Reflection Cum Critical Paper

Land Grabs, The Agrarian Question and The Corporate Food Regime
Land grab in the context of current review is the large scale acquisition of agricultural land through
buying, leasing or any other means by big corporations with the support of state for the purpose of
producing agricultural and commercial crops. According to International Land Coalition (ILC), between
2000 and 2011, 2042 deals covering 203.4 million hectares of land were under negotiations or already
completed. Major part of this land grab occurred in Sub Saharan Africa and Asia. The ILC suggested
that the major driver behind large scale land acquisition is the growing demand of food and cash
crops. Also, finance agriculture was also a lot of interest for big corporations. The decline of bio fuel
industry failed many land grab deals.

Land grabbing mainly occur by two methods: 1) Dispossession by displacement: It is a politically led
displacement where a small peasant gives his land to big corporation under political pressure for
money or in the place of another piece of land elsewhere. 2) Dispossession by accumulation: It is
market led exclusion where a small peasant can’t be able to stand in competition to big companies
and ultimately loses his land.

Now, the Agrarian question is: whether, and if so, how Capital is transforming Agricultural Sector.
Capitalism in Agricultural Industry forces the farming system to increase the productivity to meet the
requirements of the industry at the lowest cost possible. Higher is the production; higher are the
profits for big corporations. However this process undermines the capacities of small farmers to
compete in market. Now, the labour class (which was previously independent small scale farmers) has
no part in decision making. They have to work according to the order of higher class corporate bosses.

The corporate food regime is handled by multinational food corporations which produces crops and
provides food to the entire world. In the recent years, growing demand of “organic”, “healthier” and
“green” food shifts some attention of these companies towards healthy food products. These
products are mainly affordable by rich families and hence these are more popular in rich countries
(mainly global north). On the other hand, to cater the need of global south, these countries produce
products on large scale that are affordable to local peoples, which may not be as healthy as other
products. There are various motives of corporate businesses: Agribusiness produces food crops.
Industrial capital is interested in producing cash crops. Finance capital seeks to produce new crops and
agricultural instruments. First two increases their productivity to gain maximum profit by selling huge
number of products while last produces limited number of products which are in high demand to
increase their selling price and gain profit on that price.

Now the question arises that whether or not capitalist agriculture meet the food requirements in the
future. Is the increase in productivity sustainable using this model? Are these companies sees the
agricultural land as another resources as coal and goal and will allow to deplete its quality over the
time?
To cater the need of food for global population, an international organisation must be formed to
affectively distribute the food resources across the nations. Biotechnological modified species of crops
may be used to increase the productivity. Exploitation of land resources must be restricted. Nature
friendly agricultural practices must be followed to avoid many environmental problems. Some laws
must be formed to safeguard the rights of small farmers and labourers against big agricultural
companies.

Environment Issues and Burden on small farmers by the emergence of

capitalism
Capitalism often tend to ignore the environmental problems occur due to the over exploitation of
resources. Big companies just try to maximize the productivity to meet the market need at the low
cost even at the expense of environmental destruction. As we can see in the case of Indonesia where
palm oil tree production creates deforestation which ultimately causes flooding at Indonesia (which is
mostly a coastal country). Historically, Indonesia is not a huge producer of palm oil but due to
emergence of big agricultural companies and land grabbing by them from small farmers creates this
situation there. They forced the local farmers to grow palm oil trees there. Deforestation was done on
a large scale to create the fields for palm oil trees. This destroyed biodiversity there. Also, this
deforestation contributed in global warming which is a threat to mankind, in general.

Another major problem is the exploitation of small farmers by the big companies. Big companies
either grab their land using political power or defeat them into market by increase the competition in
the market which ultimately leave farmer with no choice but to give up their land and work as
agricultural labourers. Then due to the pressure of increasing productivity, often extra load is put on
to the farmer. They don’t even get their fair share of profit. As we can see in Indonesia, most of the
farmers are poor due to the low amount of money they are getting for their palm oil by the big
companies. Another example is the peasants of Bihar under East India Company who were forced to
grow opium which was not good for the fields. It depleted the nutrients in the soil. It created the
shortage of food in the country. Also, they didn’t even get enough money for their survival. Ultimately
Millions of people were dead due to famine under the rule of East India Company.