What’s the new global source for fresh, shiny produce?

Famine-ridden Ethiopia

by Nancy Macdonald on Thursday, August 19, 2010 12:40pm - 0 Comments

Mostly, the deals fly under the radar. Sometimes, their size or sheer audacity triggers attention—like former AIG trader Philippe Heilberg’s deal to lease one million acres in Darfur. When it emerged that Daewoo, the South Korean giant, had signed a 99-year lease granting it close to half of Madagascar’s arable land, protests broke out in Antananarivo, the country’s capital, eventually sinking both the deal, and the president.

Why Africa? Not only is land roughly one-tenth the price of land in Asia, it’s likely the “final frontier,” says Paul Christie, marketing director at Emergent Asset, a London investment firm investing several hundred million dollars in commercial farms in Africa. Some 90 per cent of the world’s arable land is thought to be in use. Also, as Heilberg told the German magazine Der Spiegel after closing the deal in Darfur, “When food becomes scarce, the investor needs a weak state that does not force him to abide by any rules.” Sudan, a dictatorship ranked among the five most corrupt countries on the planet, certainly qualifies. Heilberg’s deal was approved by the deputy commander of Sudan’s People’s Liberation Army (SPLA), the official army of semi-autonomous southern Sudan. “This is Africa,” he recently told Rolling Stone. “The whole place is like one big mafia. I’m like a mafia head. That’s the way it works.”

He’s now looking to double his Sudanese holdings. In so doing, he’ll also gain access to hundreds of million of gallons of scarce water resources—the hidden impulse behind this new play on Africa, says Michael Taylor, with the Rome-based International Land Coalition. “Saudi Arabia has no shortage of land.

Its interest in Africa,” he says, “is water.” What we tend to think of as a dry continent actually has more water resources per capita than Europe, and drought-ridden countries from the Persian Gulf to Asia want in. In places, Taylor warns, investors are walking away with two-page contracts covering 99-year leases. No matter what the harm—over-consumption of water, over-fertilization, deforestation—“governments will be powerless to make changes.” South Korea’s Sudanese plantation will draw from the Nile, threatening Egypt’s food security downstream. Already experts warn of a brewing conflict between the nine Nile states—including favourite destinations for foreign farms: Sudan, Ethiopia, Tanzania and Kenya. Can the region shoulder the added water strain?

But the land deals also offer a chance to reverse decades of under-investment in Africa—which was bypassed by the Green Revolution that, in the ’60s and ’70s, transformed India and China. In much of the poor world, “land is not primal forest,” says Oxford economist Paul Collier; “it is just badly farmed.”

Collier, among the best-known voices on global poverty, argues that the West’s “love affair with peasant agriculture” is clouding the development debate on Africa. “Our peasantry vanished for a simple reason—it was inefficient,” says the author of The Bottom Billion, pointing to emerging market successes like Brazil, where large-scale industrial farms have replaced small holdings. “Commercial farms innovate,” he writes, “because scale helps to overcome the impediments faced by the small.” Some African intellectuals bridle at Western criticism of the play on Africa. “They’re here because we want them here,” says Teshome Gabre-Mariam, one of Ethiopia’s top lawyers. “We can’t ignore the development potential of this venture. We have everything to gain, nothing to lose.”

These days the severity of the food crisis has eased, but not forever. By 2050, when the global population tips nine billion, demand for food will have risen by as much as 70 per cent, according to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization. Food commodity prices continue to climb alongside rising energy prices and desertification is accelerating from Australia to China to Spain; the rising temperatures are predicted to slash yields. In places, that’s already begun. Like it or not, hungry eyes will increasingly zero in on Africa. The world, it seems, may come to depend on it.

Bookmark and Share
  • M_A_D_world

    Done rightly this could be a boon to regions in need of stable revenue from exports. However it seems the "Kovalchuck" type land deals may further impervious a region that could stand strongly if some of the various countries leaders there would think beyond their own take.

    "Kovalchuck Deal: a deal that is signed to get the cash up front without worry of future consequences or the rules that it circumvents."

  • Johathan

    Out sourcing always has its trials. However, given time it greatly improves the lives of the people in the country involved. Ask the thousands of farmers who work on these crops if this is a good idea, you will get a very positive response. Of course everybody always wants more, that is nature. The problem is that in Africa when you want more, you take it by violence.

    The Portuguese had huge cooperative farms in their colonies in Africa. The farms provided jobs and food for millions of starving people. Back in the 50s the city of Luanda was as developed as Paris. Both white and black Africans lived peacefully together in the same neighborhoods and often intermarried. Many Portuguese left to seek a better life in Africa. It all worked well until the Chinese and Soviets trained and paid terrorists to attack the cities and farms killing hundreds of thousands. Over 2 million people fled to Portugal (population at the time was only 8 million).

    These kinds of investments can in the long run contribute to stabilization. However the west has been investing in Africa for centuries and they still seem to find ways to keep themselves from progressing. Lets hope this time it works out better.

  • http://www.afrigrow.com Tom

    After 5 years in Ethiopia, it is clear that commercial agriculture is more productive and innovative and, if well managed, better for the land than the subsistence farming of the last 2,000 years that wiped out much of the soil productivity, and the soil itself. It may even be that lifestyles and incomes for those working on commercial farms are better than if they grew their own and took their chances with local markets. However, projects need to be very well managed in terms of adequate rent (tax) for the use of a country's resources, and ensuring the effect on local population and especially their food security is positive. In general, Ethiopia is keen on foreign exchange, since local market food prices are often higher than export world market prices. it is important that when they do bring foreign investors, that the benefits to the country and the local population are optimized.

  • Anon.

    This is horrible. Why can't Ethiopians use their own land to feed themselves?

From Macleans