Connect with us

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

How food and water are driving a 21st-century African land grab

Published

on

A woman tends vegetables at a giant Saudi-financed farm in Ethiopia.

An Observer investigation reveals how rich countries faced by a global food shortage now farm an area double the size of the UK to guarantee supplies for their citizens.

We turned off the main road to Awassa, talked our way past security guards and drove a mile across empty land before we found what will soon be Ethiopia’s largest greenhouse. Nestling below an escarpment of the Rift Valley, the development is far from finished, but the plastic and steel structure already stretches over 20 hectares – the size of 20 football pitches.

The farm manager shows us millions of tomatoes, peppers and other vegetables being grown in 500m rows in computer controlled conditions. Spanish engineers are building the steel structure, Dutch technology minimises water use from two bore-holes and 1,000 women pick and pack 50 tonnes of food a day. Within 24 hours, it has been driven 200 miles to Addis Ababa and flown 1,000 miles to the shops and restaurants of Dubai, Jeddah and elsewhere in the Middle East.

Ethiopia is one of the hungriest countries in the world with 2.8 million people needing food aid, but paradoxically the government is offering at least 3m hectares of its most fertile land to rich countries and some of the world’s most wealthy individuals to export food for their own populations.

The 1,000 hectares of land which contain the Awassa greenhouses are leased for 99 years to a Saudi billionaire businessman, Ethiopian-born Sheikh Mohammed al-Amoudi, one of the 50 richest men in the world. His Saudi Star company plans to spend up to $2bn acquiring and developing 500,000 hectares of land in Ethiopia in the next few years. So far, it has bought four farms and is already growing wheat, rice, vegetables and flowers for the Saudi market. It expects eventually to employ more than 10,000 people.

But Ethiopia is only one of 20 or more African countries where land is being bought or leased for intensive agriculture on an immense scale in what may be the greatest change of ownership since the colonial era.

An Observer investigation estimates that up to 50m hectares of land – an area more than double the size of the UK – has been acquired in the last few years or is in the process of being negotiated by governments and wealthy investors working with state subsidies. The data used was collected by Grain, the International Institute for Environment and Development, the International Land Coalition, ActionAid and other non-governmental groups.

The land rush, which is still accelerating, has been triggered by the worldwide food shortages which followed the sharp oil price rises in 2008, growing water shortages and the European Union’s insistence that 10% of all transport fuel must come from plant-based biofuels by 2015.

In many areas the deals have led to evictions, civil unrest and complaints of “land grabbing”.

The experience of Nyikaw Ochalla, an indigenous Anuak from the Gambella region of Ethiopia now living in Britain but who is in regular contact with farmers in his region, is typical. He said: “All of the land in the Gambella region is utilised. Each community has and looks after its own territory and the rivers and farmlands within it. It is a myth propagated by the government and investors to say that there is waste land or land that is not utilised in Gambella.

“The foreign companies are arriving in large numbers, depriving people of land they have used for centuries. There is no consultation with the indigenous population. The deals are done secretly. The only thing the local people see is people coming with lots of tractors to invade their lands.

“All the land round my family village of Illia has been taken over and is being cleared. People now have to work for an Indian company. Their land has been compulsorily taken and they have been given no compensation. People cannot believe what is happening. Thousands of people will be affected and people will go hungry.”

It is not known if the acquisitions will improve or worsen food security in Africa, or if they will stimulate separatist conflicts, but a major World Bank report due to be published this month is expected to warn of both the potential benefits and the immense dangers they represent to people and nature.

Leading the rush are international agribusinesses, investment banks, hedge funds, commodity traders, sovereign wealth funds as well as UK pension funds, foundations and individuals attracted by some of the world’s cheapest land.

Together they are scouring Sudan, Kenya, Nigeria, Tanzania, Malawi, Ethiopia, Congo, Zambia, Uganda, Madagascar, Zimbabwe, Mali, Sierra Leone, Ghana and elsewhere. Ethiopia alone has approved 815 foreign-financed agricultural projects since 2007. Any land there, which investors have not been able to buy, is being leased for approximately $1 per year per hectare.

Saudi Arabia, along with other Middle Eastern emirate states such as Qatar, Kuwait and Abu Dhabi, is thought to be the biggest buyer. In 2008 the Saudi government, which was one of the Middle East’s largest wheat-growers, announced it was to reduce its domestic cereal production by 12% a year to conserve its water. It earmarked $5bn to provide loans at preferential rates to Saudi companies which wanted to invest in countries with strong agricultural potential .

