Connect with us

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Industrial plantations: stop endangering local farmers, Indigenous knowledge, and food system models – land-grab victims

Published

on

By Witness Radio Team.

Emotions, tears, and testimonies exposing the dark side of industrial agriculture rocked activities to mark the International Day of Struggle against industrial plantations 2024 celebrations in Uganda.

The day, celebrated in Uganda for the first time, began with a live radio talk show on Witness Radio, broadcast in the local dialect. Leaders of communities affected by industrial plantations in Uganda, under their umbrella organization—the Informal Alliance for Communities Affected by Irresponsible Land-Based Investments—shared harrowing accounts of forced evictions, lack of compensation, and broken promises by industrial plantation investors, all of which have escalated poverty and worsened the hunger crisis.

The Ugandan Alliance united with global informal alliances to collectively resist the rapid expansion of industrial plantations. Together, they resist increasing irresponsible land-based investments, threatening local communities’ human rights and destroying the environment. The day is commemorated every September 21st of the year.

Ugandan smallholder farmers are hugely under attack as their lands are being grabbed for large-scale industrial plantations despite being among the world’s largest food producers.

The 2021 report by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), titled “Which farms feed the world and has farmland become more concentrated?”, revealed that small-scale farmers produce up to 70%- 80% of the world’s food and contribute nearly a third of the global food supply.

During the one-hour radio program, the Alliance leaders representing Kiryandongo communities revealed that investors illegally evicted them to make way for coffee, maize, soya, and sugar cane plantations; Kalangala communities are victims of palm oil plantations; and Mubende communities are victims of carbon offset tree plantations, among other communities. They revealed that their communities were dumped in abject poverty while the industrial plantations made huge profits after forceful evictions.

“Millions of Ugandans have been brutally evicted for profit. They have not been compensated or resettled, and what is replacing their lands are plantations that serve no purpose to the common person since most the crops in the plantations serve an international market.” Akiteng Stella, the Informal Alliance Chairperson, was evicted from her land in Kiryandongo to make way for sugarcane plantations.

Akiteng added that people who once grew their food crops on fertile lands have been reduced to paupers in their own countries, as they no longer have land to farm.

“Ideally, there are many challenges facing these communities, and now their only means of survival is working on the investors’ plantations. So, you wonder how a former landlord earning millions of Uganda shillings each season from their land can be reduced to a casual laborer to earn a monthly salary of nearly 200,000/: Uganda shillings? Is that true development or simply profiting off our land and workforce?”

Currently, big corporations are promoting large-scale industrial agriculture, backed by significant funding from entities like the World Bank, claiming it’s the way to go for food security and climate protection.

While doing so, they have received criticism that their businesses are doing the opposite. Recently, African faith leaders, alongside hundreds of civil society and farmer groups, revealed that industrialized plantations had done more harm than good, increasing poverty, exacerbating food insecurity, eroding local seed varieties, and degrading the environment across Africa. The faith leaders said that the promoted initiatives have increased dependence on expensive farm inputs, eroded local seed varieties, degraded soil fertility, and weakened farmers’ resilience to climate shocks like drought.

However, the expansion of industrial plantations serves only the interests of investors and governments, as many of these ventures are backed by influential government figures. For example, the so-called development that the New Forests Company claimed to have brought to the community in Mubende District can only be applauded by those who choose to disregard the realities on the ground.

Being evicted from fertile lands without compensation and abandoned in the wilderness feels incomprehensible to someone accustomed to actively farming their land and relying on agriculture for daily survival. According to its Senior Corporate Social Responsibility Programme Manager, Mr. Alex Kyabawampi, the company fully compensated the affected residents.

However, the leaders of the affected residents questioned what the company called compensation. Saying that even those who were allegedly compensated received land that was practically worthless, hilly and rocky terrain that yielded nothing, and to make matters worse, the residents were reportedly instructed to use the same land to plant more trees for the company.

“People are starving day and night. They resettled to a terrible place, and nothing could grow on it. Moreover, the land allocation was not done fairly—you find older adults being given land on top of a hill. How are they expected to reach it? People should come to the ground to witness our suffering,” Julius Ndagize revealed angrily during the radio program, adding that people are dying helplessly with nowhere to bury their dead, children are becoming malnourished, and families are being torn apart.

