Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

French

Agricultural mechanisation promotes continuous cultivation on a piece of land and expansion of the area under cultivation, thereby intensifying competition for land. This impacts the land tenure system based on customary land tenure and communal landholding that thrived under land fallowing. Situated within the evolutionary theory of land rights and adopting an empirical qualitative research approach, this paper examines the effects of agricultural mechanisation on customary land tenure relations in Ghana's Transitional Zone. The paper argues that the widespread adoption of agricultural mechanisation has led to farm extensification and intensification which have engendered intense competition and conflicts over land and trends towards individual landholding. This has provided the arsenals for manipulation by the powerful in society and ushering in a new form of customary land tenure relations that replaces traditional social relations with capitalist relations and creates tension between allodial rights holders and the usufructuary and customary tenancy rights holders

Keywords

Ghana agricultural mechanisation customary land tenure land use changes communal landholding land fallowing

Introduction

The critical role of land in agrarian society can never be overstated. In Africa, the importance of land does not lie only in its economic value to secure livelihoods and food security (Platteau, 1996). Land is also central to people's identity and socio-religious life (Austin, 2005) and is linked to the regulation of social and power relations (Chitonge, 2018). In Africa, south of the Sahara, it is estimated that only five to 10 per cent of the land is held under freehold title, and for the remaining 90 per cent, the greater proportion is considered customary or communal land (Chimhowu and Woodhouse, 2006; Deininger, 2003). The implication is that the largest portion of African land has been in the hands of traditional or local leaders and access has been mediated through indigenous customary arrangements (Chimhowu and Woodhouse, 2006; Bruce, 1993), which have been evolving. The drivers of such evolution relating to customary tenure over the past years have been the subject of intense research across the African continent. Several scholarly works have identified drivers that account for changes in customary land tenure in Africa including demographic growth, urbanisation, greater integration in the global economy and neoliberal reforms, livelihood diversification, socio-economic and cultural change, monetarisation of the economy, HIV/AIDS, conflict and public policy, and legislation (Cotula and Cissé, 2006; Chimhowu, 2019; Colin et al., 2007; Yaro, 2010; Abdulai, 2002).

The permutations of these factors have manifested in different ways and contexts in transforming customary tenure relations. In the case of forest regions of Ghana and Côte d'Ivoire, it has been demonstrated that these factors manifested in the introduction of cash crops, especially cocoa, that led to commoditisation of land in this area with the associated changes to customary land tenure relations (Boni, 2005; Benneh, 1970; Colin, Kouamé and Soro, 2007; Chauveau, 2006). In the northern regions of Ghana, the changes in tenure relations have been attributed to demographic pressures and intensification of capitalist economic relations (Yaro, 2010; Abdulai, 2002), whilst in the peri-urban centres, urbanisation and population growth have been associated with changes in customary land tenure (Ubink, 2008). In the transitional zone (TZ), migration and increase in population growth, large-scale land acquisitions, state policies, increasing demand for food in the urban centres and greater integration into the capitalist economy (Amanor and Iddrisu, 2022; Amanor and Pabi, 2007) have resulted in increasing adoption of agricultural mechanisation which has become the immediate trigger of the customary tenure changes in the study area. The primary focus of this study is to examine the implications of agricultural mechanisation for customary land tenure relations in the TZ of Ghana.

For many years, the TZ was considered a land-abundant (Amanor and Pabi, 2007), where land had less value and was easily accessible. Due to the favourable agro-ecological conditions and the relative availability of socio-economic infrastructure, this zone not only has attracted migrant farmers from the northern part of Ghana, but has also become the target of domestic and transnational large-scale land acquisitions (Tonah, 2002; Schoneveld, 2017; Sarfo and Robert, 2021). These trends, coupled with the states’ drive to transform the agricultural sector, have led to the increasing adoption of new farming systems that place agricultural mechanisation at the core of the new green revolution in Africa which has profound effects on customary land tenure that had successfully managed land relations.

Agricultural modernisation and mechanisation have gained ascendency in Africa in the past two decades, after the failures of past state-led adventures of the 1960s and 1970s (Collier and Dercon, 2014; Yaro et al., 2017; Daum and Birner, 2020). Given this, the government of Ghana has been working with the Alliance for Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) and other development partners in initiating steps at mechanising subsistence agriculture (FAO, 2017; Kansanga et al., 2018). Through initiatives, such as the establishment of Agricultural Mechanisation Service Centres (AMSECs) and the National Fertilizer Subsidy in 2005 and 2008 (Houssou et al., 2016), the Savannah Accelerated Development Authority (SADA) in 2012 (Guo et al., 2013) and Planting for Food and Jobs (PFJ) in 2017 (Tanko et al., 2019; Ansah et al., 2020), the Ghanaian State has been making available agricultural inputs, especially tractors, fertilisers and other agrochemicals, to farmers to facilitate the adoption of mechanisation. Aside from the state initiatives, the private sector has also been involved in the importation of agricultural machinery as a result of the increasing demand for such input by Ghanaian farmers leading to widespread adoption of agricultural mechanisation in one form or another, especially in the TZ and the savannah regions of the country (Amanor and Iddrisu, 2022; Kansanga et al., 2019; Diao et al., 2014). This has led to agricultural intensification associated with more intensive farming on the same piece of plot, reduction in fallow periods, an increased cropping frequency and use of fertilisers and other chemical inputs (Diao et al., 2016; Kleemann et al., 2017, Warren, 2023) with a profound impact on land tenure relations in these areas.

