Land rights and supply chains of the largest food and beverage companies. The giants of Coca-Cola and PepsiCo soft drinks are big buyers of sugar, but another of the Big 10 is one of the companies in the world that produces more sugar: ABF. ABF owns British Sugary, Sugar Company in Spain, and is the majority shareholder of Illovo Sugar, the largest sugar company in Africa.
This report explains how a single crop - sugar - has led to large-scale land acquisitions and land conflicts to the detriment of small food producers and their families. Since 2000, at least four million hectares for the production of sugar have been acquired through a hundred large-scale land transactions. However, given the lack of transparency of these transactions, the area is probably much larger. In some cases, these acquisitions have led to the violation of human rights, the loss of livelihoods and hunger for small producers and their families. Large food and beverage companies do not usually own land, but they do depend on them to obtain the raw materials they need, among which is sugar. It is urgent that these companies recognize the existence of this problem and take the necessary measures to ensure that neither human rights violations nor conflicts are part of their supply chains.
Since 2000, approximately 800 large-scale land acquisitions affecting 33 million hectares worldwide have been recorded - an area equivalent to four times the size of Portugal - .1 The increase in demand for agricultural products Large-scale cultivation, such as sugar, is one of the causes that these lands are now used for commercial cultivation, instead of being dedicated to small agricultural production, of being at the service of local communities and of fulfilling their important role within of the ecosystems.
Both governments and companies and financial investors have an obligation to respect and defend the rights of communities, and obtain their informed consent before undertaking any activity related to land.2 Although food and beverage companies are not usually direct owners of the land, together they are important buyers of the raw materials that are produced in large plantations located in countries where violations of land rights abound. Food and beverage companies must urgently recognize the existence of these problems, as well as take measures to ensure that there are no violations of land rights or conflicts in their supply chains.
It is widely recognized that the rapid increase in food prices in 2008 renewed investors' interest in agriculture. In fact, from mid-2008 to 2009, registered agricultural land transactions skyrocketed by approximately 200% .6 In addition, agriculture urgently needs investments. It is a fundamental sector for food security and an essential growth engine for many developing economies.7 Private investment can contribute to inclusive growth, environmental sustainability and poverty reduction.
However, too many times investments in land have resulted in human rights violations, loss of livelihoods, alienation of spiritual and cultural ties between people and the land and, in some cases, violence and destruction of properties and crops. Oxfam calls it “backwards development.” 8 Poor women are especially affected9 as they are less likely than men to own land titles or to participate in decisions related to their access to land.10 Loss of the land is disastrous for the livelihoods and food security of communities and small farmers.
Since 2000, approximately 800 large-scale land transactions involving foreign investors affecting a total area of 33 million hectares have been registered worldwide, in addition to another 255 acquisitions made by national investors.11 However, given the poor transparency of land acquisitions and poor representation of national agreements, the figure could be much higher. Almost half of these transactions take place in Africa12, and many of them in countries with weak governance on land13 or whose hunger levels are “alarming, ” such as Mozambique, Sudan, and Zambia.14
The five countries where the largest land acquisitions per area have been recorded, a total of 16 million hectares, are South Sudan, Papua New Guinea, Indonesia, Democratic Republic of the Congo and Mozambique15. Cambodia is the country where the largest number of transactions has been registered, 104 since 2000.16
The struggle for land is not a novelty but it has intensified as the pressure on the land has increased. Investors17 have rapidly expanded large-scale agricultural production, spurred on by rising food and fuel prices and by increasing consumer demand. Small producers are excluded as the market offers companies great benefits for exploiting the land, but does not protect the human rights of these people.
It is widely recognized that the rapid increase in food prices in 2008 renewed investors' interest in agriculture. In fact, from mid-2008 to 2009, registered agricultural land transactions skyrocketed by approximately 200% .6 In addition, agriculture urgently needs investments. It is a fundamental sector for food security and an essential growth engine for many developing economies.7 Private investment can contribute to inclusive growth, environmental sustainability and poverty reduction.
However, too many times investments in land have resulted in human rights violations, loss of livelihoods, alienation of spiritual and cultural ties between people and the land and, in some cases, violence and destruction of properties and crops. Oxfam calls it “reverse development.” 8 Poor women are especially affected9 as they are less likely than men to own land titles or to participate in decisions related to their access to land. 10 The loss of land is disastrous for the livelihoods and food security of communities and small farmers.
