The Editor Zambia
Zambia must confront a difficult but urgent question: are the laws and safeguards governing land ownership sufficient to protect the country’s national interests, food security and the rights of ordinary citizens?
Section 3 of the Lands Act, Chapter 184 of the Laws of Zambia, provides that all land in the country vests in the President, who holds it in perpetuity on behalf of the people of Zambia. This principle places a public responsibility on the management of land, one of the country’s most valuable and finite resources. 
However, the law also permits land to be alienated to non-Zambians under specified circumstances. These include qualifying foreign investors, permanent residents, persons who obtain the President’s written consent, certain Zambian-registered companies with less than 25 per cent of their issued shares held by non-Zambians, and other categories recognised by law.
These provisions do not, in themselves, establish that the law is being abused. Nevertheless, they raise important questions about the scale, purpose, transparency and long-term consequences of land alienation to foreign interests.
When land becomes a national security concern
Land is more than a commercial asset. It is the foundation of agriculture, human settlement, economic activity and national development. It also carries strategic importance because whoever controls access to productive land can influence how food is produced, how communities develop and how natural resources are used.
The concern is not that every foreign investor poses a security threat. Foreign investment can bring capital, technology, employment and agricultural expertise. The real issue is whether Zambia has adequate safeguards to ensure that investment serves the national interest without undermining the rights and livelihoods of its people.
Large-scale land acquisitions, if poorly regulated or inadequately monitored, can create risks. These include the concentration of productive land in a few hands, the displacement of local communities, the loss of customary access, environmental degradation and the weakening of local food production.
Where land is located near strategic infrastructure, borders, water resources or other sensitive sites, the national security implications deserve particular scrutiny. Decisions of this nature should be guided by transparent procedures, credible assessments and effective oversight.
A country that fails to understand who controls its land, how that land is being used and what obligations investors have undertaken risks surrendering important public interests to arrangements that may be difficult to reverse.
The poor could be priced out of their own land
Perhaps the most immediate concern is the future of ordinary Zambians who depend on customary land for their livelihoods.
For many rural households, access to land is the starting point for survival. It provides space to cultivate maize, groundnuts, cassava and other crops, keep livestock, establish small businesses and pass an inheritance to the next generation.
Customary land is not necessarily free land, nor is it land without rules. It is governed by customary tenure arrangements and community institutions. Nevertheless, it can provide a route to land access for people who would struggle to purchase titled land on the open market.
As commercial demand increases, competition for land can intensify. Where land is converted from customary tenure into commercial holdings without adequate consultation, compensation or protection for existing users, local people may find themselves with fewer opportunities to farm or establish homes.
The danger is that land which once provided a livelihood may become financially inaccessible to the very people whose communities have depended on it for generations.
A young Zambian who wishes to establish a small farm should not have to compete against investors with substantially greater financial resources without meaningful protection for local access and legitimate customary rights.
Land policy must not create a situation in which ordinary citizens become strangers in their own communities, forced to seek employment on land that their families once used to sustain themselves.
Food security begins with access to land
Zambia’s food security cannot be separated from land policy. Agricultural production requires secure access to suitable land, reliable water supplies, inputs, infrastructure and markets.
If productive agricultural land is increasingly concentrated in large commercial holdings, the country must establish whether these investments are expanding domestic food production, supporting exports, creating jobs and transferring skills, or instead limiting opportunities for local farmers.
Foreign-owned agricultural enterprises can contribute significantly to national food security. But the benefits depend on what is produced, where it is sold, how local communities participate and whether productive land is being used sustainably.
A poorly designed land allocation policy could weaken smallholder agriculture, reduce local access to productive areas and increase dependence on food supplies from elsewhere. These outcomes are not inevitable, but they are risks that deserve serious examination before irreversible decisions are made.
The government should therefore assess major land allocations against clear public-interest criteria, including their contribution to domestic food supplies, employment, local procurement, environmental protection and community livelihoods.
Investors should be encouraged to work with Zambian farmers through out-grower schemes, contract farming and other arrangements that expand local participation rather than exclude it.
The central question is whether Zambia has sufficient public information and effective oversight to establish who is acquiring large tracts of land, under what legal provisions and for what purposes.
Citizens should be able to scrutinise land allocation decisions without being treated as opponents of development. Transparency is not hostility towards investors; it is a safeguard against abuse and a means of building public confidence.
The relevant authorities should publish accessible information, subject to legitimate privacy and security restrictions, on major land allocations, the size and location of the holdings, the applicable legal basis, the intended use, and the conditions attached to the investment.
There should also be effective monitoring to establish whether investors fulfil their commitments. Where land is acquired for agricultural development, authorities should examine whether it is being put to productive use, whether environmental standards are being observed and whether the rights of affected communities are being respected.
Equally important is the need to strengthen customary land administration. Communities must receive clear information, participate meaningfully in decisions affecting their land and have access to fair procedures for resolving disputes.
The law must be enforced consistently, regardless of whether the interests involved belong to powerful domestic individuals, local companies or foreign investors.
Zambia does not need to choose between attracting foreign investment and protecting its citizens. It needs a land policy that achieves both objectives.
This requires rigorous due diligence, clear criteria for approving large-scale acquisitions, stronger monitoring of land use and appropriate safeguards for food-producing areas and strategically sensitive locations. It also requires reliable records that allow the government to identify patterns of land concentration and assess their social and economic consequences.
Parliament, the Ministry responsible for lands, local authorities and traditional leaders all have important roles to play. Their decisions should be informed by evidence, guided by the law and subject to appropriate accountability.
Where existing legislation leaves gaps, those gaps should be examined openly. Where safeguards already exist, their enforcement should be strengthened. And where the public raises legitimate concerns about land allocation, the response should be evidence and explanation rather than dismissal.
A question of national inheritance
The land of Zambia is not an unlimited resource. Once productive land is fragmented, degraded or transferred under arrangements that are difficult to reverse, restoring the lost opportunities can be costly or impossible.
Section 3 of the Lands Act places land within a framework of public responsibility. That responsibility must be reflected not merely in the wording of the law, but in the decisions, safeguards and institutions through which land is administered.
Zambia must remain open to investment, but openness must not become a substitute for vigilance. Nor should commercial interests be allowed to overshadow the legitimate needs of local communities and future generations.
The ultimate test of land policy is not simply how much investment it attracts. It is whether that investment strengthens national development while preserving the ability of Zambians to access land, produce food, build homes and earn a dignified living.
The question Zambia must answer is simple: when the next generation seeks land to grow food and build a future, will that land remain accessible to ordinary citizens, or will the price of progress have placed it beyond their reach?