This new trend of agricultural mechanisation has received considerable academic treatment, with many of these studies focusing on the factors of its emergence, the extent of mechanisation and its impact on livelihoods, the environment and agricultural productivity (Mohammed et al., 2023; Amanor and Iddrisu, 2022; Kuwornu et al., 2017; Diao et al., 2014). Except for a few studies, little attention has been paid to the implications of the widespread adoption of agricultural mechanisation for customary land tenure relations, especially in areas where communal landholding has been the norm for centuries. Kansanga et al. (2018) examined the changes in contemporary agricultural land access and governance occasioned by agricultural modernisation and mechanisation in northern Ghana by focusing specifically on intra-familial land access. Their findings revealed that agricultural mechanisation has increased the intensity of agricultural land usage and exposed the customary land governance system to more competing claims over agricultural commons that were formerly owned and cultivated jointly under the extended family system, leading to intra-family land grabbing. Despite the useful insight provided by their study, the focus on intra-familial land relations leaves out several competing interests in land, such as between migrants and the autochthonous groups, allodial right holders and usufructuary title holders, men and women, as well as the youth and the elderly that are mediated outside of family relations. In a related study, Amanor and Iddrisu (2022) examined the adoption of tractor ploughing services for land preparation in northern Ghana and found that the incidence has led to the growth of smallholder farming and the “expansion of medium-scale and commercial farmers” (Amanor and Iddrisu, 2022: 169). A situation, they argued, is leading to the scramble for fertile land conducive to mechanisation. However, they did not explore how this scramble for land is altering tenure relations, except to indicate that it has created tensions between elders, youth and women over access to land.

This study, therefore, contributes to the debate on the impact of agricultural mechanisation on customary land tenure relations and extends the argument beyond the intra-familial level, especially in an area where the origin of the individual defines land access, as the TZ has a high population of migrant farmers who are competing with the indigenous people over land. In doing so, the paper addresses the following question: How does agricultural mechanisation alter customary land tenure relations in the TZ of Ghana? The paper is presented in the following order: the next section discusses the theoretical foundation; this is followed by the historical overview of agricultural mechanisation in the study area and information on the study area and methodology; and, finally, the findings, discussion of the study and conclusion are presented in the final sections of the paper.

Theoretical Framework

Land tenure in Africa has undergone several stages of evolution from pre-colonial times through colonial to post-colonial periods (Obeng Odoom, 2016; Amanor, 2022). In most cases, these tenurial changes are occasioned by new ways of using land, the new opportunity to maximise economic gains and new policies that emerge to regulate land relations (Chauveau, 2006; Amanor and Ubink, 2008; Chitonge et al., 2021). Many African countries have a plurality of land tenure (Chitonge, 2021). In Ghana, the 1992 Constitution and the New Land Act, Act 1036 of 2020, recognise and guarantee a plurality of land tenure and also categorise land into three: state, vested, and customary land (Kasanga and Kotey, 2001; Amanor, 2008). Since the largest portion of Africa's land falls within the customary domain, the debate on agrarian change in the continent has always focused on customary land tenure because access to land is considered important in poverty reduction in rural communities (Chitonge, 2021; Anaafo et al., 2023).

Debate on customary land tenure in Africa principally revolves around two main viewpoints: the replacement school of thought or the static interpretation and the conservation or communitarian school of thought (Platteau, 1996; Akaateba, 2019; Chitonge, 2021). The proponents of the static interpretation view customary tenure as a constraint to development and that customary land tenure is characterised by ambiguity and negotiability that contributes to low productivity and inhibits the allocation of land to those who can use it efficiently (De Soto, 2000; Platteau, 1996). This, they argued, should be replaced with a land titling regime that has the potential to increase tenure security, promote a flourishing land market and allow land to be used as collateral to secure loans and credits to expand production, thereby freeing the capital potential of asset held informally by poor people (De Soto, 2000; Musembi, 2007). On the contrary, the conservationist school of thought rejects the argument put forward by the replacement school and calls for the preservation of customary tenure in Africa. This view, whilst recognising some imperfections associated with the customary land tenure, argued that customary land tenure has several advantages and stresses the moral economy of preserving it and that if completely replaced could have detrimental effects on “livelihoods, social cohesion, social stability, erase cultural identities of people and lead to inequitable access to land” (Chitonge, 2021: 4; Akaateba, 2019; Peters, 2004). The proponents of the communitarian viewpoint further argue that customary land tenure is made up of bundles of rights, which include individual holding and is capable of adapting to change and that the ambiguity and uncertainty surrounding customary land tenure could sometimes serve as a spark for investment in the land (Berry, 2018). From the conservationist standpoint, what constitutes customary land relations is subject to contestation and not independent of the state (Berry, 1993, 2018; Boni, 2005; Ubink, 2008; Chimhowu, 2019). Even though the static interpretation appeared to have lost the debate, it has found its way into many land reform policies in Africa supported by the International Monetary Fund, World Bank, and other international development institutions under the guise of hybrid land tenure (Chitonge, 2021; Anaafo, 2015).

The hybrid views are varied, but they turn to conglomerate around the recognition of the prevalence of both customary and statutory tenure by calling for either the recognition and clarification of customary tenure or the “adaptation of customary norms and statutory rules in land administration” (Chitonge et al., 2021: 7; Menzein-Dick and Mwangi, 2009). Whilst the hybrid viewpoints tacitly value individual landholding, the idea of negotiability, dynamism, flexibility, and adaptability associated with customary land tenure made them embrace both. However, they hope that the customary tenure will eventually evolve towards individualisation of landholding, even if not privatisation or formalisation of land rights as envisioned by the proponents of the replacement school (Chitonge et al., 2021). This view is similar to the evolutionary theory of land rights (ETLRs) that formed the theoretical foundations of this paper.

The ETLRs has become one of the dominant approaches in discussing customary land tenure and changes in tenure relations in Africa (Platteau, 1996; Chitonge et al., 2021). The central tenet of the ETLRs is that – in the face of population pressures, technological innovations, market integration, and urbanisation – rights held in common or under a communal system will spontaneously evolve towards individual rights and subsequently lead to calls for the formalisation of land right by the right holders (Platteau, 1996; Austin, 2005; Alston and Mueller, 2014). Thus, communal rights would evolve towards individual holding and subsequently to private property holding. This argument is premised on the notion of flexibility, negotiability, adaptability, and ambiguity characteristic of customary land tenure which makes it adjustable to changing social and economic circumstances (Ubink, 2008). Within this framework, customary land tenure is perceived as a “transient phase which is expected to give way to more individualised land-holding systems amenable to market transactions” (Chitonge et al., 2021: 126). Inherent in this proposition is the assumption of a linear progression of property rights, from communal landholding to individualised private property rights that engender market integration of customary tenure relations (Boserup, 1965).

