View in EDS

TERRA ECONOMICUS: RHETORICAL STRATEGIES OF LEGITIMATION IN LAND GRABBING.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: TERRA ECONOMICUS: RHETORICAL STRATEGIES OF LEGITIMATION IN LAND GRABBING.
Authors: HASSAN, SYED ERAJ, PRASAD, AJNESH
Source: Academy of Management Perspectives; Feb2025, Vol. 39 Issue 1, p73-93, 21p, 1 Chart
Subject Terms: REAL property acquisition, GOVERNMENT policy on climate change, LAND use, COMMODITY exchanges, COLLECTIVE action
Abstract: Land grabbing intensified as a global phenomenon between 2007 and 2009, driven by entities from major economic centers acquiring vast parcels of land in low-income regions across Africa, Asia, and South America. Proponents argue that large-scale land acquisitions (LSLAs) deliver significant socioeconomic and environmental benefits by replacing inefficient smallholder practices and supporting climate change initiatives. Critics, however, contend that these acquisitions often seem speculative, lack robust justifications, and fail to consult or fairly compensate local communities. Recent evidence suggests that this commodification has disproportionately harmed marginalized communities, especially in areas lacking robust regulatory frameworks, leading to displacement, deforestation, and unfulfilled promises. We explore the mechanisms by which proponents of LSLAs justify these acquisitions despite significant local resistance. Our analysis focuses on the rhetorical strategies these actors use to construct land as an economic commodity available for exchange. We identify four key strategies: rhetorical axiomatization, rhetorical commensuration, rhetorical impersonation, and rhetorical dystopianization. These strategies illustrate the paradoxical use of language by LSLA proponents, ostensibly aimed at addressing grand challenges, yet often leading to collective action problems. We conclude with considerations of the practical and policy implications of our findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Academy of Management Perspectives is the property of Academy of Management and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Complementary Index
Description
Abstract:Land grabbing intensified as a global phenomenon between 2007 and 2009, driven by entities from major economic centers acquiring vast parcels of land in low-income regions across Africa, Asia, and South America. Proponents argue that large-scale land acquisitions (LSLAs) deliver significant socioeconomic and environmental benefits by replacing inefficient smallholder practices and supporting climate change initiatives. Critics, however, contend that these acquisitions often seem speculative, lack robust justifications, and fail to consult or fairly compensate local communities. Recent evidence suggests that this commodification has disproportionately harmed marginalized communities, especially in areas lacking robust regulatory frameworks, leading to displacement, deforestation, and unfulfilled promises. We explore the mechanisms by which proponents of LSLAs justify these acquisitions despite significant local resistance. Our analysis focuses on the rhetorical strategies these actors use to construct land as an economic commodity available for exchange. We identify four key strategies: rhetorical axiomatization, rhetorical commensuration, rhetorical impersonation, and rhetorical dystopianization. These strategies illustrate the paradoxical use of language by LSLA proponents, ostensibly aimed at addressing grand challenges, yet often leading to collective action problems. We conclude with considerations of the practical and policy implications of our findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:15589080
DOI:10.5465/amp.2023.0085