P07-UNDP-LandReform

The Institute for Domestic and International Affairs, Inc.

United Nations Development Programme Land Reform Director: Sam Zeidman

Š 2006 Institute for Domestic & International Affairs, Inc. (IDIA) This document is solely for use in preparation for Philadelphia Model United Nations 2007. Use for other purposes is not permitted without the express written consent of IDIA. For more information, please write us at idiainfo@idia.net

Introduction _________________________________________________________________ 1 Background _________________________________________________________________ 3 The Need for Land Reform _________________________________________________________ 3 Opportunities ____________________________________________________________________ 3 Implementation___________________________________________________________________ 4 History of Land Reform____________________________________________________________ 6 African Independence _____________________________________________________________ 7

Current Status _______________________________________________________________ 9 Namibia _________________________________________________________________________ 9 Zimbabwe ______________________________________________________________________ 10 Kenya __________________________________________________________________________ 11 South Africa ____________________________________________________________________ 12 Rwanda ________________________________________________________________________ 12

Bloc Positions_______________________________________________________________ 13 Africa __________________________________________________________________________ 13 United States ____________________________________________________________________ 13 Latin America ___________________________________________________________________ 14 Asia____________________________________________________________________________ 14 Europe _________________________________________________________________________ 15

Summary___________________________________________________________________ 17 Discussion Questions _________________________________________________________ 18 Works Cited ________________________________________________________________ 19

PhilMUN 2007

1

Introduction Land reform programs are far from a modern invention, but the modern world has presented new obstacles to their successful implementation. Specifically, postcolonial nations in the current global system face political difficulties in execution of the programs: since reforms inherently require the redistribution of property from one population to another, those losing land under the program often do not accept the process. Given the late departure of colonial powers from the region, states in postcolonial Africa continue to grapple with the matter.

There are two primary circumstances under which land reforms come into existence. The first is the radical redistribution of land, in which the government grants land to persons who previously had none, under the interests of fostering economic equality.1 The second refers to returning land to those from whom it was taken during rule by oppressive regimes.

After the Second World War, land reform concerns became prevalent in Asia, Africa, and South America. The formation of the United Nations (UN) in 1947, along with other developments in international law, led to global efforts at solving localized land reform disputes. The UN Charter, along with the Universal Declarations of Human Rights and the Declaration of Economic and Social Rights, discusses and legitimizes land reform in the international community.2 While the UN does not have the legal authority to implement land reform programs in developing countries, its stance does lend “political credibility� to those who share its views.3 In 1997 the UN issued a progress report on land reform and land reform policy, outlining the need for the programs, which it described as the changing of laws related to land ownership and tenure.4 Among its

1

,Krishna B. Ghimire, Land Reform & Peasant Livelihoods, ITDG Publishing: 2001, London, England.

Ibid.

3 Ibid, 61.

4 The Progress Report: Land Tenure and Land Policy, http://www.progress.org/land/landgd.htm, Accessed: 5 February 2004.

2

PhilMUN 2007

2

analyses regarding changes to land reform laws, the report discusses South African law, which changed following Apartheid but did not prove wholly effective.5 Conceptual definitions of land reform vary to some extent. According to the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, land reform consists of “the various processes involved in altering the pattern of land tenure and land use of a specified area.”6 A definition with more specificity states that reform processes include provision of secured tenure rights to the individual farmer, transfer of land ownership away from small classes of powerful landowners to tenants who actually till the land, appropriation of land estates for establishing small new settlement farms, or instituting land improvements and irrigation schemes.7 This definition outlines the various approaches policymakers take to the reallocation of land. If a state is making the difficult move from an agrarian economic system made up of subsistence farmers, the change to a more regulated paradigm is much more controversial and harder to implement.

In developing states, poverty and hunger are in direct relation to land tenure systems.8 Ideally, land reform programs effectively distribute land ownership and access to arable land. In some regimes, although such programs are ostensibly implemented to benefit the people as a whole, they allocate land primarily to the wealthy and to those with government connections.9 Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and other international organizations play a significant role in the establishment and implementation of land reform programs in developing states, but must consider the inherent social dynamics of a culture in order to facilitate reforms that a society will embrace.10

5

Ibid, 2.