Meanwhile, the Saudi investment company Foras, backed by the Islamic Development Bank and wealthy Saudi investors, plans to spend $1bn buying land and growing 7m tonnes of rice for the Saudi market within seven years. The company says it is investigating buying land in Mali, Senegal, Sudan and Uganda. By turning to Africa to grow its staple crops, Saudi Arabia is not just acquiring Africa’s land but is securing itself the equivalent of hundreds of millions of gallons of scarce water a year. Water, says the UN, will be the defining resource of the next 100 years.

Since 2008 Saudi investors have bought heavily in Sudan, Egypt, Ethiopia and Kenya. Last year the first sacks of wheat grown in Ethiopia for the Saudi market were presented by al-Amoudi to King Abdullah.

Some of the African deals lined up are eye-wateringly large: China has signed a contract with the Democratic Republic of Congo to grow 2.8m hectares of palm oil for biofuels. Before it fell apart after riots, a proposed 1.2m hectares deal between Madagascar and the South Korean company Daewoo would have included nearly half of the country’s arable land.

Land to grow biofuel crops is also in demand. “European biofuel companies have acquired or requested about 3.9m hectares in Africa. This has led to displacement of people, lack of consultation and compensation, broken promises about wages and job opportunities,” said Tim Rice, author of an ActionAid report which estimates that the EU needs to grow crops on 17.5m hectares, well over half the size of Italy, if it is to meet its 10% biofuel target by 2015.

“The biofuel land grab in Africa is already displacing farmers and food production. The number of people going hungry will increase,” he said. British firms have secured tracts of land in Angola, Ethiopia, Mozambique, Nigeria and Tanzania to grow flowers and vegetables.

Indian companies, backed by government loans, have bought or leased hundreds of thousands of hectares in Ethiopia, Kenya, Madagascar, Senegal and Mozambique, where they are growing rice, sugar cane, maize and lentils to feed their domestic market.

Nowhere is now out of bounds. Sudan, emerging from civil war and mostly bereft of development for a generation, is one of the new hot spots. South Korean companies last year bought 700,000 hectares of northern Sudan for wheat cultivation; the United Arab Emirates have acquired 750,000 hectares and Saudi Arabia last month concluded a 42,000-hectare deal in Nile province.

The government of southern Sudan says many companies are now trying to acquire land. “We have had many requests from many developers. Negotiations are going on,” said Peter Chooli, director of water resources and irrigation, in Juba last week. “A Danish group is in discussions with the state and another wants to use land near the Nile.”

In one of the most extraordinary deals, buccaneering New York investment firm Jarch Capital, run by a former commodities trader, Philip Heilberg, has leased 800,000 hectares in southern Sudan near Darfur. Heilberg has promised not only to create jobs but also to put 10% or more of his profits back into the local community. But he has been accused by Sudanese of “grabbing” communal land and leading an American attempt to fragment Sudan and exploit its resources.

Devlin Kuyek, a Montreal-based researcher with Grain, said investing in Africa was now seen as a new food supply strategy by many governments. “Rich countries are eyeing Africa not just for a healthy return on capital, but also as an insurance policy. Food shortages and riots in 28 countries in 2008, declining water supplies, climate change and huge population growth have together made land attractive. Africa has the most land and, compared with other continents, is cheap,” he said.

“Farmland in sub-Saharan Africa is giving 25% returns a year and new technology can treble crop yields in short time frames,” said Susan Payne, chief executive of Emergent Asset Management, a UK investment fund seeking to spend $50m on African land, which, she said, was attracting governments, corporations, multinationals and other investors. “Agricultural development is not only sustainable, it is our future. If we do not pay great care and attention now to increase food production by over 50% before 2050, we will face serious food shortages globally,” she said.

But many of the deals are widely condemned by both western non-government groups and nationals as “new colonialism”, driving people off the land and taking scarce resources away from people.

We met Tegenu Morku, a land agent, in a roadside cafe on his way to the region of Oromia in Ethiopia to find 500 hectares of land for a group of Egyptian investors. They planned to fatten cattle, grow cereals and spices and export as much as possible to Egypt. There had to be water available and he expected the price to be about 15 birr (75p) per hectare per year – less than a quarter of the cost of land in Egypt and a tenth of the price of land in Asia.

“The land and labour is cheap and the climate is good here. Everyone – Saudis, Turks, Chinese, Egyptians – is looking. The farmers do not like it because they get displaced, but they can find land elsewhere and, besides, they get compensation, equivalent to about 10 years’ crop yield,” he said.

