Unearthing the Truth: The Impact of Land Grabbing on Communities in Ghana

In Ghana, land grabbing has become a major problem that has sparked discussions and raised concerns about the significant effects it has on local communities all around the country. This phenomenon, involving the large-scale acquisition of agricultural land by foreign governments, multinational corporations, and private investors, is causing deep repercussions on the livelihoods, cultural legacy, and fundamental rights of thousands of Ghanaians.

A local phenomenon with global roots

Land grabbing is not new, but it took on a new dimension after 2008, when the rise in commodity prices triggered a global rush for fertile land, especially in Africa. This process, enabled by corrupt local governments and encouraged by the pluralistic legal systems (1) in many affected areas, involves the sale or long-term lease of vast tracts of land to foreign investors. This practice leaves local communities without the resources they need for their livelihoods, raising crucial issues around equality, sustainability, and the fundamentals of property ownership.

In Ghana, this phenomenon has harshly impacted rural regions, where land is the primary resource for survival. Multinational corporations, drawn by the fertility of the land and the weakness of governance structures, buy or lease land with promises of development and jobs for local communities—promises rarely kept. Instead, these acquisitions often lead to the loss of access to arable land, the introduction of cash crops (2) not intended for local consumption, and the erosion of food security — the right of communities to produce food sustainably for their own consumption. One prominent case is that of the multinational SIAT, primarily involved in palm oil and rubber production and accused of accumulating thousands of hectares without the consent of local populations. Through its subsidiaries in Ivory Coast, Nigeria, and Ghana, SIAT currently holds 2,000 acres in the Juabeso-Bia region of Western Ghana, taken from the community without any consultation or compensation.

In particular, SIAT has been accused of taking land from locals, holding thousands of hectares of land without the approval of the community through its companies in Ghana, Ivory Coast, and Nigeria. Farmers, activists, and community leaders have come together to form grassroots movements that are unified in their desire to protect their land rights. In particular, a resistance group called Youth Volunteers for the Environment Ghana, active in the Oti and Volta regions and comprised of young people directly affected by the activities of these criminal groups, have fiercely opposed their operations. To stop SIAT from encroaching on their land, the communities have planned rallies, nonviolent demonstrations, fought legal fights, and worked with NGOs, and used a range of strategies to increase public awareness and demand accountability from the government and big corporations. In addition to bringing attention to the suffering of the impacted communities, their work has spurred debates on corporate responsibility and land rights at the national and international levels. Among these responsibilities, there are the soil degradation and water resource depletion caused by the intensive agricultural techniques used by large corporations, which have devastating effects on the environment. Furthermore, the conversion of agricultural land into monocultures for export drastically reduces the availability of land for local food production, putting the country’s food security at serious risk.

In an interview, the association’s director, Wisdom Koffi, explained that local chiefs, who should be the custodians of the land, often sign contracts with multinationals without fully understanding their content and the far-reaching consequences.

“The government mostly collaborates with these multinational companies who promise the farmers generous compensation for taking their land. Sadly, after taking the lands, they fail to deliver their promise, and harass them on top”

He told us that SIAT in Ghana took over 2000 acres of land which was initially a state farm.

“However, these lands were given back to the people after the state farm collapsed. And then, they were taken away from the people without any prior information or consent, the paramount chief of the area sold the land without anybody’s consent. Even though they were promised some level of compensation, they have not received anything since the year 2000”.

This activist group has been instrumental in the battle against land grabbing. They have also brought the fight to the SIAT office in Belgium, which resulted in some changes in giving compensation to the victims. One major challenge the group faces is the issue of security among the people who openly protest. Wisdom mentioned a sad incident where the victims who protested were arrested by the national police.

“The only relatively safe way to express dissent is by involving people outside the country, as anyone who raises their voice within Ghana risks their life.”

Koffi also highlighted that women are the primary victims of these activities, forced to find ways to support and manage their lives alone, as husbands leave to work on fields further and further away. He emphasized that women suffer the most from the consequences of these activities - therefore, they have been working hard to support and sustain them. For this reason, Youth Volunteers for the Environment supports them, offering targeted training courses. The group has also challenged SIAT’s operations directly at its headquarters in Belgium, achieving some results, such as the provision of compensation to the victims. However, those who openly protest in Ghana pay a high price in terms of security.

Years ago, a similar situation occurred in my community in the Volta region. Local chiefs accepted huge sums of money from foreign investors and ceded lands to Chinese corporations without the consent of most of the population. Even those who were involved in the process never saw the benefits they were promised. The resistance of the people against these forms of injustice faced harassment and even murder.

In my experience, development does not materialize when the people are suffering to maintain their rights to own their lands within their own countries. As seen before, the extensive use of pesticides destroys the fertility of the soil and the overall food security.

Although the government is a major orchestrator of this issue, I believe that the chiefs in these communities should also be a major target of reconsideration. Their corrupt nature is beyond imagination. They accept money from private organizations without consulting the people and often allow these entities to “deal with the people” who resist their operations. Addressing the implications of land grabbing requires holistic approaches that prioritize the rights and well-being of affected communities, sustainable land use practices, and transparent governance.

This is a complex battle, but it can be supported also from afar, for example, through conscious consumer choices that avoid feeding the activities of multinationals like SIAT, which supplies Unilever and Nestlé with palm oil products, and Michelin and Goodyear with rubber, and by raising awareness so that as many people as possible make similar political choices.

(1) Legal framework where multiple sources of law coexist within the same country, often including both modern state law and traditional or customary laws. This can create confusion and conflicts, as the different legal systems may have varying rules and authorities, especially regarding issues like land ownership and rights.

(2) Agricultural lands dedicated to growing crops specifically for sale on national or international markets, rather than for local consumption. Examples are coffee, cotton, cocoa, and palm oil