United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, “Land Reform,”www.unece.org/env/hs/wpla/docs/guidelines/glossary.html, Accessed: 1 February 2004.

7 Department of Agricultural Economics, Montana State University,http://www2.montana.edu/lmyoung/glossary.htm#L, Accessed: 3 February 2004.

8 Ibid.

9 The Progress Report.

10 Ghimire, 64.

6

PhilMUN 2007

3

Background The Need for Land Reform There are a number of reasons why it is in national and international interests to pursue land reform programs. For one, such policies allow legal security to the occupants of land. Without land reform in their favor, communities sustaining themselves on a particular area of land may be turned away by the nominal owner of that piece of property. This displacement becomes problematic in cases where the “owner� obtained his deed during imperial rule of a region and does not maximize its use for larger societal benefits. Land reforms are necessary to solve for disproportionate land ownership by a few privileged individuals at the expense of the larger society.

Additionally, land

reforms can provide tenure security, assurance that the land on which they work will not be taken away, for poor agricultural workers.

Another reason for reform is to bring an end to arcane legal standards of ownership that grant a national government excessive power regarding land ownership.

In many states, enduring standards asserted all the land of a state ultimately the power of the sovereign governing body rather than in the hands of individuals. By removing this absolute power, governments allow property rights of individuals to become more nuanced, helping end discriminatory land ownership policies in order to protect the rights of disadvantaged groups such as women and orphans.

Opportunities Land reform, at its core, seeks to provide those who rely on subsistence farming with the land necessary to provide for their families and towns. Modern economic structure allows this process to extend to other opportunities as well, such as the providing of farm credit, cooperatives, and collective marketing. Governments, though, are often reluctant to reform their structure gradually, opting instead to delay reform until they deem they can implement comprehensive change.11

11

Ibid, 1.

PhilMUN 2007

4

As shown at right, there are four identifiable manners in which a government can intervene with relation to its agrarian lands. political

Both sound

commitment

and

sufficient administrative capacity are necessary for a successful outcome to land reform efforts, no matter the motivation of the government. Indeed, many such programs have faltered due to governments

that

have

effectively

delivered

the

progressive

changes

they

Four Types of Land Reform Intervention Land tenure reform designed to adjust or correct the reciprocal property rights between proprietors, in response to changing economic needs (e.g. the establishment of statutory committees or land boards to organize and supervise the use of common rights and other interests; the conversion of more informal tenancy into formal property rights; tenancy reform to adjust the terms of contract between landlord and tenant).

External inducements or 'market-based' incentives offered by government for social and economic reasons and leading to the restructuring of existing property rights or the creation of new ones, e.g. the distribution of public lands; state expenditure on land reclamation and subsequent allotment as private property; state sponsored credits channeled by a land bank through cooperatives; support to institutions to administer the necessary land acquisition and distribution mechanisms.

not

promised.12

Implementation The past decade has seen the majority of Africans become citizens in democratically elected

External controls or prohibitions imposed by law on property rights (i.e. non-market measures), for instance: nationalization and collectivization; restitution; redistribution policies involving expropriation of land (with or without compensation) on grounds of excessive size, under-utilization, ownership by absentee landlords and/or foreigners. By contrast, gradual redistribution policies operate e.g. through death duties. Other external controls can act against redistribution, e.g. laws preventing land fragmentation below certain minima (see Box 3).

Finally, confirmation of title to verify and secure land titles to those who have already a demonstrable claim reduces doubt and contention and so sets the foundations for development.

Source: http://www.odi.org.uk/nrp/nrp6.html

states, the formation of the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) and the African Union, and the positive overall economic growth on the continent as it increases its participation in the global marketplace.13 Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) play a unique role in assisting with the efficacy of land reform and other policies aiming to alleviate poverty. While often too limited to conduct widespread large-scale operations and projects, these groups have

12 13

Ibid, 4. “Fast Facts,� United Nations Development Programme, April 2006.

