Biodiversity, biocapacity and better choices

Scramble for land:Competing claims andcommercial pressureland and water resources they have held under customary tenure.Many cases show how the resource base of rural livelihoods is beingsqueezed through the loss of access to grasslands, forests andmarshlands that are customarily held as common property. Thepoor are bearing disproportionate costs, but reaping few benefits,largely because of poor governance. The land rush is also leadingto extensive conversion of natural ecosystems with accompanyinglosses of ecosystem services and biodiversity (Anseeuw et al., 2012).Land use decisions are invariably complex, involving manystakeholders with different priorities. Productive land may besimultaneously in demand by communities (e.g., homelands andsacred sites), or for food production, forest products, biodiversityconservation, urban development or carbon storage. Renewableenergy demands add an extra dimension, through use of land forbioenergy feedstock production. The situation is further complicatedby the interdependence between the production and consumptionof key resources such as food, fibre, energy and water. Agriculturerequires land, water and energy; water extraction and distributionrequire energy; and energy production often requires water (WorldEconomic Forum, 2011). All require ecosystem services, and oneland use decision can affect the provision of many different services.Moreover, the poorest and most vulnerable people are most affectedby the consequences of poor land use choices, while being the leastable to influence such decisions.The frequency and complexity of land use competition isexpected to rise as human demands grow.Scramble for land: Food and fuelThroughout the developing world, external investors are scramblingto secure access to agricultural land for future food production.Since the mid-2000s, it is estimated that an area almost the size ofWestern Europe has been transferred in land allocation deals. Thelatest rush for farmland was triggered by the food crisis of 2007-08, but long-term drivers include population growth; increasedconsumption by a global minority; and market demands for food,biofuels, raw materials and timber (Anseeuw et al., 2012).Recent research shows that deals reported as approved orunder negotiation worldwide amounted to a total of 203 millionhectares: 134 million hectares of this total are located in Africa;43 million hectares in Asia and 19 million hectares in Latin America.Of these, deals for 71 million hectares have so far been crossreferenced,confirming the unprecedented scale of the land rushover the past decade (Anseeuw et al., 2012).The best agricultural land is often targeted for thisacquisition. The rural poor are frequently being dispossessed ofthe poorest andmost vulnerablepeople are mostaffected by theconsequences ofpoor land-usechoicesAn area almost thesize of WesternEurope has beentransferred in landallocation dealssince mid-20005.2 millionhectares of land inPapua New Guineahas been acquiredfor long-termleasesCase study: Papua New GuineaIn the last five years, 5.2 million hectares of land in Papua NewGuinea has been acquired for long-term leases – termed SpecialAgricultural and Business Leases (SABLs). These now encompass15 per cent of the country’s land area. Nearly all of these leases havebeen handed to foreign investors or multinational corporations –mostly for logging and oil palm plantations. Under existing SABLs,around 2 million hectares of forests are allowed to be legally cleared.In a number of cases, the leases appear to have been grantedwithout the free and prior consent of a majority of the traditionallandowners, which is a legal requirement in Papua New Guinea.In response to a growing domestic and international outcry, thegovernment declared a temporary moratorium on SABLs, butthis offers only a temporary respite to one of the most seriousand immediate threats to the country’s forests and biodiversity(Laurance, 2012, in press).The sheer pace of change demonstrated by this exampleunderlies an urgent challenge: to stop dispossession and landallocations that do not serve a genuine public interest; to legallyrecognize the rights of the rural poor; and to steer toward moreequitable models that give a key role to existing land users(Anseeuw et al., 2012).The Land MatrixThe Land Matrix is an online public database of large-scale landdeals. It is facilitated by a partnership of organizations withan interest in promoting transparency and accountability indecisions over land and investment through open data. The LandMatrix aims to provide a permanent observatory to which anyuser can contribute information. www.landportal.info/landmatrixWWF Living Planet Report 2012 page 88 Chapter 2: Why we should care page 89