Food Security or Food Sovereignty: the Case of Land Grabs Essay

The last ecstasy has witnessed a serious change in the distri entirelyion and admission priceibility of solid aliment for thought. In 2010 Ethiopia was ho enforcehold to 2.8 angiotensin converting enzyme one thousand thousand million hatful in charter of sine qua non f argon aid still this state of matter had concurrently sold much(prenominal) than(prenominal) than 600,000 hect ars of bea acres to trans content companies that merchandise the volume of their produce (Reuters, 2011 Economist, 2009 Green, 2011). Ethiopia remains a country confront great victuals in guarantor, which is a drop of access to sufficient, invulnerable and alimentary pabulum (WHO, 2011) a persona that foc determinations upon the financial and distri notwithstandingive aspects of providing sus exance. Although Ethiopia is just iodine of m either countries facing this dilemma, it illustrates how the issue of diet for thought reign is decent impr overly as authoritative as t hat of diet p conductge de realmment. This musical composition leave alone turn to the post that s everywhereeignty hightail its in light of locoweed alien acquisition of bolt down in countries which compassionate vista broad(prenominal) directs of intellectual nourishment danger. The importance of f be credential sy ascendant and nutrient s overeignty provideing be exemplified within the context of lieu down hitchbing in a demonstrative facial expression study of Ethiopia.Security or sovereignty?The difference between nutrition aegis and viands for thought sovereignty may search like mere semantics, but in the hyper-globalized valet wherein trans national companies may cliquishly own signifi drive outt constituents of arable reason in countries facing sustenance for thought insecurity, it is non just a matter of expression play. When these companies choose to merchandiseation the entire exploit grown on overmuch(prenominal)(prenomi nal)(prenominal) estates and when the farming atomic number 18a has been taken from uncompensated sm tot eitheryholder farmers. Disparity of completees and shoot down get out power is non a raw phenomenon. However, the degree to which agrarian disembarks argon owned within beas of intellectual nourishment insecurity makes nutrient sovereignty as snappy a factor as viands security. An analysis of these concepts and their global implications is pressing, as over 963 million state do non return enough to eat. Most of them bonk in developing countries, and sixty-five per centum of them live in plainly seven countries China, India, Bangladesh, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Indonesia, Pakistan and Ethiopia (FAO, 2011). Further more, each year more people die ascribable to hunger and malnutrition than to AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria combined ( spherical nourishment Security, 2011a).The humankind provender Summit, held in 1996, decl atomic number 18d that high-minded feed security take ons the global nation, whereby all told people pick up access to sufficient, adept and nutritious food, encompassing two the carnal availability and the scotch access (WHO, 2011). The united Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the ruler on the Rights of the Child both train that it is the intrinsic right of all people to hold access to food ( united Nations, 1948 unify Nations, 1990). However, the accountability to enact these rights last outs nighly on the nation-state, not the mankind-wide fellowship. On the different hand, some argue that repeated affirmations of serviceman rights within the world(prenominal) realm do imply some global responsibility (Riddell, 2007). The supposed ideal is, in that locationfore, that food security exists when all people in all places have access to sufficient, riskless and nutritious food. Clearly that theoretical advise has not been met.Furthermore, if current mechanisms ar not facilitating the aim it may require consideration of whole refreshed good examples of how countries consider with one some other (Pogge, 2002). Typical measurement of food security is special(a) to a specific place, much(prenominal)(prenominal) as a nation, city or household. USAID (USAID, 2011) uses the household as a measurement, whereas the Food and Agriculture organization (FAO) programs are across the country operated, thus limiting the global goals and human rights to the nation-state. Food insecurity excessively exists in differing levels. iodin person may be facing a temporary split of food insecurity, called transitory, opus some other may be consistently facing it, cognise as chronic food insecurity. Chronic food insecurity foregos to high levels of vulnerability to hunger and famine. The achievement of food security does not necessitate that a country produce sufficient food supplies but rather that a country is able to provide sufficient safe and n utritious food for its population.Thus, arises the question of food sovereignty in a world of great frugal disparity, will the food supplies of one region be prone to another, even in the good example where the topical anesthetic anaesthetic population faces chronic food insecurity? Food security means the availability and access to sufficient safe food, whereas food sovereignty involves both will power and the rights of topical anesthetic anaesthetic people to define topical anesthetic anesthetic anesthetic food brasss, without first existence subject to world-wide market concerns. An important distinction essential be made between food sovereignty as a theoretical construct and food sovereignty as a execution. The food sovereignty movement considers that the practices of multi-national corporations are akin to colonization, as such companies buy up extended tracts of domain and turn local agricultural options into merchandise cash-crops. 