In the 2023 Global Hunger Index, Uganda ranked 95th out of 125 countries with a score of 25.2, highlighting the severity of the problem. Alliance leaders argue that this is the result of industrial farms. “Take, for instance, Kiryandongo, where over 35,000 people were illegally evicted to make way for industrial plantations. They could have contributed to food production if these individuals had been meaningfully engaged and empowered on their land,” Beryaija Benon, chairman of the Kiryandongo affected communities, wondered.

According to the World Bank’s compensation and resettlement guidelines, a person evicted from their land is entitled to a range of measures comprising compensation, income restoration support, transfer assistance, income restoration, and relocation support, which are due to affected people, depending on the nature of their losses, to restore their economic and social base.

Not only are people suffering, but the environment is also being harmed. For instance, Julius Ndagize, the leader of communities affected by New Forest Company evictions in Mubende, explained how the replacement of Indigenous trees with eucalyptus and pines has destroyed the environment. The loss of natural trees, critical for rainfall, has extended the dry season, delaying farming seasons and worsening food shortages.

“When these companies arrive, they destroy the environment. They cut down our indigenous trees, which contribute to rainfall formation, and replace them with trees that don’t support it. In Mubende, by July, we should be planting maize, Irish potatoes, and other crops, but nowadays, we can go as late as September without rain. In Kalangala, they planted palm oil trees near Lake Victoria, and these trees are sprayed with chemicals, including fertilizers. When it rains, runoff from the plantations flows into the lake, causing severe consequences for the lake and the people who depend on it,” said Julius.

Despite the hardships, the Informal Alliance continues to fight for the rights of affected communities. Their movement spans Uganda, mobilizing, sensitizing, and equipping communities with the knowledge to resist industrial plantation land grabs.

“We are reaching every corner of Uganda to mobilize and sensitize communities, broadening the fight against these land grabs. You have heard the stories of people suffering, and many more continue to face the same fate as a result of their expansion. We are urging communities to resist these land grabs,” revealed Nakato Priscilla, the Alliance’s vice chairperson.

She added, “As an alliance, they regularly hold meetings to evaluate their progress, educate people about their land rights, and assist in following up on cases, such as arrests by the police and in courts of law, to ensure that the law addresses the issues raised.”

Further, the Alliance emphasized that their movement is not against development or investors but insists that land acquisitions follow proper procedures. “We want investors to seek consent from communities, pay fairly for the land they take, and offer meaningful resettlement,” said Benon Beryaija, a member of the Alliance.

The Alliance urges the Ugandan government to compensate affected communities and that future investors use unoccupied land to avoid further displacements.

 

Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Carbon offset projects exacerbate land grabbing and undermine small farmers’ independence – GRAIN report

Published

on

By Witness Radio Team.

A new GRAIN research has revealed that carbon offset projects, often involving large-scale tree and other crop planting, contribute to a new wave of land grabbing in the Global South. The findings suggest that these projects, driven by corporate interests and international environmental agreements, are displacing thousands of communities and threatening small-scale farmers’ independence.

A report titled “From Land Grabbers to Carbon Cowboys: A New Scramble for Community Lands Takes Off,” released by GRAIN, an international non-profit organization supporting small farmers and social movements, highlights the scale of this growing problem. Since the signing of the Paris Agreement in 2016, the report identified 279 large-scale tree and crop-planting projects covering over 9 million hectares of land across the Global South, equivalent to Portugal’s size.

The projects are registered under major voluntary offset programs, including the American Carbon Registry (ACR), Climate Action Reserve (CAR), Gold Standard (GS), Verra (VCS), BioCarbono (BC), Cercarbono (CV), and Plan Vivo (PV).

The report claims that Africa has been the most affected region, with over 5.2 million hectares of the 9 million allocated to carbon offset projects. According to the report, this has led to a new form of “carbon colonialism,” with corporations and NGOs from the Global North using the lands of indigenous communities for their own economic and environmental agendas.

“There is a clear colonial dynamic at work,” the report reads. “Companies and big NGOs from the North are once again exploiting the lands of communities in the Global South for their benefit. For instance, much of the vast eucalyptus plantations managed by Brazilian paper giant Suzano, which is involved in three large-scale carbon plantation projects, have been taken from Brazil’s indigenous and traditional peoples.”

