1. THE IMPACT OF LARGE SCALE FOREIGN LAND ACQUISITIONS ON RURAL HOUSEHOLDS: QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE EVIDENCE FROM Tanzania
EMMA AISBETT and GIULIA BARBANENTE
University of Hamburg, Erasmus University of Rotterdam
Mention mixed approach research made possible by increasing, improved access to data and growing body of literature

2. Four pathways of influence on rural households welfare
Rural households property rights over land
2. Returns to land controlled by rural households
3. Returns to rural households labour supply
4. Prices of agricultural goods consumed by the household

3. Qualitative evidence – Sources
National laws
Case studies from literature
Reports from human rights organisations and local media
Information from investors’ sources
Interviews with land experts (Dar es Salaam, 2017)

4. 1- property rights Decentralised land acquisition system
Village land recognised and protected
Negotiations and compensation required for acquisition
Delays in implementing some land laws provisions
Irregularities in the process of land transfer and compensation
Irreversibility of land status change
Lack of knowledge of procedures by villagers

5. 2- returns to land Access to new technologies and production methods
Benefits form improved infrastructure
Benefits from high standards of environmental protection of some investors
Loss in water access and other resources
Evidence of land degradation
Challenges with promises made by investor
De schutter

6. 3- returns to labor Poor working conditions
Opportunities created by the arrival of investors in terms of:
Outgrowing schemes
Wage work
Poor working conditions
Seasonality/casual labor
Low wages
Preference for migrant workers

7. 4- price of agricultural products
Shift towards wage-labor economy
Agricultural products bought instead of produced
Wages not able to cover the market prices
Risks of food insecurity

8. Quantitative evidence - Sources
Land Matrix - land acquisitions
Year of signature of the contract
Location (district level)
Size of land acquired (hectares)
Nationality of the acquirer
LSMS-ISA - rural development
LSMS-ISA, World Bank
3280 households in rural Tanzania
Three rounds of interview: , ,
Tanzania National Bureau of Statistics

9. Variables from LSMS-ISA
Rural households property rights over land
Certification
Area (hectares)
2. Returns to land controlled by rural households
Value of field if rented to 3d party(Birr)
Returns to rural households labour supply
Agricultural work (hrs/w)
Other work (hrs/w)
Wage work (hrs/w)
Goods consumed by the household
food expenditure (overall and product-specific)
Non-food expenditure (overall and product-specific)

10. Econometric approach Difference in difference with CEM weights
Observe change between 2008 and 2012
Treatment group: districts which received land acquisitions between 2008 and 2011
Control group: districts that did not receive land acquisitions prior to 2012
Robustness checks:
Control group with only hh in districts that receive LSLA after 2012
Change between 2010 and 2012 for districts that received LSLA in : medium term effect
We want to look at the distribution with quantile regression of actual land holdings not their change, so control for initial land holding with dependent variable as final outcome

11. observations
Strong robust evidence of loss in area of fields owned or cultivated by households
Increase in credit access
No evidence of outgrower schemes or raise in wage labor
Strong robust increase in non-food expenditure, in particular education and alcohol/tobacco
Food consumption: fall in consumption of cooking oils
Rise in education expenditure could be linked to the improved access to education that many investors promise….
Decrease in cooking oil for commercial pressure on them for biofuel?

12. conclusion
Qualitative evidence mostly critical of LSLAs’ effect on rural populations
Quantitative evidence more nuanced
Inclusive land laws not enough – need for advocacy
More to be done with increased access to data

13. Thank you giulia.barbanente@edle-phd.eu