Land for Equity as an Innovative Approach to Large-scale Land Investments: Benefits and Risks Jennifer Duncan, Landesa Sr. Attorney and Africa Program Director For presentation at the Multi-stakeholder Conference on Agricultural Investment, Gender and Land in Africa: Towards inclusive, equitable and socially responsible investment. Cape Town, South Africa. 5-7 March, 2014. Presentation Overview and Objectives Introduce Land for Equity as an approach to balancing the benefits and risks in large-scale land investments Outline the potential advantages and risks of a Land for Equity approach Provide a brief comparison with fixed price leases and other compensation approaches Discuss ways for states to support communities considering a Land for Equity approach in dealing with investors Conclusions Photo credit: vredeseilanden, Flickr 2 1
Land for Equity Basic Concept and Objectives Land for Equity is an approach to balancing equities benefits and risks between stakeholders in large-scale land based investments. The essence of Land for Equity is for the land holder (e.g., state or communities) to trade long-term rights to the land for an equity stake in the investment venture, rather than cash lease or sales payments. Photo credit: ICRISAT Hope 3 Experience with Land for Equity to Date In Tanzania, the government has suggested that a policy favoring Land for Equity would help to create mutual benefits for the state, villages, and investors. In South Africa, Land for Equity became the structural framework for innovative (though not often successful) approaches to accessing and utilizing state support for post-apartheid land reform efforts. [China and South Korea development on the urban fringe] Similar models used in extractive industries 4 2
Basic structure and implications Trade land for minority equity stake in the venture (though often majority stake in South Africa) This means landholder gives up secure income stream from fixed lease payments assumes part of the start-up risk calculates that longer term profit shares will provide an escalating income stream over time Photo credit: UN 5 Potential benefits In best case scenario, land for equity schemes can: Create mutual incentives among communities and investors for ensuring the success and profitability of their joint venture Provide a long-term income stream from the venture that will benefit the community over time Help landholders to capture a greater share of the increase in land value over time Help investors to share start-up risks 6 3
Risk factors Minority shareholders have limited decision-making authority in the venture, and insufficient rights and ability to monitor activities that may reduce reported profit (concerns about transfer pricing, etc.). Deals are complex: government and communities have limited capacity to evaluate prospective investor and then to negotiate, monitor and enforce agreements. Could be significant risks to women and minority/vulnerable groups within communities; additional research needed. Photo credit: vredeseilanden, Flickr 7 More risk factors Return on investment in agriculture often requires a very long time. Difficult to reconcile with shareholder expectations for dividends. No return on the investment if the project fails. Companies assume risk by giving up full ownership control. Can be difficult to determine fair equity percentages. 8 4
Comparing Land for Equity with Other Compensation Approaches Three basic types: Fixedprice lease; Land for Equity; and other joint venture-type arrangements (such as revenue sharing); plus many hybrid combinations. There are major benefits and risks of each to 3 stakeholder groups (communities, government and investors). Photo credit: Gates Foundation 9 Land for Equity v. Fixed Price Leases Fixed-price leases are: Easy to understand and manage, especially for local communities Reliable, ongoing income stream Risk is relatively low. For land rights holder (individual, community or government) land simply reverts back at end of lease (exception: in some cases rights transfer to state when a community lease expires Zambia, ambiguity in Mozambique) Can be difficult to determine fair lease rates for long term deals No participation in upside of profitable deal Incentives not aligned between parties so perhaps less reason to cooperate. Photo credit: vredeseilanden, Flickr 10 5
Land for Equity v. Other Approaches to Compensation Other Risk-Sharing Arrangements Land holder can receive percentage of net or gross revenues Some of the same risks as land for equity Hybrid arrangements Can entail a wide variety of structures For example, combine fixed-price lease with a smaller risk-sharing component Allows for maximum flexibility Requires relatively knowledgeable parties (or adequate representation) 11 Government Assistance to Communities Provide training, legal and technical advice Through government Through private sector Academia, NGOs Critical question is how to fund this in a way that does not create conflict of interest Make model contracts available Ensure effective dispute resolution mechanisms are available 12 6
More on Government Assistance to Communities Help communities organize Assist communities in participatory land use planning Require feasibility studies and impact assessments Many of these strategies will require funding: the key questions are how and from whom. Photo credit: vredeseilanden, Flickr 13 Summary of Main Points Land for Equity is an innovative approach to compensation for large-scale land investments. It has not been tested on a significant scale in Africa, outside of the very unique South African context. Stakeholders must carefully consider how much risk government and community landholders are prepared to take on when contemplating compensation schemes. Land for Equity could be a useful way to distribute profits to communities/landholders over time, but only in limited cases where high levels of technical assistance are readily available. Over time, stakeholders can work to develop and fund technical assistance support to communities, creating capacity to choose effectively from a range of compensation models for land rights transactions In the meantime, fixed price leases, or hybrid options, may provide a better alternative to communities contracting directly with private investors. 14 7
A Final Observation Gender implications of Land for Equity approaches have not been adequately researched. This will be of critical importance moving forward. Photo credit: Gates Foundation 15 Thank You Jennifer Duncan & Darryl Vhugen, Landesa jend@landesa.org, darrylv@landesa.org 16 8