Land grabbing in Ian Baird Land grabbing is causing serious social and environmental impacts around the world. This article focuses on Laos and Cambodia to show that, rather than being a global problem inflicted on poor countries by rich Western nations and companies, local governments and investors are the real forces behind this damaging trend A large rubber plantation in Cambodia N CHINA TAIWAN BURMA Hong Kong Land over 400 m LAOS Chiang Mai LUZON THAILAND PHILIPPINES Bangkok Manila CAMBODIA Phnom Penh VIETNAM Ho Chi Minh City 0 South China Sea km 500 Figure 1 Map showing the location of Cambodia and Laos 16 MINDANAO I n recent years there has been growing concer n about t he soc ial and environmental impacts of what is called global land grabbing or the global land rush. What this means is richer countries buying up large areas of land in poorer countries, usually for growing food crops. It has been occurring in poorer nations in southeast Asia, South America, and especially Africa and has displaced local people and caused environmental damage. Large numbers of small-scale farmers and poor rural people, including indigenous peoples, have lost access to agricultural and forest lands which were their source of food. Instead this land is cultivated by outsiders who usually plant boom crops such as rubber trees, oil palms, cassava, sugar cane, soy beans, bananas and corn. As well as the impact on local people, deforestation and biodiversity loss have dramatically increased in many places as a result of the land clearing necessar y to plant these crops. People’s fundamental human rights have frequently Geography Review February 2017 Laos and Cambodia Understanding why it happens been violated because of these agricultural investments. The problem is occurring in a number of less industrialised countries, but this article focuses on Cambodia and Laos in southeast Asia (Figure 1). A global land grab? The global land grabbing meta-narrative (big story: see Glossary) first emerged in October 2008 when the non-governmental organisation (NGO) Genetic Resources Action International (or GRAIN), based in Barcelona, released a report entitled Seized: The 2008 Land Grab for Food and Financial Security. The influential paper described a global land grab that it blamed on: ■ governments of countries unable to meet their own food needs trying to gain control of land for food production ■ corporations and private and institutional investors looking for opportunities in the midst of a deepening financial crisis GRAIN’s findings were important, quickly gained acceptance, and helped raise awareness about a growing crisis around the world. But the report also presented an overly simplistic picture of what was happening. In order to understand the complexity of the story, and the fact that it is not all black and white, it is necessary to move from looking at it as a global problem and consider what is happening in particular places. Focusing on the ‘global’ scale of land grabbing has tended to hide other crucial factors, especially flows of capital in regions, and the roles played by national and local government bodies and private companies. We need to scale the focus down to more local areas. Laos and Cambodia are good examples of why this rescaling of the landgrabbing debate is required. The global land grab narrative produced by GRAIN does not explain much of what has occurred in these countries in recent years. Focusing on Laos and Cambodia Accurate statistics about the number and size of land areas acquired by private investors in Laos and Cambodia are difficult to find. In 2013, however, it was estimated that 2,600 land concessions and land leases had been given out in Laos, covering an area of 1.1 million hectares and amounting to about 5% of the country’s total land base. In Cambodia in 2012 it was estimated that 2.1 million hectares had been allocated to economic land concessions. A large proportion of the concessions approved in Laos and Cambodia have been for developing boom crops, such as rubber. The expansion of boom-crop plantations has led to widespread displacement of population and environmental destruction in both countries. The human suffering and environmental damage this has caused have been well documented, including by this author. Who is investing? However, large-scale plantation development in Laos and Cambodia has not been mainly financed by rich countries. For example, GRAIN suggested that investments in food production in Cambodia were being driven by middle eastern governments, such as Qatar, Kuwait and United Arab Emirates. But A smallholder family in Paraguay forced off their land by investors. Their plot (behind them) is now a soybean field and they live in huts by the roadside www.hoddereducation.co.uk/geographyreview 17 Glossary Boom crop A cash crop which has a high price for a short time due to global market demand. During the period when the price is high, there is an increase in the area being cultivated with the crop. Global land grabbing The acquisition of large amounts of land by richer countries, mainly for large-scale boomcrop plantations in poorer countries in the tropics. The land is used to meet food requirements in richer countries, and to provide new investment opportunities for investors. Global land rush An alternative term for land grabbing that has recently gained popularity because it emphasises the ‘rush’ mentality and practices often associated with land grabbing. Land concession An agreement between a government and a private investor that provides the investor with long-term access (between 25 and 99 years) to large amounts of land (often many thousands of hectares). Meta-narrative A ‘big story’, produced by activists, journalists, developers, scholars and government officials to explain developments. For instance, a familiar meta-narrative of our time is that ‘globalisation’ is an unstoppable process to which countries’ economies must adapt or risk being left behind. 