This new wave of land grabbing is compared to the 2007–2008 global land rush when hundreds of communities were displaced to make way for large-scale industrial farms. These same global giants are back, but with a different mission: securing land for carbon plantations.

Devlin Kuyek, a researcher with GRAIN, points out the deception at the heart of these projects. “Companies often persuade farmers to sign contracts that require them to plant and maintain trees on portions of their land. However, within a few years, these trees overtake significant areas of farmland that would otherwise be used for food production, causing devastating impacts on local food security and access to land.”

Since the 2016 Paris Agreement, carbon offset projects, primarily involving tree plantations, have led to increasing conflicts over land use and displacement of communities. The push for carbon credits through tree planting has also triggered what activists and researchers call “carbon colonialism.”

For years, activists and scientists have warned that carbon offset schemes, mainly through tree planting, would lead to surges in land grabbing, especially in the Global South. “These warnings are now proving true,” says GRAIN researcher Ange-David Baïmey.

The report‘s primary concern is the shift from communal land management to privatized land contracts. Large-scale plantations—often growing eucalyptus and acacia, species known for their environmental impacts—displace traditional land uses, disrupt ecosystems, and restrict local communities’ access to their lands. Farmers who participate in these schemes are frequently misled, receiving far less compensation for their involvement than initially promised. Payments for carbon credits often fall short of covering the farmers’ losses, leaving them in a risky position.

Under these contracts, farmers must provide proof of land ownership, which then transfers the rights to the carbon sequestered in the trees and soil to the project backers. While these deals may not forcibly displace farmers, they represent a form of control over the land that undermines farmers’ autonomy and limits their ability to use their land as they see fit.

Uganda has also become entangled in this new form of land grab. For example, the Swedish hamburger chain Max Burgers has been buying carbon credits from a project called Trees for Global Benefits, which was managed by the Ugandan organization Ecotrust in 2003. While the project claims to avoid displacing farmers by encouraging them to plant trees on their lands, the report reveals troubling realities. Participating farmers sign contracts requiring them to grow and maintain trees, receive seedlings, some training, and periodic monitoring in return for payments from the carbon credits sold to Max Burgers to offset their carbon footprint.

However, this arrangement has come at a cost. The report notes that this scheme has accelerated food insecurity and poverty among local farmers. An investigation by Swedish journalist Staffan Lindberg in Aftonbladet in May 2024 revealed that some farmers who planted trees for Max Burgers’ carbon credits have resorted to cutting them down for charcoal production, driven by hunger. The trees, initially planted on their farmland, have left them with little room to grow food.

Samuel Byarugaba, a farmer quoted in the report, shares his experience: “I used to be something called a model farmer. People came to me to learn about farming, and I was proud to show off our farm. We had enough food to feed ourselves and could sell the surplus. Now, it’s all gone.”

Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

Public development banks are a disaster to the Global Development Agendas – activists and CSOs.

Published

on

By Witness Radio team.

September is traditionally a busy time in Uganda’s farming calendar. Farmers are busy weeding their plantations, and cattle keepers rejoice as their grasslands thrive, providing abundant feed for their livestock.

A photo of a burnt grass-thatched house belonging to a community defender in Kiryandongo District.

However, this is different for the community land rights defender Kaliisa Joseph. Instead of enjoying the fruits of his labor, he is now in distress. On September 5th, 2024, Kaliisa’s home was set ablaze, and household items worth more than 1.5 million Ugandan shillings were destroyed. His kraal, which housed over 60 cattle, was also demolished by workers from Agilis Partners, a U.S.-based multinational grain development company in Kiryandongo District.

Joseph Kaliisa, a community land rights in the Kiryandongo district, has been actively engaged in mobilizing his community of more than 3000 residents to push back Agilis Company’s illegal land eviction in the Kiryandondongo district. His home has been repeatedly raided, his crops destroyed, and his animals impounded by the multinational company, which accuses Kaliisa and the people he defends of occupying the land illegally. However, information from Witness Radio indicates that the communities have legal rights to the land.