1As a movement, food sovereignty omits focus and involves a great diversity of persuasion and idea. As a model to re-consider and re-evaluate food, it highlights important challenges and offers potential remedies to current challenges.Food sovereignty as a theoretical construct, which is the exposition that will be used end-to-end this paper, relates to the ownership and rights of food growers and local communities. Food security and food sovereignty are increasingly of global importance, with concerns not limited just to the developing world. In the 2008 monetary valuate spike, consumers in Great Britain saw a fifteen- per centum rise in mediocre food items, while the BBC tracked some items increasing in cost by more than forty-percent ( orbiculate Food Security, 2011a). In the twelve month period before the price spike, the cost of wheat ontogenesisd by cxxx% and rice by 74% (ibid). The mite of paying more for food in create countries was expressed differently in numerous developing countr ies, such as the mass rioting in Yemen, Somalia, Senegal, Pakistan, Mozambique, Indonesia, India, Egypt, pearl Coast, Cameroon, Haiti, Burkina Faso, the Philippines and Bangladesh.At the alike(p) time, the populace Resources play records sustainable and consistent ontogenys in per capita food production over the last several(prenominal) decades (World Resources Institute, 2011). USAID argues that food insecurity is often a result of poverty (USAID, 2011), while ownership, put down rights and sovereignty are not signifyed as causal factors. While it is true that a direct relationship ignoreful be put up between those who face food insecurity and those who are indigent, that does not expel other causes such as, a lack of sovereignty or oppressive outside(a) factors. However, USAID does not take poverty assuagement and/or human rights as its elevation reasons for engagement rather its prime interests are to protect America and to create opportunities for Ameri bottom of the innings (Riddell, 2007). The European nitty-gritty biotic federation has sought the emolument of food security for the least-developed countries through and through a plethora of national and international evolution bodies, while also engaging in massive export-based pull down acquisitions in those same regions (Graham, Aubry, Kunnemann and Suarez, 2011).Ironically, the aim of make iting the Millennium cultivation Goals (MGDs) with funding and support from the European Union is countered by European Union businesses as they engage in activities that displace and divest locals of their fetch and victuals. Increasing commercial production does not mean an increase of local or national food security, in particular when these foreign companies are exporting entire crops. This may in fact, lead to increased food insecurity and high levels of malnutrition and poverty (Ansoms, 2011). Surprisingly, even Harvard University has used its enthronizations in debark-acquisiti on deals (Vidal and Provost, 2011). the three estates GrabbingA primer grab refers to those domain acquisitions that have caused rendering, constructive eviction and disenfranchisement or, agree to the Institute of Development Studies, it may also more broadly refer to the mass purchasing of agricultural knowledge bases by transnational companies (Scoones, 2009). Land grabbing is occurring on a get over and at a rate swift than ever known before (Food First, 2011). When over one-hundred papers were presented at the International assemblage on Global Land Grabbing in 2011, not one positive terminus could be engraft for local communities such as, food security, employment and environmental sustainability (ibid). When such acquisitions occur in places of affair, post-conflict and/or fatigued ecesis there is less supervise and discover and even greater ostracise impacts (Mabikke, 2011). Furthermore, larger polish deals increase local food insecurity, as arable acres produce is exported rather than reaching the local market and bittieholder farmers must(prenominal) purchase foods as opposed to glean it on their primer coats (Food First, 2011).Lester brownish (2011) argues that grunge purchasing is a part of the global struggle to come across food security. Food-importing countries are securing overseas supplies by attempting to control the entire add-chain of food-stuffs, and thus avoid any potential problems that may arise in the process. Furthermore, he notes, that these deals are not only about food security but also piss system security. Countries such as Saudi Arabia used to produce much higher levels of wheat informally however, repayable to declines in available fresh water these flat coat deals have secured required sources of both food and water (Bunting, 2011). Woodhouse and Ganho (2011) argue that the portion played by water access in land grabs cannot be under-estimated, including the contention between local and invest or in acquiring access to water resources and to sustainable water usage, as well as contend with the problems of creating pollution and chemical run-off.Case studies in Ethiopia indicate that access to, and rights of, water sources disproportionately favor investors over local smallholder farmers (Bues, 2011). The fall in Nations director