Stock-Taking of Land Reform and Farm Restructuring Results of a World Bank-FAO policy research study David Sedik FAO

Why a Stocktaking? Country or regionPeriodDuration (years) Land transferred (million ha) Mexico Brazil Japan Korea Taiwan (Rep. of China) CEE countries CIS countries

Why a Stocktaking? Though land reform can be essential for rural growth and poverty alleviation, it does not seem to have lived up to its potential Production, yields, services declined, unemployment increased – did land reform contribute to this?

Four case studies Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Kazakhstan, Moldova How did reforms affect farm performance and rural well-being between farm types and across countries? Farm performance measured by growth in yields, productivity, and profitability Well-being measured by subjective perceptions

Sources of information and data Primary – Household surveys – Farm enterprise surveys – Focus groups – Key informant interviews – Semi-structured interviews Secondary – Literature review – Official statistics – Data from other surveys and studies

Overview of presentation Selected comparative results – Agricultural production and land reform – Enabling environment for agriculture – Economic performance – Households’ perceptions on well-being and rural services – Households’ acceptance of land reform – Gender findings Policy implications

Overview of presentation Selected comparative results – Agricultural production and land reform – Enabling environment for agriculture – Economic performance – Households’ perceptions on well-being and rural services – Households’ acceptance of land reform – Gender findings Policy implications

Land reform not the reason for agricultural decline in the 1990s In all four countries, agricultural production and productivity began to – fall before land reform – grow after land reform

Moldova

Azerbaijan

Good enabling environment yet to be established in CIS countries

Yield and area growth drives recovery in Azerbaijan

Crop yield growth drives recovery in Kazakhstan

Crop yield and area growth drive recovery in Moldova

Individual farm crop yields equal to or higher in all CIS (official stats) Moldova Individual farms Corporate farms Azerbaijan Individual farms Corporate farms Kazakhstan Individual farms31920 Corporate farms13510

TFP and land productivity greater in family farms from sample NTFPLabor productivity Land productivity Moldova Family farms Corporate farms Azerbaijan Family farms652.37,8031,762 Corporate farms1513, Red italics indicate figures are statistically different at 20% or better level.

TFP and land productivity greater in family farms from sample NTFPLabor productivity Land productivity Kazakhstan Family farms Corporate farms Bulgaria Family farms Corporate farms Red italics indicate figures are statistically different at 20% or better level.

Rural HH subjective well-being: MD better than BG, but not as high as AZ or KZ BulgariaAzerbaijanKazakhMoldova Today Good Bad yr. change Better Worse Percent of households

High portion of income from farming in Moldova and Azerbaijan Portion of family income from agriculture

Rural public services deterioration worst in AZ, BG, improvements in MD, KZ 1. Scale from 0 to 100: 0=not available, 100=always available. 2. “Before” refers to the period before dismantling of collective/state farms. AzerbaijanMoldova Present level of household satisfaction 1) with service Before 2 TodayBefore 2 Today Electricity Gas Drinking water Telephone

Rural public services deterioration worst in AZ, BG, improvements in MD, KZ 1. Scale from 0 to 100: 0=not available, 100=always available. 2. “Before” refers to the period before dismantling of collective/state farms. KazakhstanBulgaria Present level of household satisfaction 1) with service Before 2 ) TodayBefore 2) Today Electricity Gas Drinking water Telephone

Land allocation resulting from land reforms is least widely accepted in Moldova % Percentage of households perceiving land allocation as fair

Land legislation is gender neutral but access to information, resources and power seems to disadvantage women In all four countries, female headed households – Use less land – Have lower perceived well-being – Rent out more land Qualitative interviews suggest that in all countries women as compared to men have – Less access to information and legal resources – Less access to agricultural equipment – More household responsibilities

Overview of presentation Selected comparative results – Agricultural production and land reform – Enabling environment for agriculture – Economic performance – Households’ perceptions on well-being and rural services – Households’ acceptance of land reform – Gender findings Policy implications

Implications for policy Ag production stable or grows after robust land reforms in MD, BG, AZ. This suggests that these reforms were beneficial. In CIS countries, individual sector yields equal to or higher than those in corporate farms. Land reform alone not sufficient to ensure better farm performance or better well being