DOCSLIB.ORG

Land, Violent Conflict and Development

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Land, Violent Conflict and Development OECD DEVELOPMENT CENTRE Working Paper No. 233 Land, Violent Conflict and Development by Nicolas Pons-Vignon and Henri-Bernard Solignac Lecomte Land, Violent Conflict and Development DEV/DOC(2004)02 DEVELOPMENT CENTRE WORKING PAPERS This series of working papers is intended to disseminate the Development Centre’s research findings rapidly among specialists in the field concerned. These papers are generally available in the original English or French, with a summary in the other language. Comments on this paper would be welcome and should be sent to the OECD Development Centre, Le Seine Saint-Germain, 12 boulevard des Îles, 92130 Issy-les-Moulineaux, France. THE OPINIONS EXPRESSED AND ARGUMENTS EMPLOYED IN THIS DOCUMENT ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THOSE OF THE OECD OR OF THE GOVERNMENTS OF ITS MEMBER COUNTRIES CENTRE DE DÉVELOPPEMENT DOCUMENTS DE TRAVAIL Cette série de documents de travail a pour but de diffuser rapidement auprès des spécialistes dans les domaines concernés les résultats des travaux de recherche du Centre de Développement. Ces documents ne sont disponibles que dans leur langue originale, anglais ou français ; un résumé du document est rédigé dans l’autre langue. Tout commentaire relatif à ce document peut être adressé au Centre de Développement de l’OCDE, Le Seine Saint-Germain, 12 boulevard des Îles, 92130 Issy-les-Moulineaux, France. LES IDÉES EXPRIMÉES ET LES ARGUMENTS AVANCÉS DANS CE DOCUMENT SONT CEUX DE L’AUTEUR ET NE REFLÈTENT PAS NÉCESSAIREMENT CEUX DE L’OCDE OU DES GOUVERNEMENTS DE SES PAYS MEMBRES Applications for permission to reproduce or translate all or part of this material should be made to: Head of Publications Service, OECD 2, rue André-Pascal, 75775 PARIS CEDEX 16, France © OECD 2004 2 © OECD 2004 OECD Development Centre Working Paper No. 233 DEV/DOC(2004)02 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF BOXES.............................................................................................................................................4 LIST OF ACRONYMS..................................................................................................................................4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ..........................................................................................................................5 FOREWORD..................................................................................................................................................6 PREFACE.......................................................................................................................................................7 RÉSUMÉ ........................................................................................................................................................9 SUMMARY..................................................................................................................................................10 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..........................................................................................................................11 I. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................16 II. THE DETERMINANTS OF VIOLENT CONFLICT..........................................................................18 III. LAND DYNAMICS AND VIOLENT CONFLICT...........................................................................24 IV. LAND POLICY, CONFLICT AND DEVELOPMENT ....................................................................30 V. IMPLICATIONS FOR DONOR POLICIES ........................................................................................39 VI. CONCLUSION .....................................................................................................................................52 PARTICIPANTS LIST / LISTE DES PARTICIPANTS ...........................................................................53 BIBLIOGRAPHY.........................................................................................................................................57 OTHER TITLES IN THE SERIES/ AUTRES TITRES DANS LA SÉRIE ..............................................62 © OECD 2004 3 Land, Violent Conflict and Development DEV/DOC(2004)02 LIST OF BOXES Box 1 What is “Violent Conflict”? p. 18 Box 2 Land-Related Tensions and the Rwandan Genocide p. 22 Box 3 Land Policy in a Nutshell p. 30 Box 4 The National Housing Policy in Rwanda p. 31 Box 5 Land Reforms in Zimbabwe and in South Africa p. 35 Box 6 Dealing with Land-Related Conflict through Dialogue in Mali p. 45 Box 7 Donor Co-ordination, Participatory Governance, and the Reform of Land p. 48 Institutions in Post-War Cambodia LIST OF ACRONYMS AsDB Asian Development Bank CERDI Centre d’Études et de Recherches sur le Développement International CPDC Conflict, Peace and Development Co-operation network of the DAC DAC Development Assistance Committee of the OECD DCD Development Co-operation Directorate (the Secretariat of the OECD DAC) DFID Department for International Development of the United Kingdom GTZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (Germany) IIED International Institute for Environment and Development IDP Internally displaced persons IOM International Organisation for Migration MST Movimento dos Trabalhadores Rurais Sem Terra (Brazil) NALEDI National Labour and Economic Development Institute (South Africa) OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development SOAS School of Oriental and African Studies (London) USAID United States Agency for International Development 4 © OECD 2004 OECD Development Centre