Hi
Can anyone see a problem with what the article is describing? It is from the Economist magazine.
http://www.economist.com/node/13692889
I'm having a hard time finding an Austrian view on direct foreign investment related to agriculture, ie China buying up foreign farms to serve their domestic markets only.
Any insight would be much appreciated as i'm engaged in a debate with the some political identities here in Australia.
Thanks
Chris
It seems to me that the poor farmers can gain from this if they make sure to only provide the land for a limited amount of time and protect themselves in other ways. Just my 2 cents, others will have better input for sure.
EDIT: Furthermore, why should the farmers in poor countries give a damn which country says they own the land. Most of them live in countries whose corrupt governments have been mismanaging aid money for decades anyways.
Well, most Austrians would decry the idea of governments owning property, but if the investors were private, there would be no problem from any end. It may not be the most beneficial arrangement for those in the host country, but as long as the agreement is arrived at voluntarily by legitimate parties, there would be no issue.
Is there anything wrong with state-backed firms buying foreign agricultural land, farms etc. so they can export to their domestic markets exclusively in the event of food shortages? E.g. China is now stating they're buying up arable land/farms to ensure "food security" due to population growth.
That article is also kind of...confusing I think, because isn't food capital?
No, there's nothing economically or ethically wrong with that.
From a practical perspective in a Capitalist economy, keep in mind that local workers might refuse to work on such farms, or they might insist on much higher wages. Same for truck drivers, etc. It seems to me that in the end, it's really no different from buying the food from another country. If the other country doesn't want to sell (either the food or the labor required to grow it), there's nothing that can be done short of force.
A good question would be why Sudan and other countries suffer from famine? I suspect not because of lack of arable land (and water) - but I would prefer to know for sure.
"A good question would be why Sudan and other countries suffer from famine?"
In short, socialism and sex.
I suspected that much - but perhaps you have some references?
Sudan also has the whole "perpetual war" thing going for it, between the civil wars, the LRA, and the Darfur crisis. It all stems, though, from the government not recognizing the rights of its citizens... especially those from ethnic groups it doesn't like.