Reforming pattern of land use, web of land access and mosaic of property institutions – Transnational Institute

Report on Land Tenure, Climate Change, and Sustainable Development

Introduction: The Interconnected Crises of Land, Climate, and Inequality

The global challenges of climate change, extreme inequality, and land degradation are fundamentally interlinked. Current land regimes—comprising land use patterns, access frameworks, and property institutions—are structured to sustain a global economic model that drives environmental crises and social inequities. This system directly impedes progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), SDG 13 (Climate Action), and SDG 15 (Life on Land). Reforming these land regimes is critical for either reinforcing the unsustainable status quo or building an alternative future aligned with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The efficacy of concepts such as ‘land tenure security’ must be evaluated based on their contribution to this transformative goal.

Analysis of Current Land-Based Policies and their SDG Implications

Market-Based Mechanisms and Contradictions with the SDGs

Mainstream strategies for land-based climate change mitigation and adaptation, including many carbon offset projects and REDD+ initiatives, are predominantly market-oriented. These approaches seek solutions within a paradigm of limitless economic growth that fails to price the social and ecological costs of production. Such “false solutions” often lead to the restructuring of land control and uses, contributing to land concentration and dispossession. This process, termed “green grabbing,” directly undermines foundational goals such as:

• SDG 1 (No Poverty): By dispossessing rural working people of their primary means of production and social reproduction.
• SDG 2 (Zero Hunger): By prioritizing carbon sequestration or monoculture over food sovereignty and agroecological practices.
• SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities): By concentrating land and resources in the hands of corporate entities, states, and philanthropies, creating a new landed class.

Fragmented Approaches Versus an Integrated SDG Framework

A defining characteristic of current policy is the isolation of sectoral issues, such as separating forest conservation projects from adjacent agribusiness plantations or hydrocarbon extraction sites. This fragmented approach conceals the wider landscape of destruction and fails to address the systemic drivers of environmental degradation. An integrated approach, as envisioned by the SDGs, requires acknowledging the global interconnectedness of land use, such as the link between deforestation in the Amazon and industrial agriculture in Europe. Without a systemic perspective, climate actions risk maintaining an unsustainable status quo rather than fostering genuine transformation.

Forthcoming Intergovernmental Summits: Divergent Paths for Land Governance

COP30 and ICARRD+20: A Critical Juncture for Sustainable Development

Two major intergovernmental events, the UN Climate Change Conference (COP30) in 2025 and the International Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ICARRD+20) in 2026, will address the question of land from potentially oppositional standpoints.

• COP30: The focus on market-based initiatives like the Tropical Forest Forever Facility (TFFF) risks accelerating land concentration and further marginalizing rural communities, posing a significant threat to achieving SDG 10 and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions).
• ICARRD+20: This conference presents an opportunity to advance a new vision for agrarian reform centered on democratizing land politics. Its slogans—”land to have food, land to work, land for peace, land for life”—directly align with SDG 2, SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), SDG 16, and SDG 15, respectively.

A New Paradigm for Agrarian Reform Aligned with the 2030 Agenda

Addressing Land Concentration to Achieve SDG 10

Extreme wealth inequality is mirrored in land ownership, with the top 10% of landholders operating 56% of agricultural land. This concentration is a primary barrier to achieving SDG 10. To be effective, efforts to democratize land control must be intersectional, recognizing that class relations are interlocked with gender (SDG 5), race, and ethnicity. Building broad alliances between rural movements, academia, and supportive state actors is essential for progress, reflecting the spirit of SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals).

Moving Beyond Plots to a Holistic Framework for Land Access

A progressive land policy must recognize that rural livelihoods depend on more than a single plot of farmland. The concept of a “web of access” acknowledges the multiple land-based needs for housing, community forests, water access, and cultural spaces, which are crucial for social reproduction and community well-being. This complex access is supported by a “mosaic of property relations,” including private, public, and common-tenure systems. Protecting this web and mosaic is fundamental to sustaining agroecological integrity and advancing a wide range of SDGs, including SDG 1, SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities), and SDG 15.

Key Policy Considerations for Aligning Land Reform with the SDGs

In the context of COP30 and ICARRD+20, the following points are critical for developing land policies that support a just and sustainable future:

1. Scrutinize Market-Based Climate Solutions: Mainstream climate mitigation projects often lead to “green grabbing,” which dispossesses local populations and undermines SDG 1, SDG 2, and SDG 16.
2. Identify New Drivers of Land Concentration: Corporate climate action entities are emerging as a new landed class, exacerbating the inequality targeted by SDG 10.
3. Expand the Scope of Agrarian Reform: To be effective, reform must target all property categories—private, public, state, and customary—through which elites control land, a necessary step for achieving the institutional reforms outlined in SDG 16.
4. Adopt a Holistic Land Access Framework: Policy must be based on the “web of access” and “mosaic of property relations” that rural people require for production and social reproduction, thereby supporting the interconnected goals of poverty eradication, food security, and sustainable communities (SDG 1, SDG 2, SDG 11).

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

SDG 1: No Poverty

The article connects land control directly to the survival and flourishing of rural working people, peasants, pastoralists, and fishers. It argues that their ability to “continuously reproduce life, community and society” depends on having control over land, which is a primary means of production. The lack of land control, exacerbated by land concentration and grabbing, is a fundamental driver of rural poverty.

SDG 2: Zero Hunger

The article explicitly links land to food production through the slogan of the upcoming ICARRD+20 conference: “land to have food.” It discusses the impact of land use patterns, such as large-scale monoculture of soya for the industrial livestock sector, on food systems. The focus on agrarian reform and the needs of peasants and small-scale food producers directly addresses food security and sustainable agriculture.