Oromia is one of the centres of the African land rush. Haile Hirpa, president of the Oromia studies’ association, said last week in a letter of protest to UN secretary-general Ban Ki-moon that India had acquired 1m hectares, Djibouti 10,000 hectares, Saudi Arabia 100,000 hectares, and that Egyptian, South Korean, Chinese, Nigerian and other Arab investors were all active in the state.

“This is the new, 21st-century colonisation. The Saudis are enjoying the rice harvest, while the Oromos are dying from man-made famine as we speak,” he said.

The Ethiopian government denied the deals were causing hunger and said that the land deals were attracting hundreds of millions of dollars of foreign investments and tens of thousands of jobs. A spokesman said: “Ethiopia has 74m hectares of fertile land, of which only 15% is currently in use – mainly by subsistence farmers. Of the remaining land, only a small percentage – 3 to 4% – is offered to foreign investors. Investors are never given land that belongs to Ethiopian farmers. The government also encourages Ethiopians in the diaspora to invest in their homeland. They bring badly needed technology, they offer jobs and training to Ethiopians, they operate in areas where there is suitable land and access to water.”

The reality on the ground is different, according to Michael Taylor, a policy specialist at the International Land Coalition. “If land in Africa hasn’t been planted, it’s probably for a reason. Maybe it’s used to graze livestock or deliberately left fallow to prevent nutrient depletion and erosion. Anybody who has seen these areas identified as unused understands that there is no land in Ethiopia that has no owners and users.”

Development experts are divided on the benefits of large-scale, intensive farming. Indian ecologist Vandana Shiva said in London last week that large-scale industrial agriculture not only threw people off the land but also required chemicals, pesticides, herbicides, fertilisers, intensive water use, and large-scale transport, storage and distribution which together turned landscapes into enormous mono-cultural plantations.

“We are seeing dispossession on a massive scale. It means less food is available and local people will have less. There will be more conflict and political instability and cultures will be uprooted. The small farmers of Africa are the basis of food security. The food availability of the planet will decline,” she says. But Rodney Cooke, director at the UN’s International Fund for Agricultural Development, sees potential benefits. “I would avoid the blanket term ‘land-grabbing’. Done the right way, these deals can bring benefits for all parties and be a tool for development.”

Lorenzo Cotula, senior researcher with the International Institute for Environment and Development, who co-authored a report on African land exchanges with the UN fund last year, found that well-structured deals could guarantee employment, better infrastructures and better crop yields. But badly handled they could cause great harm, especially if local people were excluded from decisions about allocating land and if their land rights were not protected.

Water is also controversial. Local government officers in Ethiopia told the Observer that foreign companies that set up flower farms and other large intensive farms were not being charged for water. “We would like to, but the deal is made by central government,” said one. In Awassa, the al-Amouni farm uses as much water a year as 100,000 Ethiopians.

• This article was amended on 22 March 2011. Owing to an editing error the original said that more than 13 million people in Ethiopia need food aid. This has been corrected.

Original Post: The Guardian

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

EACOP project triggers floods in Kyotera District.

Published

on

By Witness Radio team.

As the detrimental effects of the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) project intensify, hundreds of Ugandan communities are bearing the brunt of this colossal project. From forced evictions and displacements to the criminalization of project critics and now devastating flash floods, the urgency of addressing these issues is paramount. The suffering of local communities hosting the project has been exacerbated.

In Kyotera District, central Uganda, communities remain stranded as floodwaters rush into their homes and gardens, destroying their food stores and leaving families in despair. Residents attribute the cause of the floods to the ongoing construction activities related to the EACOP project.

Kyotera is one of the 10 districts that the project traverses to the port of Tanga in Tanzania; the others include Hoima, Kikuube, Kakumiro, Kyankwanzi, Gomba, Mubende, Lwengo, Sembabule, and Rakai.

The EACOP project, a 1,444km pipeline that will transport oil from Hoima in Uganda to the port of Tanga in Tanzania, has cast a wide net of impact. It has affected thousands of people, especially in local communities, leading to displacement, destruction of property and crops, and environmental hazards such as floods.

The development of oil activities in Uganda has led to several major projects supporting oil extraction, processing, and export. The proponents of these projects argue that they bring economic development and job opportunities to the region.

