Land Governance, Trade Shocks and the Hidden Cost of Tariffs

Editorial – On a sweltering morning in Brazil’s Cerrado region, smallholders watch anxious buyers arrive to purchase soy. With the United States implementing steep tariffs on U.S. exports, China has turned to Brazil, sharply increasing demand for soy and beef. Farmers, agribusinesses, and local authorities are feeling the immediate effects on land, livelihoods, and governance.

A Brazilian soybean farmer watches over his crop as global demand surges following U.S. tariff changes, underscoring the intersection of trade policy, land use, and farmer livelihoods. (Photo: Igor Alecsander)

Meanwhile, along Mexico’s northern border, industrial parks lie half-full as firms adjust to new tariff pressures. In South Africa, citrus and wine farmers scramble to find alternative markets as U.S. tariffs bite.

These seemingly disparate events share a common thread. Trade policy now directly influences land governance, land use, and tenure security. As the World Bank and International Monetary Fund convene their Annual Meetings in Washington, D.C., this reality deserves centre stage.

Brazil: Surging Exports and Land Pressures

Reuters reports that Brazil’s agricultural exports to China have increased sharply as U.S. market access declines. Soy and beef, the country’s key commodities, are at the centre of this surge. Analysts from the Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) and the World Economic Forum note that rising demand is accelerating land conversion in the Amazon and Cerrado, pushing both forested and communal lands into agricultural production.

Traceability initiatives and private moratoria are attempting to ensure that supply chains remain sustainable. Certification schemes increasingly require parcel-level data on land use, ownership, and cultivation practices. Without clear records, producers cannot demonstrate compliance with environmental or social standards.

“The land pressure is real,” said a SEI researcher tracking commodity frontiers. “Without robust cadastral systems and enforcement, this expansion risks informal land claims and deforestation.”

The governance implications are significant. Brazilian authorities face heightened demand for cadastral mapping and land registration, and failure to meet these needs can exacerbate land disputes. At the same time, agribusiness investors benefit from a clearer regulatory framework, creating a two-tiered system in which smaller landholders may face insecurity.

Export-driven land conversion shows that macroeconomic shocks do not only affect trade balances—they reshape local land governance, tenure security, and environmental outcomes.

Mexico: Near-shoring, Industrial Land, and Urban Growth

In Mexico, Reuters reports job losses in border manufacturing towns following tariff announcements. New foreign direct investment projects have slowed, raising concerns about industrial capacity and regional development.

Yet, analysts from Global Practice Guides highlight a countervailing trend: Firms are near-shoring, relocating operations to Mexico to mitigate supply-chain risks. This creates rapid demand for industrial parks, logistics hubs, and residential development near manufacturing corridors. Municipal and state land-planning offices face pressure to approve zoning, oversee permits, and manage land-registration processes.

The city of Querétaro has become a focal point of Mexico’s near-shoring boom, with factories and housing expanding faster than land-use planning can keep pace — exposing the crucial role of land governance in managing industrial growth. (Photo: Erick Daniel Velasco Esquivel)

These changes are not purely technical. Disputes over compensation for acquired land have emerged, while informal housing is growing near industrial zones where planning and infrastructure are lagging. Without strengthened land governance, near-shoring risks becoming a source of social tension and uneven development.

Land administration is now integral to economic strategy. Transparent titling, streamlined registration, and equitable compensation mechanisms are crucial to balancing industrial growth with local rights and urban planning needs.

South Africa: Agricultural Tariffs and Tenure Stress

South African farmers, particularly those producing citrus and wine, face a 30% U.S. tariff on exports, Reuters reports. The impact is immediate: reduced income, disrupted supply chains, and urgent efforts to diversify export markets. Local commentators highlight that smaller farmers are particularly vulnerable to distress sales or consolidation pressures.

The citrus-growing town of Citrusdal in South Africa’s Western Cape is among the hardest hit by new U.S. tariffs. As export earnings fall, farmers warn of job losses and possible land consolidation, underscoring the link between trade shocks and tenure security. (Photo: Getty Images)

Government support packages may help mitigate short-term income losses, but they also shape land-administration priorities. Reduced funding or attention for cadastral offices, registration services, or dispute-resolution mechanisms can undermine tenure security.

Export shocks ripple through land tenure. Without robust support systems, smallholders risk losing land, and informal markets may expand to absorb stressed properties. Well-designed policies, aligned with trade strategies, are essential to prevent land inequities.

Patterns Across Countries

Despite the differing contexts of Brazil, Mexico, and South Africa, clear patterns emerge in how trade shocks intersect with land governance. One of the most evident is that export diversion drives rapid land conversion. Brazil provides a stark illustration: when major buyers shift sourcing, agricultural frontiers expand quickly, often encroaching on forested and communal lands. This expansion carries both social and environmental consequences, including increased risk of contested land claims and deforestation.

Income shocks similarly increase tenure risk. Farmers in South Africa, facing tariffs on citrus and wine, and industrial landholders in Mexico, affected by slowed foreign direct investment, confront pressures that can lead to distress sales or informal land arrangements. When revenues drop or investment flows contract, those with insecure tenure are disproportionately vulnerable.