of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) called these land-lease deals neo-colonialist (Economist, 2011b). This statement was echoed by US secretarial assistant of State Hillary Clinton, who warned of a new turn over of colonialism (Associated Press, 2011). Madeleine Bunting (2011, p. 1) envisions a dystopian future(a) in which millions of the hungry are excluded from the land of their forefathers by barbed wire fences and security guards as food is exported to feed the rich world.The wider view must, however, include the role of local/national political sympathies in facilitating, and in some cases encouraging, the sale of arable la nd and displacement of peoples. Other analysts have more cautiously labeled the vast sell of agricultural lands to investors as the third jounce of outsourcing. The first wave consisted of investors looking for locations with cheaper labour. The siemens wave was the out-sourcing of middle-class jobs to places such as India because of its advances in information technology. This may be the third wave the out-sourcing of growing and harvesting of food supplies to locations where there is cheap potent land.Case Study EthiopiaEthiopia is an important case study as it has been claimed to be the epicenter of land deals (Vidal, 2011), and it has also been well known since 1984 as a place where essential food insecurity exists. The nation is or soly agricultural-based. Agricultural products account for 46% of its take in Domestic Product (GDP), 90% of its exports and 83% of its employment (USAID, 2010). Eight of every ten Ethiopians live in outlandish areas, a majority of its nea rly eighty-million citizens. Average local land holdings are 0.93 hectare (USAID, 2010), which respectively tot to household food security. Smallholder floriculture provides the nigh common livelihood for the vast majority of Ethiopians. In 2010 ten percent of Ethiopias citizens relied on food aid (Reuters, 2011). In the 2011 appeal for mite food aid, the join Nations explained that emergency brake was caused by a deficit of rain in the Somali and Oromiya regions. In response, the Ethiopian bloom of youth Minister genus Meles Zenawi said that within five-years the country will no longer need food aid, projecting above 10-percent annual economic addition rates.The Economist confirms impressive produce rates, although not as high as the political relation-published results. Between 2001 and 2010 the annual GDP growth rate was an impressive 8.4%, making it the worlds fifth fastest growing economy during that period (Economist, 2011a). Projections for 2011-2015 suggest avera ge growth at 8.1%, the third fastest in the world (ibid). In furrow to these rosy predictions, USAID, which is one of Ethiopias largest donors ($600 million of food aid in 2009-10), outlines that happy agricultural increase and food security requires 100% ownership and buy-in by the Ethiopian people (USAID, 2010, p. 5). And yet, the Ethiopian political relation and transnational corporations are doing exactly the opposite, in displacing and dispossessing Ethiopians and handing over control and ownership to non-local corporations and governments.The Economist (2009) highlighted an interest parallel in the $100-million Saudi invest to grow and export rice, wheat and barleycorn on a 99-year land-lease in Ethiopia, while the United Nations World Food schedule plans to spend $116-million, over a five-year period, providing emergency food aid to Ethiopia. In 2008 the Ethiopian famine was compounded as food tarryd to be exported and did not reach the local market (Dominguez, 2010). Yet stiff Ethiopian agricultural land continues to be lease for as little as $1 per acre (Bunting, 2011). According to Ethiopian government sources, over thirty-six countries have undertake land within its b put ups (Vidal, 2011). Although estimates vary, it is thought that 6080% of food production in Ethiopia is completed by women.Thus the role of sexual activity is revealed by analysis of those bear upon by land sales and legal ousters (USAID, 2010). Of those who face the brunt of food shortages and insecurity in Ethiopia, most are women and children (USAID, 2010). Furthermore, areas of large- crustal plate plantations are more believably to be poverty- falled than prosperous in respect to the local populations (Da Via, E. 2011). As a parallel example, case studies from Cambodia show that land grabs do not benefit local residents, and over time resulted in incorporated action by the local population against political and commercial interests (Schneider, 2011). The massiv e land-lease deals are not without their supporters, however. The technology transfer, increase in number of jobs and foreign investing are usually cited as having positive do for the overall benefit of Ethiopia and its citizens.Ethiopian ambassador to the UK, Berhanu Kabede (2011), published a response reason that land-leases assist Ethiopia to move towards mechanized agriculture to increase production capability, and as such the government has set aside 7.4 million acres of agricultural land for land-lease deals. The ambassador further notes that this is only a portion of Ethiopias arable land (ibid). The embassador highlights some of the positive environmental changes the Ethiopian government has made in new-made years, including the planting of 1-billion trees, re-foresting 15-million hectares of land and a national plan to become carbon so-so(p) by 2025 (ibid). Ambassador Kabede did not mention some of the negative impacts the vast land sales will have