PhilMUN 2007

5

certain inherent advantages over governments.14 For example, NGOs acquire better information about local level conditions, have minimal amounts of corruption, and act as societal watchdogs.15 In all of these senses, NGO support is beneficial to realizing effective land reform, and governments in Africa are increasingly embracing this fact, establishing partnerships with NGOs to aid in providing services. Institutions such as farmers unions have also worked with the NGO sector in developing solutions to agricultural problems.16 The United Nations, while supporting governmental land reform programs in the interest of its ideals for human rights, has consistently budgeted a large percentage of its food aid to southern Africa in recognizing the failure of governments there to implement effective policies such as market liberalization and land reform; such failure has contributed to a food crisis in the region.17 In 2003, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan addressed the obligation of the United Nations to accelerate rural development, including effecting land reform, stating, “Nowhere will our commitment be put to the test more than in Africa, where food insecurity and AIDS are working in vicious tandem to thwart the continent’s rural development.”18 Through the UNDP, the United Nations helps governments develop Poverty Reductions Strategies at a national level, and lobbies states to enact policies that facilitate the anti-poverty strategies linked to the Millenium Development Goals.19

14

“Poverty and Inequality in South Africa,” United Nationa Development Programme, Online, http://www.undp.org.za/docs/poverty2.html 15 Ibid.

16 “Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme,” New Partnership for Africa’s Development, July 2003.

17 “Southern Africa’s food crisis worsens, with over 14 million people now in need – UN,” United Nations News Center, 16 September 2002, Online, http://www.un.org/apps/news/storyAr.asp?NewsID=4718&Cr=Africa&Cr1=food&Kw1=land+reform&Kw2=&Kw 3= 18 “As ECOSOC opens session, Annan urges global action on rural development,” United Nations News Center, 30 June 2003, Online, http://www.un.org/apps/news/storyAr.asp?NewsID=7575&Cr=ecosoc&Cr1=&Kw1=land+reform&Kw2=&Kw3= 19 “Fast Facts,” 3-4.

PhilMUN 2007

6

History of Land Reform Land reform programs have existed since the time of the Romans and through the Middle Ages, and modern efforts have arisen especially in post-colonial states. In the era in which these states were first colonized, the worldwide expansion of European empires brought with it competition among the powers. During the 19th Century, for example, European states divided Africa among themselves; while they had abolished slavery, Europeans still felt a duty to civilize the continent, and the Berlin Conference of 1884 facilitated this division.20 The land reform policies for Africa thus chiefly benefited Western Europeans aiming assert their control over the continent; European peasants who had the capital to do so often moved to Africa where they received land grants to build their own farms and estates.21 As with the American colonies during the 17th and 18th Centuries, Europe relied on emigration of its own citizens to Africa to bolster imperial control over the region.

Once in Africa, Europeans used modern weaponry to quell resistance by indigenous tribes unwilling to submit to European rule. The tribal system itself worked in the Europeans’ favor, as historical rivalries among tribes led some to ally with European forces in order to defeat their traditional enemies. These strategies divided the indigenous Africans into an untenable fighting force, allowing for defeat by the Europeans, who in turn often voided their peace agreements with many of the tribes that had earlier fought alongside them. Ultimately, the colonization of Africa served as a means for European governments to give land to fellow Europeans who sought it by relocating them to Africa.

In Africa and elsewhere, states have established many agrarian programs. Two philosophies, capitalist agriculture and socialist agrarian reforms, have emerged as potentially viable. The former creates internal markets for the development of industry in

20

Rosenberg, Matt T. “Berlin Conference of 1884 - 1885 to Divide Africa,� The Freeman Institute, http://www.freemaninstitute.com/RTGcolony.htm, Accessed: 25 February 2004.

21 Powelson, 148.

PhilMUN 2007

7

order to transform landless peasants into small independent producers.”22 The latter distributes land to the poor as a means of collective ownership rather than individual gain; this type of reform also involves mechanisms such as the nationalization of land and collectivization of both means of production and production itself.23 Both philosophies, and combinations thereof, have been implemented by states with varying degrees of success.

African Independence European colonization of Africa reached its zenith in the late 19th Century, but the growing costs of maintaining empires began forcing many states to withdraw from the continent, granting independence to formerly occupied realms.

