of over 2000 ha each have accounted for land transactions in the order of 22.7 Mha
since the year 2000. This proliferation of LSLAs has been invariably referred to as
the ‘land rush’ considering its magnitude and rapidity (Arezki et al. 2013). European
investors emerged as important players in this land rush, as they have been involved
in more than 300 deals, spanning almost 14 million ha of agricultural land, mostly in
SSA (Antonelli et al. 2015; Bracco 2015).
Many studies have discussed the different drivers of LSLAs in SSA, including the
(a) need to secure reliable and long-term food supplies (especially for land and/or
water-scarce countries) (Allan et al. 2013); (b) increasing demand for liquid biofuels,
especially in the EU (Antonelli et al. 2015; Bracco et al. 2015; Cotula et al. 2009)
and (c) speculation on the future prices of agricultural land (De Schutter 2011a) (see
Chaps. 2–3 Vol. 1, Chap. 5 Vol. 2). Actually, the production of agrofuels
1 and
flexible crops (i.e. crops for food, fuel and industrial purposes) has been a key driver
of both the realised and intended LSLAs pursued by many EU investors around SSA
(Bracco et al. 2015; Bracco 2015; Schoneveld 2014).
Some of the key factors that have created this conducive environment for the
surge in LSLAs in SSA include the high rates of return on capital for farming
investments (up to 50–60% per year) (FAO in World Agronomy and VM Group
2011) and the combination of favourable conditions, such as cheap land/labour and
guaranteed markets (Friends of the Earth Africa and Friends of the Earth Europe
2010). However, according to FAO (2011) of the land deals undertaken in SSA
during the early stages of the land rush, only 20% resulted in productive investments.
In fact by the mid-2010s, almost all of the biofuel investments related to jatropha that
drove to a large extent the land rush (Schoneveld 2014) had collapsed across SSA
(Ahmed et al. 2019).
Perspectives about the opportunities and risks associated with LSLAs in SSA
have been quite polarised. For example, some organisations have pointed to the
opportunities for economic and social development that may arise from the capital
inflows in the target local and national economies (World Bank 2011; German
Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development 2009). Other organisations have mostly delved on the negative negative effects of poorly operated and
regulated LSLAs on local communities and the environment (Hufe and Heuermann
2017). Many scholars have highlighted the need to maximise the benefits of LSLAs
while minimising their negative impacts (Allan et al. 2013; Cotula et al. 2009; Davis
et al. 2014; Jägerskog et al. 2012; Deininger 2011; De Schutter 2009, 2011a;
Matondi et al. 2011; FAO 2011) (see below).
LSLA can indeed have many different sustainability impacts in SSA, and thus
affect progress towards meeting the Sustainable Development Goals (Dell’Angelo
et al. 2017). On the one hand, LSLAs can boost economic growth, rural development
1 The EU Renewable Energy Directive (EU RED. 2009/28/EC) has set by the year 2020 a
mandatory national target of meeting 20% of a country’s gross final energy consumption through
renewable energy sources, as well as a 10% share of renewable energy in all forms of transport
(EU 2009).
138
M. Antonelli et al.
since the year 2000. This proliferation of LSLAs has been invariably referred to as
the ‘land rush’ considering its magnitude and rapidity (Arezki et al. 2013). European
investors emerged as important players in this land rush, as they have been involved
in more than 300 deals, spanning almost 14 million ha of agricultural land, mostly in
SSA (Antonelli et al. 2015; Bracco 2015).
Many studies have discussed the different drivers of LSLAs in SSA, including the
(a) need to secure reliable and long-term food supplies (especially for land and/or
water-scarce countries) (Allan et al. 2013); (b) increasing demand for liquid biofuels,
especially in the EU (Antonelli et al. 2015; Bracco et al. 2015; Cotula et al. 2009)
and (c) speculation on the future prices of agricultural land (De Schutter 2011a) (see
Chaps. 2–3 Vol. 1, Chap. 5 Vol. 2). Actually, the production of agrofuels
1 and
flexible crops (i.e. crops for food, fuel and industrial purposes) has been a key driver
of both the realised and intended LSLAs pursued by many EU investors around SSA
(Bracco et al. 2015; Bracco 2015; Schoneveld 2014).
Some of the key factors that have created this conducive environment for the
surge in LSLAs in SSA include the high rates of return on capital for farming
investments (up to 50–60% per year) (FAO in World Agronomy and VM Group
2011) and the combination of favourable conditions, such as cheap land/labour and
guaranteed markets (Friends of the Earth Africa and Friends of the Earth Europe
2010). However, according to FAO (2011) of the land deals undertaken in SSA
during the early stages of the land rush, only 20% resulted in productive investments.
In fact by the mid-2010s, almost all of the biofuel investments related to jatropha that
drove to a large extent the land rush (Schoneveld 2014) had collapsed across SSA
(Ahmed et al. 2019).
Perspectives about the opportunities and risks associated with LSLAs in SSA
have been quite polarised. For example, some organisations have pointed to the
opportunities for economic and social development that may arise from the capital
inflows in the target local and national economies (World Bank 2011; German
Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development 2009). Other organisations have mostly delved on the negative negative effects of poorly operated and
regulated LSLAs on local communities and the environment (Hufe and Heuermann
2017). Many scholars have highlighted the need to maximise the benefits of LSLAs
while minimising their negative impacts (Allan et al. 2013; Cotula et al. 2009; Davis
et al. 2014; Jägerskog et al. 2012; Deininger 2011; De Schutter 2009, 2011a;
Matondi et al. 2011; FAO 2011) (see below).
LSLA can indeed have many different sustainability impacts in SSA, and thus
affect progress towards meeting the Sustainable Development Goals (Dell’Angelo
et al. 2017). On the one hand, LSLAs can boost economic growth, rural development
1 The EU Renewable Energy Directive (EU RED. 2009/28/EC) has set by the year 2020 a
mandatory national target of meeting 20% of a country’s gross final energy consumption through
renewable energy sources, as well as a 10% share of renewable energy in all forms of transport
(EU 2009).
138
M. Antonelli et al.