SDG 5: Gender Equality

While not the central focus, the article acknowledges the intersectionality of social struggles. It states that “class relations interlock with other axes of social differences: gender, race and ethnicity, caste, generation, among others.” This implies that any effort to democratize land control must address gender inequalities in land access and ownership to be truly effective.

SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

This is a core theme of the article. It opens by stating that “Land, climate change and extreme inequality are inherently linked.” It provides specific data on both wealth and land inequality, citing that “1% of the world’s population has wealth equivalent to the combined wealth of the bottom 50%” and that the “top 10% of largest landholders operate on average 56% of agricultural land.” The entire discussion revolves around the concentration of land and power in the hands of elites and corporations versus the landlessness of ordinary working people.

SDG 13: Climate Action

The article critically examines mainstream climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies. It discusses the upcoming UN Climate Change Conference (COP30) and critiques market-based solutions like carbon offset projects, REDD+, and the “Tropical Forest Forever Facility (TFFF).” It argues these “false solutions” often lead to “green grabbing” and reinforce the capitalist structures that cause the climate crisis, rather than solving it.

SDG 15: Life on Land

The article is fundamentally about land use, ecosystems, and biodiversity. It discusses forest conservation, the negative impacts of monoculture soya plantations, and hydrocarbon extraction. It critiques the isolated approach of “showcasing pockets of conservation projects” while ignoring “wider fields of destruction.” The concept of the “web of access and the mosaic of property relations” is presented as key to “sustaining the integrity of an agro-ecological zone, or a landscape.”

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

The article addresses the need for institutional reform regarding land governance. It critiques the limitations of “land tenure security” as a concept and calls for deep reforms to “democratize land control.” It highlights the role of property institutions and the need to target all types of property categories used by elites. The ICARRD+20 conference’s slogan “land for peace” directly connects land reform to building peaceful and just societies.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

SDG 1: No Poverty

1. Target 1.4: By 2030, ensure that all men and women, in particular the poor and the vulnerable, have equal rights to economic resources, as well as access to basic services, ownership and control over land and other forms of property.

   The article’s central argument for democratizing land control and ensuring rural working people have a “web of access to land” for multiple purposes (housing, gardens, community spaces) directly aligns with this target’s emphasis on control over land and property.

SDG 2: Zero Hunger

1. Target 2.3: By 2030, double the agricultural productivity and incomes of small-scale food producers, in particular women, indigenous peoples, family farmers, pastoralists and fishers, including through secure and equal access to land, other productive resources and inputs, knowledge, financial services, markets and opportunities for value addition and non-farm employment.

   The article explicitly focuses on the needs of “peasants, pastoralists, fishers and Indigenous peoples” and argues that their ability to flourish depends on land control. The call for agrarian reform is a direct call to secure their access to land.

SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

1. Target 10.1: By 2030, progressively achieve and sustain income growth of the bottom 40 per cent of the population at a rate higher than the national average.

   The article’s critique of a system where the “1% of the world’s population has wealth equivalent to the combined wealth of the bottom 50%” highlights the need for redistributive measures like land reform, which would directly benefit the bottom segments of the population.

2. Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, caste, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status.

   The call for struggles to be “intersectional in character” and to connect class with “gender, race and ethnicity, caste” speaks directly to the need for inclusive political and economic empowerment, which is at the heart of this target.

SDG 13: Climate Action

1. Target 13.2: Integrate climate change measures into national policies, strategies and planning.

   The article critiques the current integration of market-based climate measures, arguing they are “false solutions” that cause “green grabbing.” It implicitly calls for a different, more just integration of climate action into land and agrarian policies.

SDG 15: Life on Land

1. Target 15.2: By 2020, promote the implementation of sustainable management of all types of forests, halt deforestation, restore degraded forests and substantially increase afforestation and reforestation globally.

   The article’s discussion of “preserving tropical forests forever” and the critique of isolating conservation projects from adjacent destructive land uses like monoculture directly relate to the challenge of achieving sustainable forest management.

2. Target 15.3: By 2030, combat desertification, restore degraded land and soil, including land affected by desertification, drought and floods, and strive to achieve a land degradation-neutral world.

   The mention of “land grabbing,” which has “implicated a quarter of a billion hectares of land worldwide,” and the expansion of monoculture implies large-scale land degradation that needs to be addressed and restored.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Indicators for SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities)

• Wealth Concentration: The article provides a direct statistic: “an estimated 1% of the world’s population has wealth equivalent to the combined wealth of the bottom 50%.” This can be used as a direct indicator to measure extreme wealth inequality.
• Land Ownership Concentration: The article cites an FAO report that “the top 10% of largest landholders operate on average 56% of agricultural land.” This percentage is a clear, measurable indicator of inequality in land distribution, relevant to Target 10.2.

Indicators for SDG 15 (Life on Land)

• Area of Land Acquired in Large-Scale Deals: The article mentions that “land grabbing has implicated a quarter of a billion hectares of land worldwide.” Tracking the total area of land transferred through large-scale acquisitions (including “green grabbing” for climate projects) serves as an indicator of pressure on land and ecosystems.

Indicators for SDG 1 & 2 (No Poverty & Zero Hunger)

• Security of Land Tenure/Access: While the article critiques the simplicity of the term ‘land tenure security,’ its detailed description of a “web of access” and “mosaic of property relations” implies the need for more nuanced, qualitative indicators. Progress could be measured by the extent to which legal and institutional frameworks recognize and protect these complex, layered rights for rural communities, which is relevant to official indicator 1.4.2 (Proportion of total adult population with secure tenure rights to land).

4. Create a table with three columns titled ‘SDGs, Targets and Indicators” to present the findings from analyzing the article.

Source: tni.org