Within these newly

sovereign states, debate began over the distribution of land.

One of the new states, Zimbabwe, in which Europeans first arrived in 1890, represents a microcosm of the politics of land reform in African post-colonial states.

European settlers claimed for themselves the most arable farmland and restricted the native Africans to less fertile lands, which they called the “reserves.” The Europeans quashed indigenous attempts to retake the optimal farmland with fierce reprisals, including the execution of the leaders of rebellions. The British Land Apportionment Act of 1930 barred African land ownership outside the reserves, except in a special freehold purchase area. Such enforcement measures kept Africans, besides those needed for labor on White farms, in the reserves, which grew overpopulated and unable to produce enough to provide for the population.

These conditions persisted until 1965, when far-right Prime Minister Ian Smith unilaterally declared independence after the British government refused to grant it.24 Concurrently, two major liberation organizations emerged: Zanu, led by Robert Mugabe,

22

“Agrarian Reform: History,” The Columbia University Press: 1994, http://www.slider.com/enc/1000/agrarian_reform_History.htm, Accessed: 5 February 2004, 3.

23 Ibid.

24 Ayinde, “History of Zimbabwe’s Land Reform,” Race and History News and Views, 12 August 2002, http://www.raceandhistory.com/cgi-bin/forum/webbbs_config.pl/noframes/read/771, Accessed: 11 February 2004.

PhilMUN 2007

8

and Zapu, led by Joshua Nkomo.25 In response to the declaration, England imposed drastic economic sanctions upon the colony, and further subsidized British commercial agriculture, thereby making it very difficult for African farmers to compete. The “land question” became a major cause of an ensuing guerrilla war, fought with increasing ferocity during the 1970s with intimidation and torture tactics in rural areas the norm for both sides. In 1979, negotiations in London led to the Lancaster House Agreement, which paved the way for official independence for Zimbabwe in April 1980.

For the first time, Africans controlled a sovereign Zimbabwean state. After a landslide victory in the first free elections of Zimbabwe,

Robert Mugabe

Mugabe promised to resettle Africans onto the land Europeans had occupied. government

approximately

resettlement projects.

Britain gave the new USD

$88

million

for

Under the Lancaster House

constitution, the Zimbabwe government could only buy land from “willing sellers”; after its expiration the government passed a law allowing it to make compulsory purchases.

The last decade, though, has seen few

transfers, as the government has failed to budget for serious reform.26 Despite what initially appeared to be a progressive effort for land reform, Mugabe’s associates, rather than the poor, received much of the land. In 1997, Mugabe announced that his government would acquire 1,500 farms against the wishes of their owners. He further requested that the British government compensate these farmers, claiming that initial responsibility rests on Rhodesian colonists for stealing the land when the area was initially colonized. To this day, Mugabe continues his land reform, although

25 26

Ibid, 2.

Ibid.

PhilMUN 2007

9

it is widely considered to be a corrupt and unequal endeavor, resulting in greater ownership for Mugabe’s compatriots than the rural poor.27

Current Status One of the United Nations Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) is the reduction of poverty by one-third by the year 2015. In March 2006, the UNDP issued a report calling for, among other measures, land reform programs in the newly independent state of East Timor as a means towards helping the state meet the MDG.28 Overall, changes in the policies of governments in states, such as Uganda and Tanzania, to enact land reforms have been widespread and promising, but the need for effective land reform has far from disappeared.29 In the current discourse of the international community, land reform represents a facet of larger initiatives to end food shortages and poverty.

Namibia Independent since 1990, Namibia has

Namibia

focused on the disparities in land ownership among races since gaining sovereignty. Led by President Sam Nujoma from its inception as a sovereign state until 2005, its land reform policies primarily focus on obtaining land from willing sellers.30 As in Zimbabwe, though, the bureaucracy and funding of the operation, combined with the sparse number of “willing sellers,” have kept such policies from having significant impact.

27

Factions like the

Ibid, 2.

“Impoverished Timor-Leste can still reach poverty-reducing goal, says UN report,” United Nations News Centre, 9 March 2006. Online, http://www.un.org/apps/news/storyAr.asp?NewsID=17744&Cr=Timor&Cr1=&Kw1=land+reform&Kw2=&Kw3= 29 Wily, 8.