These include the EACOP project, the Tilenga Project operated mainly by Total Energies (with partners like CNOOC and UNOC), which covers oil fields located in Buliisa and Nwoya districts, and the Kingfisher Project, which is managed by the Chinese oil company CNOOC and is located on the southeastern shores of Lake Albert (mainly in Kikuube District). It focuses on drilling oil and setting up a central processing facility (CPF), and oil camps and access roads have been constructed to support these operations.

However, these developments have not left the communities the same. Instead of bringing only the promised prosperity, they have contributed to poverty, fear, and uncertainty among the local populations and have exacerbated the climate crisis.

It is also worth noting that activists who stand up to defend these communities face a different kind of suffering: harassment, surveillance, arrests, and even physical attacks. They have been criminalized under vague charges, often labeled as enemies of development for demanding transparency, fair compensation, and environmental protection.

For the communities in Kyotera, the construction of an access road leading to the EACOP camp in the Kyotera district, which serves as a base for project operations, blocked drainage channels, causing water to overflow into the neighboring villages.

The floods, which started last month in April, have now affected seven households in Kyakacwere village, Kakuto Subcounty, Kyotera district.

People’s houses and gardens are flooded, forcing them to look for alternative places to live, and several plantations, such as banana plantations, maize, and beans, among others, continue to be affected. The impacts have already caused dispossession to the affected communities and are likely to cause financial losses and food insecurity for smallholder farmers and their families.

Noeline Nambatya, a 47-year-old mother and a person with disability, shares her traumatic experience of waking up to a flooded house. “This has never happened to us. I found my house full of water in the morning, and several of my household items had already been destroyed. We want justice, we can’t stay in this situation. We were living peacefully, and now, because of the so-called investors, this is what we are reaping.” She revealed in an interview with the Witness Radio team.

The disaster left her home logged, her crops destroyed, and her livelihood distorted. Currently, the caretaker of eight faces immense challenges in providing for her family, including feeding and supporting them in school. The adverse situation forced her and the family to relocate to the nearby village of Muyenga.

Another affected person, Lukyamuze Paul, claims the floods have caused significant damage, including cracking houses and severely destroying crops. He holds the EACOP project responsible for the devastation, stating that when the access road leading to the EACOP camp was constructed, it blocked existing drainage channels, changing the natural water flow into people’s homes.

The environmental concerns arising from EACOP project activities, such as floods, continue to affect different project host communities. The problem was first experienced in Bulisa district in 2022 when Total Energies began the construction of the Tilenga feeder pipeline, resulting in floods that affected surrounding communities.

Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Ugandan ​​activist​ asks HSBC to put ‘lives before profit’ as campaigners target bank’s AGM

Published

on

Patience Nabukalu, who has experienced climate-related flooding, joins protestors from around the world to deliver a letter to CEO Georges Elhedery criticising the financing of oil, gas and coal projects.

At nine years old, Patience Nabukalu was devastated when her friend, Kevin, died in severe flooding that hit their Kampala suburb, Nateete, a former wetland. Witnessing deaths and the destruction of homes and livelihoods in floods made worse by extreme rainfall has had a profound impact on her.

She decided to try to bring about change – to do what she could to amplify the voices of those in the Ugandan communities worst affected by the climate crisis.

Now 27, Nabukalu is one of several young climate activists who travelled to London this week to attend what has been predicted to be the last in-person AGM held by HSBC. They will deliver a letter to the bank’s CEO, Georges Elhedery, urging him to stop financing the expansion of oil, gas and coal projects and harmful industrial agribusiness, and to stop providing money to companies that forcibly remove people from their homes to make way for such infrastructure.

“This is an opportunity to talk to real people, not just an HSBC office,” said Nabukalu, speaking before the meeting at the Intercontinental hotel. “I will be so happy to get the chance to hand over the letter and to ask: ‘Has HSBC measured the damage they have done by financing corporations that are driving the climate crisis?’”

A woman stands in front of a banner with the London financial district skyline behind her.
Nabukalu in London ahead of the protest. Photograph: Jess Midwinter/Action Aid

The letter refers to a 2023 Action Aid report, which identifies HSBC as “the largest European financier of fossil fuels in the global south”, channelling $63.5bn (£48bn) into fossil fuel activities between 2016 and 2022.

The letter to Elhedery, from young people all over the world, refers to HSBC’s plans, announced earlier this year, to review its commitment to scaling back its financing of fossil fuels.

“This has made something very clear: you value profit margins and boardroom agendas more than the lives of millions of people bearing the full brunt of your decisions,” the letter reads.

