The indigenous Batwa (‘Twa) of Burundi were traditional forest dwellers, and currently comprise less than 1 per cent of the population of the country. Significant deforestation and historical discrimination have resulted in the displacement of this group. Many Batwa communities were resettled, disconnecting them from both their historical land and with it, their livelihoods. This relatively small and poor African nation is seeking greater economic prosperity, in part through the development of land and naturally available resources. In response, Batwa advocacy groups have worked simultaneously to retrieve their land and to advance legal rights, which would allow their people to operate as recognized individuals within society, even without their land power and heritage. Through the finickity legal provision of ID cards, some ‘Twa have acquired improved human rights: the right not to be harassed, access to education for their children and the right to vote. Challenges remain as a result of being severed from their land and the income-generating capacity that it brings, but as Burundian society continues to develop, the Batwa and their leaders are finding alternative sources of power. More recently, a women Batwa leader was appointed as a minister in the cabinet, indicating that although land and its restitution remains central to their heritage, it is not their only available source of opportunity.

‘Land is power’ we are told, but the attempt to make land the subject rather than the object of power confuses and detracts from the central premise of systemic land-based inequality. The capacity to choose, to take, retain, share and distribute land are all indicators of an alternative power source.

Land Power is a timely and invaluable primer for this under-explored theme, but Albertus’ primary assertion is undermined by his own case studies of national development. These indicate that although land can retain and advance power, it is rarely the primary driver. Instead, it is the power of land rights and systems of enforcement, which may incorporate economic systems, political and legal structures and cultural norms, that show us where the power lies and how to change it.

Albertus begins by wresting with the Herculean task of describing the entire historical development of land power in a few introductory chapters, providing readers with a game of spot-the-difference for personal pet land interests that they feel are missing. However, the writer’s historical breakdown of the five primary types of land ownership that emerged by the sixteenth century – and the subsequent reforms of the ‘Great Reshuffle’: settler, collective, land-to-the-tiller and cooperative – provides a useful glossary for the nation-specific stories that follow.

The writer exhales somewhat in the second and third parts of the book, with compelling stories of the development of land reforms and their capacity to lay the foundations for systemic inequality, as exhibited in the lives of real people. Charting the complex social and political timelines of various nations, we are better able to understand how entire societies were formed, with land possession and rights as the definitive factor. Albertus excels at raising the profile of those who have been oppressed by power structures, particularly those indigenous groups who belonged to pieces of land of which they were not considered the owners. The inspirational stories of environmental restitution and better land distribution provide deft encouragement that the systems and structures of land allocation can be wielded for good, despite current international evidence that implies otherwise.

In the third part, stories of the struggle for restitution provide stronger arguments to support the assertion that land is power – but perhaps not in the way that the author intends. Land is intrinsically powerful to indigenous people, not simply for its use or even its ownership in the economic understanding of the term, but as a part of its vital nature. Similarly, from an environmental perspective, land has power beyond systems of capital, to grow, shape, evolve and flourish without human action or dictation. In contrast, the injustice of women’s rights, though unfathomably still a subject of international debate, is again a tool of decision-makers, legal and political rights and cultural norms, rather than something that emanates from the land itself. This is acknowledged by the writer in his analysis of the development of land rights in Indian culture, and the failure of gender-progressive reforms to property inheritance laws in the face of social norms.

Though the categorization of land power is confused and unclear in the text, Albertus’ storytelling and his conclusions provide important nuance in a world of false binaries. The book dictates remarkable political and social histories of land movements, particularly in South America, and he makes the courageous choice not to provide easy answers. Albertus offers the bold invitation to necessary, messy and imperfect solutions, which, however land and power are defined, are the only hopeful way forward. Better definition and analysis can only support this vital effort.