Figure 1: Sugar, soy and palm oil: footprint on the earth in 201230
The big 10 and the sugar
The Big 10 are supplied with sugar through various suppliers and use it in the preparation of soft drinks, pastries, pastry products and ice cream. Due to the lack of transparency of most of these companies, it is impossible to determine how much sugar they use exactly Danone62, Unilever63 and ABF (in their sugar-related activities, such as we will see later) they have revealed the volume of their purchases and their production. Coca-Cola is the largest buyer of sugar in the world64 and controls 25% of the global soft drinks market.65 PepsiCo follows closely, with an 18% share of this market.66 Coca-Cola uses az Car in the elaboration of Coca-Cola, Sprite, Fanta, Dr Pepper, vitamin water, energy drinks and fruit drinks and juices; PepsiCo has lines of similar products, such as Pepsi-Cola, Mountain Dew and Mirinda, to name a few. 9
The giants of Coca-Cola and PepsiCo soft drinks are big buyers of sugar, but another one of the Big 10 is one of the companies in the world that produces more sugar: ABF. ABF owns British Sugary, Azucarera in Spain, and is the majority shareholder of Illovo Sugar, the largest sugar company in Africa. ABF produces 4.3% of the world's sugar supply, and has the capacity to produce 5.5 million tons of sugar per year worldwide.67
More than half of the sugar produced by ABF is obtained from sugar cane68, and most of it is produced by Illovo Sugar in six African countries: Malawi, Mozambique, South Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania and Zambia. According to some media outlets, Illovo Sugar is involved in land conflicts in at least three countries - Malawi, Mali and Zambia - .69 The rest of ABF's sugar is obtained from sugar beets grown in Europe and China. .70 ABF sells sugar both to the food industry and directly to consumers, through its Silver Spoon brands (sugar made from sugar beets) and Billington's (made from sugar cane). ABF also uses sugar to make its own food products, such as Jordans cereals and Ovaltine drinks.
Coca-Cola, PepsiCo and ABF play a very important role not only as sugar producers, but also as buyers of this raw material, present in many of its world famous brands. Therefore, they must assume a special responsibility in relation to conflicts over land that affect the sugar industry. These companies may not have legal responsibility or direct control of these conflicts, but as large buyers of sugar they are, they have to respect international human rights norms and principles and take responsibility for dealing with rights-related issues. on earth present in their supply chains. And in the case of the sugar activities that ABF directly controls, the responsibility is even greater.
Conclusions and recommendations
The expansion of crops that require intensive land use, such as sugar, is one of the causes of increased pressure on land, which usually occurs at the expense of the most vulnerable people. The result is that entire communities have lost their homes, their small farms and their food security. Large financial investors, trading companies and governments must take measures to end these abuses, but the Big 10 also have to take action. However, the evaluation carried out by the campaign After the brand shows that the Big 10 currently lack the necessary level of awareness, as well as sufficient commitments and policies to detect and address land-related problems and conflicts to throughout their supply chains.
At a more elementary level, Oxfam asks companies to individually strive to learn more about their supply chains and take steps to solve existing problems. This requires a thorough analysis, greater transparency and joint measures in collaboration with marketers and other actors present in their supply chains, as well as with governments. These measures have to give rise to concrete and binding solutions that contemplate the participation of the affected communities in the decision-making process and ensure that these people benefit from development, instead of increasing their exclusion.
Know and show the risks associated with land-related problems107
1. Unveil and make public the risks and impacts on communities derived from land-related problems through relevant and reliable impact assessments, 108 that involve the affected communities.
2. Reveal who the company's suppliers are and where the sugar, palm oil and soybeans from which they are sourced come from.
Commit to adopt a zero tolerance policy towards land grabbing
Establish and apply a credible zero tolerance policy towards land grabbing, and include such policy in the suppliers' codes of conduct.
3. In order to improve their policies and practices, 109 companies must commit to adopt production standards common to the entire sector in the sugar, palm oil and soybean sectors.110 The objective of these standards should be to contribute to improve sustainability by the year 2020.
Advocate for governments and marketers to face land grabbing and support responsible agricultural investments
4. Publicly defend the need for governments and marketers111 to commit to make responsible investments in agriculture, as well as to apply the Voluntary Guidelines for responsible governance of land tenure, which include the protection and promotion of all Land rights of affected communities.
5. Mobilize suppliers and other companies in the sector to adopt zero tolerance policies, join sectoral initiatives to improve sustainability and take an active role in these initiatives to increase their impact and make everyone strive to improve
EcoPortal.net
Excerpt from the Oxfam Report "Sugar Fever"
http://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/bn-sugar-rush-land-supply-chains-food-beverage-companies-021013-en.pdf
Land Conflicts: Sugar Fever