However, the ETLRs has been criticised for the assumption that customary land tenure is a form of property held in common as there exist several interests in land, including individual holding and sharecropping which has been a feature of the customary land tenure system in Ghana (Amanor, 2009a). The assumption of linear progression has also been criticised, as the evolution of customary land tenure occurs amidst contestation, state interventions, and manipulation by traditional leaders (Berry, 1993; Boni, 2005; Ubink, 2008; Colin et al., 2007). The idea that the evolution of land rights will lead to the demand for formalisation of land rights through land right titling is not supported by this study. The trend towards individualisation in the study area does not commensurate with the demands for formal land title. Only those who are engaged in large-scale land investments and the urban elites obtain formal titles to secure and protect their lands. The majority of the local community members do not care about such titles once the land is under their continued cultivation or when they are recognised by the community for making capital investment. In situations where the local community members have demanded land rights titles, such titles tended to be informal titles (Chauveau, 2006). Even though the evolutionary theory of land rights does not entirely account for all the nuances of the changing tenure relations brought by agricultural mechanisation in the study area, it provides a useful framework to appreciate the fact that the customary land tenure is not static, but evolving, and that such evolution will be advantageous for some individuals at the expense of others. This study, therefore, provides an empirical demonstration of how one of the factors cited for the evolution of customary land tenure, technological innovation, in this case agricultural mechanisation unfolds in practice.

Agricultural Mechanisation in the Atebubu-Amantin Municipality: An Overview of the Past and Present

The TZ has been christened a major “breadbasket” of Ghana and different varieties of food crops ranging from vegetables, cereals, sorghums, roots, and tubers are produced there. Land in the area is predominately customary and is held and controlled by traditional leaders. Farming practices in the study area in the past were dominated by land fallowing where farmers cultivated a plot of land for one to three years and abandoned the plot for another to allow the former plot to regain its fertility. When fallow land is allowed to regenerate, the right to use such land does not lie in the hands of only the first user, but such a plot of land reverts to the entire community. This system of land relations has been described as communal landholding (Amanor, 2009b). The practice was widespread in the study area since the abundance of land in the face of relatively low population density did not put much pressure on access to land at the time. The use of tractors, fertilisers, and agrochemicals for food crop cultivation was almost non-existent in the past in the study area. This is consistent with the description of the past farming system by Benneh (1973), Amanor and Pabi (2007), and Sarfo (2020, 2011).

The earliest attempt at mechanising agriculture in the Atebubu-Amantin Municipality started with the government's introduction of commercial and mechanised agriculture in the 1960s, and subsequently in the 1970s with the introduction of state farms (Amanor and Iddrisu, 2022). These interventions had limited effect on the study area since only a handful of such projects were established. As observed by Amanor and Pabi (2007), the introduction of state farms served as an opportunity for the transfer of new technology and innovations to the peasant farmers. However, in the Atebubu area, the state farm was late in its introduction and did not have much impact on the local farmers as they continued in their traditional modes of farming (Sarfo, 2011). In the Atebubu-Amantin Municipality, lands that were developed as state farms were converted to residential plots upon the collapse of the state farms. Even though mechanised farming to some extent was practised in some of the sampled communities in the form of tobacco and cotton outgrower schemes, it had limited impact on food crop farming. The practice of land fallowing persisted into the 1990s, but has since been declining as many more farmers have been adopting mechanisation. This is consistent with the literature that traces the resurgence of agricultural mechanisation to this period and also coincides with the intensification of large-scale land acquisition in the TZ and the Atebubu area in particular (Amanor and Iddrisu, 2022; Kansanga et al., 2019; Schoneveld, 2017; Diao et al., 2016; Diao et al., 2014).

Farmers in the study area attributed the adoption of agricultural mechanisation to population growth, migration, state policies, the desire to control the land and the rising scarcity of land emanating from widespread alienation of large swathes of land by the traditional leaders to domestic and transnational investors. However, the emergence of mechanisation in the study area is contrary to the theory of farming system evolution (Boserup, 1965), which argued that the rise in population will lead to a “transition from fallow cropping to permanent cultivation systems,” and this will result in the adoption of new technology (Daum and Birner, 2020: 2; Boserup, 1965; Diao et al., 2014). As discussed earlier, the initial attempt at mechanisation in the study area was a deliberate effort by the state and not driven by a transition from fallow cropping to permanent tillage. Agricultural mechanisation is rather transforming the farming system from fallow cropping to permanent cultivation (Amanor and Pabi, 2007; Sarfo and Robert, 2021).

Agricultural mechanisation in the Atebubu-Amantin Municipality entails the deployment of technology and innovation in four major processes within the farming cycle, namely, land preparation, weed control through agrochemicals, application of fertiliser and harvesting. However, the major component of agricultural mechanisation in this area involves the initial land preparation, which requires the stumping of the trees on the land to pave the way for the use of tractors for land clearance.

Study Area and Methodology

The data for this paper were collected in the Atebubu-Amanten Municipality in the Bono East Region. According to the 2021 Population and Housing Census of Ghana, the population of the municipality stood at 144,947, with the majority engaged in agriculture employing 70.2 per cent of all households (GSS, 2021). The municipality is home to the Bono people, but has high presence of migrant settler farmers. The main crops cultivated in the area include maize, yam, cassava, vegetables, groundnuts, beans, rice, cashew, and mango, with the latter two being more recent additions (Sarfo, 2020; Tonah, 2002). The municipality exhibits the characteristics of the TZ with vegetation made up of “savanna woodland interspersed with high forest mosaics in gallery forests along stream banks and valleys” (Amanor and Pabi, 2007: 54). The area experiences two rainy periods, from May to August, and from September to October, allowing for two planting seasons in a rain-fed cultivation system.

