 In recent years, the wave of large-scale land acquisitions for plantation agriculture in low and middle-income countries across Africa, Asia and Latin America has had important impacts on local communities. Some of these could be positive. New jobs and access to new markets may be created or there might be investments in infrastructure. But there can also be negative impacts including dispossession of land or violations of the human rights to food, housing or freedom of expression. And when injustices occur, it can be very difficult for the communities to understand and identify who to hold to account and how to go about doing this. Large-scale land acquisitions are made possible by a vast array of actors who provide money, expertise and manpower. They can include investors or lenders, a business managing the project on the ground, subcontractors, local governments and buyers. These actors can be spread across multiple countries and markets so it can be difficult to identify who they are, what their role is and therefore who to hold to account when negative impacts occur. The concept of an investment chain can help us understand all this. An investment chain is the network created by all the actors making any one investment project possible. Mapping an investment chain helps identify important actors and understand the role they play in the project, like offering a loan or buying the product. Money flows in both directions along the investment chain. We find it very useful to think of the investment chain as a stream whose flow changes direction. Let's look at an example of a sugar plantation in the imaginary kingdom of Bangala to make sense of this. The government of Bangala agrees to lease a large piece of land to E-Power, a foreign company who want to produce sugar as well as ethanol for export and electricity. The government approves the deal without consulting the communities that are using the land. And E-Power hides up contractors to build the plant and now oversee the day-to-day running of the operations on the ground. The company E-Power is the main visible actor in this part of the investment chain, but all of these players make up midstream. Upstream is made up of all the actors that provide the money. So in this case, the parent company who owns E-Power, let's say a Swiss investment firm called Moneymakers, also other investors who might have invested or lent money to E-Power or Moneymakers. The lenders could be private or government-owned banks from different countries, for example the UK, Germany, Norway and Italy. Finally, at the downstream end are those who buy the end products, such as trading companies, retailers and manufacturers. In our example, EU markets who want affordable sugar and ethanol and the government of Bangala who need electricity for the national grid. So simply put, the investment chain has three parts, upstream, midstream and downstream, and they all have identifiable players. Identifying and mapping the actors in an investment chain can help communities who have lost their land or suffered abuses clarify who is playing what role and how they relate to one another. This information can be used to establish accountability by identifying pressure points in the chain. So hang on, what's a pressure point? Pressure points are the actors and relationships that can be targeted or used to influence the outcome of an investment. Pressure points can be activated by a range of players, from governments who seek to regulate against foul play, individuals and communities affected by the deals who want to fight back, to civil society groups who want to highlight abuse and point to better practice. This can involve processes in the host state, in the investor's home country or in third countries that may be connected to the investment, such as advocacy, legal proceedings, complaints mechanisms or legislative reform. Pressure points exist throughout the chain and can be activated in a number of different countries, wherever the investment chain extends to. Used effectively, pressure points can create opportunities to improve the terms of land deals, restrict or cancel deals, or promote alternative models of agricultural investment that play small scale producers at centre stage. Pressure points might also be used to obtain remedies for any harms already suffered, such as financial compensation. Investment chains are complex, but with a framework to understand them, we can take action to remedy harms already suffered and promote investments that support inclusive, sustainable development. Learn more at IID.org