Working Paper No. 233 DEV/DOC(2004)02 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This work was carried out under the OECD Development Centre’s 2003-2004 Policy Dialogue programme. We extend our deep appreciation to the United States Agency for International Development for its financial contribution to the organisation of the informal experts’ seminar on “Land, Conflict and Development” (Paris, 19-20 June 2002), from which it originated. We are also grateful to Mark Berman, Chair of the Conflict, Peace and Development Co- operation Network of the OECD Development Assistance Committee, for his support and involvement. Throughout its preparation, the authors received invaluable support and advice from Francesca Cook (OECD Development Co-operation Directorate), Jolyne Sanjak (USAID), Christopher Cramer (SOAS), Jean-Louis Arcand (CERDI), Julian Quan (DFID), and Nicholas Theotocatos (IOM). Discussions with, and comments from participants in the “Land, Conflict and Development” informal seminar provided fertile support. We are in particular grateful to Ian Bannon (World Bank), Karim Hussein (Sahel and West Africa Club of the OECD), Roger Zetter (Oxford Brookes University) and Graham Saunders (Sphere Project). The opinions expressed in this paper however remain the authors’, and any error should be attributed to them only. © OECD 2004 5 Land, Violent Conflict and Development DEV/DOC(2004)02 FOREWORD On 19-20 June 2003, responding to a proposal of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the OECD Development Centre and the OECD Development Co-operation Directorate organised an informal experts’ seminar in Paris on “Land, Conflict and Development”, in order to: i) examine the links between land and conflict; ii) help formulate preliminary proposals on how donors can best incorporate land issues in their policy frameworks for the management and mitigation of conflict; and iii) propose next steps to advance this agenda further. On the occasion of the seminar, the OECD hosted the European launch of the World Bank’s 2003 Policy Research Report on Land Policy for Growth and Poverty Reduction, itself the result of wide consultation and dialogue. This, and the Guidelines of the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC) on Helping Prevent Violent Conflict, provided the policy frameworks against which the debates took place. In addition, the seminar benefited from the participation of several members of the European Union Task Force on EU Guidelines on Land Tenure, which held its meeting on the previous day in Paris. In order to help focus the discussions, the Development Centre and USAID commissioned an issues paper, prepared by Professor Jean-Louis Arcand from the Centre d’Etudes et de Recherches sur le Développement International (CERDI) and Nicolas Pons-Vignon, a consultant for the OECD Development Centre. Leading remarks by Mark Berman, Chairman of the Conflict, Peace and Co-operation Development Network of the DAC, and comments by Klaus Deininger, co-ordinator of the World Bank Policy Research Report on Land Policy, provided background and orientation for the discussion. No other formal presentations were made. The group engaged in a structured roundtable discussion on the implications of the complex relationship between land and conflict for development assistance. Details about the workshop can be found at www.oecd.org/dev/land. This paper draws from the original issues document prepared ahead of the seminar, as well as from the very fruitful discussions which took place. It attempts to contribute to the ongoing reflection on how to better integrate land policy and conflict prevention and mitigation by proposing steps towards a unified policy framework. The paper also seeks to articulate preliminary recommendations for donor agencies, which will have to be further explored through research and dialogue. 6 © OECD 2004 OECD Development Centre
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Land Inequality and Rural Unrest: Theory and Evidence from Brazil
    Land Inequality and Rural Unrest: Theory and Evidence from Brazil Michael Albertus∗ Thomas Brambor† Ricardo Ceneviva‡ Abstract What is the relationship between landholding inequality and rural unrest? And why does land reform that ostensibly addresses rural grievances sometimes exacerbate unrest? We advance the understanding of these longstanding questions by shifting the emphasis from how landholding inequality fuels rural grievances to how it captures the collective action capacity of landowners. Using municipal-level data from Brazil’s large land reform program from 1988 – 2013, we demonstrate that the relationship between landholding inequality and unrest is conditional. Isolated threats to landed elites in the form of land invasions are difficult to repel, generating a positive relationship between landholding inequality and one- off land invasions. By contrast, sustained, broader local threats triggered by nearby land reforms catalyze landowner organization to repel land invasions, leading to the reverse rela- tionship. The findings provide a novel answer for why a straightforward link between land inequality and rural unrest is elusive, and may generalize to a broad range of similar cases. Word count: 10,991 ∗Department of Political Science, University of Chicago, 5828 S. University Avenue, Pick Hall 426, Chicago, IL 60637, phone: (773) 702-8056, email: [email protected]. †Department of Political Science, Lund University, PO Box 52221 00 Lund, Sweden. Phone: +46 (0)46-2224554. Email: [email protected]. ‡Departamento de Ciˆencia Pol´ıtica, Instituto de Estudos Sociais e Pol´ıticos, Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Rua da Matriz, 82, Botafogo, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, 22260-100, Brazil. Phone: +55 21 2266-8300.
