IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i2p1220-d1029898.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Smallholder Views on Chinese Agricultural Investments in Mozambique and Tanzania in the Context of VGGTs

Author

Listed:
  • Rebecca Pointer

    (Independent Researcher, Cape Town 7945, South Africa)

  • Emmanuel Sulle

    (The Aga Khan University, Arusha Campus, Ngaramtoni ya Chini, Arusha P.O. Box 499, Tanzania)

  • Clemente Ntauazi

    (Institute for Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town 7535, South Africa)

Abstract

Based on a case study in each country, this study documents the views of Mozambican and Tanzanian smallholders regarding Chinese agricultural investments and the extent to which investors abide by their legitimate land tenure rights as defined by the Voluntary Guidelines for the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Forests and Fisheries in the Context of National Food Security (VGGTs). The VGGTs offer guidelines to government on how to protect the land tenure of rural communities when land is being acquired for large-scale land investments. The study also assessed the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on smallholders. Due to COVID-19, instead of fieldwork, we conducted telephone interviews with 20 smallholders in Mozambique and 35 in Tanzania. The Mozambican case showed that even when land set aside for investors was not in dispute, smallholders still had unmet expectations, especially regarding investors’ corporate social responsibility activities. In the Tanzanian case, even though the land leased by the Chinese investor had been designated as general land, it had laid fallow for a long period, and smallholders had moved back onto the land, only to be displaced in 2017. Although smallholders’ views on the investment were mixed, the case underscored the need for government to assess current land use before allocating it to investors—regardless of how the land is classified and especially in areas where land shortages are creating conflict. The cases show that even if communities are consulted about proposed land investments, guidelines need to include clauses that allow for ongoing communications between investors, communities and government officials such that if communities are unsatisfied with the results of the investment, renegotiation is possible. Further, in the event of crises, such as COVID-19, investors should partner with communities and government to limit the extent of harm in communities as a result of the crisis.

