Blog post 8: Dodgy dealings - water grabbing in Sierra Leone

Last month the Sierra Leone Land Alliance (SSLA) released a report titled ‘Land grabbing in a time of Covid-19 in Sierra Leone’ in which they said land ownership was a primary cause of tension between the government and citizens (Politico 2020). This notion is not new: land tension and unequal distribution of resources has frequently been stated as a major driver of the Sierra Leone civil war (Sturgess and Flower 2013).

This post will explore land grabbing in Sierra Leone in more detail, highlighting why it’s such a contentious issue. It will illuminate the reasons behind the government’s decision to lease/sell land and why citizens are so opposed to it. Unlike my other blog entries, it will focus on foreign players’ involvement in African hydropolitics and how they are partly to blame for the poor relationship between Sierra Leone citizens and government.  

Land grabbing

First a quick introduction to land grabbing: what is it and how does it relate to water and development in Africa? Land grabbing or transnational land acquisitions refer to the transfer of landuse and/or ownership rights from local communities to foreign investors through large-scale land acquisitions (Rulli et al. 2013). It is contentious because it is often done without prior consent of the landusers and/or owners. Water is a major driver of LSLAs (Franco et al. 2013) as it is needed to sustain agricultural production: 83% of freshwater use in Africa is for agriculture (Wada et al. 2011). Thus, every land grab is also a water grab.


Sierra Leone 

Following the civil war, Sierra Leone, backed by the World Bank, has pushed to attract large-scale agribusiness investments to aid economic recovery (Tran 2013). Despite, the multiple land grabs in Sierra Leone since 2000 (fig. 1), the 2011 acquisition of 6,500ha of farmland in the Pujehun region in particular, has garnered a lot of media attention (Tran 2013; Gbandia 2016). The Sierra Leone government leased the land to Luxembourg-based Socfin Group for 50 years. In addition to paying annual rents, Socfin promised jobs and the construction of roads, schools and a hospital, benefiting the local communities (Mousseau et al. 2012). However, subsequent broken promises and opposition from local communities have since contributed to the tension between the government and citizens. 


Figure 1. Land deals concluded in Sierra Leone (excluding mining) between 2000 and 2016. Overall, 24 investors from 16 different countries engaged in LSLAs. Socfin land grabs are highlighted in red. Source


Who should be held accountable?

The government?

The primary justification for promoting LSLA is based on the claim that 85-89% of the country’s arable land is ‘unused’ (Sturgess and Flower 2013).  However, a report by GIZ concluded that there was in fact no vast ‘unused’ arable land (2011) as fallow land was required by farmers.  This misunderstanding or purposeful oversight of existing farming practices not only displaced communities but also impacted their economic and social livelihoods. Protestors opposing the land grab were arrested and some detained without food for 8 days. Other grievances against the government included a lack of consultation with local land users, poor transparency and communication, and bribery of the Paramount Chief who held the most power amongst the traditional communities (Mousseau et al. 2012). 

Socfin?

In the construction of the plantation, crucial forests and agricultural land was lost with little compensation to local farmers. In fact, there appears to be minimal consideration of local communities much beyond their use as an exploitable resource. Working conditions are described as “near-slavery” with low wages, long hours, insufficient toilets and a days’ forfeited pay if you are 10+ minutes late after lunch (Mousseau et al. 2012). Remember all land grabs are water grabs? Well, Socfin are likely extracting water for palm oil processing from underlying shallow basement aquifers or the Moa river (fig. 2) (UNICEF 2012). Whilst previously, a synergy between the distributed small holder agriculturalists and distributed low intensity use of groundwater existed (Schumacher 1973), Scofins more intense water demands may deplete low yielding basement aquifers. Not only does this extraction affect local communities’ water supply, but it may impact others who use the same aquifer or are downstream, leading to more widespread discontent.

Figure 2. Map of the potential water sources (excluding rainfall collection) for Socfin extraction. They have unrestricted water use and access, only paying $0.0007/m3 extracted (Mousseau et al. 2012). Volumes extracted are unregulated and therefore actual water sources used are unknown. Source: map made by author (me) using data from Berkeley, WorldBank, HumData and BGS.

Conclusion

It is not the investment by foreign players that is the problem. Instead, it is the disregard for local communities and effective exploitation of resources that leads to conflict. Consequently, it is an issue of management and power equality between local landowners, the government and Socfin that can only be achieved through proper regulation, consultation and transparency. Therefore, foreign players and the government are equally accountable for tensions between Sierra Leone citizens and authorities. 


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Blog post 4: Cape Town water crisis - just another political game?

Image
Around mid-2017 friends and family in Cape Town started talking about their fears of running out of water. By the end of the year my social media feeds were full of shared posts about water conservation. On the 1st of February 2018, the South African government increased Cape Town’s mandatory water restrictions, limiting water use to 50 litres/person/day ( City of Cape Town 2018 ). Recommendations accompanying the restriction included only one toilet flush a day and one laundry load a week ( CBC 2018 ). Additional water had to be bought (if you were lucky enough to find some) or collected from natural springs in the city (fig. 1). All of this was in an effort to avoid “Day Zero” – the day the city runs out of water. This post will explore whether this crisis was caused by poor environmental conditions or politics.  Figure 1. Messages from my friend at the University of Cape Town who was experiencing the drought first hand. So, who or what caused this crisis? Drought? Well let’s pr...
Read more

Blog post 1: Introductions

Image
Hello and welcome to my blog where I discuss hydropolitics in Africa! This blog post is a quick introduction to me and why I'm passionate about African hydropolitics. It will also give a brief insight into why water is such an important political issue and touch upon some topics I hope to explore more in future posts. I grew up in the cultural melting pot that is Johannesburg, South Africa, and this sparked my interested in the Africa continent. Although whilst living there I experienced hosepipe bans and occasional water shortages due to poorly maintained water pipes, it was not until I moved to the U.K. that the topic of hydropolitics in Africa really grabbed my attention. When back visiting Johannesburg, I volunteered at the Yeoville Community School which caters to children with challenging socioeconomic backgrounds.  Most of the children I met lived in informal housing in the surrounding townships, such as Alexandra, Vooslorus and Orange Farm and almost all of them looked for...
Read more

Blog post 2: Liquid gold

Image
This is a quick post about a video I came across and wanted to share. Although it gives a global overview of the water crises, I think it nicely summarises why water and freshwater management is important as well as portraying its political nature.  Source Whilst some of the case studies mentioned in the video are from countries elsewhere in the world, the broader issues they touch upon, such as transboundary resource issues (Colorado River) and local water conflicts (Mexicali), can also be explained using case studies from around Africa. One line from the video that particularly stood out to me was:  " The more scarce water gets, the more access to it becomes a competition with winners and losers, often with governments picking." Not only is this highly relevant to the blog but it also suggests that water will become increasingly politicised in the future as climate change leads to increased water scarcity ( UN 2020 ).
Read more