Foreign Bulk Buying of Farmland - A Threat?

[Veliky Kaiser Theos]

Discuss.

I am of the opinion that it isn't. I don't see how it could be. Foreigners have to conform to the same laws, and they're still paying taxes. If national food security ever becomes a big concern, I'm sure the government could restrict food exports by placing tariffs on them.

[Condottiere 40K]

I think you should add some examples of China, Saudi Arabia and who else is doing so and where.

[GreatAugustus]

Foreign Bulk Buying of Farmland - A Threat?

European Colonisation: Send troops in and massacre the natives.

American Colonization: Buy them out and enslave the children. Use coups or recruit terroists for maximum effect.

[Veliky Kaiser Theos]

European Colonisation: Send troops in and massacre the natives.

American Colonization: Buy them out and enslave the children. Use coups or recruit terroists for maximum effect.

Good thing I'm not a part of either of those 2 groups. Otherwise I might get offended (seizes the moral high ground....)

It depends can you cite a source for this.

Theoretically I would say it can be a risk if it drives a short term mentality in how agricultural land is managed. If it makes the distant/absentee owner only concerned about near term profit it could mean a general failure to consider the long-tern issues like soil loss, herbicide and pesticide resistance (either applied or GM) or problems with animal waste run off.

Those are excellent points.

[GreatAugustus]

Good thing I'm not a part of either of those 2 groups. Otherwise I might get offended (seizes the moral high ground....)

No no no. I was refering to history, not the world today! - Unless I am wrong. (am I wrong?)

I'm talking about countries with a kleptocratic government (banana republics). Some examples are Guatemala and Honduras.
Also you would probably like to read on the United Fruit Company.

[conon394]

Discuss.

I am of the opinion that it isn't. I don't see how it could be. Foreigners have to conform to the same laws, and they're still paying taxes. If national food security ever becomes a big concern, I'm sure the government could restrict food exports by placing tariffs on them.

It depends can you cite a source for this.

Theoretically I would say it can be a risk if it drives a short term mentality in how agricultural land is managed. If it makes the distant/absentee owner only concerned about near term profit it could mean a general failure to consider the long-tern issues like soil loss, herbicide and pesticide resistance (either applied or GM) or problems with animal waste run off.

[Blau&Gruen]

Discuss.

I am of the opinion that it isn't. I don't see how it could be. Foreigners have to conform to the same laws, and they're still paying taxes. If national food security ever becomes a big concern, I'm sure the government could restrict food exports by placing tariffs on them.

Where? In US, UK, Cechenia, Belorussia, CH, Serbia?

[Nevins]

Meh. Worst case scenario is the government repossesses the land if something goes south, its not as if the Chinese are buying up American land and taking it to China.

[Voodo chile]

Yea there's always a massive amount of opposition to selling assets. We had a situation a while back where the Chinese were intending on buying 'Crafar Farms'. I'm under the impression the sold it to the Chinese.
I guess people don't like having large portions of land owned by foreign people who live thousands of kms away, they'd rather have the guy who lives down the road running it.
I've heard numerous people fearing that foreigners are going to take over the country and that the selling of power stations, rail or land will get us one step closer to this. But yea i don't know. I cant help but see it all being a 'they took our jobs' situation being up scaled.

[SLN445]

Alot of crys for changes in the law about China buying large amounts of Australian Farmland, though its not like its a problem worse comes to worse we will just seize back the land or buy it back if its going to have a negative effect.

[Condottiere 40K]

This is really too vague - if it's about foreigners buying up large tracts because they feel they can profit from aggro prices, all that changes is ownership.

If it's about a concerted campaign by foreign governments to purchase huge areas of agricultural land in foreign countries with a view towards food security, whose produce during times of emergency will be diverted directly to their economies rather than the local or open global markets, that's another.

[Exarch]

so long as taxes and customs are paid, why care?

If an agri company wanted to direct its produce towards a certain market, then it's their prerogative, and in the highly unlikely event of a malthusian crisis where food is so scarce, the fact that the croplands are in my country, what's to stop my government from nationalising those farms, as some governments nationalised some oil companies?

[hellheaven1987]

No, because government can always confiscate those land back using various excuse. For example, such as socialist revolution.

[LSJ]

It can be a serious threat to rural communities if it is done irresponsibly.

Irresponsible operations would be like some in sub-Saharan and Latin American countries, where the government gives corporations a lot of freedom without regard for the welfare of the farmers. The company and government might sign a contract including trade deals (where tariffs have to be cut down and products of the corp. purchased), or investments in infrastructure (where the corp. is the majority stakeholder). In some cases, the land holders have no choice, either because the government forces them to accept the purchase, or the owners risk gaving access to water and roads cut off. While farmers used to be able to farm cheaply and have freedom with how they use the land, the operation may change for the worse. The corporations may force the farmers to use specific brands of GM seeds, which are far more expensive to grow and maintain. They also require the farmers to purchase seeds every year - harvesting their own breaks the contract. They may also require the purchase of certain equipment - again, not doing so terminates the contract. The farmers run a much more expensive operation, and may not get an increase in their pay for the increased expense or the increased yield. The crops grown also tend to be for export, not local markets. The crops may be directed for use in biofuels or utility crops like corn.

The bulk purchase of farmland by large foreign entities isn't necessarily threatening, as many purchases are done ethically. I mean to simply point out that there can be threats due to corruption on the part of companies and governments. The risk is greater in less developed and less democratic countries, because in such cases the governments are less likely to regulate or nationalize the operations because of the billions in investment and taxes, and because in many cases the operation has the (in)direct backing of a country or organization like China, the USA, IMF, or World Bank. When your country is trying to develop infrastructure with help from the IMF, you can't nationalize. It's suicidal.

[Veliky Kaiser Theos]

No, because government can always confiscate those land back using various excuse. For example, such as socialist revolution.

And we all know how well that went for Cuba's economy.

[magpie]

Well there are a few finance houses investing in tracts of the amazon rain forests, With a view of turning them into farmland.

[Veliky Kaiser Theos]

Well there are a few finance houses investing in tracts of the amazon rain forests, With a view of turning them into farmland.

I don't understand how a corporation can legally buy rainforests. It's rather short sighted for a government to allow.

[Erebus Pasha]

This is not a discussion about the economic relevance of Romania. Please keep the thread on-topic

[YuriVII]

Foreigners buying your nation's food supply...sounds suspicious. But I suppose if you have appropriate oversight things can go smoothly. Afterall, if food becomes a problem you can just send some guys with guns over and get the land while citing some law that a compliant judge will uphold.

Or the owner of that land can be powerful enough to buy out the government and the judge....well then you're screwed. Food supplies cause revolutions more than anything else.

[Balian76]

There was a lot about food security in the Australian media but no actual statistics about land ownership have been produced to support the claims. Scaremongering about China is like a sport for the Australian tabloid media. In the 80's and 90's it was the Japenese now it's China.