Empirical data were collected at Mem, Watro, Akokoa, and Dobidi Nkwanta — four rural settlements in the Atebubu-Amanten Municipality — from August 2022 to July 2023. These communities were purposively sampled because of the extensive adoption of agricultural mechanisation. Through purposive sampling, semi-structured, in-depth interviews were conducted involving smallholder farmers, commercial farmers, traditional leaders, and representatives of the Office of the Administrator of Stool Lands (OASL), Customary Land Secretariat (CLS), and the Ministry of Food and Agriculture (MOFA). In total, 50 respondents were purposively selected for the study. Out of the 50 respondents, 40 were selected from four rural communities and 10 from each community. These respondents were selected bearing in mind their in-depth knowledge about land tenure issues and agricultural mechanisation, gender, the kind of activities they engaged in, and the length of time spent in the community to ensure that they are knowledgeable and understood the dynamics and ramifications of agricultural mechanisation and tenure changes in the area. The remaining 10 respondents included two Paramount Chiefs, four Divisional Chiefs, a representative each from the OASL and the CLS, and two agricultural extension officers from MOFA. This was to elicit their expert information on the phenomenon under study since the positions they occupy afforded them a better appreciation of land relations and agricultural mechanisation in the study area. Aside from the interviews, four focus group discussions (FGDs) were also conducted, one in each of the communities, bringing together different interest groups including men, women, youth, migrants, and the autochtonous to share their views on the topic under discussion. Each FGD session brought together eight to 12 participants. The interviews and FGDs generally lasted about an hour and elicited information on agricultural mechanisation, past and present land tenure arrangements, and changes in land tenure relations, the implications of agricultural mechanisation for land access and tenure security. The interviews were recorded after obtaining consent from the respondents and transcribed for analysis. Additionally, the researchers engaged in active observation through farm visits, attended social gatherings, observed the phenomenon first-hand, and engaged in informal conversations. The different methods of data collection allowed for triangulation. Data presentation and discussions were done descriptively and thematically.

Implications of Agricultural Mechanisation for Customary Land Tenure Relations

Agriculture mechanisation has impacted customary tenure relations in the TZ of Ghana in diverse ways. These include expansion of areas under cultivation, farm intensification, competition, and conflict over land, trends towards individualisation and changes in land relations. To appreciate these land tenure dynamisms, a detailed mechanism of land access in the study area is established to serve as the spring board for the discussion on the implications of agricultural mechanisation for customary land tenure relations in the TZ.

Land in the research area is generally customary land under the control of the paramount stool. Individuals’ access to land depended on their relationship with the various levels of the traditional hierarchy. Under the system of land fallowing, the indigenous¹ people did not need permission from anyone to farm on a fallow plot of land provided such a plot did not lie closer to another person's farm.

The migrant farmers, most of whom trace their origin to the northern part of Ghana and Burkina Faso, on the other hand, contacted the village head through an intermediary who in most cases were the people who offered them a place to stay, in essence, their landlords. Describing this practice, a farmer at Dobidi-Nkwanta commented:

I came to this area as a farm labourer and was living with one man who was my landlord. When I was ready to start my own farm, I informed my landlord who took me to the village head. I was made to provide a goat, two bottles of schnapps and some amount of money that was used for the performance of some rituals before I was granted the opportunity to start farming. Annually, I was made to provide some tubers of yam, and together with the other migrants in the village, we contributed and bought a sheep and two bottles of schnapps that were submitted to the village head who in turn submitted the items to the divisional chief (Field Interview, 23 April 2023).

This vividly describes the processes that migrant farmers went through to acquire farmland for farming under land fallowing in the study area. The assertion was confirmed by many of the respondents, including the traditional leaders. The children of the migrant farmers did not need to go through the same processes, but were also subjected to the payment of annual tribute or royalties. Access to land was therefore mediated by customary relations either as an indigene or a migrant (see Sarfo, 2020 for a discussion on land tenure practices in Atebubu). Whilst the indigenous peoples’ access to land was based on their indigeneity and performance of some customary service towards the allodial right holder, the migrants’ access to land was based on payment of annual tribute mostly in the form of farm produce. There was also no limitation in the size of land a farmer could cultivate and the payment of tribute was not dependent on the farm size or a specific plot of land. This arrangement was possible because no individual assumed exclusive control over the land as fallow land reverted to the community. Members of the community had a pattern of moving their farms in a lineal order to avoid clashing with each other.

The new trend is that, after a small-scale farmer has cultivated a plot of land for two to three years, instead of allowing the land to fallow, the farmer stumps the trees on the land and ploughs with a tractor. The middle-class people from the cities and the emerging medium-scale farmers who have the financial resources obtain fallow land from the chiefs and develop it for mechanised farming. Many domestic and international investors have also acquired several hectares of land for mechanised commercial agriculture. For instance, the African Plantation for Sustainable Development (APSD) has acquired an estimated 82,000 ha for eucalyptus plantation, and the Amantin Agro Processing Company (AAPC) has also acquired over 41,600 ha for the cultivation of cassava to be processed into industrial starch. There were several other relatively smaller acquisitions ranging from 100 ha to 1,000 ha. Although some of these acquisitions have not been developed, others have been brought under cultivation. For example, APSD has developed approximately 24,000 ha of the acquired land at the time of the data collection exercise. The company has also allocated 30 per cent of the remaining land for conservation. The representative of AAPC also indicated that they had developed 20 per cent of the acquired land. In cases where local community members still have access to the land acquired by the investors, their tenure security was precarious as they could be evicted from the land anytime the investor needed the land. The widespread adoption of agricultural mechanisation in the study area thus presents some implications for customary land tenure relations worthy of consideration.

The Expansion of Areas under Cultivation

Agricultural mechanisation has led to the expansion of land area under cultivation. The adoption of mechanised farming through the use of tractors, fertilisers and other agrochemicals has made it possible for small-scale farmers to expand their farm sizes. In an interview at Mem, a farmer observed that:

When I started my maize farm at Abrewanko, I was using cutlass to prepare the land on my own. Labourers were difficult to find so how many acres could I prepare within a very short planting window? My entire farm was about 5 acres but with the use of a tractor and agrochemicals, I now have about 40 acres to myself (Field Interview, 20 September 2022).

A farmer comparing farm sizes under land fallowing with the use of hoes and cutlasses for cultivating yam and mechanisation also stated that:

We thought our yam farms were big but the use of tractors and herbicides has proven to us that we were not doing anything then (Field Interview, 10 May 2023).

A teacher who also engages in farming indicated that he has been able to expand his farm size since he acquired his own tractor.

A divisional chief who resides in Atebubu, but has a farm at Mem observed that:

My farm is located some 5 kilometres away from Mem. I was the first person to stumped the trees on the land and plough with tractors in 2007. There was no one ploughing with tractors there. But now all around my farm, people are using tractors. With the use of tractors I was able to expand my farm which won me the best maize farmer of Ghana in 2012 (Field Interview, 10 February 2023).

