Timothy O. Williams Director, Africa Background on LSLAs in WA Framework for analysis of LSLAs & impacts Summary of unethical and inimical practices Economic, social and environmental impacts Factors responsible for negative practices Strategies for improving integrity in LSLAs

1. www.iwmi.org
Water for a food-secure world
Unethical and inimical practices in large-
scale land acquisitions in West Africa
Timothy O. Williams
Director, Africa
International Water Management Institute (IWMI)

2. www.iwmi.org
Water for a food-secure world
Presentation Outline
• Background on LSLAs in WA
• Framework for analysis of LSLAs & impacts
• Summary of unethical and inimical practices
• Economic, social and environmental impacts
• Factors responsible for negative practices
• Strategies for improving integrity in LSLAs

3. www.iwmi.org
Water for a food-secure world
Background on LSLAs in WA
• Ghana & Mali have in recent years recorded LSLAs for the
production of biofuels and food crops. Three LSLAs in Ghana
totaling 126,200 ha and two in Mali totaling 140,000 ha were
studied.
• Governments in the 2 countries view FDIAL as a way of infusing
capital, modern technology and infrastructure into their agricultural
sector to increase productivity.
• In Ghana where 80% of the total land area is held under communal
ownership, customary land owners equally welcome FDIAL.
• Questions remain about the transparency and accountability of land
deals.

4. www.iwmi.org
Water for a food-secure world
• Questions also remain about lack of consideration of
water dimensions of FDIAL. Specifically:
- water requirements of crops planted on newly
acquired large tracts of land;
- impacts of water use on ecosystem services;
- impacts on water rights and livelihoods of existing
land users.
Background on LSLAs in WA (contd.)

5. www.iwmi.org
Water for a food-secure world
A framework for analysing SES (based on Ostrom 2009)

6. Current state
Infiltration
Runoff
EvapotranspirationRainfall Rainfall
Runoff
Infiltration Irrigation
Evapotranspiration
Altered state
-
Current water balance FDI water balance
Groundwater
reserves
Relative Time (Years)5050
More capture and use of blue water with
green water management insufficiently
considered.
Opportunistic reliance on green
water use
Baseline
Mosaic of small fields,
diverse crops,
rangeland and forest
Intensive agriculture,
Monocrops, intercrops
Best case
scenario (C)
Worst case
scenario (B)
0
0
HydrologicalLivelihoodsEcosystems
Current land use Land use under FDI in biofuel and food production
Improved ecosystem
services. Higher system
productivity,
environmental integrity.
Greater resilience due to
investment in land and
water management
Best case
scenario (A)
Worst case
scenario (F)
Improved ecosystem
services due to
sustainable land and
water management
practices
Ecosystem services
linked to land and
water adequate but
degrading in some
areas
Tipping
point
Continuous
downward
spiral
Degraded resource base,
less bio-diversity.
Reduced resilience and
greater vulnerability due
to unsustainable land and
water management
Improving
natural resource
base: Soils,
water, biomass
Worst case
scenario (D)
0
Higher and stable
income due to
sustainable
intensification and
diversification
Displacement of poor farmers
due to land acquisition with
no recourse to wage
employment or contract
farming
Higher income from contract
farming & wage employment.
Reclamation of degraded
farmland and opportunity for
cultivation of intercrops
Low natural, physical and
financial capital assets, low
adoption of technology,
vulnerability to weather and
market risks
Best case
scenario (E)
Lower income, negative
livelihood outcomes due
to depleted capital
assets
Best case
scenario (G)
Worst case
scenario (H)
Livelihoods,EcosystemsandHydrologicalimplications
Low unstable income
due to poor
technology adoption
and access to markets
Low but stable
income due to
technology adoption
and improved access
to markets
Groundwater
reserves
HydrologicalLivelihoodsEcosystems
Relative Time (Years)
Loss of ecosystem
services due to poor
land and water
management
Irrigation

7. Surveys and Reviews
• Cohort groups surveyed: Investors, Regulatory agencies, Traditional Chiefs
and Smallholder farmers;
• Documents reviewed: Land lease agreements, Land and Water Policies,
Environmental Impact Assessments
1.
2. Biophysical Modeling
Hydrology model
Crop water use model
Methods
Computed catchment water fluxes e.g. surface
runoff and ground water recharge, that occur
outside conventional crop water use.
Estimated crop water requirements and irrigation
demands of biofuel (LSLAs) and food crops (current
land use systems with smallholder farming) over a
given period of time.

8. www.iwmi.org
Water for a food-secure world
Summary of unethical and inimical practices: 1
• Lack of consultation, transparency and accountability in
land deals by governments and land-owning families.
• By-passing of regulatory agencies by investors.

9. Government agencies that come
at a later stage into the land
acquisition process
1. Environmental Protection Agency
2. Ghana Investment Promotion
Centre
Government agencies with relevant
functions but usually excluded
from the process of LSLA
1. Water Resources Commission
2. Ghana Irrigation Dev. Authority
3. Ministry of Food and Agriculture
Primary actors/institutions
Regional
Lands
Commission
Traditional
Council
Land
Investor
Actors/Institutions typically involved in LSLAs in the study
areas in Ghana

10. www.iwmi.org
Water for a food-secure world
Summary of unethical and inimical practices: 2
• Poor and inadequate EIAs and EMPs that are below
international standards.
• Flouting of national legislation and operational rules in the
use and management of water by investors.
• Underestimation of implications of LSLAs for:
• crop water requirements;
• impacts of water use on ecosystem services;
• impacts on water rights and livelihoods of existing
land users.

11. www.iwmi.org
Water for a food-secure world
Summary of unethical and inimical practices: 3
• Narrowly defined contracts that focus solely on land
leasehold.
• Employment arrangements that fail to meet international
labour standards.

12. www.iwmi.org
Water for a food-secure world
Economic, social and environmental
consequences
• Displacement and involuntary loss of access to land and
associated water rights by poor land and water users.
• Direct negative impacts on household food security and
incomes of displaced poor people.
• Lack of assessment of water requirements of crops planted
and implications for other uses and users.
• Limited overall benefits to local communities from
production and processing activities associated with LSLAs.

13. www.iwmi.org
Water for a food-secure world
Causes of negative practices
• Wealth, power and information asymmetries.
• Multiple actors concurrently exercising rights under parallel
systems of land and water governance.
• Ambiguous and outdated land and water statutes.
• Poor policy coherence and coordination of activities of
regulatory agencies.
• Poorly resourced and ineffective regulatory agencies.
• Inability of poor land and water users to self-organize and
lobby for their rights.

14. www.iwmi.org
Water for a food-secure world
Strategies for improving integrity
• Alternative institutional arrangements that will allow FPIC
and coordination of cross-sectoral policies.
• Legislative reforms to recognize the rights of existing land
users coupled with legal literacy campaigns.
• Address poor funding and weak capacity of regulatory
agencies.
• Adoption of internationally agreed voluntary guidelines for
responsible land-based investments in Africa.
• Land deals are not considered as inevitable.

15. www.iwmi.org
Water for a food-secure world
Dank u wel
Merci beaucoup
Thank you