Editing Land reform (section)

==Motivation==
{{see also|Property redistribution}}
Land reform is a deeply political process<ref name="Boone, Catherine 2007"/><ref>{{cite book |last1=Manji |first1=Ambreena S. |title=The Politics of Land Reform in Africa: From Communal Tenure to Free Markets |date=2006 |publisher=Zed Books |isbn=978-1-84277-495-3 }}{{pn|date=January 2025}}</ref> and therefore many arguments for and against it have emerged. These arguments vary tremendously over time and place. In the twentieth century, many land reforms emerged from a particular political ideology, such as communism or socialism. In the 19th century in colonized states, a colonial government may have changed the laws dictating land ownership to better consolidate political power or to support its colonial economy.<ref>Berry, Sata. "Debating the land question in Africa." Johns Hopkins University. N.d. {{cite web |url=http://www.unc.edu/~wwolford/Geography160/saraberry.pdf |title=Archived copy |access-date=2010-12-02 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120113212159/http://www.unc.edu/~wwolford/Geography160/saraberry.pdf |archive-date=2012-01-13 }}</ref> In more recent times, electoral mobilization and the use of land as a patronage resource have been proposed as possible motivations for land reform efforts, such as the extensive redistributive land reforms of Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Boone |first1=Catherine |last2=Kriger |first2=Norma |title=Multiparty elections and land patronage: Zimbabwe and Côte d'Ivoire |journal=Commonwealth & Comparative Politics |date=April 2010 |volume=48 |issue=2 |pages=173–202 |doi=10.1080/14662041003672502 }}</ref>

===Arguments for===
Arguments in support of land reform focus on its potential social and economic benefits, particularly in [[developing countries]], that may emerge from reforms focused on greater land formalization. Such benefits may include eradicating food insecurity and alleviating rural poverty.<ref>Meinzen-Dick, Ruth, Markelova, Helen and Moore, Kelsey. "The Role of Collective Action and Property Rights in Climate Change Strategies." International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), 2010. and Economic Commission for Africa. "Land Tenure Systems and their Impacts on [[Food security]] and Sustainable Development in Africa." 2009.</ref>

{{rquote|right|And the great owners, who must lose their land in an upheaval, the great owners with access to history, with eyes to read history and to know the great fact: when property accumulates in too few hands it is taken away. And that companion fact: when a majority of the people are hungry and cold they will take by force what they need. And the little screaming fact that sounds through all history: repression works only to strengthen and knit the repressed.| ''[[The Grapes of Wrath]]''<ref>''[[The Grapes of Wrath]]'', by [[John Steinbeck]], Penguin, 2006, 0143039431, pg 238</ref>}}

Arguments in support of such reforms gained particular momentum after the publication of ''The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Everywhere Else'' by Peruvian economist [[Hernando de Soto (economist)|Hernando de Soto]] in 2000. The poor, he argues, are often unable to secure formal property rights, such as land titles, to the land on which they live or farm because of poor governance, corruption and/or overly complex bureaucracies. Without land titles or other formal documentation of their land assets, they are less able to access formal credit. Political and legal reforms within countries, according to de Soto, will help to include the poor in formal legal and economic systems, increase the poor's ability to access credit and contribute to economic growth and poverty reduction.<ref>De Soto, Hernando. ''The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Everywhere Else''. New York: Basic Books. 2000.</ref>

Many international development organizations and bilateral and multilateral donors, such as the World Bank, have embraced de Soto's ideas, or similar ideas, about the benefits of greater formalized land rights.<ref>Deininger, Klaus W. ''Land Policies for Growth and Poverty Reduction''. The World Bank. 2003. [https://books.google.com/books?id=-3HWZigoZDMC]</ref> This has translated into a number of development programs that work with governments and civil society organizations to initiate and implement land reforms.<ref>World Bank. "Regional Study on Land Administration, Land Markets, and Collateralized Lending." 2003. [http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTEAPREGTOPRURDEV/Resources/573691-1141228934263/2280904-1153493824735/RegionalStudyonLand+Administration.pdf]</ref> Evidence to support the economic and pro-poor benefits of increased formalized land rights are still inconclusive according to some critics (see "Arguments against land reform" below).

Other arguments in support of land reform point to the need to alleviate conflicting land laws, particularly in former colonies, where formal and informal land systems may exist in tension with each other.<ref>Moore, Jina. "Africa's continental divide: land disputes." ''Christian Science Monitor''. January 30, 2010. [http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Africa/2010/0130/Africa-s-continental-divide-land-disputes]</ref> Such conflicts can make marginalized groups vulnerable to further exploitation.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Kafumbe |first1=Anthony Luyirika |title=Access to justice: Widows and the institutions regulating succession to property in Uganda |journal=Human Rights Review |date=July 2006 |volume=7 |issue=4 |pages=100–113 |doi=10.1007/s12142-006-1005-8 }}</ref> For example, in many countries in Africa with conflicting land laws, AIDS stigmatization has led to an increasing number of AIDS widows being kicked off marital land by in-laws.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Ambasa-Shisanya |first1=Constance |title=Widowhood in the era of HIV/AIDS: A case study of Slaya District, Kenya |journal=SAHARA-J: Journal of Social Aspects of HIV/AIDS |date=August 2007 |volume=4 |issue=2 |pages=606–615 |doi=10.1080/17290376.2007.9724882 |doi-access=free |pmid=18071612 }}</ref> While the woman may have both customary and statutory rights to the land, confusion over which set of laws has primacy, or even a lack of knowledge of relevant laws, leave many AIDS widows at a significant disadvantage. Also, conflicting formal and informal land laws can also clog a country's legal system, making it prone to corruption.<ref>Tettey, Wisdom, B. Gebe and K. Ansah-Koi. "The Politics of Land and Land-related Conflicts in Ghana: A Summary." Land Policy Reform Project. Institute for Statistical, Social and Economic Research at the University of Ghana. 2008. [http://www.isser.org/images/stories/landproject/Summary%20POLITICS_OF_LAND_AND_LAND-RELATED_CONFLICTS%20-%20summary.pdf] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200307003730/http://www.isser.org/images/stories/landproject/Summary%20POLITICS_OF_LAND_AND_LAND-RELATED_CONFLICTS%20-%20summary.pdf|date=2020-03-07}}</ref>