These assertions were echoed during the FGDs as many of the participants indicated that with mechanisation, they have been able to increase their farm sizes.

However, smallholder farmers who were unable to adopt mechanisation, but rather continued with land fallowing practices, lost access to their farmland, leading to further reduction in their farm sizes. A woman in her fifties at Watro said:

I had a two-acre land I used to cultivate yam. Last year I decided to allow the land to fallow only to hear that someone had stumped the trees on it and cultivated maize. When the issue got to the elders, I only got one acre back as they claimed the person had invested in the land by stumping the trees (Field Interview, 16 March 2023).

Similarly, some migrant farmers at Mem lamented their land loss. They argued that they had a hamlet some six kilometres away from Mem where they were cultivating yam under land fallowing. Their plight was described by one of them in the following words:

When the natives of Mem started ploughing their lands with tractors, we wanted to do the same but the Asaase Wura (Landlord) did not permit us. We were still cultivating yam under land fallowing. When we allowed the land to regenerate, the Mem people would come and stump the trees and use the land for mechanised farming which enabled them to gain control over such land. We have now been permitted to also engage in mechanised farming but they have already taken away all the land we were farming on (Field Interview, 22 October 2022).

The above narratives indicate how agricultural mechanisation has enabled some community members to expand their farm sizes, whereas others who were unable to adopt mechanisation were losing farmland leading to a reduction in farm sizes.

Another development that has led to the expansion of land area under cultivation observed during the study was the emergence of large-scale land acquisitions. As indicated earlier, several domestic and national investors have acquired large swathes of land in the study area for developing mechanised commercial farms and tree plantations bringing several hectares of land under cultivation. In the Akokoa and Dobidi Nkwanta areas, much of the land has been leased to commercial farmers involving national and international investors. It was observed that whilst the farm sizes of smallholder farmers were reducing in that area, those of large-scale investors were expanding. During FGDs at Akokoa and Dobidi Nkwanta, the common sentiment that the participants expressed was that foreigners and affluent local investors had taken over their lands. They pointed accusing fingers at the foreign investors, wealthy Ghanaians from the cities, including politicians, civil servants, military officers, and Ghanaians in the diaspora who have acquired large tracts of land in the study area.

The acquired land was used for commercial agriculture by mechanising farm operations. This enabled investors to bring an extensive area under cultivation, thereby expanding their operations. In the case of the absentee farmers who hardly visited their farms, mechanisation helped them to develop their lands as, in most cases, their caretakers had private businesses to attend to. The commercial farmers also provide mechanisation services to the smallholder farmers who cannot afford to acquire their own machines, and this enables smallholders to expand their farm sizes. The adoption of agricultural mechanisation has led to the extensification of the area under cultivation in the study area. This is consistent with earlier studies (Diao et al., 2014; Amanor and Iddrisu, 2022; Kansanga et al., 2019).

Farm Intensification

Mechanisation has led to the intensification of the use of the farmland as there has been continuous cultivation on the same piece of plots without any fallow period. Under the system of land fallowing, the fallow intervals served as a period for the land to regenerate to regain its fertility. However, the widespread adoption of mechanisation has limited the land available to allow farmers to engage in land fallowing. A respondent at Akokoa indicated that “all the land in this area has been turned to plots.² We have stumped all the trees on the land so you cannot find any land that has been allowed to fallow for even two years” (Field Interview, 10 May 2023). To restore soil fertility under mechanisation, farmers resort to the application of fertilisers, which the state has been advocating its adoption by farmers to improve farm productivity. Respondents also attributed the farm intensification to the difficulties involved in the initial land preparation to pave the way for the use of tractors.

Competition and Conflicts Over Land

The trend towards farming extensification and intensification occasioned by the adoption of agricultural mechanisation has led to intense competition for land, resulting in the commodification and commercialisation of land and rising land values. Much of the hitherto non-farming areas have been brought under intensive and continuous cultivation leading to scarcity and rising value of land in the area. In a FGD at Watro, a respondent intimated that:

Had anybody told us that land would be scarce within the shortest possible time as we are experiencing, I do not think anyone here would have agreed with that person. Since we started farming with tractors many people from different places have come to acquire land here. Many of us have also expanded our farm sizes and it is becoming increasingly difficult to find vacant land except in the hinterlands (FGD, 15 January 2023).

With the expansion of the cultivated area coupled with the influx of migrant farmers and large-scale agricultural investors, the area has come under intense competition for land. A respondent at Akokoa commenting on the competition over land said:

Because mechanisation has made farming easier, people who never dreamt of farming are now fighting for farmland. Some of our community members who have been employed in government agencies are now competing with us for land, not to mention people from different places who have been granted land here (Field Interview, 14 May 2023).

This phenomenon has generated intense competition for land leading to conflicts over land. An elderly farmer noted that:

In the past, no one claimed their fallow land, if it were so, I would not be able to measure the extent of land I have. The land I ever cultivated is vast, but now those who have gone to clear the trees are claiming the land as theirs. Fallow lands were for all community members, but now after clearing the land for yam cultivation, the next step is to stump the trees on the land and use it for mechanised farming or tree planting leading to intense competition for land (Field Interview, 13 August 2022).

This practice is not only placing land firmly in the hands of individuals, but also reducing the availability of land as farmers keep expanding their farm sizes under mechanised farming. Coupled with LSLAs, land, that not too long ago was considered abundant in the area, has become a scarce resource leading to increased competition and commodification.

The competition is so intense that land-related disputes have become a common occurrence in the area. A respondent observed that because of the competition for land: Brothers are fighting brothers, wives are at loggerheads with husbands, and fathers and children are not on good terms. The animosity between chiefs and subjects and between indigenes and migrants has reached the rooftop (Field Interview, 1 December 2022).

Amidst intense competition for land leading to rising value and commodification of land, actors, especially, the customary leaders have positioned themselves to take advantage of the situation by redefining their roles in land administration. The situation described above is reminiscent of the developments occasioned by the adoption of agricultural mechanisation in the savannah regions of Ghana (Kansanga et al., 2018, 2019; Amanor and Iddrisu, 2022; Yaro et al., 2017; Diao et al., 2014).

