There is growing consensus that inequality is not only a key economic concern but also the greatest societal challenge afflicting humanity today. Last year, world leaders adopted the sustainable development goals (SDGs) which among other things prioritized the need to urgently address inequality. A study by Oxfam revealed that the combined riches of the world’s richest 62 individuals in 2015 equaled the wealth of 3.5 billion people - the bottom half of the world's population. This revelation ought to move world leaders to shift from rhetoric to practice and institute urgent measures to arrest inequality, which is undermining human progress, poverty eradication and sustainable development efforts. 

Land grabbing, a phenomenon that gained prominence in the last decade, is perpetuating glaring inequality to levels not seen before. As global trade in products relying on land resources grow exponentially, so do environment burdens, ecological distribution conflicts and related resistance struggles. The last decade has witnessed a skyrocketing demand for agricultural land, ushering in a new wave of commodification and financialization of land. More than 1,600 large-scale land deals have been documented so far, targeting over 60 million hectares. Tragically, these emerging land markets place land in the hands of those that can afford it, rather than those who really need it- the poor smallholder producers. 

Over 3 billion displaced by WB projects

In the period 2004-2014, World Bank projects alone economically or physically displaced 3.4 billion people. Further, a report by ActionAid reveals that the global land rush has resulted in a massive rise in the number of people in developing countries being evicted or denied access to their own land – sometimes in violent confrontation with the authorities – as big business moves in. These unwarranted displacements disrupt livelihoods and income sources for poor farmers, amount to violation of human rights, besides entrenching poverty and inequality: a further hindrance to equitable and sustainable development.

The tendency to view local communities as passive beneficiaries of proposed Investments on their land is quite misguided. Corporations, governments and donor institutions must recognize that local communities are first and foremost the primary investors on the land that they occupy. Therefore, as far as is practically possible, “States should consider promoting a range of production and investment models that do not result in the large-scale transfer of tenure rights to investors, and should encourage partnerships with local tenure right holders.” (art 12.6 VGGTs). Expropriation and involuntary resettlement should be the last and not first course of action.

Inequality in access to and control over land and natural resources manifests gendered impacts, often skewed in favour of men. Besides the collusion of the external forces, some communities have added to the afflictions of women by using religion and culture to deny women access to their rights. Thus, besides fending off external investors, women also have to put a twin struggle to assert their land rights at the family level: a struggle within a struggle. The following experience by Jewo Jallow, a  woman smallholder farmer from Niamina Demba Kunda, The Gambia, attests to this.

“When my father died, I was deprived of land inheritance due to the fact that am a woman. Is it a crime to be a woman?” As women, we take care of the family, take care of the children and we don’t sell our land anyhow in the rural areas. Give us our one and take your two as stated in the Quran,” She demanded.
 
Land laws and seed laws under siege

Growing evidence shows that the G8’s New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition Initiative, which aims to increase foreign agricultural investment, is enticing African governments to review national laws and policies  to make it easy to lease customary land to commercial investors and extraction companies, to the detriment of local poor farmers. Besides alienating the land, this initiative seeks to further increase corporate control over production resources such as seeds and fertilizers through review of national laws as is the case in Ghana. This is likely to exacerbate poverty and inequality as whoever controls the seeds, controls the food system.

States have a primary responsibility to protect and fulfill the rights of their citizens. Likewise, states have extra-territorial obligation to ensure corporations domiciled in their countries but run offshore investments respect human rights. Any undertakings that are likely to weaken governance systems and jeopardize the rights of citizens must be frowned at. Reviews are welcome, with the understanding that laws and policies are not caste on stone. However, utmost care must be taken to ensure revisions of public policies, laws and projects do not incentivize land grabbing, but instead prioritize and support the needs of small-scale food producers – particularly women – and promote sustainable land use. Olivier de Schutter (Former UN Rapporteur on the right to food) and civil society organizations opposed to the initiative have been urging the leadership council of the New alliance to have an exit strategy - a polite way to saying abandon the initiative and replace it with something else.

Rules must change if developing countries are to benefit from trade

Nature has been prodigally generous to Africa. However, amidst all the wealth, over 50% of Africans still live on less than $1.25 a day, according to the Africa progress panel. Unfair trade policies that are skewed in favour of rich countries and multinational corporations are to blame for the ever widening gap between the rich and poor. Filthy rich corporations wield their power over developing countries, arm-twisting them to enter into concessions that often favour their interests. This exploitative and unfair international trade regime partly explains why rich countries become richer, sometimes at the expense of poor people especially where corruption and bad governance prevail.

Corporations, rich countries and powerful individuals collude with government-supported actors to exploit the natural resource wealth, depriving governments of much needed revenue and denying rural communities’ access to their most important assets. Consequently, resource conflicts are escalating in many countries as a result of communities having lost faith in the stewardship of governments and corporations. With a properly wired fair trade architecture based on equality and equity, developing countries would not need aid or handouts but business partnerships that support transfer of skills and appropriate technology. Corporations must shun tax avoidance and pay their taxes if locals are to benefit from any investments in their land.

Change is beckoning, but more leadership is needed

The good news is that some corporate leaders are beginning to appreciate that seeking free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) from communities at the start of projects is good for business. It not only helps them secure supply chains for raw materials but also reduces reputational risk from being seen as unethical and bad neighbours; and reduces the growing financial risks associated with community conflicts, regulatory disputes, and project delays. In other words, building consensus with local communities provides corporations with the social licence - the legitimacy needed for them to operate successfully.

 “Land purchases which ignore the interests of local communities ...are both morally wrong and commercially short-sighted. Property rights in many emerging and frontier markets are dysfunctional to the point that ownership of land can be granted to an operator without the tens of thousands of people who live or depend on that land knowing about it.” Mark Bowman, the Africa managing director of SABMiller (one of the main corporate supporters of the G8’s New Alliance Initiative), said in 2014.

In conclusion, inequality is surmountable but world leaders must be prepared to ruffle the feathers in order to bridge the gap: commit to implementing the Tenure guidelines, regulate businesses to make them accountable to human rights due diligence, make corporations pay their fair share of taxes, pay workers a living wage; end the gender pay gap, promote equal inheritance and land rights for women; shift the tax burden away from labour and consumption and towards wealth and capital gains, and use public spending to tackle inequality. Further, pulling down trade barriers and aid conditionalities imposed on developing countries by the rich countries will go a long way in reducing inequalities. And these are the areas the bottom billion is looking for leadership from world leaders! 

By David Barissa
International campaigner at ActionAid