Across Africa, vast swathes of fertile land are being snapped up in a global scramble that promises a new Green Revolution – or perhaps, a bitter harvest of discontent. From the bustling corridors of Gulf capitals to the boardrooms of European investment funds, the allure of Africa’s agricultural potential is proving irresistible, driven by a potent cocktail of food insecurity, climate anxieties, and the relentless pursuit of profit.
For decades, Africa has been a continent of immense, yet largely untapped, agricultural promise. Now, with 65 percent of the world’s uncultivated arable land lying within its borders, the eyes of a hungry world are turning south. Data from the Land Matrix Initiative paints a stark picture: a staggering 37 percent of all global large-scale agricultural investments are now flowing into Africa, making it the most targeted region for these deals within the Global Majority.
This intensified interest is no accident. The ghost of the 2007-2008 global food crisis still haunts the corridors of power, particularly in the Middle East and North Africa. Rising food prices then were a potent accelerant for unrest, a stark reminder that “bread and butter” issues often underpin political stability. The ensuing turmoil, including the Arab Spring, laid bare the vulnerabilities of food-importing nations. Consequently, Gulf states like Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have aggressively pursued food security strategies, securing land and water abroad, from Southeast Asia to Eastern Europe and, critically, across Africa.
Beyond the immediate concerns of food security, other drivers have propelled this land rush. The aftermath of the 2007-2008 global financial crisis saw a flight to tangible assets, with arable land becoming a prized commodity for investment funds seeking to diversify their portfolios. More recently, the seismic shifts wrought by the Covid-19 pandemic, a surge in protectionism, and escalating geopolitical conflicts have further amplified anxieties over food and energy security, making land an even more coveted resource.
The Illusion of a Green Revolution?
On the surface, these large-scale land acquisitions (LSLAs) offer a tantalising vision: a “Green Revolution” for Africa, mirroring the agricultural transformation witnessed in South Asia in the 1960s. The promise of capital investment, technology transfer, and improved productivity echoes through the pronouncements of many African governments, who are often keen to secure long-term leases, particularly given the complexities of communal land ownership on the continent.
Yet, the reality on the ground is often less rosy. While over 50 percent of finalized land deals are operational, meaning the land is being used for something, actual farming is taking place on a mere 11 percent of the contracted land. In countries like Mozambique and Tanzania, vast tracts have been allocated not for staple food production, but for biofuels and agro-industrial crops.
Indeed, the initial enthusiasm for bioethanol production in the late 2000s, driven by concerns over peak oil and decarbonisation, has waned significantly. Growing concerns about the sustainability of biofuels, their carbon footprint, and their impact on food supply, coupled with the rapid ascent of electric vehicles, have cast a long shadow over this particular land-use trend.
The New Frontier: Carbon Markets and “Green Colonialism”
A more recent, and increasingly significant, driver of land deals is the burgeoning carbon market. Under the framework of the Kyoto Protocol’s Voluntary Carbon Markets, carbon credits have emerged as a valuable commodity. Companies and countries seeking to meet regulatory requirements are buying credits from project developers or nations – many in Africa – that have accumulated them through low emissions or carbon sequestration projects.
The African Carbon Markets Initiative, launched at COP27, aims to generate 300 million new carbon credits annually by 2030. Gabon, with its rich forestry resources, has already begun making carbon credits available, and Kenyan President William Ruto has optimistically dubbed carbon resources an “unparalleled economic goldmine.”
However, critics are increasingly vocal, denouncing these practices as “land grabs,” “neocolonial exploitation,” or even “green colonialism.” They point to a disturbing trend: investors, particularly foreign governments, acquiring land in food-insecure countries for agricultural production, only to export the produce to their own nations, like the Gulf states, rather than supplying local markets. Countries such as Mozambique, Sudan, Chad, and Tanzania, despite hosting significant land deals, continue to grapple with high levels of food insecurity among their own populations.
Geopolitical Chessboard and Diverging Interests
The trajectory of LSLAs over the past two decades mirrors the profound geopolitical and geoeconomic shifts shaping the global landscape. Major global powers and emerging economies – including China, India, Turkey, and the Gulf countries – are actively securing access to food supplies. European and American investment funds are also significant players, as seen in Tanzania and Ghana. Simultaneously, African governments, from Ethiopia to Madagascar, are leveraging these deals to secure financing in the wake of commodity shocks and diminishing foreign aid.
Historical and geopolitical ties also influence investment flows. Sudan, for example, has forged agreements with Gulf nations, while Brazil has invested in biofuel production in Mozambique. Interestingly, Russia, despite expanding its footprint in Africa through security services, has not significantly engaged in land deals. As the world’s largest country by landmass with vast agricultural expanses and low population density, Russia has little incentive to outsource agricultural production. Instead, its focus is on strengthening its military presence and securing access to mineral resources.
The issue is further complicated by internal dynamics, with some African governments seeking to expand their control over agricultural land, even in disputed territories, as exemplified by the ongoing contention between Sudan and Ethiopia over the Al Fashaga region.
Transparency, Corruption, and the Road Ahead
The debate surrounding LSLAs is highly politicized. While proponents highlight the potential for transforming Africa’s agricultural sectors through efficiency gains, technological advancements, and enhanced connectivity, the challenges are undeniable. A lack of transparency surrounding these deals fuels concerns about corruption, particularly given the sensitive nature of land use and tenure across the continent. The advent of non-financial standards for economic performance, such as those in carbon markets, further heightens the risk of corruption or “greenwashing,” especially in challenging business environments marked by conflict and instability, like the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Despite these critiques, it is crucial to acknowledge the agency of African governments, who often voluntarily offer land to prospective investors. While navigating complex land tenure issues, large-scale land acquisitions could indeed be vital for improving efficiency and technological capabilities across the continent.
Looking Forward: A Future of Consolidation, Not Revolution?
In the most likely scenario, African land will continue to attract investor and government interest. However, the nature and geographic distribution of these deals will evolve, reflecting the consolidation of emerging geopolitical alignments, with Gulf countries likely exerting growing influence in certain regions. Concerns about self-sufficiency and control over production chains are expected to remain dominant, overshadowing the free trade principles that characterised earlier decades. While the momentum behind broader environmental, social, and governance (ESG) considerations may be waning, carbon credits are poised to remain a key framework for investment in some regions.
This new context, coupled with ongoing food insecurity and political instability in several African countries, suggests a future where “win-win” solutions – deals that benefit both investors and local populations – may become more elusive. While mutually advantageous deals are not impossible, they are more likely to occur in countries with fertile land, water resources, political stability, strong land rights frameworks, and deeper integration into regional value chains.
A widespread “Green Revolution” in Africa, driven by these investment trends, appears unlikely in the short to medium term. The prevailing investment drivers, alongside geopolitical and geoeconomic trends, suggest a future of consolidated interests rather than a transformative agricultural shift. This could, in some regions, exacerbate existing tensions and even lead to clashes over land tenure and use, particularly in areas like the Horn of Africa and Central Africa. The great African land rush, it seems, is far from over, and its ultimate harvest remains to be seen.