Trend Towards Individualisation

The developments described above have led to the emergence of a trend towards individual landholding. The process of developing the land for mechanised farming is labour and cost-intensive. Therefore, those who are successful in developing the land assume exclusive control over such plots. A respondent stated that:

I have developed about 30 acres that I use for cultivating maize. Now the plot has become mine. I can even hire part to other people and no one can take the plot that I have developed away from me. Mechanised farming has become a means of sharing the land, if you do not work hard to develop some area for yourself, a time will come when you will not have land to farm on (Field Interview, 20 October 2022).

A smallholder farmer at Dobidi Nkwanta added:

Now everybody is farming on the land they have developed. I have spent so much money and energy in preparing this land to enable me to plough with a tractor, so I will not leave it for someone to take over. All the land in this area has been turned into plots. I cultivate my plot twice a year and since I stumped the trees, I have been farming continuously (Field Interview, 23 January 2023).

This was a common opinion expressed by the respondents. When a farmer was unable to cultivate his or her plot in a particular year or season, he or she rents the plot out to another farmer to protect his or her land. Thus, continuous cultivation of the same piece of plot developed for mechanised farming gave the farmers some form of control over the land, thereby depriving access to others.

The claim made by the respondent above about land prepared for mechanised farming is not based on land title registration but rather on the investment made and continuous cultivation. This process is consistent with the emergence of family landholding in the forest regions of Ghana (Boni, 2005, 2008; Amanor and Pabi, 2007). The trend towards individualisation is also consistent with the proposition put forward by the proponents of the ETLRs: that technological innovation will lead to the intensification of competition for land, leading to the emergence of individual landholding (Platteau, 1996; Austin, 2005; Alston and Mueller, 2014). Contrary to the demand for land title registration as argued by the ETLRs, the respondents resorted to intensive cultivation to secure their land which leaves them vulnerable in the face of intense competition, commodification, and the rising value of land.

Changes in Land Relations

The trend towards individual landholding has also altered the relationship between the land users and the allodial rights holders. The relationship between landowners and holders of usufructuary rights under the fallowing system was mediated through different mechanisms: migrant farmers paid an annual tribute, whilst indigenous farmers, by virtue of their ancestral claims, provided labour services in exchange for access. During the FGDs, it became clear that not only were the migrants initially prevented from engaging in mechanised farming, but they were also required to pay a substantial amount before they were given the go-ahead to clear the trees on the land for mechanised farming or engaged in tree crop cultivation. They were also required to pay an annual tribute, but, this time, in cash. The annual tribute was calculated based on the number of acres a farmer cultivates. Explaining this new arrangement, a Divisional Chief opines:

Annually, we were charging a farmer Ghc 500.00 (1Ghc = 11$) as tribute irrespective of the number of acres a farmer cultivates. But the farmer will develop the land and give it out on rent at Ghc 200.00 per acre per crop season. Were they not cheating us the chiefs who are the owners of the land? That is why we are now charging them based on the number of acres they cultivate (Field Interview, 14 September 2022).

This emerging trend has given rise to farmland rental arrangements both between land users and chiefs, and among land users themselves. Land renting has become a common feature especially in areas where LSLAs have taken place and led to scarcity of land. Some people have taken advantage of this situation by developing the land for mechanised farming only to rent it out.

Agricultural mechanisation has also altered land relations by replacing social relations with economic relations in the study area. Chiefs are reinterpreting their fiduciary position and asserting direct ownership of land, exploiting its rising value through commodification and commercialisation. This allows them to alienate land to outsiders, disadvantaging both their subjects and long-established migrant farmers, some of whom have inhabited the study area for centuries. Anaafo et al. (2023) and Anaafo (2015) similarly observed that land scarcity and commodification trigger a change in the role of chiefs in customary land administration. The traditional leaders are also transforming the annual tributes or royalties that migrant farmers provided in the past into renting agreements and exacting much more money from the migrant farmers before they could access land for their farming activities. Customary leaders have begun charging autochthonous farmers for access to land for mechanised farming despite their traditional exemption from such payments — particularly when they required substantial or fallow land. The communal landholders, on the other hand, are also devising means to outwit the chiefs by developing large tracts of land and hiring the plots to farmers interested in engaging in mechanised farming, thereby exacting rent from the land. This has created tension among traditional leaders who are the allodial rights holders and the usufructuary rights holders as well as between migrant farmers and the autochthonous. The transformation in the agrarian sector through agricultural mechanisation is altering the communal landholding relations into individual landholding, a trend anticipated by the ETLRs. However, this evolution was occurring amidst contestation from different actors as they jostled to secure favourable terms for themselves.

Conclusion

What constitutes customary land tenure or customary land in Africa has been shrouded in controversies, but it must be acknowledged that African customary land tenure systems are marked by ongoing negotiations over access, control, and user rights. This study has discussed the implications of the adoption of agricultural mechanisation for customary land tenure relations, with a particular focus on the Atebubu-Amantin Municipality in Ghana. The study found that the agrarian system in the study area is evolving as a result of the massive adoption of agricultural mechanisation that has led to the abandonment of the aged old land fallowing that thrived in the era of abundant land. The widespread adoption of agricultural mechanisation in the study area has led to farm extensification and intensification, engendering intense competition and conflicts over land. This has accelerated trends towards individual landholding, thereby transforming tenure relations as envisaged by ETLRs. This is leading to the replacement of communal landholding with individualised landholding. Many of these changes are emerging spontaneously without any firm control or direction from the traditional leaders or state institutions, making the phenomenon assume a form of the “survival of the fittest” scenario that could negatively impact the land access of the women, the youth, migrants, and the poor in society. The paper recommends that policymakers consider developing, and effectively implementing, a nationwide spatial and land use plan. This plan should specify the various uses of all the land in the country. The paper also recommends that future research should consider the impacts of the changing tenure relations occasioned by the adoption of agricultural mechanisation on the powers of traditional leaders and their ability to administer customary land effectively and efficiently as well as its impact on land access and livelihoods of the communal landholders.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Kwasi Sarfo

Michael Atakro

Notes

Author Biographies

Kwasi Sarfo is a Lecturer at the University of Energy and Natural Resources, Sunyani, Ghana and a PhD candidate at the Centre for African Studies at the University of Cape Town, South Africa. His research interest includes African land tenure systems, democratisation in Africa, African social and political systems and rural development in Africa. His dissertation investigates the outcomes of large-scale land acquisitions in Ghana.