Environmentalists criticised HSBC after it delayed key parts of its climate goals by 20 years, and watered down environmental targets in a new long-term bonus plan for Elhedery that could be worth up to 600% of his salary. In February, the lender said it was reviewing its net zero emissions policies and targets – which are split between its own operations and those of the companies it finances – after realising its clients and suppliers had “seen more challenges” in cutting their carbon footprint than expected.

The activists’ letter asks “that you not only stand by your commitments to end your support for the fossil fuel industry in line with what the science requires, but also put an end to all lending and underwriting for corporations involved in fossil fuel expansion”.

Nabukalu will also urge the bank to stop funding corporations that are backing the east African crude oil pipeline from Uganda to Tanzania. Once constructed, the pipeline would produce an estimated 379m tonnes of CO2 over 25 years. The main backers of the multimillion-dollar pipeline are the French oil company TotalEnergies and the state-owned China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC).

Nabukalu, who has visited people living along the proposed route, said: “This pipeline is already causing damage even before its construction. Thousands and thousands of people have been displaced. They were promised land titles, but have none. Their livelihoods have been sabotaged. They cannot build agriculture, the water table is low, so they have little access to water.

“These people should be at the centre of the bank’s decisions.”

“We will talk to HSBC and ask them to stop financing fossil fuels that are driving the climate crisis,” said Nabukalu. “By continuing to finance TotalEnergies they are destroying our future.”

A report published in April found that those displaced along the pipeline’s proposed route had reported being inadequately compensated and rehoused.

Some western banks have declined to fund it after pressure from a coalition of organisations and community groups.

A spokesperson for HSBC said: “We follow a clear set of sustainability risk policies which support our ambition to align the financed emissions in our portfolio to net zero by 2050. We do not comment on client relationships.”

Source: The Guardian.

Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Over 1,000 residents in Uganda’s lost village at risk of extreme hunger

Published

on

What you need to know:

 In January, a joint team of soldiers and police evicted more than 400 local people who had been occupying part of the 64 square kilometre Maruzi ranch in Apac District. The most affected were actually residents of Acam-cabu Village.

Acam-cabu Village is no longer a recognised administrative unit in northern Uganda’s Apac District after it was erased from the map of Uganda following a land dispute.

 Since this area is now excluded from the list of existing villages in the country, a total of 1,040 people living in 180 households there cannot now benefit from any government programmes and projects.

 Mr Bosco Wacha, the LCI chairman of Acam-cabu, said the village disappeared from the map of Uganda around 2018.
“Since 2018, I have not been getting my salary and the people who have been isolated because of this confusion are suffering,” Mr Wacha said on the phone on Thursday, May 1, 2025.

 He also said all the households in the lost village are at risk of extreme hunger and starvation because the government has stopped them from engaging in any farming or economic activities.

“There is a severe shortage of food here because we have been stopped from farming. We are not able now to take our children to school and we lack access to healthcare,” said Mr Joe Olwock, the area chairman of the National Resistance Movement (NRM) party.

Mr Felix Odongo Ococ, Akokoro LC3 chairman, said that although the government doesn’t recognise Acam-cabu as a village in Uganda, during the National Population and Housing Census, 2024, enumerators went and counted people there.

Data obtained from the local leadership of this isolated administrative unit shows that there are 180 households in Acam-cabu. Of these, at least 14 households have one member each and eight households have eight members.

 However, a household regarded as number eight in the document that was reportedly sent to the Office of the Prime Minister (OPM) has the highest membership, standing at 11 people. This household is followed by number 158, which has 10 members, and household number eight has a total of nine members.

Dr Kenneth Omona, the Minister of Northern Uganda, previously said he would meet the leadership of Apac to try to iron out all issues affecting the community in the district.
In January, a joint team of soldiers and police evicted more than 400 local people who had been occupying part of the 64 square kilometre Maruzi ranch in Apac District. The most affected were actually residents of Acam-cabu Village.

The squatters, numbering over 1,500 occupied the said land around 1995. They had repeatedly ignored various eviction notices, saying the land belongs to their fore grandfathers.

In September 2015, the High Court in Lira issued an interim order blocking Apac District leadership from evicting the affected residents. The district then resorted to using the army and police to evict the squatters.
The Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF) has established a military detachment to man security of the area.

Source: Monitor.

Continue Reading

Resource Center

Legal Framework

READ BY CATEGORY

Facebook

Newsletter

Subscribe to Witness Radio's newsletter



Trending

Subscribe to Witness Radio's newsletter