Livelihoods and coping strategies of local communities on previous customary land in limbo of commercial agricultural development: Lessons from the farm block program in Zambia

The surge in large-scale land acquisitions (LSLAs) has captured the attention of activists, development practitioners, policy makers and academics. Supported for food security, biofuels, financial investments, eco-tourism etc., opponents of LSLAs raise concerns regarding the fate of local communities suffering from (potential) land dispossession and involuntary displacements, environmental degradation, diminished local food security and sovereignty and casualisation of farm workers. Scholarly efforts to understand socio-economic and environmental impacts of LSLAs grapple with: (i) methodological challenges related to lack of (reliable) baseline data; and (ii) implementation of LSLA deals - LSLAs can be complex operations; cancelled or abandoned, and reshaped by diverse biophysical, socio-cultural and political landscapes in which they unfold. Few attempts have been made to understand how local communities cope with failed LSLA deals. Addressing this gap, this paper uses participatory rural appraisal methods to examine coping strategies of local communities in Nansanga farm block, a government of Zambia-led LSLA program. Overall, our fieldwork shows Nansanga is a deal in limbo of development: state-funded infrastructure has crumbled, and many private investors have not developed the land they bought. Instead, mining and tobacco companies have emerged as important economic players, filling the development vacuum created by the government’s absence in Nansanga. As immigration for casual mining jobs increases, there is land dispossession in some places, and curtailed access to dambos that used to be communal under customary land tenure. Our findings question the possibility of LSLA deals to contribute to wealth creation for local people. Our findings suggest pre-existing socio-economic status and household labour are key to understanding coping strategies of local people in Nansanga. High wealth households are more likely to take advantage of emerging opportunities from (failed) LSLA deals than low wealth households. Finally, LSLA deals transform resource use and therefore livelihoods - reinforcing pre-existing socio-economic community conditions.<br/

Housing retrofit:Six types of local authority energy service models

Given the ambitious policy target to become net zero carbon by 2050, what role can local authorities play in the decarbonisation of housing? An examination is presented of six local authority energy service models relevant to housing retrofit in Britain. Local authorities have an important role, with local knowledge about housing stock and economic opportunities; they also have relevant planning and governance responsibilities. However, relatively little is known about either the different energy service models adopted for retrofit or their relative effectiveness. Models identified from empirical case study research constitute experimental innovations resulting from constrained finances and competition requirements in public services. They provided (1) energy-efficiency upgrades to public, residential and commercial buildings and/or (2) district heating infrastructure to secure ‘upstream’ resource efficiencies. Findings show that local initiatives provided different retrofit mixes, with differing potential for effective change. The limitations of current models are considered, along with the policy and market changes needed to empower local authorities to contribute systematically to net zero carbon buildings.  'Policy relevance' How can British local authorities organise energy-efficiency retrofit in buildings? Six energy service models are identified which deliver on-site energy-efficiency upgrades and/or area-based efficient heating infrastructure. Reductions to energy demand from these models tend to fall short of the radical changes required by UK net zero 2050 goals. Whilst the energy service models provide examples of local innovation and effectiveness, much more ambitious policy is essential to enable a step change in energy service models for retrofit. Policy and regulatory changes are needed: first, to reform the energy retail market to support energy services geared to reducing demand; and second, to empower local authorities and their partners to scale up whole-area retrofitting, including privately owned buildings