The Political Economy of Large-Scale Land Acquisitions: Institutional Diagnostics

Abstract

In recent years, large-scale land acquisitions (LSLA) have altered land-based property rights in many agricultural systems. Promoters conceive LSLAs as a strategy to alleviate poverty through international transfer of capital and technology, increased agricultural productivity and new agricultural markets. In contrast, critics point to elite capture, loss of local livelihoods and cultural values, increased food insecurity and human rights violations as consequences of LSLAs. The many varieties of the “new rush for land” continue to challenge the development of middle-range theories that would explain divergent trajectories and outcomes of LSLAs. Thus, LSLA research is inconclusive about local, national and international governance options that would secure legitimate use and transactions of agricultural land in specific socio-economic, cultural and biophysical settings. A diagnostic research approach has been suggested as an effective way forward if a research field is in such a condition. A diagnostic method for LSLAs profiles the essential features of specific problems of LSLAs in particular contexts and seeks to devise governance options that match with specific LSLA problems. This panel contributes to the development of a comprehensive diagnostic method for LSLAs by gathering institutional analyses of LSLAs. Based on empirical, theoretical and research synthesis approaches, the assembled papers diagnose essential features of institutional deficits at multiple governance levels in LSLAs. The panel focuses on the following questions: (1) Which institutional, socioeconomic, cultural and biophysical factors account for divergent trajectories of contested rights in LSLAs? Which diagnostic patterns of illegitimate LSLAs can be generalized, which contextual factors modify general insights? (2) How do attributes of political and legal systems (e.g. human rights mechanisms, corruption) translate into trajectories and outcomes of LSLAs? (3) Which institutional similarities and differences characterise contemporary and colonial “land grabs”? How do the historical roots of colonial and pre-colonial common property institutions shape today’s conditions for LSLAs?