prices

(3) (6) Freeze/ban of food exports in many countries(7) Riots

in various

big cities in

the South

(8) GLOBAL RUSH FOR

LAND

Food

Energy

Immediate causal links: Role of climate in the 2007-2007 Food price hikes (2/2)

Based on FAO, June 2008. Soaring Food prices. Facts and perspectives..

III. Magnitude and impacts of climate-related LSLTs?

Palm oil plantation, Indonesia (FoEE, 2010)

Magnitude of LSLTs and the share of biofuels

Magnitude of LSLTs:• GRAIN : Wake-up call• Madagascar/Daewoo• IFPRI: 15-20 million

ha• World Bank: +40

million ha in less than a year (press reports)

Share of biofuels in LSLTs:

• Pre-rush: 0.5% of cultivated land

Rush period:• World Bank: 21%

of the reported deals

• FoEE: 1/3 of land acquired in Africa

• IIED (4 countries): 50%

Selected cases of reported LSLA for biofuels in Africa (FoEE, 2010)

Impacts (Subject to controversies)

• Reduced dependency on fossil fuel

• Potential for mitigating GHG: 2nd and 3rd generation biofuels

• Recuperation of degraded land: Jatropha?

• Non-land based biofuels: diversified production systems at farm level

• Access to an expanding market

• Net contributor to GHG emission: 1st generation Biofuels

• Food insecurity, especially for the poor

• Pressure on water: risks of “water wars”

• Evictions and increased landlessness

• Risk of proliferation of GMO-based biofuels

IV. Way forward

Weak Governance

Strong Governance

Improving land & NR governance: focus at national level

Obs. The strength of governance: a key factor in the NR’s susceptibility of being swallowed by the global market

Kimberly Process Diamonds

Forest

Wildlife

Mining

Water

Forest Stewardship Council

CITES

EITI

WCD / WWF

Strengthening global citizen engagement & CSR

Obs. CSR & global governance seek to compensate weak governance at national level: Do we have better alternatives?

Gen

eral

in

stru

men

ts:

GC

; E

P;

IFI’

s A

cco

un

tab

ilit

y m

ech

anim

s

Global

governance

Addressing the land-based biofuels (1/2)• Invest in climate adaptation: Diversification;

agricultural/water infrastructure• Rethink energy security strategies with priority to:

– Options with minimal effects on food security: 2nd and 3rd generation biofuels?

– Options that do not involve land acquisitions

• Strengthen land/NR governance at national/local levels

• Consider relevance/effectiveness of global governance mechanisms (CSR, citizen engagement) to guide international investments

Addressing the land-based biofuels (2/2)• Brazil:PNDB (National Prog for Development and

Use of Biodiesel):– Establishment of a “Social Fuel Stamp” to involve family

farmers in the sector– Biodiesel processing plants to accumulate stamps on basis

of raw material (soybean) purchased from small farmers– Stamps rewards in tax exemptions

• Mali-Biocarburant (Jatropha): – Works with +4000 small farmers in 3 regions (contract

farming)– Famers’ cooperative (ULSSP) holds 20% of the shares of

Mali-Biocarburant

The Case for a multi-stakeholder dialogue

http://www.gwpda.org/photos/coppermine/thumbnails.php?album=13&page=2

Who wins from the “Trench warfare” logic?

What do we lose in talking/engaging with the other camp?

• You need courage to engage in a trench warfare• You also need courage to meet/talk to the other camp• Dialogue idea: a bet on the latter (Ref. presentat. ROPPA)

Thank you !

For more information on ILC: www.landcoalition.org