Search

The recent wave of large-scale land acquisitions or land deals, popularly called ‘land grabbing’ in subSaharan Africa, has provoked vigorous debate over the potential benefits and risks to local people, with results structured by complex policy and institu­tional context. Land deals present new develop­ment challenges and aggravate old vulnera­bilities, raising critical questions for investigation. Yet empirical evidence of impacts on local populations is limited, particularly regarding how land deals affect local people’s livelihood assets, strategies, and outcomes. Guided by the sustainable livelihood approach and a quasi-experimental design, I compare livelihoods before and after a land deal project and between an affected and a control community in southwestern Tanzania. I use household surveys, focused group discussions, and key informant interviews to collect data. The ANOVA analyses revealed that the project severely deterio­rated households’ natural, financial, and social capital and had far-reaching impacts on well-being in the affected community compared to the control village. The study recommends that African countries should consider (1) scrutinizing land deals and enforcing contracts, (2) conducting rigorous envi­ron­mental and social impact assess­ment, (3) strengthening customary land rights and reinforc­ing compensation policies, and (4) mean­ingfully involving locals in land deal negotiations. This contribution responds to the deficit in research on land deals’ impacts on livelihoods and well-being and lays the groundwork for future research.

Large-scale land acquisitions (LaSLA), otherwise ‘land grabbing’ in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), raise difficult normative questions the current literature does not sufficiently explore. LaSLA is asso...

This paper examines the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic on the existing health inequalities disproportionately affecting vulnerable populations. It explores the impact of COVID-19 pandemic response measures to “curb the spread” on informal sector workers in Ghana. In Ghana, like many other developing countries, the informal sector was impacted by a higher risk of exposure to the COVID-19 infection and the slew of pandemic response measures, for example, lockdowns and stay-at-home orders, as well as guidelines around social distancing implemented by their governments. Given the high level of precarity that undergirds work in the informal sector and the intersectional forces that contribute to and maintain their marginality—class, race, ethnicity, gender, religion, and geographic location—this paper creates a space for dialogue about the unintended consequences of pandemic response measures on the livelihood security of informal sector workers.

The recent wave of large-scale land acquisitions or land deals, popularly called ‘land grabbing’ in subSaharan Africa, has provoked vigorous debate over the potential benefits and risks to local people, with results structured by complex policy and institu­tional context. Land deals present new develop­ment challenges and aggravate old vulnera­bilities, raising critical questions for investigation. Yet empirical evidence of impacts on local populations is limited, particularly regarding how land deals affect local people’s livelihood assets, strategies, and outcomes. Guided by the sustainable livelihood approach and a quasi-experimental design, I compare livelihoods before and after a land deal project and between an affected and a control community in southwestern Tanzania. I use household surveys, focused group discussions, and key informant interviews to collect data. The ANOVA analyses revealed that the project severely deterio­rated households’ natural, financial, and social capital and had far-reaching impacts on well-being in the affected community compared to the control village. The study recommends that African countries should consider (1) scrutinizing land deals and enforcing contracts, (2) conducting rigorous envi­ron­mental and social impact assess­ment, (3) strengthening customary land rights and reinforc­ing compensation policies, and (4) mean­ingfully involving locals in land deal negotiations. This contribution responds to the deficit in research on land deals’ impacts on livelihoods and well-being and lays the groundwork for future research.

Large-scale land acquisition projects by foreign investors, also known as “land grabbing,” raise difficult questions about the processes of valuing land in Sub-Saharan Africa that the current literature does not sufficiently explore. Land acquisitions can help developing countries like Tanzania achieve their economic and development goals. Nonetheless, it can also threaten local livelihoods and well-being due to displacement, lack of access to natural capital, and conflicts between land users. Empirical evidence is limited on how local contexts affect the recognition and incorporation of multiple values that people hold about land into decisions on land acquisition projects in Tanzania. Plural valuation (PV) is needed to design more comprehensive and deliberative policy instruments that enhance nature’s contributions to people. This empirical study uses sociocultural valuation approaches to assess the diverse values of land in the Bagamoyo district of Tanzania, impacts of EcoEnergy land acquisition project on local livelihoods, and contextual factors that enable or hinder incorporating PV into decisions. The findings suggest that synergies and conflicting values of land exist, and PV can serve as a negotiation support tool to reconcile the differences and land conflicts. The success of PV relies on the (1) extent of partnership and participation, (2) design of asset valuation process, (3) stakeholder goals, and (4) sociopolitical context. Currently, the risks of land acquisition projects outweigh the benefits to people in rural Tanzania. However, to realize the sustainable and equitable flow of the contributions of land to Tanzanians, the government should consider improving the valuation processes by (i) fostering recognition of neglected voices and marginalized people, (ii) rectifying power imbalances and injustices that result from current land valuation processes, (iii) reinforcing customary land rights and compensation policies, and (iv) adhering to the principle of free, prior, and informed consent.