Additional arguments for land reform focus on the potential [[environmental quality|environmental benefits]] of reform. For example, if reform leads to greater security of [[land owner]]ship, through either formal or informal means, then those that use the land will be better stewards of it.<ref>World Resources Institute. "The Wealth of the Poor: Managing Ecosystems to Fight Poverty." 2005. {{cite web |title=World Resources 2005 -- the Wealth of the Poor: Managing ecosystems to fight poverty &#124; World Resources Institute |url=http://archive.wri.org/publication_detail.cfm?pubid=4073 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110807172600/http://archive.wri.org/publication_detail.cfm?pubid=4073 |archive-date=2011-08-07 |access-date=2010-12-02}} and Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). "Land Tenure and Rural Development." FAO Land Tenure Studies No. 3. 2002. Accessed August 21, 2010. Available: [http://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/005/y4307E/y4307E00.pdf]{{dead link|date=December 2017|bot=InternetArchiveBot|fix-attempted=yes}}</ref>

Land reforms carried out in Japan, Taiwan and South Korea are credited with contributing to the industrial development. The equitable distribution of land led to increasing agricultural outputs, high rural purchasing power and social mobility.<ref>{{cite book |title=How Asia Works: Success and Failure in the World's Most Dynamic Region |date=2014 |publisher=Grove Press |isbn=9780802121325 |chapter=Land: The Triumph of Gardening}}</ref>

===Arguments against===
Many of the arguments in support of land reform speak to its potentially positive social and economic outcomes. Yet, as mentioned previously, land reform is an intensely political process.<ref name="Boone, Catherine 2007" /> Thus, many of those opposed to land reform are nervous as to the underlying motivations of those initiating the reform. For example, some may fear that they will be disadvantaged or victimized as a result of the reforms. Others may fear that they will lose out in the economic and political power struggles (especially in under developed countries) that underlie many land reforms.<ref>[http://www.economist.com/node/16703331 "A chance to improve how Kenya is run." ''The Economist''. July 29, 2010]</ref>

Other groups and individuals express concerns about land reforms focused on formalization of property rights. While the economic and social benefits of formalized land rights are often touted, some research suggests that such reforms are either ineffective or may cause further hardship or conflict.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Deagle |first1=Joanna Emily |title=Land Regularisation in Vidigal, Rio de Janeiro - Was de Soto right? |journal=Brasiliana: Journal for Brazilian Studies |date=23 March 2015 |volume=3 |issue=2 |pages=264–296 |doi=10.25160/bjbs.v3i2.19857 |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Musembi |first1=Celestine Nyamu |title=De Soto and Land Relations in Rural Africa: Breathing Life into Dead Theories about Property Rights |journal=Third World Quarterly |date=2007 |volume=28 |issue=8 |pages=1457–1478 |doi=10.1080/01436590701637334 |jstor=20455012 }}</ref>

Additional arguments against land reform focus on concerns over equity issues and potential [[elite capture]] of land, particularly in regards to reforms focused on greater land formalization. If improperly or inadequately implemented, critics worry that such reforms may further disadvantage marginalized groups such as indigenous communities or women.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Drimie |first1=S. |title=The impact of HIV/AIDS on land: case studies from Kenya, Lesotho and South Africa |journal=HSRC Review |date=18 May 2016 |volume=1 |issue=2 |pages=3 |hdl=20.500.11910/9657 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Varley |first1=Ann |title=Gender and Property Formalization: Conventional and Alternative Approaches |journal=World Development |date=October 2007 |volume=35 |issue=10 |pages=1739–1753 |doi=10.1016/j.worlddev.2007.06.005 }}</ref> These concerns also lead to questions about the institutional capacity of governments to implement land reforms as they are designed. Even if a country does have this capacity, critics worry that corruption and patrimonialism will lead to further [[elite capture]].<ref>{{cite book |title=Gender in Agriculture Sourcebook |date=2008 |publisher=World Bank Publications |isbn=978-0-8213-7588-4 }}{{pn|date=January 2025}}</ref>

In looking at more radical reforms, such as large-scale land redistribution, arguments against reform include concerns that redistributed land will not be used productively and that owners of expropriated land will not be compensated adequately or compensated at all. Zimbabwe, again, is a commonly cited example of the perils of such large-scale reforms, whereby land redistribution contributed to economic decline and increased food insecurity in the country.<ref>[http://www.economist.com/node/1201137?story_id=1201137 "From breadbasket to basket case." ''The Economist''. June 27, 2002]</ref> In cases where land reform has been enacted as part of [[socialism|socialist]] [[collectivization]], many of the arguments against collectivization more generally apply.