Locking in Inequality

Feb 20^th 2013

• Submitted by Musole. M. Musumali

Development, both economic and human, is necessary. Africa is going through its most dynamic growth period in recent times. The continent has achieved growth rates above five per cent for most of the past decade, making Africa one of the fastest growing regions in the world today.

Massive investments of up to tens of billions per annum are being made in infrastructure on the continent (an estimated US $45 billion per annum for new construction and maintenance according to the 2009 flagship report Africa’s Infrastructure: A Time for Transformation by the Africa Infrastructure Country Diagnostic). However, these investments are triggering land conflicts. Projects such as roads, railways, airports, hydroelectric dams, and mines consume land and also open up previously isolated areas that are home to indigenous people, the poor and ethnic minorities. Closing the huge infrastructure gap that exists in Africa will mean that these conflicts will get worse if not managed well.

Furthermore, African lands are increasingly being snapped up by oil palm producers and other commercial agriculture giants, who are seeking new deals and buying up water rights. Millions of hectares of “empty” land are being increasingly sold to new players (e.g. the BRIC countries) looking to secure territories. In a quest to boost financial resources for development and especially increase productivity of the agricultural sector, African governments have welcomed these investors.

From February 11-12, 2013, the African Development Bank hosted a forum to discuss indigenous peoples and their development issues. Beyond the question of how to identify indigenous peoples on the continent, one issue which kept coming up was the problem of indigenous peoples being robbed of their land and losing access to natural resources upon which their livelihoods depend. The appropriation of land as Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) is no longer an unusual occurrence, but what is worrying is that in many cases the expected benefits are rarely realized and, even when they accrue, they do not benefit those whose land is being acquired. In many cases, the poorest of the poor are disenfranchised.

How can the range of stakeholders ensure investments in infrastructure and large-scale land-based investment (LSLBI) deals do not lock in inequality, and by extension unsustainability?

It has been estimated that approximately 98 per cent of the land in Africa is administered by Government (Rights and Resources Initiative, 2011). Many land policies have blanket statements along the lines of “all land is owned by the state”. In its efforts to promote good governance of land resources and in response to the challenges faced by African countries in this regard, the Bank, in collaboration with African Union Commission (AUC) and United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (ECA), established the AU-ECA-AfDB Land Policy Initiative (LPI) in 2006. The LPI aims to facilitate knowledge-sharing and mutual learning, foster political will, and to lobby for financial support for land policy formulation and implementation in Africa. The LPI has successfully developed the Framework and Guidelines on Land Policy in Africa (2010), which reflects a consensus on land issues, and serves as a basis for commitment by African Governments to land policy formulation and implementation.

To protect vulnerable groups from the negative externalities of development, the Bank is revising its safeguards policies: the ultimate objective is to facilitate good development through its operations beyond doing “no harm”. The various safeguards tools aim to avoid, minimize, mitigate or compensate for negative social and environmental externalities resulting from development interventions. For example, the Bank’s Resettlement Policy goes beyond providing for “replacement”, but aims to improve the circumstances of those displaced by Bank-supported interventions.

In many African countries the development landscape is complex, fraught with vested interests, inequalities, and perpetual struggles for scarce resources. Trade-offs are inevitable and the winners and losers are diverse. It is a fact that the growth of the last decade has been concentrated in specific sectors and has not been translated into benefits for those in or on the margins of poverty. How can these circumstances be changed to achieve win- wins on as many fronts as possible?