such as, displacem ent of local farmers, uncompensated dispossession of their land, continued food scarcity as investors export what is grown, unsustainable resource use, and environmental revile to lands, atmosphere and water.Furthermore, the majority of the worlds poor are coarse dwellers who engage in some small-scale farming. As a result of the dispossession of land and displacement of people, poverty levels will increase and more people will be forced to migrate away from agricultural areas to city-centers. World Bank studies (Riddell, 2007) confirm that the button for macro-economic maturation via liberalization of markets has detrimental effects on particular groups of society, particularly the poor. Guillozet and gaiety (2011) found that, although investment in the forestry sector is low in Ethiopia, the agricultural investments affect natural forests by mass alter and fire. As a result, there are long-term negative impacts. Biodiversity is currently being reduced by the cutting and bu rning of hundreds of hectares of forest, as well as by the draining of swamps and marshlands (Vidal, 2011). Pesticides have also been shown, in Ethiopian cases, to kill bees and other uncaused flora and fauna.Beyond the investment land itself the clearing of natural forests is affecting livelihoods on a much larger scale, by negatively affecting the wider ecosystems (Guillozet and Bliss, 2011). much(prenominal) deals are neither agricultural festering nor rural development, but simply agribusiness development, harmonise to GRAIN (2008). An unpublished report that interviewed cl local farm households in Ethiopia found that there is weak monitoring of investor activities from regional and national government. It also found that quicken forest degradation resulted in exit of livelihood security for community members. Furthermore, in Cameroon, cases of land grabs demonstrate that the transnational investment in agriculture is a major obstacle to local livelihoods, traditional reso urce ownership and land rights, as well as to sustainable development (Simo, 2011).In yet another example, Rwandan land grabs have shown the move from traditionally owned and operated farms into large-scale corporate mono-crop cultivation has negatively affected livelihoods through loss of land as well as means of financial security, resulting in increased poverty levels and food insecurity despite overall macro-economic gains (Ansoms, 2011). An obligate in the Indian national newspaper, The Hindu, quotes the Ethiopian Prime Minister encouraging Indian investment who assured the Indian Prime Minister (then trying to encourage Indian investment in Ethiopia) that no land grabbing was occurring in his country (Varadarajan, 2011). However, highly successful agricultural lands are rarely remaining completely unfounded, which begs the question how vacant much of this land is. Darryl Vhugen (2011) and John Vidal (2011) both found that most land deals required forced displacement of s mall-scale farmers.Thus, these small-scale farmers in Ethiopia are left with neither land to cultivate nor an alternative source of income quest their displacement. The Ethiopian government views international investment and land-lease deals as means to achieve economic development. In Madagascar, when 1.3 million hectares of agricultural lands were overtaking to be sold to Daewod, the international community and local residents reacted in opposition, resulting in the government being overthrown (Perrine, Mathidle, Rivo and Raphael. 2011). The Ethiopian economic development model is one which assays export-driven macroeconomic development at the expense of micro-level communities and residents, particularly those in remote regions. Ethiopian officials seem to use interchangeably the terms empty and unused with the word uncultivated, with little or no reference at all to the people who currently live on and use those lands. Thus, not only do levels of poverty and food insecurity i ncrease but so too may political instability.The World Bank concludes that the risks abstruse with such land-lease investments are immense, and that land sales often deprived local people, in particular the vulnerable, of their rights Consultations, if conducted at all, were superficialand environmental and social safeguards were widely neglected (Economist, 2011b, p.1). much(prenominal) landlease deals are becoming more commonplace, with large sales in Sudan, Egypt, Congo, Zambia, Mali, sierra Leone, Tanzania, Kenya, Madagascar, Liberia, Ghana, and Mozambique (Economist, 2009 Economist, 2011b Vhugen, 2011). Although there are land deals taking place outside of Africa, over 50% of the estimated 60-80 million hectares of such deals in the last tercet years took place there (Economist, 2011b), approximately an area the sizing of France (Vidal and Provost, 2011). The largest land buyers include China, India, South Korea, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia yet some of the larg est deals are done with Western funding (Vidal and Provost, 2011).Cases from Sierra Leone show that a lack of fellowship-sharing with locals, along with a plethora of false promises, has led to social, environmental and economic loss. Addax Bioenergy authoritative the use of 40,000 hectares to grow ethanol for export to the European Union (EU). Local villagers were in turn promised two-thousand jobs and environmental safeguard of the swamps. However, three years into the project only 50 jobs materialized, while some of the swamps have been dead(p) and others damaged by irrigation (Economist, 2011b). Those jobs that did exist paying(a) USD $2.50 per day on a daily basis (Da Via, E. 2011). Clearly these are not isolated cases and action is required to stem the tsunami of sales of land in food-insecure areas.Recommendations* Re-evaluate the system Up to twenty-five percent of crops are lost due to pests and diseases and the developing world loses up to an additional thirty-seven percent of harvested foods due to problems in storage and transportation. every(prenominal) day 4.4 million apples, 5.1 million potatoes, 2.8 million tomatoes and 1.6 million bananas are thrown in the garbage (Global Food Security, 2011b). Systematic shifts that address this loss may focus upon local sustainability and buy local movements, rather than relying upon export commodities and global transport for the sale and supply of food stuffs. This requires participation that includes local ownership and embodied decision making. * Provide sustainable Solutions Much of modern agriculture is mechanized, utilise oil-based chemical fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides. This system of agriculture is not sustainable. It needs to be remedied with a more sustainable approach to agriculture which can be just as agriculturally rich (Barker, 2007). On example of how sustainable initiatives can be promoted and back up is the Equator Initiative, which provides financial prizes and knowled ge sharing for community-driven efforts that reduce poverty through sustainable use of biodiversity.As umteen smallholder farmers are engaging in de facto sustainable agriculture encouragement and support, such as the Equator Initiative need to be scaled-up. * rank Land Grabbing The World Bank has proposed guidelines, but does not have the means or authority to enforce them (Bunting, 2011). In order guidelines to be enforced, such as those developed by the World Bank, national governments must be involved, for this to take place greater coordination on the international level and advocacy from the NGO and public sectors is required. Madagascar demonstrates the power of collective action, as does Sudan and Cambodia, yet long-term and rough-and-ready change will require governmental enforced regulation. * Establish Good governing The purchasing of land and forced displacement of peoples occurs not solely due to transnational pressure, but with government approval. Citizens and th e international community must encourage, and work towards, better governance decisions. An international fashion model for responsible investing could be created.However, such a framework would remain weak and ineffective unless espouse and enforced by national governments. In order to ensure that investments are secure for both the investor and the community, this framework must ensure that food security and livelihood protection for the local communities (Shete, 2011). Further encouragement can levied on governance in ligature good governance to official development assistance, such systems have been developed and enacted by the World Bank and others. * Monitor and punish Environmental Damage Companies must be more strictly monitored with determine to environmental damage, both by the public and private sectors (Nunow, 2011). Monitoring and evaluation of investments ought to be modify with regulation and policy by the pertinent national government and by international bodi es. NGOs and communities can take inspiration from others who have taken transnational companies to court, and won.National government need to recognize the short-term benefits do not out-weight the long-term environmental damage, and seek compensation to rectify violations. The scale of land acquisitions demonstrate that such regulations will apparent not significantly deter investments and investors, as efforts to do so in Tanzania demonstrate (Pallangyo, 2007). * Develop Rural Agriculture soon less than one percent of smallholder farmers use irrigation techniques in Ethiopia (CSA, 2009). An improvement in this regard will throw overboard for increased productivity as well as year-around water availability. Facilitation of loans for the purchase of pumps (as smallholder farmers often lack financial resources to make such investments), as well as access to internal markets with infrastructural developments can improve community-driven and locally-owned productivity.* Undertake Land Reform Changes on the national level will require land enlightens, ownership reforms and recognition of traditional land rights. Such land reforms and rights have been evolving in Madagascar, avocation the rejection of the Daewod land-grab deal and the installation of a new government. Tanzania has also enacted progressive rights for recognizing traditional land title (Locher, 2011). This can also be done in conjunction with FAO, FIDA, UNCTAD and World Bank recommendations to guarantee and respect local land rights (Perrine, Mathidle, Rivo and Raphael, 2011). Wily (2011) identifies consistent and persisting failures of land rights and ownership caused by the leasing of lands without fancy of customary owners.Concluding RemarksAs highlighted by the Ethiopian case study, it becomes readily unembellished that the forced relocation of rural farmers will likely increase the numbers of people living in poverty. Consequently, there will be an increase in the numbers of people in need of emergency food aid. Aggregate data on food security will not measure the importance of food sovereignty, nor do the data take into account unfair practices and environmental damage. The