Paper short abstract:

This paper explores how foreign large-scale investors have interpreted the ‘land tenure security’ paradigm in Uganda and Sierra Leone. I analyse how investors have facilitated the formalisation of customary land rights in the course of their land acquisition strategies, with varying outcomes.

Paper long abstract:

Against the background of the global ‘land rush’ debate, the international community has promoted a plethora of global governance norms for more responsible land investments. A growing emphasis has been set on the paradigm of ‘land tenure security’ in these instruments, which is often equated with the formalisation of land rights to protect local communities from dispossession. There is an expectation on companies to avoid ‘land grabbing’ at all costs, to identify and protect legitimate land rights, and practice principles such as ‘Free Prior Informed Consent’ (FPIC). However, how investors are supposed to do this and how they are doing this is under-researched and varies widely. More importantly, whether the recognition and documentation of local land rights in the context of investments leads to the protection of these rights remains unclear. This paper sheds light on these questions by analysing cases of land investments on (unregistered) customary land in northern Uganda and Sierra Leone, in which investors have facilitated processes of land formalisation. In Sierra Leone, this has led to the safeguarding of customary land rights, while in Uganda, customary rights were gradually erased through their conversion to other tenure systems. Based on 13 months of fieldwork in both countries, I argue that these variations in outcomes depend on the interplay of the concrete practices of private firms (in interpreting the land tenure security paradigm) and the wider context of local land politics and land governance institutions in both countries.