Search

Biofuel development was mainly promoted in several parts of Africa as an energy security or rural development strategy. Jatropha was the biofuel feedstock that received the most interest across Africa from investors. However, jatropha expansion gave rise to a number of contested issues, which produced conflicts, winners, and losers. Access to land was at the heart of several of these conflicts. Though some success stories of individual jatropha projects have been documented, the overwhelming majority of these projects in Africa have either collapsed or faced significant difficulties. Understanding the reasons behind the failure of the jatropha sector is an important gap in the academic literature, while the lessons learnt from failed projects could inform future policies and practices. This literature review synthesizes the key drivers of failure of the jatropha sector in Ghana as identified in the literature, and complemented through site visits and expert interviews. It identifies a number of reasons behind the failure of individual jatropha projects such as poor business planning, institutional barriers, limited community participation, unfair compensation practices, obstacles posed by civil society and unconstructive involvement of chiefs. The findings indicate the systemic nature of these problems as they often worked synergistically to catalyse the collapse of many jatropha projects in Ghana. Re-vitalising the biofuel, and especially the jatropha, industry is virtually impossible given the current challenges. This would require a renewed political interest in Ghana particularly to deal with the deficits of the land administration institutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Large-scale land acquisition in Africa has been the concern and the focus of growing global literature on land grabbing. The upswing in biofuel investments in Ghana led to large-scale land acquisitions by the private sector presided over by chiefs. This research investigates how chiefs, in playing their traditional roles in the acquisition of land and as arbitrators, were, in most instances, the cause and the solution to the ensuing conflicts in the various communities. Data was collected through interviews, use of questionnaires and focus group discussions. Some of the conflict issues include loss of farmlands or other communal lands, disagreements on the land acquisition processes, the quantum and mode of execution of compensation payments and the existence or contents of social responsibility agreements. Furthermore, the use of negotiation, mediation and courts by people in these communities relative to arbitration by chiefs is increasing. The Government of Ghana needs to strengthen the public sector land institutions and put in place stronger and binding mechanisms for resolving disputes arising from large-scale acquisitions of land to cushion the effect of the weakening confidence in the chieftaincy institution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The widespread acquisition of land for large-scale/commercial production of biofuel crops in Ghana has raised concerns from civil society organizations, local communities and other parties, regarding the impact of these investments on local livelihoods. This paper assessed the effect of large-scale acquisition of land for production of Jatropha curcas on farmers' livelihoods in Ghana. The study was conducted in 11 communities spanning the major agro-ecological zones and political divisions across Ghana. Methods of data collection included questionnaire survey, interviews and focus group discussions. Results show that several households have lost their land to Jatropha plantations leading, in some cases, to violent conflicts between biofuel investors, traditional authorities and the local communities. Most people reported that, contrary to the belief that Jatropha does well on marginal lands, the lands acquired by the Jatropha Companies were productive lands. Loss of rights over land has affected households' food production and security, as many households have resorted to reducing the area they have under cultivation, leading to shortening fallow periods and declining crop yields. In addition, although the cultivation of Jatropha led to the creation of jobs in the communities where they were started, such jobs were merely transient. The paper contends that, even though the impact of Jatropha feedstock production on local livelihoods in Ghana is largely negative, the burgeoning industry could be developed in ways that could support local livelihoods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Examines the interplay of land and water grabs in Ghana. • Explores the role of actors, power relations, and institutions in land-water grabs. • Land and water grabs were intricately intertwined. • Investors cleverly negotiated access to water resources in land deals. • Farmers were more concerned with land dispossessions than water rights abuse. Recent land grabs in Sub-Saharan Africa are influenced by both land availability and access to water resources beyond seasonal rains. However, much of the literature has treated land grabs and their attendant water resource appropriations as separate phenomena until recently. This paper examines the complex interplay of land grabs and surface water appropriations in large-scale plantation agriculture in two agro-ecological zones in Ghana. Using mixed methods (actor interviews, focus groups, and smallholder farmer surveys), three case studies, and theoretical insights from political ecology and the hydrosocial cycle, it explores the local conditions, actor interests, motivations, and power relations; decision making; and institutional lapses that enable land grabs to go in tandem with water resource appropriations. The results show that although land and water grabs were intricately intertwined, investor negotiations for land rarely included water use rights. Motivated by the notion of abundant, unused water, investors carefully negotiated access to water for irrigation, including offering social benefits in exchange for unrestricted water use. Uneducated traditional leaders were mostly oblivious to national legislation and institutional arrangements for land and water use and sometimes unknowingly sanctioned unlimited water use by investors. Farmers were more concerned about land dispossessions and agrochemical threats to water quality, not water rights abuse. The findings expose often-overlooked forms of water appropriations driven by land grabs and highlight their hydrosocial ramifications in the drought-prone savanna belt of Ghana. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]