    [Show full text]
  • Ernesto 'Che' Guevara: the Existing Literature
    Ernesto ‘Che’ Guevara: socialist political economy and economic management in Cuba, 1959-1965 Helen Yaffe London School of Economics and Political Science Doctor of Philosophy 1 UMI Number: U615258 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U615258 Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 I, Helen Yaffe, assert that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Helen Yaffe Date: 2 Iritish Library of Political nrjPr v . # ^pc £ i ! Abstract The problem facing the Cuban Revolution after 1959 was how to increase productive capacity and labour productivity, in conditions of underdevelopment and in transition to socialism, without relying on capitalist mechanisms that would undermine the formation of new consciousness and social relations integral to communism. Locating Guevara’s economic analysis at the heart of the research, the thesis examines policies and development strategies formulated to meet this challenge, thereby refuting the mainstream view that his emphasis on consciousness was idealist. Rather, it was intrinsic and instrumental to the economic philosophy and strategy for social change advocated.
    [Show full text]
  • Land Reform in Eastern Europe
    Land Reform in Eastern Europe Western CIS, Transcaucuses, Balkans, and EU Accession Countries Renee Giovarelli David Bledsoe Seattle, Washington October 2001 This paper was prepared under contract with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). The positions and opinions presented are those of the author alone, and are not intended to represent the views of FAO. The Rural Development Institute (RDI), located in Seattle, Washington, USA, is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) corporation. RDI is a unique organization of lawyers devoted to problems of land reform and related issues in less developed countries and transitional economies. RDI’s goal is to assist in alleviating world poverty and instability through land reform and rural development. RDI staff have conducted field research and advised on land reform issues in 35 countries in Asia, Latin America, Eastern Europe and the Middle East. For more information about RDI, visit the RDI web site at <www.rdiland.org>. Renee Giovarelli is a staff attorney at RDI and the Director of RDI’s Kyrgyzstan and Women & Land Programs. David Bledsoe is a staff attorney and Deputy Director of Administration at RDI. This report was prepared for submission to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. The authors express their appreciation for the valuable input provided by Roy Prosterman, Leonard Rolfes, and Robert Mitchell. The authors would also like to acknowledge the important contributions of the following RDI Research Assistants to the preparation of this report: Laura Gerber, Oesa Glick, Devon Shannon, Kallie Szczepanski, and Alethea Williams. i Executive Summary The former socialist countries of Eastern Europe (that is, Europe east of Germany and west of the Urals, but including all of Russia) began a transition to a market economy in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s.