18 Forest burnt for a rubber plantation in Cambodia the reality is that investments have come from neighbouring countries in Asia, especially Vietnam, China and Thailand, as well as other countries in the region, and also Cambodian investors. It is true that some of the products from these regional investments are ending up in Western markets, but not all of them. For example, about 60% of the natural rubber produced is being used to manufacture car tyres. While some of these go to Western countries, many are being sold within growing Asian markets. This fact has so far received relatively little attention. The role of government In addition, investments in plantation development are frequently only possible as a result of governance and policy decisions being made by the Lao and Cambodia governments. These governments need to be made more accountable for what is happening. Both countries have made it possible for investors to obtain long-term land concessions of up to 10,000 hectares each. They have turned a blind eye to investors who have created more than one company in order to bypass the rules. This enables the land grabbers to create even larger plantations, as subsidiaries of the same company acquire multiple concessions next to each other. For example, the Vietnam Rubber Group (VRG) and Hoanh Anh Gia Lai (HAGL), both Vietnamese companies, have both established multiple rubber concessions in southern Laos and northeastern Cambodia. The ability of foreign companies to acquire large land concessions is a relatively new thing. For example, before the takeover of Laos by a Soviet Union-aligned communist government in 1975, the maximum size of land concessions allowed for foreigners was a mere 5 hectares, certainly not enough to develop a large-scale rubber plantation. After communist governments were established in both Laos and Cambodia in 1975, foreign land concessions were at first prohibited altogether. However, since the 2000s both countries have adopted new legislation in order to facilitate large-scale land-based concession investments. The Lao government has referred to this process as ‘turning land into capital’. Although they were sometimes encouraged to do this by international development institutions, such as the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, and other large donors, the decisions to facilitate such investments have ultimately been made by national governments. These governments must bear much of the responsibility for creating the Geography Review February 2017 conditions that allow such destructive and unjust investments to occur. Local support and corruption The role of local investors, land and power brokers and local government officials has not received enough attention and criticism so far. This is despite the crucial roles that these people are playing in facilitating and protecting large-scale land investments, including those coming from local, regional and international players. Powerful local people, including politicians, bureaucrats, military and police officials, and businessmen, frequently use their political and economic power to ensure that investments are approved and later that they proceed without being disrupted by unsatisfied local people. Corruption is also frequently involved. In Cambodia most inter national land investments have partnered, either officially or unofficially, with local powerbrokers. The way these people operate has not been studied enough, possibly because it is hard for international researchers to understand the particular local circumstances and political environment and connections that allow these players to be successful. It takes knowledge of local languages, and connections with local Further reading eadin Townsend, J. (2012) ‘Development update: Land grabs’, GEOGRAPHY REVIEW Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 20–21. For rubber concessions by Vietnamese companies in Laos and Cambodia, see: www.tinyurl.com/gvxjy35 For an expanded version of the argument focusing on northeastern Cambodia, see: www.tinyurl.com/h6g4qkz politicians and business people, to understand the underlying hidden associations that are taking place. For the same reasons it is difficult for activists campaigning against land grabs to develop international campaigns and have any influence on these actors. Points for discussion 1 Analyse the role of national governments in encouraging and facilitating new large-scale land investments in southeast Asia. 2 Evaluate the usefulness of using ‘bigpicture’ or ‘meta’ narratives when examining global issues such as land grabbing and globalisation. Ian G. Baird is an assistant professor in the Department of Geography at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA. His research is primarily related to people-environment geography and is focused in Laos, Cambodia and Thailand. Key points • Large-scale economic land concessions, covering millions of hectares of land, have been granted to companies by governments in Laos and Cambodia in recent years for developing boom crops. • These land concessions have caused serious social and environmental impacts, including extensive displacement of small-scale farmers and other poor and marginalised groups of people. • This phenomenon has frequently been referred to as ‘global land grabbing’ or the ‘global land rush’. • While examining the global scale of land grabbing is important, the roles of regional, national and local players need to be examined more closely in order to understand the problem. Success in all your A-level subjects! Did you know we publish all these A-level magazines to help you get the grades you need? From as little as £3.75 an issue, each print magazine stretches your subject knowledge and gives you focussed topical content for your studies, in print and online! www.hoddereducation.co.uk/geographyreview Go to www.hoddereducation.co.uk/magazines for: All the latest information on each title ●● Simple ordering options, including subscriptions sent straight to your home ●● Alternatively, contact our customer services department direct by emailing subscriptions@bookpoint.co.uk 19