Since 2010, Brazil has tightened a longstanding law limiting the size of farmland foreigners can buy after halting much of its planned purchases of foreign land. [23] Land can be “confiscated” by the government or local or foreign investors. Those who have occupied or used the land may be evicted or displaced or prevented from using it. Evictions may be forced or accompanied by violence or threats. Brazilians have been colonizing the Amazon rainforest for decades, but many have no official documents, putting them in a legal gray area. In some cases, billboards are placed near a lot for concession, lease or sale. The display of a billboard does not provide sufficient information to allow municipalities to understand the potential impact of a proposed project or the ways in which they can challenge it. Land grabbing is the controversial issue of large-scale land acquisition: the purchase or lease of large plots of land by national and transnational corporations, governments and individuals. An environmental impact assessment must be conducted before the land is used in a way that could harm the environment. At the heart of food sovereignty is the ability of communities to access and control land on their own terms.
Land is an integral part of cultural identity and agricultural autonomy, but in many parts of the world, land officially does not belong to anyone. Instead, people have been on the land for centuries and generations, having cooperative and peaceful agreements on how to use the land sustainably and have sovereignty over their land and food. Land grabbing is a direct attack on these sustainable and cooperative systems of cultural and agricultural life. When it comes to an official definition of “land grabbing”, we like this one from FIAN International: whether an individual or community has a legally recognized right to occupy or use land depends on the national system of individual and collective land ownership and the protection afforded to those who use the land for various purposes. These sample phrases are automatically selected from various online information sources to reflect the current use of the word “land grabbing”. The views expressed in the examples do not represent the views of Merriam-Webster or its editors. Send us your feedback. Much of the public debate then focused on the phenomenon of land grabbing, which is one of the issues addressed by these guidelines.
Appropriate laws are needed to stop the phenomenon of land grabbing by governments and multinationals that violates natural and traditional land rights. Okay, but what does land grabbing have to do with sustainability? “Land grabbing” has a significant impact on human rights and the environment. Increased investment in farmland by multinationals and investors from rich industrialized countries to poor and less developed countries inevitably leads to transfers of power to local communities. Proponents of these land deals argue that they offer opportunities to improve agricultural practices, which will lead to economic growth in host countries. However, there is growing evidence that “land grabbing” only displaces poor and vulnerable populations and harms the environment. “Improvements” in agricultural practices generally mean more technology that requires inputs that can be potentially harmful to the host environment. This technology is usually expensive and can push small farmers out of production without help. It can also be extremely harmful in the long run compared to local practices developed over centuries. These practices were adopted because of their unique ability to interact with a particular environment and respond not only to the needs of the local population, but also to the needs of the country. This loss of agricultural independence or food sovereignty then exacerbates the increase in poverty and the reduction of food security – an essential component of sustainable development.
Although hailed by investors, economists and some developing countries as a new path to agricultural development, investing in land in the 21st century has been criticized by some NGOs and commentators as having a negative impact on local communities. International law attempts to regulate these transactions. [3] Of these deals, the average size is 40,000 hectares (99,000 acres), with a quarter of more than 200,000 hectares and a quarter of less than 10,000 hectares. [17] 37% of projects concern food crops, 21% cash crops and 21% biofuels. [17] This indicates the wide variety of investors and projects associated with land acquisition: the size of the land, the types of crops and the investors involved vary considerably from one agreement to another.