Co-opting Authority and Privatizing Force in Rural Africa

Ensuring Corporate Power over Land and People

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Large-scale land investment projects in sub-Saharan African have received substantial criticism for their negative local impacts, but few studies discuss specifically their application of corporate power on the ground. This paper provides an examination of such application in rural Sierra Leone. The paper describes how one corporation both directly and indirectly co-opted authority and privatized force in order to wield power over the land and people. The data illustrates how local authorities and security actors were incentivized to defend the interests of the corporation as opposed to the local communities they supposedly represent and protect. Such processes ensured corporate power not only over the land, but also over the local population. The findings, therefore, demand more robust and multidimensional accountability mechanisms to avoid the corporate acquisition of power in rural Africa. Such mechanisms would demand: a) that investing corporations be more informed about local socio-cultural, economic and political dynamics on the ground, b) that funders and local governments fund, report on and enforce more regular, culturally sensitive, and independent assessments of project impacts, and c) that funders, governments, corporations, and customary elites be held accountable for the negative impacts of such projects by international and national civil society organizations.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)749-771
Number of pages23
JournalRural Sociology
Volume83
Issue number4
Early online date10 Jan 2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 7 Dec 2018

Fingerprint

corporation
Sierra Leone
demand
local population
civil society
elite
criticism
responsibility
examination
community
economics

Keywords

  • Development
  • Africa
  • Political Sociology and Political Economy

Cite this

Co-opting Authority and Privatizing Force in Rural Africa : Ensuring Corporate Power over Land and People. / Millar, Gearoid.

In: Rural Sociology, Vol. 83, No. 4, 07.12.2018, p. 749-771.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{8f8d3d4904344d049f11edc7a42221fd,
title = "Co-opting Authority and Privatizing Force in Rural Africa: Ensuring Corporate Power over Land and People",
abstract = "Large-scale land investment projects in sub-Saharan African have received substantial criticism for their negative local impacts, but few studies discuss specifically their application of corporate power on the ground. This paper provides an examination of such application in rural Sierra Leone. The paper describes how one corporation both directly and indirectly co-opted authority and privatized force in order to wield power over the land and people. The data illustrates how local authorities and security actors were incentivized to defend the interests of the corporation as opposed to the local communities they supposedly represent and protect. Such processes ensured corporate power not only over the land, but also over the local population. The findings, therefore, demand more robust and multidimensional accountability mechanisms to avoid the corporate acquisition of power in rural Africa. Such mechanisms would demand: a) that investing corporations be more informed about local socio-cultural, economic and political dynamics on the ground, b) that funders and local governments fund, report on and enforce more regular, culturally sensitive, and independent assessments of project impacts, and c) that funders, governments, corporations, and customary elites be held accountable for the negative impacts of such projects by international and national civil society organizations.",
keywords = "Development, Africa, Political Sociology and Political Economy",
author = "Gearoid Millar",
note = "Funded by Radboud University Nijmegen and the Carnegie Trust for the Universities of Scotland I would like to thank Radboud University Nijmegen for supporting the initial six months of fieldwork for this project with a faculty fieldwork grant in 2012, and the Carnegie Trust for the Universities of Scotland for supporting the follow‐up field trip in November−December 2013 with a Carnegie research grant.",
year = "2018",
month = "12",
day = "7",
doi = "10.1111/ruso.12203",
language = "English",
volume = "83",
pages = "749--771",
journal = "Rural Sociology",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Co-opting Authority and Privatizing Force in Rural Africa

T2 - Ensuring Corporate Power over Land and People

AU - Millar, Gearoid

N1 - Funded by Radboud University Nijmegen and the Carnegie Trust for the Universities of Scotland I would like to thank Radboud University Nijmegen for supporting the initial six months of fieldwork for this project with a faculty fieldwork grant in 2012, and the Carnegie Trust for the Universities of Scotland for supporting the follow‐up field trip in November−December 2013 with a Carnegie research grant.

PY - 2018/12/7

Y1 - 2018/12/7

N2 - Large-scale land investment projects in sub-Saharan African have received substantial criticism for their negative local impacts, but few studies discuss specifically their application of corporate power on the ground. This paper provides an examination of such application in rural Sierra Leone. The paper describes how one corporation both directly and indirectly co-opted authority and privatized force in order to wield power over the land and people. The data illustrates how local authorities and security actors were incentivized to defend the interests of the corporation as opposed to the local communities they supposedly represent and protect. Such processes ensured corporate power not only over the land, but also over the local population. The findings, therefore, demand more robust and multidimensional accountability mechanisms to avoid the corporate acquisition of power in rural Africa. Such mechanisms would demand: a) that investing corporations be more informed about local socio-cultural, economic and political dynamics on the ground, b) that funders and local governments fund, report on and enforce more regular, culturally sensitive, and independent assessments of project impacts, and c) that funders, governments, corporations, and customary elites be held accountable for the negative impacts of such projects by international and national civil society organizations.

AB - Large-scale land investment projects in sub-Saharan African have received substantial criticism for their negative local impacts, but few studies discuss specifically their application of corporate power on the ground. This paper provides an examination of such application in rural Sierra Leone. The paper describes how one corporation both directly and indirectly co-opted authority and privatized force in order to wield power over the land and people. The data illustrates how local authorities and security actors were incentivized to defend the interests of the corporation as opposed to the local communities they supposedly represent and protect. Such processes ensured corporate power not only over the land, but also over the local population. The findings, therefore, demand more robust and multidimensional accountability mechanisms to avoid the corporate acquisition of power in rural Africa. Such mechanisms would demand: a) that investing corporations be more informed about local socio-cultural, economic and political dynamics on the ground, b) that funders and local governments fund, report on and enforce more regular, culturally sensitive, and independent assessments of project impacts, and c) that funders, governments, corporations, and customary elites be held accountable for the negative impacts of such projects by international and national civil society organizations.

KW - Development

KW - Africa

KW - Political Sociology and Political Economy

UR - http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ruso.12203/full

U2 - 10.1111/ruso.12203

DO - 10.1111/ruso.12203

M3 - Article

VL - 83

SP - 749

EP - 771

JO - Rural Sociology

JF - Rural Sociology

IS - 4

ER -