According to eyewitnesses, these events occurred on Thursday, September 5th, 2024, while Kalisa and his family were away grazing their cattle. Kalisa, who should have been reaping the benefits of his land, now finds himself unable to cultivate or graze freely.

“I can’t use my land as I used to,” Kalisa said. “Whenever I take my cows for grazing, they are seized by the company, and I have to pay 50,000 Ugandan shillings for each cow seized to get it back. Last week, they came and destroyed everything.”

Agilis Partners Limited is receiving multiple financing from different public development banks (PDBs). It has used these funds to displace local communities.

However, whenever the company receives these funds, there is usually a sharp increase in violent land evictions and cattle seizures in Kiryandongo, alongside widespread human rights violations/abuses.

Agilis Partners, owned by U.S. twin brothers Phillip and Benjamin Prinz, has continued to benefit from other funding sources, including the Dutch Oak Tree Foundation, DOB Equity, the United Nations Common Fund for Commodities, the U.K.’s DFID-funded Food Trade Programme, and Vested World.

Kalisa is just one of the millions affected by these public development banks’ (PDBs) funding for companies like Agilis. These communities face illegal evictions, escalating violence, and environmental degradation, all supported by PDBs.

A recent report titled Demystifying Development Finance by 100 Global South activists and civil society experts reveals how PDBs fuel human rights violations, environmental destruction, inequality, and debt in the name of development.

The 52-page report highlights how PDBs, including the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank (ADB), and the Inter-American Development Bank, are driving projects that harm people and the planet and are said to be holding a massive amount of countries’ debt based on a series of eye-opening case studies, data, and critical trend analyses.

According to the report, the available official statistics show that the most significant percentage of PDB financing currently goes to financial services, public administration, trade, energy, transportation, and infrastructure. A significantly lower but significant percentage goes to investment in social sectors such as health, education, housing, water and sanitation, and agriculture.

While some PDBs offer grant-based assistance, most financing comes through loans, often at high interest rates. Like Chinese PDBs, these loans sometimes come with shorter repayment periods. Even institutions like the World Bank’s International Development Association (IDA), which offers concessional loans to the lowest-income countries, are criticized for contributing to debt crises in the Global South.

In 2023, during the Finance in Common Summit (FICS), over 35 civil society activists from more than 20 countries came together to challenge the claims of the world’s largest development banks. These banks present themselves as champions in the fight against climate change and poverty, but activists argue that their projects often exacerbate the problems they claim to solve.

“Development banks are advocating for a bigger role in the global economy,” said Ivahanna Larrosa, Regional Coordinator for Latin America at the Coalition for Human Rights in Development. “But are they truly fit for this purpose? Unfortunately, the stories of communities worldwide show us that development banks are failing to address the root causes of the problems they claim to solve. We need to hold them accountable for this.”

The IFC’s involvement in projects like the Sal de Vida lithium mine in Argentina further demonstrates the problem. In the name of renewable energy, the project is displacing Indigenous communities and destroying fragile ecosystems. At the same time, local authorities, including the police and officials, align with the company to silence dissent by threatening and criminalizing local community leaders and the families living near the construction site.

The negative impacts of PDBs extend across the globe. In Kenya, PDBs have pushed for increased health sector privatization, leading to a divide between those who can afford care and those who cannot. Out-of-pocket healthcare spending in Kenya rose by 53% per capita between 2013 and 2018, deepening inequalities and hampering the country’s progress toward universal health coverage.

Continue Reading

MEDIA FOR CHANGE NETWORK

EACOP: Uganda sues to evict landowners standing in way of regional pipeline

Published

on

Works at the Tilenga Development Project operated by TotalEnergies. Some landowners object to what they consider forced evictions with inadequate compensation. PHOTO | IPS

Uganda’s government is in a legal tussle with 112 landowners who are set to be displaced by the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (Eacop) as low-value payment, absentee landlords and a complex landownership system in some parts of the country delay compensation, causing a headache to the project developers.

Because of this, a Ugandan court will on September 16, 2024, hear a case in which the government has sued 80 people, seeking to evict them from their land in three districts within the Greater Masaka region on the route of the Eacop, whose developers are racing against time to meet the timelines set for the country’s first oil exports next year.