Bernard Okoampah Otu is a Lecturer at Koforidua Technical University. He holds a PhD from the Centre for African Studies, University of Cape Town, South Africa. His research interest revolves around land conflict, farmer–herder conflict, African history and human security.

Michael Atakro is an Assistant Lecturer at Koforidua Technical University. He holds an MPhil in African Studies obtained from the University of Ghana, Legon. His research interests include political and constitutional history and African culture.

References

Abdulai

(2002) Land rights, land use, dynamics and policy in peri-urban Tamale, Ghana. In: Toulmin

Del-ville

Traore

(eds) The Dynamics of Resource Tenure in West Africa. Oxford: IIED, pp. 72–85.

Akaateba

(2019) The politics of customary land rights transformation in peri-urban Ghana: powers of exclusion in the era of land commodification. Land Use Policy 88: 104197.

Alston

Mueller

(2014) Towards a more evolutionary theory of property rights. Iowa Law Review 100: 2255.

Amanor

(2008) The changing face of customary land tenure. In: Amanor

Ubink

(eds) Contesting Land and Custom in Ghana. Leiden: Leiden University Press, pp. 55–99.

Amanor

(2009a) Securing land rights in Ghana. In: Ubink

Hoekema

Assies

(eds) Legalising Land Right – Local Practices, State Responses and Tenure Security in Africa, Asia and Latin America. Leiden: Leiden University Press, pp. 97–131.

Amanor

(2009b) Tree plantations, agricultural commodification, and land tenure security in Ghana. In: Ubink

Hoekema

Assies

(eds) Legalising Land Right – Local Practices, State Responses and Tenure Security in Africa, Asia and Latin America. Leiden: Leiden University Press, pp. 133–161.

Amanor

(2022) Land administration, chiefs, and governance in Ghana. In: Takeuchi

(ed) African Land Reform under Economic Liberalisation: States, Chiefs, and Rural Communities. Singapore: Springer, pp. 21–39.

Amanor

Iddrisu

(2022) Old tractors, new policies and induced technological transformation: agricultural mechanisation, class formation, and market liberalisation in Ghana. The Journal of Peasant Studies 49(1): 158–178.

Amanor

Pabi

(2007) Space, time, rhetoric and agricultural change in the transition zone of Ghana. Human Ecology 35: 51–67.

10.

Amanor

Ubink

(2008) Contesting land and custom in Ghana: introduction. In: Amanor

Ubink

(eds) Contesting Land and Custom in Ghana. Leiden: Leiden University Press, pp. 9–26.

11.

Anaafo

, 2015. Land reforms and poverty: the impacts of land reforms on poor land users in the Nkoranza South Municipality, Ghana . PhD Thesis, University of Tasmania, Australia.

12.

Anaafo

Ayamga

Bata Domanban

(2023) Custom, modernity, and stability of land rights in Ghana: an empirico-legal review. Cogent Social Sciences 9(1): 2209366.

13.

Ansah

Lambongang

Donkoh

(2020) Ghana’s planting for food and jobs programme: a look at the role of capability in farmers’ participation. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities 21(2): 161–182.

14.

Austin

(2005) Labour, Land, and Capital in Ghana: From Slavery to Free Labour in Asante, 1807–1956. New York: University of Rochester Press.

15.

Benneh

(1970) The impact of cocoa cultivation on the traditional land tenure system of the Akan of Ghana. Ghana Journal of Sociology 6: 43–61.

16.

Benneh

(1973) Small-scale farming system in Ghana. Africa. Journal of the International African Institute 43(2): 134–146.

17.

Berry

(1993) No Condition is Permanent – The Social Dynamics of Agrarian Change in Sub-Saharan Africa. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

18.

Berry

(2018) Who owns the land? Social relations and conflict over resources in Africa. GLOCON Working Paper No. 7. Freie Universität Berlin, Junior Research Group “Global Change – Local Conflicts?” (GLOCON), pp. 1–13.

19.

Boni

(2005) Clearing the Ghanaian Forest: Theories and Practices of Acquisition, Transfer and Utilisation of Farming Titles in the Sefwi-Akan Area. Accra: University of Ghana.

20.

Boni

(2008) Traditional ambiguities and authoritarian interpretations in Sefwi land disputes. In: Amanor

Ubink

(eds) Contesting Land and Custom in Ghana. Leiden: Leiden University Press, pp. 81–111.

21.

Boserup

(1965) The Conditions of Agricultural Growth – The Economics of Agrarian Change under Population Pressure. London: Allen & Unwin.

22.

Bruce

(1993) Do indigenous tenure system constrain agricultural development? In: Bassett

Crummey

(eds) Land in African Agrarian Systems. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, pp. 35–56.

23.

Chauveau

(2006) Changes in Land Access and Governance in West Africa: Markets, Social Mediations and Public Policies: Results of the CLAIMS Research Projects. London: IIED.

24.

Chimhowu

(2019) The ‘new’ African customary land tenure. Characteristic, features and policy implications of a new paradigm. Land Use Policy 81: 897–903.

25.

Chimhowu

Woodhouse

(2006) Customary vrs private property rights? Dynamics and trajectories of vernacular land markets in Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Agrarian Change 6(3): 346–371.

26.

Chitonge

(2018) The micropolitics of customary-land conversions in Zambia: emerging trends and practices. In: Umar

Chitonge

(eds) Contemporary Customary Land Issues in Africa: Navigating the Contours of Change. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, pp. 22–49.

27.

Chitonge

(2021) Land governance in Africa: the new policy reform agenda. In: Chitonge

Harvey

(eds) Land Tenure Challenges in Africa: Confronting the Governance Deficit. Cham: Springer, pp. 1–24.

28.

Chitonge

Mfune

Kafwamba

, et al. (2021) Hybrid land markets: monetarised customary land transactions in Zambia. Canadian Journal of African Studies/Revue canadienne des études africaines 51(1): 123–143.

29.

Colin

Kouamé

Soro

(2007) Outside the autochthon-migrant configuration: access to land, land conflicts and inter-ethnic relationships in a former pioneer area of lower Côte d’Ivoire. The Journal of Modern African Studies 45(1): 33–59.

