How foreign investment can strengthen African governments' control over land

African governments are strategically utilizing foreign investment, infrastructure projects and conservation initiatives to assert greater control over land and communities, according to research conducted across 14 countries in sub-Saharan Africa. The study, conducted by Dr. Carolin Dieterle from The University of Manchester and Yuezhou Yang of the University of Oxford, challenges the notion that African states are too weak to regulate powerful foreign investors.

Instead, it posits that governments can leverage these investments and partnerships to strengthen their own authority, at times, at the expense of communities' existing land rights. However, it underscores that the responsibility of foreign investors, donors and conservation organizations, whose involvement shapes these processes, should not be overlooked.

The research, published in Geoforum, examines 24 cases across Uganda, South Africa, Tanzania, Zambia and Kenya, combining on-ground fieldwork from 2018 to 2024 with an analysis of existing research and policy documents. Two key strategies emerge: "widening" and "deepening." Widening refers to governments extending their reach into traditionally less controlled or shared areas with local communities, through large-scale land investments, infrastructure development and land designation for conservation.

Deepening involves further strengthening this authority over time through legislative changes, administrative improvements, land registration and technical tools like digital mapping. Governments have, in some instances, labeled land as vacant or underused to make it appear suitable for development, overlooking existing farming, pastoralism, customary land rights and local governance systems.

For instance, in Ethiopia, large-scale agricultural investment attracted by the government included the identification of land for a federal land bank and its promotion as available for productive use. In northern Uganda, claims of uninhabited or ungoverned land were used to justify changes in customary land classifications and its allocation for investment projects.

Infrastructure schemes, such as the Lamu Port–South Sudan–Ethiopia Transport corridor in Kenya and agricultural planning in Tanzania, have similarly extended state authority into regions traditionally governed by communal tenure systems. Conservation efforts, including the designation of land as parks, reserves or protected areas, can also consolidate state control by restricting local use of the land.

While the study highlights that foreign investment does not necessarily mean governments relinquish control to external interests, it emphasizes the potential for these processes to be exclusionary or coercive, often leading to displacement, evictions and conflict. The authors argue that while stronger state control is not always beneficial, it does reshape the relationship between governments and the communities living on the land.

The findings provide a framework for understanding how land investment, development planning and environmental policies can alter land governance dynamics.