Marc Edelman

Resistance, acquiescence or incorporation? An introduction to land grabbing and political reactions ‘from below’

Political reactions ‘from below’ to global land grabbing have been vastly more varied and complex than is usually assumed. This essay introduces a collection of ground-breaking studies that discuss responses that range from various types of organized and everyday resistance to demands for incorporation or for better terms of incorporation into land deals. Initiatives ‘from below’ in response to land deals have involved local and transnational alliances and the use of legal and extra-legal methods, and have brought victories and defeats. The relevance of political reactions to land grabbing is discussed in light of theories of social movements and critical agrarian studies. Future research on reactions ‘from below’ to land grabbing must include greater attention to gender and generational differences in both impacts and political agency.

Messy hectares: questions about the epistemology of land grabbing data

Recent research on land deals reports gigantic quantities of hectares seized, with relatively little regard for the solidity of the evidence or for considerations of scale other than area. This commentary questions the usefulness of aggregating data of uneven quality and transforming it into ‘facts’. Making claims on the basis of problematic evidence does not serve agrarian and human rights activists well, since it may undercut their legitimacy and make it difficult for them to identify their adversaries. Studying land tenure and corporate ownership is inherently complicated, with intractable legibility problems. Social scientists must subject their sources to critical scrutiny and understand the contexts of their production, preservation and dissemination. An accelerated process of dispossession is clearly in motion, but countering it effectively requires precise and accurate data, which are difficult to obtain. Oversimplified claims may not only undermine efforts to counter specific cases of land grabbing – and claims about land grabbing more generally – but may also divert attention from less publicized cases and from the actors behind the land grabbing. They also tend to reduce land grabbing to a quantitative problem rather than focusing on the social relations that it may or may not transform. This is a much revised and expanded version of a paper presented at the Plenary Session Roundtable on Methodologies: Identifying, Counting and Understanding, International Academic Conference on Global Land Grabbing II, organized by the Land Deals Politics Initiative (LDPI), Cornell University, 17–19 October 2012. I am grateful to Jun Borras, Andrés León, Carlos Oya, Katherine Verdery and this journals reviewers for comments that contributed to sharpening an earlier draft.

Global Land Grabs: historical processes, theoretical and methodological implications and current trajectories

Abstract Scholars, practitioners and activists generally agree that investor interest in land has climbed sharply, although they differ about what to call this phenomenon and how to analyse it. This introduction discusses several contested definitional, conceptual, methodological and political issues in the land grab debate. The initial ‘making sense’ period drew sweeping conclusions from large databases, rapid-appraisal fieldwork and local case studies. Today research examines financialisation of land, ‘water grabbing’, ‘green grabbing’ and grabbing for industrial and urbanisation projects, and a substantial literature challenges key assumptions of the early discussion (the emphasis on foreign actors in Africa and on food and biofuels production, the claim that local populations are inevitably displaced or negatively affected). The authors in this collection, representing a diversity of approaches and backgrounds, argue the need to move beyond the basic questions of the ‘making sense’ period of the debate and share a common commitment to connecting analyses of contemporary land grabbing to its historical antecedents and legal contexts and to longstanding agrarian political economy questions concerning forms of dispossession and accumulation, the role of labour and the impediments to the development of capitalism in agriculture. They call for more rigorous grounding of claims about impacts, for scrutiny of failed projects and for (re)examination of the longue durée, social differentiation, the agency of contending social classes and forms of grassroots resistance as key elements shaping agrarian outcomes.

Food sovereignty: forgotten genealogies and future regulatory challenges

‘Food sovereignty’ has become a mobilizing frame for social movements, a set of legal norms and practices aimed at transforming food and agriculture systems, and a free-floating signifier filled with varying kinds of content. Canonical accounts credit the Vía Campesina transnational agrarian movement with coining and elaborating the term, but its proximate origins are actually in an early 1980s Mexican government program. Central American activists nonetheless appropriated and redefined it in the late 1980s. Advocates typically suggest that ‘food sovereignty’ is diametrically opposed to ‘food security’, but historically there actually has been considerable slippage and overlap between these concepts. Food sovereignty theory has usually failed to indicate whether the ‘sovereign’ is the nation, region or locality, or ‘the people’. This lack of specificity about the sovereign feeds a reluctance to think concretely about the regulatory mechanisms necessary to consolidate and enforce food sovereignty, particularly limitations on long-distance and international trade and on firm and farm size. Several regulatory possibilities are mentioned and found wanting. Finally, entrenched consumer needs and desires related to internationally-traded products – from coffee to pineapples – imply additional obstacles to the localisation of production, distribution and consumption that many food sovereignty proponents support.