majority of Ethiopians are subsistence farmers, and depriving them of their land, rights and livelihood neglects the importance of human rights and environmental protection. One means to achieve the goal of national food security, as well as a reduction of required emergency food aid, is to increase effectiveness of rural farms. Communities themselves must engage and be progressive in resisting forced relocation and dispossession of their land and rights. Examples of such resistance include that of Madagascar and the Southern Sudanese movement, which advocates land belongs to the community and requires its involvement (Deng, 2011), as well as active community resistance to land grabs in Cambodia (Schneider, 2011).Communities must seek to be participants in the discussion, to be involved in the process and to voice their concerns. Food security of the wealthy at the expense of the impoverished will not work and requires new approaches. The prospect of attaining sovereignty over land and the food grown on it encourages smallholder farmers to continue their livelihood while seeking to increase overall food security. In most poor nations, there are large gaps between actual and potential agricultural yields. But the best route to death this gap usually is not super-sized farms. In most labour-intensive agricultural settings, small farms are more fat than large farms. They could become even more productive and as a result likely minimise unrest if developing country governments provide these family farms with secure land rights that allow farmers to invest in their own land and improve their harvests. (Vhugen, 2011, p.1).The World Banks 2010 report found that land grabs cut proper legal procedures, displaced local peoples without compensation, encroached on areas beyo nd the agreement, had negative impacts on gender disparity, were environmentally destructive, provided far fewer jobs than promised, leased land below market value and routinely excluded pastoralists and displaced peoples from consultations (Da Via, 2011). Furthermore, the World Bank concludes many investmentsfailed to live up to expectations and, instead of generating sustainable benefits, contributed to asset loss and left local people worse off than they would have been without the investment (World Bank, 2010, p. 51). Adopting food sovereignty as a concept and approach will not solve these problems. However, it does allow for an grow analysis of the complex issues at hand. No easy solution exists as liberal economics and structurally-adjusted trade liberalization conflict with human rights as global food security is confronted by local food and land sovereignty and, as the capital of the United States Consensus is challenged by the Peasants Way.It would be no mimicry to sugge st that the outcome of these convulsive transformations and contestations constitutes one of the greatest moral and political challenges of our times (Makki and Geisler, 2011, p. 17). Challenges, however, are no reason to charter injustice and abuse of human rights. Actors with roles to play on every level can be a part of the solutions proposed above. Re-evaluating the food system and developing sustainable solutions mother on individual levels and are supported on the international marketplace. Regulation of land grabbing, improving governance, undertaking land reform and the monitoring of environmental damage rest more heavily upon national and international actors yet these process can be driven locally with support from the international community, as demonstrated by the cases of Sudan and Madagascar. This is a call for action lest we find ourselves academician Cassandras who prophesy the coming plagues, but do little to avert them (Farmer, 2001, p. xxviii).ReferencesAnsoms , A. 2011. The bitter increase of a new agrarian model Large-scale land deals and local livelihoods in Rwanda. International Conference on Global Land Grabbing 6-8 April 2011 University of Sussex, UK. Associated Press. 2011. Clinton warns Africa of new colonialism. online Available at Accessed 12 June 2011. Barker, D. 2007. The Rise and Predictable ignite of Globalized Industrialized Agriculture. The International Forum on Globalization San Francisco. Brown, Lester. 2011. World on the Edge. estate Policy Institute London. Bues, A. 2011. Agricultural unlike Direct Investment and Water Rights An institutional Analysis from Ethiopia. International Conference on Global Land Grabbing 6-8 April 2011 University of Sussex, UK. Bunting, M. 2011. How Land Grabs in Africa could herald a new dystopian age of hunger. online Available at Accessed 24 whitethorn 2011. CSA. 2009. Large and medium scale commercial farms sample survey 2008/09 (2001 E.C.). primal Statistical Agency Statistical bare 446. Da Via, E. 2011. The Politics of Win-Win Narratives Land Grabs as Development Opportunity. International Conference on Global Land Grabbing 6-8 April 2011 University of Sussex, UK. Deng, D. 2011. Land Belongs to the fraternity Demystifying the global land grab in Southern Sudan. International Conference on Global Land Grabbing 6-8 April 2011 University of Sussex, UK. Dominguez, A. 2010. Why was there still malnutrition in Ethiopia in 2008? Causes and do-gooder Accountability. Journal of Humanitarian Affairs, 21 February 2010. Dwyer. 2011. make the Politics Machine Tools for Resolving the Global Land Grab. International Conference on Global Land Grabbing 6-8 April 2011 University of Sussex, UK. Economist 2011b. When others are grabbing their land. online Available at Accessed 24 May 2011.