Bridging the gap between land ownership and economic progress

Bridging the gap between land ownership and economic progress

• Unholy alliance forms around KMAL carcass

• Unpacking the cabinet talks stalemate

• Chanakira: the unlikely foot soldier for expropriation schemes

• A conversation on nation, nation state and nationalism

• Mbeki is victim of a culture he helped create

• Towards a new Africanm identity

• Where is Zimbabwe's Obama?

• Power sharing versus power transfer

• Business has role as change agent in Africa

• Interrogating Ownership in Africa

• Actors might change, but Zimbabwe plot stays same

• The world according to Mandela and Mugabe

• Mugabe needs incentives to reform, not sanctions

• The agenda for change post-Sharm El-Sheikh

• What is the meaning of independence?

• Has Mugabe's war bluster won it?

• Imperialism no threat to organised people

• Mugabe using language of xenophobes

• SA's BEE project intersects with xenophobia

• A Rainbow Nation without black

• A post-election conversation with Mugabe

• Doubts aside, Tsvangirai now best bet for a New Zimbabwe

• African mines remain theatres for foreign operators

• Mugabe's self-help constitutional order

• The New Zimbabwe is almost upon us

• Zimbabweans have spoken, and the message is in the detail

• Mugabe's re-election would be disaster for private enterprise

• Zimbabweans at the polls: the great debates

• Change cannot wait for Madhuku's post-election ambitions

• Voting for change in Zimbabwe

• Can an independent win in Zimbabwe? Yes he can!

• Makoni: puppet, Zanu PF agent or national hero?

• Who is behind Makoni? Please count me in!

• Obama v Billary Clinton: lessons for Africa

• If Zuma is corrupt, who isn't?

• Charamba gives civil service a very bad name

• Be the change that you want to see

• The paradox of African liberation and change

• Zimbabwe and the Jacob Zuma factor

• The EU-Africa relationship post-colonialism

• Beyond Lisbon: setting the African agenda

• Implications of Zuma winning ANC presidency

• Africa's enduring economic apartheid

• Does indigenisation threaten law of succession?

• Defining the role of the State in post-colonial Africa

• Mushore's ordeal and the Zimbabwe we want

• Does rule of law pose a threat to Africa?

• Capitalism may challenge the poor, but it gives them hope

By Mutumwa D. Mawere
(www.mmawere.com)
Posted to the web: 04/11/2008 01:47:22
AS WE search for the causes of Africa’s present condition, we have to accept that the complex interplay between ideology, populist and antagonistic politics, bad economics, corruption; knowledge, capital and execution gaps have all contributed to place the continent at the bottom of the human development ladder.

Land ownership is an issue of burning concern to many Africans. The issue is not only emotional but has been opportunistically used by politicians to cling to power. The colonial experience has regrettably shaped and largely distorted issues related to land ownership to the extent that post-colonial Africa is incapable of looking forward and investing in a land tenure system that can facilitate production efficiency and effectiveness.

Who does the land in Africa belong to? How should the land be owned? What rights to land should be conferred on the holder? Should land be treated like other assets in terms of negotiability and transferability?

There are many people irrespective of their station in life or education who subscribe to the proposition that land in Africa should be reserved to black people notwithstanding the implications on land value in a market that is structured on racial and not economic grounds.

To the extent that the colonial state appropriated land on racial grounds, it has not been possible in post-colonial Africa to escape from dealing with land reform outside the prism of race. The argument used during the colonial era, which has been inherited with minor variations, is that blacks by nature and practice are subsistence farmers and, therefore, could not have been prejudiced by the transfer of land to settlers who were predominantly commercial farmers.

After all, it is then asserted that the land so appropriated was not being used for economic purposes. Accordingly, using this line of thinking it could not argued rationally that the emergence of white commercial farming impacted negatively on black farm output.

Generally a commercial farmer has a different relationship to land than a subsistence farmer. In approaching the politically-charged issue of land reform, the majority of African elites that took over control of the post-colonial state have taken a view that the nationalisation of land and its subsequent transfer to landless peasants will in and out of itself lead to economic progress.

The colonial state was framed as a capitalist business model under which race became the first qualification for full market participation. With capitalism in retreat following the global financial crisis and socialism having been discredited as an ideology that can advance human progress, we should all be searching for a new kind of ideology that can help address African issues.

Against a backdrop of global system in turmoil, it would be convenient for African leaders to ignore the communiqué entitled: “Decision on Major Issues Concerning the Advancement of Rural Reform and Development” released by the Central Committee of China’s ruling Communist party on October 19, 2008.

This landmark decision comes 30 years after the launch of economic reforms that have dramatically changed the condition of China. In December 1978, under the leadership of Deng Xiaoping, the Chinese people invested in change and accepted that socialism had failed to deliver on the promise.

China experimented with communism and the results were not encouraging. For many Africans, the Chinese case study is more relevant, least because it has been traditional for African leaders in post–colonial Africa to flirt with socialism, in the search of a viable and appropriate economic model.

The recent reforms are meant to usher China into the next stage of its evolution into a fully functioning capitalist system. Thirty years ago, the Communist party liberated peasant farmers from collectivised farming imposed by Chairman Mao Zedong’s administration by allowing them to farm their plots for a profit.

However, the land remained under the ownership of the state with farmers being entitled to 30-year renewable leases. Like many African leaders, the Communist party under Chairman Mao was afraid of giving freehold title to citizens and trusted the state as a custodian of land.

After 30 years of experimenting with Adam Smith’s principles, the reforms have produced largely urban-based millionaires while condemning the rural folk to poverty. The obstacles preventing farmers from exchanging their land and building through consolidation viable land units for enhanced production have now been accepted as being responsible for suppressing productivity, incomes, and social mobility in the rural areas.

Even the Chinese communist party has now accepted that removing the obstacles would be a huge boost to the economy. At a time when the global capitalist financial architecture is being attacked, the Chinese have no intention of reversing the gains of economic reform and realise that introducing a proper market in agricultural land would go a long way towards reducing one of the remaining sources of social tensions and insecurity in the country.

Any system that captures the human spirit is likely to succeed. In the urban areas, the Chinese leaders understood that without conferring a bundle of property rights in relation to housing to citizens, it was unlikely that industrial development could have taken place. A decade ago, the housing market was privatised notwithstanding the fact that ownership of urban land is vested in the state. Citizens are permitted to trade on long leases.

The new Chinese plan will allow farmers to lease their contracted farmland or transfer their land use rights. There is also discussion of increasing the lease period beyond the current 30 years.

The discovery from experience by the Chinese leadership that there is a direct link between land tenure system and farm efficiency and productivity was inevitable but what is regrettable is that it has taken 30 years for it to be implemented, albeit, on a limited basis as farmers are still not allowed to mortgage their houses and land.

Will Africa learn from the Chinese experiences and avoid the costly mistakes of experimenting with ideologies that fail to capture the human spirit?

Mutumwa Mawere's weekly column is published on New Zimbabwe.com every Monday. You can contact him at: mmawere@global.co.za
JOIN THE DEBATE ON THIS ARTICLE ON THE NEWZIMBABWE.COM FORUMS
newsdesk@newzimbabwe.com