    [Show full text]
  • The Effects of Land Redistribution: Evidence from the French Revolution
    The Effects of Land Redistribution: Evidence from the French Revolution ∗ Theresa Finley † Raphaël Franck ‡ Noel D. Johnson § Susquehanna University Hebrew University of Jerusalem George Mason University This Version: June 17, 2018 Abstract: This study exploits the confiscation and auctioning off of Church property that occurred during the French Revolution to assess the role played by transaction costs in delaying the reallocation of property rights in the aftermath of fundamental institutional reform. French districts with a greater proportion of land redistributed during the Revolution experienced higher levels of agricultural productivity in 1841 and 1852 as well as more investment in irrigation and more efficient land use. We trace these increases in productivity to an increase in land inequality associated with the Revolutionary auction process. We also show how the benefits associated with the head-start given to districts with more Church land initially, and thus greater land redistribution by auction during the Revolution, dissipated over the course of the nineteenth century as other districts gradually overcame the transaction costs associated with reallocating the property rights associated with the feudal system. Keywords: Institutions, Property Rights, French Revolution, Coase Theorem JEL Codes: N53, O43, P14, D47 ∗We are grateful for comments from Philip Hoffman, Mark Koyama, James Robinson, Jean-Laurent Rosenthal, Nic Ziebarth, and participants in the January 2017 George Mason University Workshop on Economic History and Development as well as seminar participants at Wake Forest University. We acknowledge travel and research support from the Ben Porath Fund & the Department of Economics at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. All remaining errors are the fault of the Authors.
    [Show full text]
  • Land Reform and Bounded Rationality in the Middle East
    Domestic Conquest: Land Reform and Bounded Rationality in the Middle East Matthew E. Goldman A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Washington 2015 Reading Committee: Reşat Kasaba, Chair Elizabeth Kier Clark Lombardi Program Authorized to Offer Degree: Near & Middle Eastern Studies ©Copyright 2015 Matthew E. Goldman University of Washington Abstract Domestic Conquest: Land Reform and Bounded Rationality in the Middle East Matthew E. Goldman Chair of the Supervisory Committee: Professor Reşat Kasaba Henry M. Jackson School of International Studies This dissertation examines the rise and fall of projects for land reform - the redistribution of agricultural land from large landowners to those owning little or none - in the Middle East in the mid 20th century, focusing on Egypt, Iraq, Palestine/Israel, Syria, and Turkey. Following the end of World War II, local political elites and foreign advisors alike began to argue that land reform constituted a necessary first rung on the ladder of modernization, a step that would lead to political consolidation, development, industrialization, and even democratization. Unfortunately, many land reform projects resulted in grave disappointments, leading to reduced agricultural output, increased rural poverty, political conflict, and more authoritarian rather than more democratic forms of government. As many policymakers and development experts themselves came to understand, an underlying cause of these problems was their failure to adjust land reform models to account for crucial variations in local political, economic, and ecological conditions. Using a method of similarity approach, this project asks why land reform projects so often sought to apply imported models in vastly different local contexts and then failed to adequately adjust these policy models to suit local realities.
    [Show full text]
  • From Land Reform to Industrial Revolution the Mexican Case
    FROM LAND REFORM TO INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION THE MEXICAN CASE EDMUNDO FLORES Among Latin American countries Mexico is the sole country self-suffi- cient in food or, Inore accurately, who exports her agricultural surpluses. The historical key to this secret, and further to the secret of her industrial growth, :nay be found in the role played by the Land Reforln. In this article the author reviews Mexico's development after the Mexican Revolu- tion and clarifies the process from Land Reform to Industrial Revolution. According to data from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the present agricultural product of Latin America decreased nearly ten percent per capita, compared to the period 193~~38. Since then, agricultural imports-mostly foodstuffs-increased more than eighty percent and upset seriously the balance of payments of most Latin American coun- tries. In this depressing panorama of economic stagnation and regression, Mexico is the only exception. The combined effects of land reform, road construction, irrigation, agri- cultural credit, and the spread of many innovations through research extension and training, enabled the agricultural sector to grow at an average rate of more than 50/0 during the last thirty years and turned Mexico into the only Latin American country virtually self-suflicient in food. While growing domestic demand has been met, exports of cotton, coffee, cattle, tomatoes, fresh vegetables, and sugar-cane have increased steadily. Furthermore, until ten years ago it was customary to import corn and wheat to supplement domestic production and meet local demand. Then, quite suddenly, Mexico began to generate surpluses and became an exporter.
