View previous stories
	Land is central to the livelihoods by Lorenzo Cotula International Institute for Environment and Development   Land acquisitions are on the increase in Africa and other continents, raising the risk, if not made properly, that poor people will be evicted or lose access to land, water, and other resources, according to the first detailed study of the trend.   The study has been realized by the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) at the request of UN Food and Agriculture Organization and International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD).   It warns that such deals can bring opportunities (guaranteed outlets, employment, investment in infrastructures, increases in agricultural productivity) but can also cause great harm if local people are excluded from decisions about allocating land and if their land rights are not protected.   The report highlights a number of misconceptions about what have been termed land grabs. It found that land-based investment has been rising over the past five years. But while foreign investment dominates, domestic investors are also playing a big role in land acquisitions.   Private sector deals are more common than government-to-government ones, though governments are using a range of tools to indirectly support private deals.   Concerns about food and energy security are key drivers, but other factors such as business opportunities, demand for agricultural commodities for industry and recipient country agency are also at play.   Although large-scale land claims remain a small proportion of suitable land in any one country, contrary to widespread perceptions there is very little “empty” land as most remaining suitable land is already under use or claim, often by local people.   The report found that many countries do not have sufficient mechanisms to protect local rights and take account of local interests, livelihoods and welfare.   A lack of transparency and of checks and balances in contract negotiations can promote deals that do not maximize the public interest. Insecure local land rights, inaccessible registration procedures, vaguely defined productive use requirements, legislative gaps and other factors too often undermine the position of local people.   It calls for carefully assessing local contexts, including existing land uses and claims; securing land rights for rural communities; involving local people in negotiations, and proceeding with land acquisition only after their free, prior and informed consent.   Co-authors Sonja Vermeulen and Lorenzo Cotula of IIED caution that land acquisitions vary greatly and that blanket statements about land-grabbing are highly misleading.   "Ultimately, whether international land deals seize opportunities and mitigate risks depends on their terms and conditions – what business models are used, how costs and benefits are shared, and who decides on these issues and how," says Cotula. "This calls for proper regulation, skilful negotiation and public oversight."   Alexander Mueller, Head of the Environment and Natural Resources Department at FAO stresses the need to see foreign investment and large-scale land acquisitions in the context of global environment and food security challenges.   "This new trend is a result of the recent food crisis and volatility of food prices, among other factors. The new challenges of global food insecurity and global investment should be addressed through appropriate regulations, and well-informed agricultural and food policies. The study should help to link decisions on investment with an awareness of all implications, including social and environmental ones, in a perspective of sustainable rural development. Developing guidelines for land governance, or a code to regulate international investments will improve decision making and negotiations."   Poor women and men must not be sidelined. "Their input and their interests must be central, and we must ensure that any benefits promised, such as employment, infrastructure, agricultural know-how, do materialize."   The study includes research from Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Madagascar, Mozambique, Sudan, Tanzania and Zambia.   http://www.commercialpressuresonland.org/ Visit the related web page
	Is the law of war suited to today''s conflicts? by Jakob Kellenberger International Committee of the Red Cross   The ICRC has just completed a two-year study on the current state of international humanitarian law. In this interview, ICRC president Jakob Kellenberger talks about the study''s main conclusions. He highlights four areas where international humanitarian law should be strengthened.   What was the ICRC’s objective in undertaking such a study?   The study should be viewed in connection with our core mission of enhancing protection for victims of armed conflict.   The study was aimed at identifying and understanding, more precisely and clearly, the humanitarian problems arising from armed conflict and devising possible legal solutions to them in terms of legal development or clarification.   Because the nature, causes and consequences of armed conflict have evolved over the years, it is important to engage in dialogue within the international community to determine how to better address the current humanitarian needs of armed-conflict victims.   Our study represents an attempt to take stock of this reality and to initiate a dialogue, which we see as essential, with a view to strengthening the existing legal framework.   What are the study''s conclusions?   One of the main conclusions is that any attempt to strengthen international humanitarian law should build on existing law, which remains an appropriate framework for regulating the actions of the parties involved in armed conflict, including non-international armed conflict.   In most cases, what is required to improve the situation of conflict victims is greater compliance with the existing legal framework, rather than the adoption of new rules. If international humanitarian law were scrupulously adhered to, most current issues of humanitarian concern would quite simply not exist.   However, the study also showed that international humanitarian law, in its current state, especially in non-international armed conflict, does not always offer satisfactory legal responses to the needs observed on the ground.   More precisely, we came to the conclusion that new responses under international humanitarian law must be devised to better protect people deprived of liberty in non-international armed conflict, people displaced within their own countries (IDPs), and the natural environment, and also to help better enforce international humanitarian law and make reparations to those who suffer the effects of violations.   What are the next steps?   We want to engage in dialogue with States, and with other parties concerned, on the study''s conclusions and possible further action that should be taken. This will be a good opportunity to find out to what extent our view of the humanitarian situation and the challenges currently facing international humanitarian law is shared by others.   In the coming months we intend to engage in consultations with States. Based on these consultations, the ICRC will decide on how to proceed further. Ultimately, only States have the capacity to bring about improvements to international law.   * Read the statement by the president of the ICRC, on strengthening legal protection for the victims of armed conflict, via the link below. Visit the related web page
	View more stories