He has some suggestions over at Vox for how to make sure those selling the land benefit:
- Ensure adequate transparency by either following or adopting similar transparency standards to those contained in theExtractive Industry Transparency Initiative;
- Ensure that the projects conform to best social and environmental practices by either committing to follow or adopt ing similar standards to those contained in the World Bank’s safeguard policies, the IFC’s Performance Standards, or theEquator Principles. These standards, in addition to ensuring that the deals are preceded by adequate environmental and social impact studies, will also ensure that adequate attention is paid to the rights of all involuntarily resettled people, regardless of whether or not they have formal title to the land they occupy, and adversely affected minorities and indigenous people. In this regard, they should also pay attention to the work of the UN Special Representative of the Secretary General on Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and Other Business Entities, who is calling on corporations to cooperate with governments in implementing a “protect, respect, and remedy” approach to the human rights of those affected by their operations.
- Ensure that adversely affected people share in the benefits of the project.
- Ensure that the transactions have a grievance mechanism so that any disputes that may arise in connection with the rights of affected people are fairly and effectively dealt with.
If the host state and foreign investors act in conformity with these suggestions, they will maximise the prospects that any large-scale land transaction benefits all stakeholders and minimise the chances of concluding harmful deals. As both the former President of Madagascar and the President of Daewoo Logistics have learned, failing to do so can have very unpleasant consequences indeed.