    [Show full text]
  • Authoritarian Survival and Poverty Traps: Land Reform in Mexico
    World Development Vol. 77, pp. 154–170, 2016 0305-750X/Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. www.elsevier.com/locate/worlddev http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2015.08.013 Authoritarian Survival and Poverty Traps: Land Reform in Mexico MICHAEL ALBERTUS a, ALBERTO DIAZ-CAYEROS b, BEATRIZ MAGALONI b and BARRY R. WEINGAST b,* a University of Chicago, USA b Stanford University, USA Summary. — Why do governments in underdeveloped countries pursue policies that undercut long-term economic growth? Focusing on Mexico’s massive but inefficient land reform, we argue that governments do so to underpin political survival. Using a panel dataset of Mexican states from 1917 to 1992, we find that land distribution was higher during election years and where the threat of rural unrest was greater. Furthermore, PRI support eroded more slowly in states receiving more reform. The program, which carried restrictive property rights, thus served the PRI regime’s electoral interests. But while land distribution generated a loyal political clientele, it generated steep costs – lower long-term economic growth. Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Key words — economic growth, land reform, authoritarian regimes, clientelism, redistribution, Mexico 1. INTRODUCTION Mun˜oz-Pin˜a, de Janvry, & Sadoulet, 2003). The literature in political science, history, and sociology suggests that land A general conundrum of government in underdeveloped reform was either employed as an instrument of peasant con- countries is why political officials pursue policies that under- trol or regime ‘‘legitimation” (e.g., Esteva, 1980; Warman, mine long-term economic growth. Governing coalitions in 1972). these countries create monopolies and limit economic entry to We build on these works, focusing on why the governing create rents for favored constituents that distort prices and pre- Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) structured property vent competitive markets (North, Wallis, & Weingast, 2009); rights in an inefficient manner.
    [Show full text]
  • Latin-American Land Reform: the Uses of Confiscation
    Michigan Law Review Volume 63 Issue 2 1964 Latin-American Land Reform: The Uses of Confiscation Kenneth L. Karst The Ohio State University Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, Land Use Law Commons, Law and Economics Commons, Legal History Commons, Legal Remedies Commons, and the Torts Commons Recommended Citation Kenneth L. Karst, Latin-American Land Reform: The Uses of Confiscation, 63 MICH. L. REV. 327 (1964). Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol63/iss2/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Michigan Law Review at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Michigan Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. LATIN-AMERICAN LAND REFORM: THE USES OF CONFISCATION Kenneth L. Karst* N Latin America, every land reform is motivated principally by I political demands for equality, for the redistribution of wealth and income. The statement is true even in those countries where the governments are hostile to the idea of redistribution. Palliatives that exploit the ambiguity of the word "reform" in such countries are aimed at appeasement of the demand for sharing the wealth. Landless peasants and landowners understand perfectly well; yet, many technicians and students of land reform continue to speak a different language, a language in which land reform means anything from agricultural rent control to the introduction of hybrid corn.1 In part, talk of this kind is the product of sophistication.
    [Show full text]
  • Land Reform Processes in West Africa: a Review
    LAND REFORM PROCESSES IN WEST AFRICA: A REVIEW Sahel and West Africa Club Secretariat SAH/D(2006)560 August 2006 1 2 Land Reform Processes in West Africa: A Review Sahel and West Africa Club Secretariat August 2006 The principal authors of this document are: - Mr. Hubert Ouedraogo, LandNet West Africa Coordinator - Mrs. Donata Gnisci, Conflict Analyst, SWAC Secretariat - Mr. Léonidas Hitimana, Agro-Economist, SWAC Secretariat It draws on contributions from the following specialists on land in West Africa: - Mr. Jean-Pierre Chauveau, IRD, France - Mr. Karim Hussein, IFAD - Mr. Paul Mathieu, FAO - Mr. Paul Richards, Wageningen Agricultural University, The Netherlands - Mr. Aude-Sophie Rodella, Ph.D. candidate - Mr. Jean Zoundi, SWAC Secretariat 3 4 Contents ACRONYMS ................................................................................................................................................................6 FOREWORD................................................................................................................................................................7 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................................8 I. LAND, CONFLICT AND RECONSTRUCTION ISSUES: AN AFRICAN PERSPECTIVE......................9 1.1 THE ECONOMIC COMMUNITY OF WEST AFRICAN STATES ...........................................................................10 1.2 THE WEST AFRICA ECONOMIC AND MONETARY UNION ..............................................................................12
    [Show full text]
  • Land Reform and Landholdings in Brazil
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Assunção, Juliano Working Paper Land reform and landholdings in Brazil WIDER Research Paper, No. 2006/137 Provided in Cooperation with: United Nations University (UNU), World Institute for Development Economics Research (WIDER) Suggested Citation: Assunção, Juliano (2006) : Land reform and landholdings in Brazil, WIDER Research Paper, No. 2006/137, ISBN 9291909211, The United Nations University World Institute for Development Economics Research (UNU-WIDER), Helsinki This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/63468 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. www.econstor.eu Research Paper No. 2006/137 Land Reform and Landholdings in Brazil Juliano Assunção* November 2006 Abstract Land and wealth are closely related in rural Brazil, a country characterized by high levels of inequality in terms of income or landholdings.
