Methodological reflections on "land grab' databases and the "land grab' literature "rush'

This article focuses on two issues. First, it critically engages with the emerging global databases on large-scale land deals and the data' on global trends so far circulated, paying special attention to their accuracy and reliability, and the extent to which they represent an instance of false precision'. The usefulness of these datasets and some of the possible side effects of their abuse or bad use are also critically explored. Second, the article considers some important methodological problems that may lie behind the fast-growing research on land grabs'. In particular, some of the untested assumptions implicit in many of the existing studies as well as the problematic dichotomies that often influence researchers' interpretations of available evidence will be critically discussed, emphasizing the need for greater reflexivity' in current land grab' research. The paper concludes that the need for methodological rigour is not a luxury, but rather politically and tactically crucial from the point of view of those who campaign against real dispossession and exploitation. There is no shortcut for good quality evidence.