Industrial relocation further intensifies governance demands, as seen in Mexico’s nearshoring trend. The rapid influx of firms creates immediate needs for municipal planning, land-use permitting, and registration services. Land administration capacity becomes a prerequisite for ensuring that economic growth occurs equitably and efficiently.

Finally, traceability and green trade standards are reshaping the expectations placed on governments and producers. Global buyers and certification programmes increasingly require parcel-level transparency, particularly in Brazil, to verify compliance with environmental and social standards.

Governments that fail to provide reliable land records risk excluding their producers from lucrative international markets. Together, these patterns reveal that land governance is no longer a peripheral concern; it is central to the functioning of modern trade and economic policy.

Wider Implications: Lessons for Other Countries

The experiences of Brazil, Mexico, and South Africa offer clear lessons for other nations navigating the intersection of trade policy and land governance. Rapid shifts in export demand, industrial relocation, and income shocks can expose weaknesses in tenure security, cadastral systems, and land-use planning.

Countries with incomplete land registration, limited dispute-resolution capacity, or informal tenure arrangements are particularly vulnerable. Conversely, robust land administration, transparent titling, and well-integrated spatial planning can mitigate risks, ensure equitable access, and enable sustainable participation in global markets.

Table | U.S. Reciprocal Tariff Rates based on the tariff schedule as of August 2025: These rates can vary across products, trade agreements and other factors. For current rates, consult the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

Country	U.S. Reciprocal Tariff Rate (%)
Algeria	30
Bosnia and Herzegovina	30
Brazil	50
Brunei	25
Canada	35
China	30
Iraq	35
India	50
Kazakhstan	25
Laos	40
Libya	30
Mexico	25
Moldova	25
Myanmar (Burma)	40
Serbia	35
South Africa	30
Switzerland	39
Syria	41
Tunisia	25

Policymakers worldwide can draw on these cases to anticipate pressures, align trade and land strategies, and safeguard both livelihoods and ecosystems in the face of shifting macroeconomic currents.

Land Consolidation: Opportunities and Risks

Land consolidation emerges as a key factor in the interplay between trade shocks and land governance. In Brazil, the surge in soy and beef exports encourages larger agribusinesses to acquire or lease parcels from smallholders who cannot meet traceability or compliance requirements, accelerating frontier expansion and, at times, informal conversion of communal lands.

In Mexico, near-shoring heightens demand for contiguous industrial parcels, prompting consolidation of fragmented plots into logistics and manufacturing hubs; without clear titling and equitable compensation, this process can trigger disputes and informal settlements.

In South Africa, declining agricultural incomes caused by tariffs may push smaller farmers toward sale or merger with larger operations, concentrating land ownership and potentially reducing tenure security for vulnerable groups.

Across all contexts, consolidation can improve efficiency, market access, and supply-chain management, but without robust governance, it risks reinforcing tenure insecurity, social inequities, and environmental degradation.

Land Governance: From Footnote to Core Policy

As policymakers meet in Washington, land should not be an afterthought. Industrial strategy, trade policy, and macroeconomic decisions intersect with land tenure, use, and governance. Investment projects cannot proceed smoothly without secure, documented land rights, as unclear ownership slows approvals, increases costs, and generates disputes.

Markets increasingly demand verified environmental and social compliance, which requires accurate land records. Weak land governance can exacerbate inequality, dispossession, and social tension when trade shocks or investment flows hit vulnerable communities.

If these dimensions are ignored, macroeconomic gains can come at the expense of land equity, environmental sustainability, and social cohesion.

Policy Recommendations

To ensure that land governance supports trade and economic policy, the following measures should be prioritised:

• Integrate land policy into trade and industrial planning. Every trade-shock mitigation strategy should consider tenure security, cadastral mapping, dispute-resolution mechanisms, and equitable compensation.

• Invest in spatial infrastructure. Parcel-level systems, updated registries, and geospatial mapping improve traceability, support environmental compliance, and strengthen property rights.

• Monitor vulnerability in export-dependent regions. Brazil, Mexico, and South Africa illustrate the risks; other countries with similar exposure should be proactively assessed.

• Protect customary and smallholder tenure. Reforms must avoid privileging large formal actors at the expense of marginalised groups.

• Embed land metrics in macroeconomic programmes. Track cadastral coverage, land disputes, registration backlogs, and community inclusion indicators alongside trade or industrial metrics.

Looking Ahead

The World Bank and IMF Annual Meetings will set the tone for trade, industrial strategy, and resilience planning. Land governance cannot remain a secondary concern. Brazil, Mexico, and South Africa offer early lessons: tariffs and trade realignments create tangible pressures on land, affecting livelihoods, environmental integrity, and economic participation.

At LPN, we will continue to track these dynamics, publish country briefs, and convene regional dialogues to ensure that land policy voices are heard. Policymakers, financiers, and trade negotiators must recognise that trade shocks are not only financial—they are spatial, social, and territorial.

As one Brazilian smallholder remarked recently, surveying the cleared fields of the Cerrado: “The markets are changing, but the land remembers. If we do not manage it carefully, the land will take its own course.” In today’s interconnected world, that cautionary perspective should guide global policy discussions, from Washington to São Paulo, from Mexico City to Cape Town.