    [Show full text]
  • Case Studies in Reforms in Land Administration 8 Notes 13 References 13
    Agricultural Land Redistribution and Land Administration in Sub-Saharan Africa Land Redistribution and Land Administration Agricultural Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized DIRECTIONS IN DEVELOPMENT Agriculture and Rural Development Agricultural Land Redistribution Public Disclosure Authorized and Land Administration in Sub-Saharan Africa Byamugisha Case Studies of Recent Reforms Frank F. K. Byamugisha, Editor THE WORLD THE WORLD BANK Public Disclosure Authorized Agricultural Land Redistribution and Land Administration in Sub-Saharan Africa DIRECTIONS IN DEVELOPMENT Agriculture and Rural Development Agricultural Land Redistribution and Land Administration in Sub-Saharan Africa Case Studies of Recent Reforms Frank F. K. Byamugisha, Editor © 2014 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW, Washington DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000; Internet: www.worldbank.org Some rights reserved 1 2 3 4 17 16 15 14 This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpreta- tions, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Nothing herein shall constitute or be considered to be a limitation upon or waiver of the privileges and immunities of The World Bank, all of which are specifically reserved.
    [Show full text]
  • Land Reform and Agricultural Development: Zambia Versus Zimbabwe
    Global Majority E-Journal, Vol. 5, No. 1 (June 2014), pp. 18-32 Land Reform and Agricultural Development: Zambia versus Zimbabwe Amélie Thouvenot Abstract This article examines the impact of the land reforms undertaken in Zambia and Zimbabwe on agricultural development. The Zambian land reform of 1995 has led to significant improvements in agricultural productivity and output since the early 2000s, allowing for a rising GDP and hopes that such growth will be redistributed across the education and health sector. In Zimbabwe, the land reform of the 2000s led to economic dislocation, a phenomenal drop in total agricultural output, an uncontrolled inflation, a rising debt obligation to foreign nations, and an overwhelming loss in resources as political conflicts sparked violence. I. Introduction At the time of independence, both, the Republic of Zambia (henceforth Zambia) and the Republic of Zimbabwe (henceforth Zimbabwe) inherited a distribution of colonial land ownership that was biased towards the white political elite. Zambia, which became independent in 1964, underwent three land reforms: first, the enactment of the 1970 Land Acquisition Act (which aimed at nationalizing land held by absentee landlords), second, the 1975 Land Act (which basically converted all land to statutory leasehold), and third, the 1995 Lands Act (which aimed at stimulating private, including private foreign, investment). Zimbabwe, which officially gained independence in 1980, had only one land reform, which was initiated with the signing of the Lancaster House Agreement in 1979. The Lancaster House Agreement required that the government had to wait ten years before instituting land reform. Hence, though it was possible to sell and buy land under the so-called ‘willing seller, willing buyer principle’ before the 10-year waiting time, consistent with the Lancaster House Agreement, President Robert Mugabe started to implement a controversial land redistribution (the so-called fast-track resettlement program) in February 2000.
    [Show full text]