30 “Talking like Mugabe,” Economist, 14 September 2002. Online, Lexis Nexis. http://www.lexisnexis.com.

28

PhilMUN 2007

10

Namibian Farm Workers Union have grown more militant, threatening to invade lands if workers there are mistreated, exacerbating the need for egalitarian economic structure.31 In May 2006, the Namibian cabinet approved a plan to hasten the availability of plots of land, which includes a recommendation for discussion on whether forced expropriation, as in Zimbabwe, is a viable means to that end.32 The cabinet further called for increased accountability in the screening process for potential land beneficiaries and improvements to a system of “affirmative action” loans to farming communities to increase their landpurchasing power.33

Zimbabwe Since the spring of 2000, government-supported groups in Zimbabwe have occupied White-owned farms. The clash between White farmers and Black workers has led to violence resulting in many deaths on both sides. The unrest has had a negative Zimbabwe

impact upon agricultural production, which may lead to the starvation of the Zimbabwean people.

New laws require White farmers to vacate their land before receiving any type of compensation.

Several of these farmers have done so without making legal appeal; those who have gotten payment for their lands receive it in the devalued Zimbabwean dollar. Even the beneficiaries of the program struggle: although many Zimbabweans in rural areas now have land, they lack seeds and

31

Sharon LaFraniere, “Tensions Simmer as Namibia Divides Its Farmland,” The New York Times, 25 December 2004. Online, Lexis-Nexis. http://www.lexisnexis.com.

32 Lindsay Dettlinger, “Cabinet Approves New Land Reform Plan,” The Namibian, 17 May 2006. Online, LexisNexis. http://www.lexisnexis.com.

33 Ibid.

PhilMUN 2007

11

fertilizers to actually cultivate it; the government has dismissed their efforts at obtaining aid from the state due to a lack of available funds.34 The international community continues to pressure Zimbabwe to respect its obligations under international humanitarian law, such as the right to security of property as stated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.35 The international community has also sent funds to Zimbabwe to help implement a land reform program that would comply with the principles established by the September 2001 Commonwealth Abuja Agreement and the 1998 International Donors’ Conference on Land Reform.36 Despite these efforts, governmental flaws are not the only setbacks to land reform in Zimbabwe. The HIV/AIDS pandemic, according to the United Nations Relief and Recovery Unit (RRU), has made a marked negative impact on agriculture in Zimbabwe.37 Most of those afflicted with HIV/AIDS are between the ages of fifteen and twenty-three, “the core of the agricultural labor force,” dropping the proportion of cultivated, arable land in the state by thirty-nine per cent.38

Kenya

Kenya

Under a recent presidential decree, absentee landlords in the Coast Province of Kenya, most of whom are British or Arab, will lose ownership of their land to squatters.

The issue of land

redistribution has persisted since Kenya gained independence, as land ownership established during the colonial period continued after the dissolution of the colony. The decree received varied reactions in

34

“History of Zimbabwe’s Land reform,” Race and History Forum, 12 August 2002, http://www.raceandhistory.com/cgi-bin/forum/webbbs_config.pl/noframes/read/771, Accessed: 3 February 2004.

35 Fast Track Land reform in Zimbabwe, http://www.hrw.org/reports/2002/zimbabwe/ZimLand030201.htm#P103_19190, Accessed: 5 March 2004.

36 Ibid.

37 Ibid, 1.

38 Ibid, 1.

PhilMUN 2007

12

Kenya, with many people hopeful that it will sever the last vestiges of colonial rule, while others are skeptical about whether the decree will bring about meaningful change or was merely political pandering.39

South Africa In contrast to Zimbabwe, South African land

South Africa

reform efforts have met much success. The current law in South Africa, passed in response to an incident in which thousands of squatters sought to take over a White-owned farm, states that squatters are not permitted to force farm owners from their land.

