Does Commons Grabbing Lead to Resilience Grabbing? The Anti-Politics Machine of Neo-Liberal Agrarian Development and Local Responses

Haller, Tobias; Käser, Fabian; Ngutu, Mariah

doi:10.3390/land9070220

Cited by 11 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Resilence and Social-Ecological Transformations at Regional Scales Large-scale agricultural investments transform the socialecological systems in which they operate, with profound implications for the resilience of livelihoods and land systems (Schoneveld et al 2011. The four patterns identified here offer nuances to the notion of resilience grabbing, i.e., the process by which LAIs reduce the resilience of local communities as a consequence of displacing them from access to food and non-food resources held as commons (Haller et al 2020). This process may operate most concretely in LAIs of Patterns 3 and 4 with large losses of land access among communities.…”

Section: Implications Of Large-scale Agricultural Investments Formentioning

confidence: 90%

“…Thereby, LAIs can contribute to undermine resilience. Haller et al (2020) introduced the notion of "resilience grabbing" to refer to processes in which LAIs reduce the resilience of local communities as a consequence of displacing them from access to food and non-food resources held as commons (Boillat and Bottazzi 2020).…”

Section: Socio-economic Impacts Of Large-scale Agricultural Investmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Why do large-scale agricultural investments induce different socio-economic, food security, and environmental impacts? Evidence from Kenya, Madagascar, and Mozambique

Oberlack¹,

Giger²,

Anseeuw³

et al. 2021

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Large-scale agricultural investments (LAIs) transform land use systems worldwide. There is, however, limited understanding about how the common global drivers of land use change induce different forms of agricultural investment and produce different impacts on the ground. This article provides a cross-country comparative analysis of how differences in business models, land use changes, and governance systems explain differences in socio-economic, food security, and environmental impacts of LAIs in Kenya, Madagascar, and Mozambique. It brings together results on these aspects generated in the AFGROLAND project that collected data in a multi-method approach via household surveys, business model surveys, semi-structured household interviews, life-cycle assessments of farm production, analysis of remote-sensing data, key informant interviews, and document analysis. For the present project synthesis, we combined a collaborative expert workshop with a comparative analysis of 16 LAIs. The results show that the LAIs follow four distinctive impact patterns, ranging from widespread adverse impacts to moderate impacts. Results demonstrate how the following conditions influence how the global drivers of land use change translate into different LAIs and different impacts on the ground: labor intensity, prior land use, utilization of land, farm size, type of production, experience in local agriculture, land tenure security, accountability of state and local elites, the mobilization capacity of civil society, expansion of resource frontiers, agricultural intensification, and indirect land use change. The results indicate that commercial agriculture can be a component in sustainable development strategies under certain conditions, but that these strategies will fail without substantial, sustained increases in the economic viability and inclusiveness of smallholder agriculture, land tenure security, agro-ecological land management, and support for broader patterns of endogenous agrarian transformation.

show abstract

Section: Implications Of Large-scale Agricultural Investments Formentioning

confidence: 90%

Section: Socio-economic Impacts Of Large-scale Agricultural Investmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why do large-scale agricultural investments induce different socio-economic, food security, and environmental impacts? Evidence from Kenya, Madagascar, and Mozambique

Oberlack¹,

Giger²,

Anseeuw³

et al. 2021

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our study drew on a set of frameworks that conceptualize the revitalization of collective resource management: the SESF (McGinnis and Ostrom 2014;Brossette et al 2022), social-ecological systems functioning in cycles (Westley et al 2013;Luthe and Wyss 2015), social innovation (Polman et al 2017;Kluv ánkov á et al 2018;Bosworth et al 2020;Barlagne et al 2021), and knowledge coproduction (Gibbons et al 1994;Klein et al 2001;Nowotny et al 2001;Robinson and Tansey 2006;Hirsch Hadorn et al 2008, Lemos and Morehouse 2005in Pohl et al 2010Steger et al 2020Steger et al , 2021. These frameworks are interlinked and provide a holistic perspective on sustainable revitalization of CRM as social-ecological systems.…”

Section: Social Innovation and Knowledge Cocreation In Community-base...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cocreation of knowledge is understood as a collaborative endeavor of academic and nonacademic actors (Robinson and Tansey 2006;Lemos andMorehouse 2005 in Pohl et al 2010). As an approach, it belongs to the framework of transdisciplinary research (Klein et al 2001;Hirsch Hadorn et al 2008). It takes place in the context of application (Gibbons et al 1994;Nowotny et al 2001), and it is an iterative, ongoing process for generating holistic understanding of an issue (Berkes et al 2003;Jasanoff 2004;Armitage et al 2011;Shirk et al 2012).…”

Section: Social Innovation and Knowledge Cocreation In Community-base...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Revitalizing Collective Resources in Mountain Areas Through Community Engagement and Knowledge Cocreation

Torre

Stemberger²,

Bottura³

et al. 2022

Mountain Research and Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The subjective aspects through which it is possible to complete the representation of complex events strongly linked to agroecological activities have been characterized. This research has assessed the dynamics of the loss of TEK accumulated by the population and their impact on public participation in collective networks on which demographic balance and resilience in rural areas depend [53][54][55].…”

Section: The Landscape Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Network of Landscapes in the Sustainable Management of Transboundary Biosphere Reserves

Romano

Pérez-Chinarro

Coral

2020

Land

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The creation of Transboundary Biosphere Reserves (TBRs) is one of the most outstanding contributions of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Man and Biosphere Programme (MAB). Recent revisions have shown that there is a gap between its biodiversity conservation proposals and the theoretical convergence of nations towards sustainable development goals with the practices in action. By applying the landscape approach to the case study of the rural system of the Spanish–Portuguese border, declared Meseta Ibérica TBR (MITBR), it is verified that the spatial zoning of TBRs is a prominent factor in this gap, since they do not correspond to the landscape units and bioregions. This has led to the formulation and implementation of strategic proposals for the reorientation of TBRs towards the stimulation of landscape networks in the transboundary framework. Agroecological networks in this territory stand out, which brings together one of the highest concentrations of indigenous breeds in Europe. A breeder replacement experience was carried out based on the social networks of the MITBR that protect the landscape. The main conclusion of this article is that TBRs are effective in practice through the promotion of cross-border networks of governance and social participation, and mainly through agroecological ones due to their outstanding effect on biodiversity.

show abstract

Does Commons Grabbing Lead to Resilience Grabbing? The Anti-Politics Machine of Neo-Liberal Agrarian Development and Local Responses

Abstract: This Special Issue contributes to the debate that land grabbing should be discussed as commons grabbing [...]

Cited by 11 publications

References 27 publications

Why do large-scale agricultural investments induce different socio-economic, food security, and environmental impacts? Evidence from Kenya, Madagascar, and Mozambique

Why do large-scale agricultural investments induce different socio-economic, food security, and environmental impacts? Evidence from Kenya, Madagascar, and Mozambique

Revitalizing Collective Resources in Mountain Areas Through Community Engagement and Knowledge Cocreation

Network of Landscapes in the Sustainable Management of Transboundary Biosphere Reserves

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About