Transnational capital and the scramble for land and profit: financialization, agrarian development, and resource conflict in Africa
通过七个非洲国家的案例，系统考察金融化农业经济活动如何在不同阶段引发发展或冲突，揭示其灰色地带对社区资源冲突的影响，为政策制定者提供警示。
The promise of financialization in the agrarian world in Africa stems from its capacity to (re)create local economies purportedly for the benefit of investors, local communities, and governments. However, financialization is also known to unevenly distribute risks and rewards between investors and local communities. Therefore, this paper employs a just transition lens to systematically examine existing studies on financial investments in economic activities that involve the exploitation of agricultural resources. It does so to generate big picture insights on the relationship between financialized agro-economic activities (FAEAs), agrarian development, and resource conflict in Africa. Informed by an exploratory research design, the paper draws on secondary data on seven case studies (Uganda, Tanzania, Zambia, South Africa, Côte d’Ivoire, Senegal, and Ghana) to outline the different sets of endogenous and exogenous circumstances, practices, and tendencies in the pre-entry, entry, operations, and exit phases of FAEAs that explain how and why they spur development or engender conflict across their lifespans. By examining FAEAs across these phases in multiple countries, we show that the explanations for their developmental and conflictual outcomes transcend causal binaries of settled versus contested resource rights in the pre-entry phase, stakeholders engagement versus lack of engagement in the entry phase, economic integration versus displacement in the operations phase, and inclusive versus exclusive project termination. It shows that the effect of FAEAs on development and conflict are better understood by also considering the different grey areas between each of the aforementioned pair of factors that shape how FAEAs unfold in local communities. By applying a whole-systems perspective on just transition to examining FAEAs, this paper helps to highlight these grey dynamics (e.g., the side effects of integration on food security, long-term financial well-being, and community cohesion), thereby alerting policymakers, development practitioners, and the general public on how and why FAEAs make local communities susceptible to resource conflict in spite of their acclaimed developmental potential.