30.

Collier

Dercon

(2014) African agriculture in 50 years: smallholders in a rapidly changing world? World Development 63: 92–101.

31.

Cotula

Cissé

(2006) Changes in ‘customary’resource tenure systems in the inner Niger delta, Mali. The Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law 38(52): 1–29.

32.

Daum

Birner

(2020) Agricultural mechanization in Africa: myths, realities and an emerging research agenda. Global Food Security 26: 100393.

33.

Deininger

(2003) Land markets in developing and transition economies: impact of liberalization and implications for future reform. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 85(5): 1217–1222.

34.

De Soto

(2000) The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Everywhere Else. New York: Basic Books.

35.

Diao

Cossar

Houssou

, et al. (2014) Mechanization in Ghana: emerging demand and the search for alternative supply models. Food Policy 48: 168–181.

36.

Diao

Silver

Takeshima

(2016) Agricultural mechanization and agricultural transformation. IFPRI Discussion Paper No. 01527. Washington, DC: IFPRI, pp. 1–42.

37.

Food Agriculture Organisation (2017) Regional Overview of Food Insecurity and Nutrition. Africa: FAO.

38.

Ghana Statistical Service (2021) Ghana 2021 Population and housing census. Available at: https://statsghana.gov.gh/gssmain/fileUpload/pressrelease/2021%20PHC%20General%20Report%20Vol%203A_Population%20of%20Regions%20and%20Districts_181121.pdf (accessed 20 November 2021).

39.

Guo

Akudugu

Al-Hassan

(2013) The savannah accelerated development authority: factors to consider in modernizing agriculture in Northern Ghana. Journal of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development 5(10): 207–215.

40.

Houssou

Aboagye

Kolavalli

(2016) Meeting Ghanaian Farmers’ Demand for a Full Range of Mechanization Services. Washington: IFPRI.

41.

Kansanga

Andersen

Atuoye

, et al. (2018) Contested commons: agricultural modernization, tenure ambiguities and intra-familial land grabbing in Ghana. Land Use Policy 75: 215–224.

42.

Kansanga

Andersen

Kpienbaareh

, et al. (2019) Traditional agriculture in transition: examining the impacts of agricultural modernization on smallholder farming in Ghana under the new Green Revolution. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology 26(1): 11–24.

43.

Kasanga

Kotey

(2001) Land Management in Ghana: Building on Tradition and Modernity. London: IIED.

44.

Kleemann

Baysal

Bulley

, et al. (2017) Assessing driving forces of land use and land cover change by a mixed-method approach in north-eastern Ghana, West Africa. Journal of Environmental Management 196: 411–442.

45.

Kuwornu

Apiors

Kwadzo

(2017) Access and intensity of mechanization: empirical evidence of rice farmers in Southern Ghana. Brazilian Archives of Biology and Technology 60: 1–18.

46.

Meinzen-Dick

Mwangi

(2009) Cutting the web of interests: pitfalls of formalizing property rights. Land Use Policy 26(1): 36–43.

47.

Mohammed

Batung

Saaka

, et al. (2023) Determinants of mechanized technology adoption in smallholder agriculture: implications for agricultural policy. Land Use Policy 129: 106666.

48.

Musembi

(2007) De Soto and land relations in rural Africa: breathing life into dead theories about property rights. Third World Quarterly 28(8): 1457–1487.

49.

Obeng-Odoom

(2016) Understanding land reform in Ghana: a critical postcolonial institutional approach. Review of Radical Political Economics 48(4): 661–680.

50.

Peters

(2004) Inequality and social conflict over land in Africa. Journal of Agrarian Change 4(3): 269–314.

51.

Platteau

(1996) The evolutionary theory of land rights as applied to sub-Saharan Africa: a critical assessment. Development and Change 27(1): 29–86.

52.

Sarfo

(2011) The effect of land tenure on yam farming in Atebubu traditional area . MPhil Thesis, University of Ghana, Ghana.

53.

Sarfo

(2020) Land tenure practices in Atebubu, Ghana. Journal of African Studies and Ethnographic Research 2(2): 7–27.

54.

Sarfo

Roberts

(2021) Land tenure dynamism in yam farming in the Atebubu-Amanten District. Ghana. The International Journal of Humanities & Social Studies 9(6): 97–106.

55.

Schoneveld

(2017) Host country governance and the African land rush: 7 reasons why large-scale farmland investments fail to contribute to sustainable development. Geoforum; Journal of Physical, Human, and Regional Geosciences 83: 119–132.

56.

Tanko

Ismaila

Sadiq

(2019) Planting for Food and Jobs (PFJ): a panacea for productivity and welfare of rice farmers in Northern Ghana. Cogent Economics and Finance 7(1): 1693121.

57.

Tonah

(2002) Fulani pastoralists, indigenous farmers and the contest for land in northern Ghana. Africa Spectrum 37(1): 43–59.

58.

Ubink

(2008) Struggles for land in peri-urban Kumasi and their effect on popular perceptions of chiefs and chieftaincy. In: Amanor

Ubink

(eds) Contesting Land and Custom in Ghana. Leiden: Leiden University Press, pp. 155–181.

59.

Warren

(2023) Population density, urbanisation and agricultural mechanisation in modern Ghana. Review of Development Economics 27(3): 1605–1629.

60.

Yaro

(2010) Customary tenure systems under siege: contemporary access to land in northern Ghana. GeoJournal 75(2): 199–214.

61.

Yaro

Teye

Torvikey

(2017) Agricultural commercialisation models, agrarian dynamics and local development in Ghana. The Journal of Peasant Studies 44(3): 538–554.

Assessing the Implications of Agricultural Mechanisation for Customary Land Tenure Relations in the Transitional Zone,Ghana

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Theoretical Framework

Agricultural Mechanisation in the Atebubu-Amantin Municipality: An Overview of the Past and Present

Study Area and Methodology

Implications of Agricultural Mechanisation for Customary Land Tenure Relations

The Expansion of Areas under Cultivation

Farm Intensification

Competition and Conflicts Over Land

Trend Towards Individualisation

Changes in Land Relations

Conclusion

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

ORCID iDs

Notes

Author Biographies

References