The squatters had argued that they had

owned the land before the Apartheid government seized it. The government responded by passing the law making the actions of the squatters illegal and giving the land back to the white farmers. Many of the squatters today do not ask for land to grow crops but to build homes. Of the 65,000 claims to land in South Africa, 46,000 have been resolved.40

Rwanda Following a murderous genocide that resulted in the deaths of more than 800,000 persons within three months and a civil war in 1994, Rwanda continues to struggle with an influx of internally displaced persons (IDPs) and returning refugees. Ninety-four per cent of Rwandans are directly dependent upon land, often passed on from generation to generation, to support their families. Adherence to this tradition, however, has led to ever-decreasing plots of land for families, and an overall shortage of land. Existing

39

Joseph Odhiambo, “Pledge to Redistribute Kenya Land,” BBC News Online, 22 August 2006. Online, http://news.bbc.co.uk 40 “More Squeeze Than Grab,” The Economist, 15 January 2004.

PhilMUN 2007 efforts of both the Rwandan government and the

13 Rwanda

international community have often failed to address this cultural tradition.

The primary deficiency of land ownership in Rwanda is the lack of security of ownership; even disputes brought in front of the law are settled by ad hoc tribunals rather than a clear, cogent legal system. Equality of land rights for women are lacking as well, and the overall land ownership crisis has spread to neighboring countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, such as Burundi, emphasizing the transnational impacts of the need for land reform.

Bloc Positions Land reform is by no means an issue exclusive to Africa. A survey of other world regions reveals their various attitudes towards land reform, but the most striking examples of the viewpoints of a state reveal themselves in the land reforms implemented by individual states.

Africa The continent, as explained throughout this document, has seen significant efforts at land reform initiatives in its post-colonial states. Both NEPAD and the AU support equitable distribution of land among their proposed measures to improve conditions around the continent. Many governments, though, lack the economic and administrative capabilities to bring these ideals into practice, but welcome assistance in doing so.

United States The U.S. supports land reform and other initiatives to reduce global poverty, and has placed a particular emphasis on alleviating poverty through expanding access to

PhilMUN 2007

14

trade.41 It does not approve of the land reform policies instituted by Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe, asserting that his rule has led to negative impacts on the region and has prevented inequalities of land distribution there from being solved.42 In general, the U.S. supports nondiscriminatory practices regarding land ownership, much as it does in its own affairs.

Latin America In Latin American, there is a high concentration of land ownership with “fragmentation of rural factor and commodity markets and a limited degree of institutional development.”43

The governments of Latin America favor commercial

export agriculture. Two different groups control the agricultural structure: the first, peasants, have more influence over the domestic market through grain production. The second, large agricultural producers, export products like bananas, coffee beans, sugar cane, and meat. Public investment has been neglected in rural development, but has boomed in industrial factories. Due to the negation of rural developments, “farm gate prices for food have remained at low levels, and access to land and credit was severely restricted.”44

Asia Agrarian relations in Asia share the same aspects as Latin American countries.

These areas have a number of plantations used for the purposes of domestic and exported agricultural trade. The primary issues regarding plantation reform are the “seasonal employment [plantations] offer and the limits imposed on local food production by overspecialization.”45 These factors create problems in the global market and result in mass unemployment among those who rely on plantations for their vocation. An important 41

“Bureau of African Affairs,” United States Department of State, Online, http://www.state.gov/p/af/ Walter H. Kansteiner, III, Assistant Secretary for African Affairs, Testimony before the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations Subcommittee on African Affairs, 28 June 2001, Online, http://www.state.gov/p/af/rls/rm/2001/3949.htm 43 Pelupessy, Wim and Ruerd Ruben, Agrarian Policies in Central America, St. Martin’s Press, Inc.: 2000, New York, New York.

44 Ibid, 5.

45 Ibid, 3.

42

PhilMUN 2007

15

target for reform is the “landlord estate, from which tenants commonly can be evicted at will. The reform of tenancies transfers income to the tenant and creates incentives for investment.”46 There is a sense of urgency for the speedy progression of effective land reform programs because of the interest of armed groups that seek to secure land for their own purposes.

Europe As a result of the conflict in the former Yugoslavia at the end of the 20th Century, Balkan states have, under the stipulations of the Dayton Accords and by their own initiatives, taken steps to assert land ownership rights of those displaced by the fighting.