Introduction: critical perspectives on food sovereignty

Visions of food sovereignty have been extremely important in helping to galvanize broad-based and diverse movements around the need for radical changes in agro-food systems. Yet while food sovereignty has thrived as a ‘dynamic process’, until recently there has been insufficient attention to many thorny questions, such as its origins, its connection to other food justice movements, its relation to rights discourses, the roles of markets and states and the challenges of implementation. This essay contributes to food sovereignty praxis by pushing the process of critical self-reflection forward and considering its relation to critical agrarian studies – and vice versa.

Cycles of Land Grabbing in Central America: an argument for history and a case study in the Bajo Aguán, Honduras

Abstract The lack of historical perspective in many studies of land grabbing leads researchers to ignore or underestimate the extent to which pre-existing social relations shape rural spaces in which contemporary land deals occur. Bringing history back in to land grabbing research is essential for understanding antecedents, establishing baselines to measure impacts and restoring the agency of contending agrarian social classes. In Central America each of several cycles of land grabbing—liberal reforms, banana concessions and agrarian counter-reform—has profoundly shaped the period that succeeded it. In the Bajo Aguán region of Honduras—a centre of agrarian reform and then counter-reform—violent conflicts over land have been materially shaped by both peasant, landowner and state repertoires of contention and repression, as well as by peasants’ memories of dispossession.

Extensive land use and the logic of the latifundio: A case study in Guanacaste Province, Costa Rica

Traditional explanations of extensive land use on large unproductive estates in Latin American have failed to understand important aspects of the economic and political logic behind such enterprises. This article examines the reasons for the low productivity of cattle ranches over a period which spans the consolidation of haciendas in a frontier zone and their subsequent integration into the international beef market. The persistence of extensive land use in a modern export economy is explained as resulting from characteristics of the world beef market, local ecology, the Costa Rican credit and tax systems, and the social composition and political power of the landowning class.

Emancipatory rural politics: confronting authoritarian populism

A new political moment is underway. Although there are significant differences in how this is constituted in different places, one manifestation of the new moment is the rise of distinct forms of authoritarian populism. In this opening paper of the JPS Forum series on ‘Authoritarian Populism and the Rural World’, we explore the relationship between these new forms of politics and rural areas around the world. We ask how rural transformations have contributed to deepening regressive national politics, and how rural areas shape and are shaped by these politics. We propose a global agenda for research, debate and action, which we call the Emancipatory Rural Politics Initiative (ERPI, www.iss.nl/erpi). This centres on understanding the contemporary conjuncture, working to confront authoritarian populism through the analysis of and support for alternatives.

The next stage of the food sovereignty debate

Food sovereignty advocates are only beginning to discuss polemical issues, such as the role of long-distance trade, the implementation of relevant legal norms, and whether agroecological production can feed a growing global population. The questions of whether food sovereignty and food security are complementary or oppositional and the extent to which they overlap or have overlapped in the past are similarly debated. The genealogies of both concepts are older than is generally assumed. The key task for food sovereignty advocates is to think through the governance and policy issues that until now have been largely implicit in the way paradigm has been framed.

From Meerkat to Periscope: Does Intellectual Property Law Prohibit the Live Streaming of Commercial Sporting Events

This article discusses the potential impact of live streaming on the commercial sports industry and analyzes whether commercial sports enterprises have the legal power to stop live streaming of professional and collegiate sporting events. Part I of this article explores the history of live streaming commercial sporting events. Part II analyzes whether courts are likely to hold live streamers directly liable for their actions under federal copyright law. Part III discusses whether courts are likely to hold manufacturers of live streaming applications secondarily liable for copyright infringement. Part IV assesses the legality of live streaming under right of publicity law. Part V then analyzes the legality of live streaming under unfair competition doctrines. Finally, Part VI concludes that current federal and state laws adequately address all meaningful public policy concerns related to the live steaming of commercial sporting events.