Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenors:
-
George Mudimu
(MUAST)
Tom Tom (University of South Africa)
Send message to Convenors
- Chair:
-
Andrew Chilombo
(Envirosmart Solutions)
- Format:
- Panel
- Streams:
- Anthropology (x) Conservation & Land Governance (y)
- Location:
- Hörsaalgebäude, Hörssaal E
- Sessions:
- Wednesday 31 May, -
Time zone: Europe/Berlin
Short Abstract:
The present intervention zooms in on how accumulation has evolved in African states and how African states have navigated the development terrain and with what ramifications for Africa’s young and growing population.
Long Abstract:
Seven decades have passed since some of the African countries have attained independence. Over the varying decades of independence, African states have gone through several ups and downs. The present intervention zooms in on how accumulation has evolved in African states and how African states have navigated the development terrain and with what ramifications for Africa’s young and growing population. Attention is also paid to how the two competing and mostly incompatible types of accumulation - capital accumulation and social accumulation - have affected African development trajectories. While neo-liberal economic and social policies mostly imposed on Africa are informed by the principles of capital accumulation, most African states are based on the principles of social accumulation hinged on kin and ethnicity The evolution of these forms of accumulation and their relevance in Africa’s development needs have excited contrasting debates on the most conducive models for Africa’s development. Are neo-liberal policies really the panacea for Africa’s development challenges? Or is mainstreaming the key principles of the ‘’economy of affection” a game changer in Africa’s progress? Key issues that draw our attention and on which contributions in this panel are based on focus on;
1. The dynamics of extractivism resultant outcomes on the environment and the peoples.
4. How Africa has been enmeshed in the ‘transition overload’ and the forces undergirding this trajectory.
5. A deepened understanding of how poly crisis (capitalism, wars, diseases and climate change) has evolved, shaping political responses
7. Changing rural livelihoods in Africa. From what to where?
Accepted paper:
Session 1 Wednesday 31 May, 2023, -Paper short abstract:
Large-scale land acquisitions (LSLAs) have emerged as an important policy issue in development discourse. As a form of extractivism where land changes hands, LSLA deals transform resource use and livelihoods in ways that reinforce pre-existing socioeconomic conditions of communities
Paper long abstract:
Large-scale land acquisitions (LSLAs) have emerged as an important policy issue in development discourse. Governments in host countries engineer policy landscapes for enclosing local community resources for capital accumulation. Supported for food security, biofuels, financial investments, eco-tourism etc., opponents of LSLAs raise concerns regarding the fate of local communities suffering from (potential) land dispossession and involuntary displacements, environmental degradation, diminished local food security and sovereignty and casualisation of farm workers. Scholarly efforts to understand socio-economic and environmental impacts of LSLAs grapple with methodological challenges related to lack of (reliable) baseline data. Some case studies have highlighted failed implementation of LSLA deals, resulting in cancellations, scaling down, abandonment or change of investment business models. Few attempts have been made to: i) understand what accounts for such failures and what happens when both state policy and private sector implementation of land deals fail; and ii) to understand how local communities cope with failed LSLA deals. Taking Nansanga farm block, a government of Zambia-led LSLA deal, this article presents a study to: i) understand LSLA deals as forms of extractivism; and ii) examine how local communities cope with failed LSLA deals. Overall, results indicate diminished role of the government in the land deal; creating a development vacuum that tobacco production and open pit manganese mining opportunistically filled in. The findings suggest pre-existing socio-economic status and household labour are key to understanding coping strategies. Finally, LSLA deals transform resource use and livelihoods in ways that reinforce pre-existing socio-economic conditions of communities.