The Psychosocial Health and Wellbeing Impacts of Large Scale Land Acquisitions in Coastal Tanzania
Abstract
This dissertation examines the psychosocial health and wellbeing impacts of Large Scale Land Acquisitions (LSLAs) in coastal Tanzania. Contemporary acquisition of large parcels of land in low-income countries by investors is both transformational and a neo-colonization strategy depending on the philosophical frame and scale of analysis. Despite multiple narratives about its impacts across scale, there is consensus in the conceptualization of LSLAs as a global force that is changing local ecologies and communities. Yet, the impact of these changes on the psychosocial health and wellbeing of local populations is less evident. This study employs mixed methods that combines qualitative and quantitative approaches in order to understand how three interrelated concepts in LSLAs—changing local landscapes, ecological governance and multiple vulnerabilities—explain differentiated psychosocial health and wellbeing impacts of LSLAs among local populations.
Results from qualitative analysis of in-depth interviews (n=37) show that LSLAs is destructive to therapeutic spaces, and thus adversely impacting the psychosocial health of local populations. The quantitative analyses (n=1,782) reveal widespread perception of poor ecological governance in LSLAs context—only 7% of the population reported good ecological governance. Individuals with poor (OR=3.00, p≤0.01) and fair (OR=4.22, p≤0.001) perception of ecological governance were more likely to report poor psychosocial health as they worry over the sustainability of their environments. Regarding how multiple vulnerabilities structure LSLAs impact on food insecurity (a predictor of psychosocial distress), the quantitative analyses further show migrant women were the most adversely impacted overall, and that male non-migrants (OR=1.58, p≤0.05) were worse impacted compared to female non-migrants. The study also found that with the influence of climate change, LSLAs impact on non-migrants’ food insecurity is reduced (women=2.4%; men=0.2%), while migrants’ food insecurity is exacerbated (women=1.4%; men=1.7%).
The study makes important contributions to theory, methodology and policy. Theoretically, by demonstrating how LSLA is associated with psychosocial health, the study extends ecological change and health framework into the analysis of health in LSLAs literature. Also, the finding that non-migrant males are more vulnerable to food insecurity impact of LSLAs demonstrates gender-based complexities in long-term impacts of ecological change. Applying therapeutic landscapes in LSLAs is helpful in broadening the conceptualisation of lands in LSLAs context, while disparities in psychosocial health impacts extends the utility of social determinants of health. Methodologically, the study demonstrates the value of mixed methods in analysis of complex phenomena such as psychosocial health and LSLAs. The findings in this study amplify the need to introduce health considerations into LSLA policymaking in Tanzania, and similar context. Importantly, the findings challenge the viability of Tanzania’s national development agenda (vision 2025), which heavily relies on LSLAs.