This is a working paper by Kanchi Kohli and Debayan Gupta, Centre for Policy Research,Namati Environmental Justice Program, which throws light on Right  to  Fair  Compensation  and  Transparency  in  Land  Acquisition,  Rehabilitation  and Resettlement (RFCTLARR) Act, 2013. It is indiacted that there has been at the centre of intense debate.

This working paper looks at the new Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement (LARR) Bill, 2011 and explores key issues within the text of the Bill and the larger political context of land acquisition in India. 

This paper will critically examine the inter relation between land acquisition, development and displacement. In addition, this paper analyses the rights of displaced under Indian and international laws with special reference to recent states different legislation on land acquisition. The present paper also try to consider the impact on land acquisition on displaced people and identifies loopholes in the existing legal framework and propose certain measure for bringing real development in to the life of displaced people.

In Tanzania like in other parts of the global South, in the name of 'development' and 'poverty eradication' vast tracts of land have been earmarked by the government to be developed by investors for different commercial agricultural projects, giving rise to the contested land grab phenomenon. In parallel, Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) has been promoted in the country and globally as the governance framework that seeks to manage water resources in an efficient, equitable and sustainable manner.

In this case, which was  heard before the Constitutional Court of the Republic of South Africa, The Restitution of Land Rights Amendment  Act 15 of 2014  was declared invalid. The Act, among other things, sought to extend the period in which land restitution claims could be  lodged. However, the court found that the Parliament did not sufficiently  consult with key stakeholders including those who had successfully  lodged claims under the previous Act of 1994. 

Large-scale land acquisitions have increased in scale and pace due to changes in commodity markets, agricultural investment strategies, land prices, and a range of other policy and market forces. The areas most affected are the global “commons” – lands that local people traditionally use collectively — including much of the world’s forests, wetlands, and rangelands. In some cases land acquisition occurs with environmental objectives in sight – including the setting aside of land as protected areas for biodiversity conservation.

In Senegal, concern about large-scale land acquisitions has been growing since 2000. Senegalese agriculture has long relied on small-scale family holdings and extensive agriculture. But the current population growth rate, combined with rapid urban development and natural resources degradation, have inevitably changed the game.

In October 2008, the NGO GRAIN published the Report “SEIZED! The 2008 land grab for food and financial security”. This moment can be referred as the birthday of the recent but fast-growing literature on land grabbing or – with a more politically correct expression – Large Scale Land Acquisitions (LSLAs).

Tanzania and Mozambique — countries of vast mountain ranges and open stretches of plateaus — now face a growing land problem. As soil degradation, climate change and population growth place enormous strains on the natural resources that sustain millions of people, multinational companies are also gunning for large swaths of land across both countries. Caught between these pressures, many poor, rural communities get displaced or decide to sell their collectively held land.

Tanzania and Mozambique — countries of vast mountain ranges and open stretches of plateaus — now face a growing land problem. As soil degradation, climate change and population growth place enormous strains on the natural resources that sustain millions of people, multinational companies are also gunning for large swaths of land across both countries. Caught between these pressures, many poor, rural communities get displaced or decide to sell their collectively held land.

The extent of land dispossession of the indigenous population in South Africa, by Dutch and British settlers, was greater than any other country in Africa, and persisted for an exceptionally long time. European settlement began around the  Cape of Good Hope in the 1650s and progressed northwards and eastwards over a period of three hundred years.

At the end of Apartheid, approximately 82 million hectares of commercial farmland (86% of total agricultural land, or 68% of the total surface area) was in the hands of the white minority (10.9% of the population), and concentrated in the hands of approximately 60,000 owners (Levin and Weiner 1991: 92). Over thirteen million black people, the majority of them poverty-stricken, remained crowded into the former homelands, where rights to land were generally unclear or contested and the system of land administration was in disarray (Hendricks 1990; Cousins 1996; Lahiff 2000).