Many European states have gone through a period of land reform at some point in their existence.

On 23 January 2003, Scottish Parliament passed the Land Reform Act, which gained Royal assent about a month later. The purpose of the act is to end the history of feudal law

The Feudal System as Defined by the Scottish Office: A technical legal framework for ownership of land. Originally it was based on the theory that all land was ultimately owned by the sovereign…in time the system became commercialized, and superiorities were frequently bought and sold as investments. The system was also used as a form of development control, so that the grant of land by a superior would typically contain many building conditions and restrictions on the use of the land.

Source:http://www.scotland.gov.uk/library/documents1/lrpg07.htm

throughout Scotland. The Act is notable because, though Scotland has long been an industrialized part of the United Kingdom, prior to this act it still had land laws espousing the sentiment that all land was the dominion of the sovereign, who leased or granted it to present-day landowners.

Despite its status as a formal state, Scotland had essentially operated its land system in parallel with a more capitalistic system, passing non-feudal laws related to zoning, building codes, and other safety purposes.

Initially begun in 1997, these efforts were designed “to identify and assess proposals for land reform in rural Scotland, taking account of their cost, legislative and administrative implications and their likely impact on the social and economic 46

Ibid, 3.

PhilMUN 2007

16

development of rural communities and on the natural heritage.�47 The ultimate goal of the process is to ensure that the land is distributed fairly and equitably, in a manner that promotes sustainable economic development. The plan, formalized in 1999, transfers formal land ownership to tenants, while preserving spaces for national parks, protecting farm land from development, and maintaining the rights of land owners relative to the state. Scottish land reform, though aided by prevailing societal attitudes and conditions, reflects one of the most thought-out programs of decentralizing property, and has laid the groundwork for a balanced process. Moreover, a final government study there detailed a step-by-step progression of how to implement the land reform and identified critical issues that would remain undetermined, including the economic, social, and political impacts of the reform.

47

“Land Reform Policy Group,� http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Rural/Land/15618/8284, Accessed: 17 August.

PhilMUN 2007

17

Summary Land reform policies have been fluidly and drastically changing for the past halfcentury. While there have been major land reform successes in some countries, others have struggled.

Problems with land reform accumulate in countries with high

percentages of the population living in poverty.

These disparities in wealth leave

agricultural crises in states that rely on foreign aid to feed their starving.

An examination of land reform practices reveals that some countries focus on short-term processes that only benefit those who have power, failing to address long-term goals involving employment and opportunity for all citizens. In these countries, the international community has begun to assist in the formation of permanent, effective land reform policies that insure equitable distribution of land rather than the corrupted norms of the status quo.

For many African states, the high costs of purchasing land to redistribute to squatters and workers have kept governments from bringing their intentions into reality.

In response, some governments have codified a process in which they nullify the property rights of colonial landowners without compensation. While such methods require less capital investment on the part of a government, they negatively affect the attitudes of the former landowners and their sympathizers, leading to prolonged legal, and occasionally violent, disputes.

In aiming to correct income gaps and detrimental effects of colonial rule, states and the international community must carefully consider the unique societies and structures of the citizens whom the land reforms will affect. Even with increased fiscal assistance, programs need positive responses of those involved; without their embrace, the policy will have difficult prospects of success.

PhilMUN 2007

18

Discussion Questions • What have been the various historical rationales for land reform? What is the ultimate goal of land reform?

• At what point does the international community have an obligation to aid in the implementation of land reform?

• At what point does the international community have an obligation to prevent corrupt land reform practices?

• How can the responses of the international community, if and when it needs to step in, be most effective at meeting the goals of land reform?

• What factors in the status quo prevent effective land reforms? Can these barriers be broken?

• What cultural factors affect perceptions of land reform?

• To what extent should the rights of landowners who obtained deeds during periods of colonialism be respected in newly sovereign states?

PhilMUN 2007

19

Works Cited “Agrarian Reform: History,” The Columbia University Press: 1994, http://www.slider.com/enc/1000/agrarian_reform_History.htm, Accessed: 5 February 2004.