Suggested Citation

  • Rebecca Pointer & Emmanuel Sulle & Clemente Ntauazi, 2023. "Smallholder Views on Chinese Agricultural Investments in Mozambique and Tanzania in the Context of VGGTs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-22, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:2:p:1220-:d:1029898
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/2/1220/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/2/1220/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wendy Wolford & Saturnino M. Borras Jr. & Ruth Hall & Ian Scoones & Ben White & Madeleine Fairbairn, 2013. "Indirect Dispossession: Domestic Power Imbalances and Foreign Access to Land in Mozambique," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 44(2), pages 335-356, March.
    2. Nerini, Francesco Fuso & Andreoni, Antonio & Bauner, David & Howells, Mark, 2016. "Powering production. The case of the sisal fibre production in the Tanga region, Tanzania," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 544-556.
    3. Abdul Malik Iddrisu & Alhassan Abdul-Wakeel Karakara & Evans S. Osabuohien, 2022. "Agricultural risks, the COVID-19 pandemic, and farm household welfare and diversification strategies in Africa," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2022-117, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    4. Natacha Bruna, 2019. "Land of Plenty, Land of Misery: Synergetic Resource Grabbing in Mozambique," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-16, July.
    5. Amanor, Kojo S. & Chichava, Sérgio, 2016. "South–South Cooperation, Agribusiness, and African Agricultural Development: Brazil and China in Ghana and Mozambique," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 13-23.
    6. Sérgio Chichava & Jimena Duran & Lídia Cabral & Alex Shankland & Lila Buckley & Tang Lixia & Zhang Yue, 2013. "Brazil and China in Mozambican Agriculture: Emerging Insights from the Field," IDS Bulletin, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 44(4), pages 101-115, July.
    7. Ian Scoones & Lídia Cabral & Henry Tugendhat, 2013. "New Development Encounters: China and Brazil in African Agriculture," IDS Bulletin, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 44(4), pages 1-19, July.
    8. Nicola Francesconi & Fleur Wouterse & Dorothy Birungi Namuyiga, 2021. "Agricultural Cooperatives and COVID-19 in Southeast Africa. The Role of Managerial Capital for Rural Resilience," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-13, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Scoones, Ian & Amanor, Kojo & Favareto, Arilson & Qi, Gubo, 2016. "A New Politics of Development Cooperation? Chinese and Brazilian Engagements in African Agriculture," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 1-12.
    2. Xiaoyu Jiang & Yangfen Chen & Lijuan Wang, 2018. "Can China’s Agricultural FDI in Developing Countries Achieve a Win-Win Goal?—Enlightenment from the Literature," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-22, December.
    3. Tamura, Yu, 2021. "Contexts behind differentiated responses to contract farming and large-scale land acquisitions in Central Mozambique: Post-war experiences, social relations, and power balance of local authorities," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    4. Xu, Xiuli & Li, Xiaoyun & Qi, Gubo & Tang, Lixia & Mukwereza, Langton, 2016. "Science, Technology, and the Politics of Knowledge: The Case of China’s Agricultural Technology Demonstration Centers in Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 82-91.
    5. Zanella, Matheus A. & Milhorance, Carolina, 2016. "Cerrado meets savannah, family farmers meet peasants: The political economy of Brazil’s agricultural cooperation with Mozambique," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 70-81.
    6. Gu, Jing & Zhang, Chuanhong & Vaz, Alcides & Mukwereza, Langton, 2016. "Chinese State Capitalism? Rethinking the Role of the State and Business in Chinese Development Cooperation in Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 24-34.
    7. Ha-Joon Chang & Antonio Andreoni, 2021. "Bringing Production Back into Development: An introduction," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 33(2), pages 165-178, April.
    8. Helena Shilomboleni, 2020. "Political economy challenges for climate smart agriculture in Africa," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 37(4), pages 1195-1206, December.
    9. Eve Bratman & Ted Auch & Bryan Stinchfield, 2022. "The Fracking Frontier in the United States: A Case Study of Foreign Investment, Civil Liberties and Land Ethics in the Shale Industry," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 53(3), pages 469-494, May.
    10. Woods, Kevin M., 2020. "Smaller-scale land grabs and accumulation from below: Violence, coercion and consent in spatially uneven agrarian change in Shan State, Myanmar," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    11. Nolte, Kerstin & Voget-Kleschin, Lieske, 2014. "Consultation in Large-Scale Land Acquisitions: An Evaluation of Three Cases in Mali," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 654-668.
    12. Varga, Mihai, 2022. "Getting the “basics”? The World Bank’s narrative construction of poverty reduction in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    13. Akrong, Rexford & Kotu, Bekele Hundie, 2021. "Economic Analysis of Youth Participation in Agripreneurship in Benin," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315090, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. David Sedik & Fujin Yi & Richard T. Gudaj, 2020. "Implications of Chinese Farmers in the Russian Far East," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 79(5), pages 1615-1622, November.
    15. Shankland, Alex & Gonçalves, Euclides, 2016. "Imagining Agricultural Development in South–South Cooperation: The Contestation and Transformation of ProSAVANA," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 35-46.
    16. Tugendhat, Henry & Alemu, Dawit, 2016. "Chinese Agricultural Training Courses for African Officials: Between Power and Partnerships," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 71-81.
    17. Borras, Saturnino M. & Franco, Jennifer C. & Moreda, Tsegaye & Xu, Yunan & Bruna, Natacha & Afewerk Demena, Binyam, 2022. "The value of so-called ‘failed’ large-scale land acquisitions," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    18. Murtah Shannon & Kei Otsuki & Annelies Zoomers & Mayke Kaag, 2018. "Sustainable Urbanization on Occupied Land? The Politics of Infrastructure Development and Resettlement in Beira City, Mozambique," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-18, September.
    19. Kronenburg García, Angela & Meyfroidt, Patrick & Abeygunawardane, Dilini & Sitoe, Almeida A., 2022. "Waves and legacies: The making of an investment frontier in Niassa, Mozambique," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 27(1).
    20. Bin Yang & Jun He, 2021. "Global Land Grabbing: A Critical Review of Case Studies across the World," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-19, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:2:p:1220-:d:1029898. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.