This document summarizes the key findings of a study on land and water governance systems in promoting sustainable large-scale agricultural investments in sub-Saharan Africa. The study analyzed 6 countries and found that land and water are governed by separate policies and institutions. Within frameworks, multiple property rights regimes exist. The volume of water extracted by investments is typically not specified. Monitoring of environmental and social impacts is lacking due to limited funding and capacity. Coordinated systems would integrate land and water administration, recognize existing rights, include planning, pricing and taxation, and resolve disputes through accessible institutions.

1. Are current land and water governance
systems fit for purpose in promoting
sustainable and equitable large-scale
agricultural investments in SSA?
Timothy Olalekan Williams
Director, Africa
International Water Management Institute (IWMI)
GWP-ILC-IWMI Workshop, Pretoria 15/6/2015

2. Presentation Outline
• Introduction and background
• Multiple dimensions of land and water
governance (L&WG)
• Comparative analysis of L&WG systems across
six study countries
• Guidelines for coordinated land and water
governance

3. Introduction
• Recent wave of large-scale agricultural
investments in sub-Saharan Africa
• Importance of coordinated land and water
governance.
• Methodology of background study

4. Analysis of impacts of large scale investments in agriculture
on water resources, ecosystems and livelihoods, and
development of policy options for decision-makers

5. Background
• AMCOW’s call for development of research-
based policy options for effective
management of land and water in LSALI.
• UNEP, GRID-ARENDAL and FAO enlisted IWMI
to conduct an analytical study to shed light on
the likely impacts of LSALI.

6. Analytical Approach for Background Study
1. At pan-continental level, an analysis of drivers,
extent, characteristics and production activities
on LSALI across SSA (based on the Land Matrix
database, www.landmatrix.org).
A three-prong approach

7. Winnowing & cleaning of LMDb
Unreliable, double counted deals eliminated.
22 target countries with 148 deals
Canceled, abandoned and failed deals eliminated.
37 target countries with 503 deals
Non agricultural deals eliminated.
37 target countries with 612 deals
Deals outside of Africa eliminated.
37 target countries with 711 deals
Initial Landmatrix database.
83 target countries with 1805 deals

8. Analytical Approach (continued)
2. A more detailed analysis of LSALI in 6 countries, Ghana,
Mali, Ethiopia, Tanzania, Mozambique and Zambia, based
on field-level case studies, to examine the adequacy of
policy and institutional frameworks for guiding and
managing such investments.
3. A socio-hydrological simulation modeling exercise in Baro-
Gilo basin in the Gambella region of Ethiopia to assess
impacts of LSALI on agricultural production and water
resources and evaluate trade-offs between biophysical and
social objectives of multiple stakeholder groups.

9. Two key results at the
pan-continental level

10. • In 2000-12, ten countries accounted for 70% of LSLAs in SSA
• Area acquired in each of these countries > 100,000 ha

11. 15%
11%
9%
6%
5%4%
50%
Ethiopia
Mozambique
Tanzania
Ghana
Mali
Zambia
Others
(15%)
(11%)
(9%)
(6%)
(5%)
(4%)
(50%)
Percentage distribution of total area of LSALI
in SSA by country, 2000-2012

12. Multiple dimensions of land and water governance
(L&WG)

13. Dimension (I)
• L&WG concerns the rules, processes and structures
through which decisions are made about access to
land and water, their use and management; the manner
in which decisions are implemented and enforced, the
way that competing interests in these resources are
managed.
• L&WG encompasses statutory, customary and religious
institutions. It covers ownership, rights and policies
governing transactions, transfers and disputes.

14. Dimension (II)
• L&WG is about power, access to information and
political economy.
• L&WG varies from country to country. This implies
there is no one-size-fits-all solution for improved
L&WG.

15. Results of comparative analysis of land and
water governance systems in 6 study countries

16. 1. In all the 6 study countries, land and water are
governed under separate but parallel policy, legal
and institutional frameworks.
Results

17. Main government organizations with key roles in L&WG for LSALI in Mozambique

18. Results (continued)
2. Within each framework, multiple property rights
regimes, including state property, customary property
and private property, coexist and are operated
simultaneously.
3. In Ghana and Zambia state and customary property rights
regimes are recognized in land matters. In Ethiopia, Mali,
Mozambique and Tanzania all land is vested in the state -
though this authority may be delegated to a lower-level
tier of government.

19. Results (continued)
4. In Mali, Mozambique, Tanzania and Zambia water access
and use rights are systematically included in LSALI
contracts. The main requirements are for the investors
to regularly pay water fees and to maintain secondary
or tertiary canals. In Ghana and Ethiopia water rights
are not often discussed at the time of land contract
negotiation.
5. In all 6 study countries, the volume of water to be
extracted by LSALI is not usually specified and water
pricing, where it exists, is not related to volume extracted.

20. Results (continued)
6. In all 6 study countries the agencies charged with the
responsibility of monitoring compliance with economic,
social and environmental impacts and mitigation
measures are poorly funded and lack the capacity to
effectively perform their functions.
7. Parallel systems of land and water rights administration
and management, poor cross- sectoral coordination of
regulatory activities and inadequate capacity in relevant
government agencies hampered effective and
coordinated L&WG in all six study countries.

21. Actors/institutions typically involved in LSALI negotiations in Ghana

22. What will coordinated L&WG systems to
promote sustainable and equitable LSALI
look like?

23. Based on an adaptation of the Land Governance
Assessment Framework (Deininger et al, 2012)
• Information on land and water rights is accessible,
comprehensive, current and reliable.
• Policies, laws and institutions recognize existing land
and water rights and enforcement is monitored.
• Land and water planning, pricing and taxation are
in place to avoid negative externalities, allow
provision of services and support effective
decentralization.

24. • Expropriation of land and water rights is done in a
consultative and transparent way and followed up
with quick payment of fair compensation and
effective appeal mechanisms.
• Interested parties can access institutions with clear
mandates to authoritatively resolve disputes
• Legal, policy and institutional reforms to bring land
and water administration under a single government
Ministry or promote greater and more effective
coordination between various agencies.
• Monitor and evaluate performance of different L&WG
arrangements

25. Thank you for your attention