“As ECOSOC opens session, Annan urges global action on rural development,” United Nations News Center, 30 June 2003, Online, http://www.un.org/apps/news/storyAr.asp?NewsID=7575&Cr=ecosoc&Cr1=&Kw 1=land+reform&Kw2=&Kw3= Ayinde, “History of Zimbabwe’s Land Reform,” Race and History News and Views, 12 August 2002, http://www.raceandhistory.com/cgibin/forum/webbbs_config.pl/noframes/read/771, Accessed: 11 February 2004.

“Bureau of African Affairs,” United States Department of State, Online, http://www.state.gov/p/af/ “Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme.” New Partnership for Africa’s Development. July 2003.

Crook, Jamie. “Promoting Peace and Economic Security in Rwanda Through Fair and Equitable Land Rights.” California Law Review, Vol. 94 Issue 5.

Dettlinger, Lindsay. “Cabinet Approves New Land Reform Plan.” The Namibian. 17 May 2006. Online, Lexis-Nexis. http://www.lexisnexis.com.

Department of Agricultural Economics, Montana State University, http://www2.montana.edu/lmyoung/glossary.htm#L, Accessed: 3 February 2004.

“Fast Facts,” United Nations Development Programme, April 2006.

Fast Track Land reform in Zimbabwe, http://www.hrw.org/reports/2002/zimbabwe/ZimLand0302-01.htm#P103_19190, Accessed: 5 March 2004.

Ghimire, Krishna B. Land Reform & Peasant Livelihoods. ITDG Publishing: 2001, London, England.

“History of Zimbabwe’s Land reform,” Race and History Forum, 12 August 2002, http://www.raceandhistory.com/cgibin/forum/webbbs_config.pl/noframes/read/771, Accessed: 3 February 2004.

PhilMUN 2007

20

“Impoverished Timor-Leste can still reach poverty-reducing goal, says UN report,” United Nations News Centre, 9 March 2006. Online, http://www.un.org/apps/news/storyAr.asp?NewsID=17744&Cr=Timor&Cr1=&K w1=land+reform&Kw2=&Kw3= Kansteiner, III, Walter H. Assistant Secretary for African Affairs. Testimony before the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations Subcommittee on African Affairs.

28 June 2001. Online, http://www.state.gov/p/af/rls/rm/2001/3949.htm LaFraniere, Sharon. “Tensions Simmer as Namibia Divides Its Farmland.” The New York Times. 25 December 2004. Online, Lexis-Nexis. http://www.lexisnexis.com.

“Land Reform Policy Group.” http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Rural/Land/15618/8284, Accessed: 17 August.

“More Squeeze Than Grab.” The Economist. 15 January 2004.

Odhiambo, Joseph. “Pledge to Redistribute Kenya Land.” BBC News Online. 22 August 2006. Online, http://news.bbc.co.uk Pelupessy, Wim and Ruerd Ruben, Agrarian Policies in Central America, St. Martin’s Press, Inc.: 2000, New York, New York.

“Poverty and Inequality in South Africa,” United Nations Development Programme, Online, http://www.undp.org.za/docs/poverty2.html Rosenberg, Matt T. “Berlin Conference of 1884 - 1885 to Divide Africa,” The Freeman Institute, http://www.freemaninstitute.com/RTGcolony.htm, Accessed: 25 February 2004.

“Southern Africa’s food crisis worsens, with over 14 million people now in need – UN,” United Nations News Center. 16 September 2002. Online, http://www.un.org/apps/news/storyAr.asp?NewsID=4718&Cr=Africa&Cr1=food &Kw1=land+reform&Kw2=&Kw3= “Talking like Mugabe.” The Economist. 14 September 2002. Online, Lexis Nexis. http://www.lexisnexis.com.

The Progress Report: Land Tenure and Land Policy. http://www.progress.org/land/landgd.htm, Accessed: 5 February 2004.

PhilMUN 2007

21

United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. “Land Reform.” www.unece.org/env/hs/wpla/docs/guidelines/glossary.html, Accessed: 1 February 2004.

Wily, Liz Alden. “Land Rights Reform and Governance in Africa.” United Nations Development Program. February 2006.