This week, two similar cases were also heard featuring landowners in Hoima and Kyankwanzi districts, which are part of the 296km Eacop stretch in Uganda, where at least 32 absentee landowners and others who rejected low-value compensation pose significant delays.

Energy Minister Ruth Nankabirwa, while addressing the media in Kampala last month, acknowledged the 112 cases “under consideration for compulsory land acquisition due to issues such as untraceable individuals, landowner disputes, refusal of compensation offers, and lack of legal title.”

Eacop officials told The EastAfrican that the project is entering a critical stage to start laying the pipeline, with early civil works almost complete.

Works on the 12 main camp persons yards (MCPYs) and six pump stations are ongoing, while the coating plant in Tanzania was commissioned in March, and 700km of line pipe has already delivered in Tanzania.

“Early civil works are ongoing in both Uganda and Tanzania,” Ms Nankabirwa said.

“In Uganda, work has been completed at three of the five MCPYs located in Hoima, Kakumiro, and Sembabule districts, while work continues at the MCPYs in Mubende and Kyotera districts.”

Stella Amony, communication lead at Eacop Ltd, the special purpose vehicle that is managing operations of the $5 billion project, said the first consignment of coated pipe “is to arrive in Uganda this month.”

But the pace of clearing the 1,443km Eacop route has been slower and dispute-ridden on the Uganda side, which is the shorter strict of the corridor, with only 96 percent of project-affected persons (PAPs) in the country having received compensation, compared with 99 percent in Tanzania.

The pipeline corridor spans 2,740 acres across 296km in Uganda, with 3,660 PAPs, while in Tanzania, it covers 10,081 acres across a distance of 1,147km, with 9904 persons eligible for compensation.

As the hearing of these lawsuits seeking to evict the landowners kicks off, some of the affected people who were sued for lacking a legal standing or a representative to process their families’ compensation have blamed their woes on NewPlan, the firm that was hired to implement the Eacop resettlement action plan.

The line pipes, which will be used for the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP), are offloaded from a ship in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Photo | Courtesy 

Sarah Namatovu, for instance, says her family was sued for lacking a legal representative or letters of administration to the estate after the rightful landowner died, and this required processing of a death certificate, which the resettlement action plan contractor promised to pursue.

“NewPlan came to our home in 2018 and informed us that the death certificate we have was not fit for purpose. This is because the certificate was not issued by the National Identification and Registration Authority,” she explained.

 “NewPlan promised to support us to acquire the right death certificate so that we could process letters of administration and get compensation, but they never did. The next thing we heard is that we had been sued because we rejected compensation, yet we did not.”

Activists say the majority of the landowners are women, the elderly, and persons with disabilities, who could become homeless if the courts grant the government’s prayers to evict the PAPs, with the government to blame for their failure to receive compensation arising from a complex land tenure system in parts of Uganda.

For instance, Peter Arinaitwe, a lawyer who represents some of the affected people in court, explained that government years ago directed the Administrator-General to stop issuing certificates of no objection and letters of administration for estates under Buganda Kingdom.

“The affected estates are those under the Succession Register in Buganda Kingdom. Matters relating to those estates are supposed to be administered by the kingdom,” he said, adding that because of that directive, it has been difficult for some people in Buganda to obtain certificates of no objection from the office of the Administrator-General to process letters of administration.

According to minister Nankabirwa, the government proposes to deposit the landowners’ compensation in court, pending the processing of legal documents that would facilitate access to their money.

Ministry of Finance officials tour an oil well in Buliisa District. Some oil wells at both Kingfisher and Tilenga have been drilled and more will be drilled ahead of 2025. PHOTO/file    

It is understood that most of the people affected by the Eacop lawsuits fall under this category, and their lawyer argues that even if their compensation is deposited with the court, the families will not access it without letters of administration.

“If affected people cannot access their compensation, yet the Uganda Constitution of 1995 says that government cannot take possession of citizens’ property before compensation, then the government will legally and morally have no right to use the land taken from the families without compensation,” said Dickens Kamugisha, CEO of the Africa Institute for Energy Governance.

Continue Reading

Resource Center

Legal Framework

READ BY CATEGORY

Facebook

Newsletter

Subscribe to Witness Radio's newsletter



Trending

Subscribe to Witness Radio's newsletter