The implications of large-scale land acquisitions on agrarian societies, a gender perspective: the case of oil palm development in Ghana.

Abstract

A global rise in large-scale land acquisitions (LSLAs) has increased expansive, mechanized plantation agriculture based on monocultures and prompted a shift away from diversified, traditional crop production. This has led to a reconfiguration of food production patterns with important implications for small-scale farmers, food security and sovereignty, and ecological change. Governments and international organizations, such as the World Bank, vigorously promote LSLAs for industrial agriculture because it is seen as the only way to feed the world and alleviate rural poverty. However, LSLAs are often promoted on lands labeled as 'idle', marginalized, or unused, which does not recognize the different forms of land-use by many farmers, especially groups such as women. This thesis investigates how large-scale land deals for biofuels development in Ghana have affected the livelihoods of smallholder farmers, particularly women. It contributes to the literature on the differential gender effects of land deals and analyzes the implications of LSLAs in Ghana for land access and control, livelihood changes, intra-household dynamics, and environmental variations. Using semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions, and existing literature, this research shows that women’s access, control, and inclusion in decisions over land is minimal. Women are particularly affected by land dispossessions (external and internal) and exploitation when selling their labour to make a living. Moreover, there have been changes in environmental conditions due to modifications in land cover and land use. An altered landscape from forest and food crop farms to hectares of oil palm monoculture has contributed to pest infestation and land degradation. Food insecurity keeps increasing as the little available lands have also joined the chain of monoculture. In all these situations, there is no intervention from the state and little or no support from social organizations in the oil palm sector as it is not deemed a priority for either. Unfortunately, there is not a strong presence of social movements to demand support or engage government and non-governmental organizations on the promised development that has eluded them. Therefore, these findings cast doubt on the state’s narratives that LSLAs for agricultural commercialization benefit local livelihoods and, hence, a viable strategy for rural development.