Ethnic Diversity in Eastern Africa: Opportunities and Challenges

A Political Economy of Land Reform in Kenya: the Limits and Possibilities of Resolving Persistent Ethnic Conflicts

A Political Economy of Land Reform in Kenya: the Limits and Possibilities of Resolving Persistent Ethnic Conflicts Nicholas O. Odoyo Introduction A high economic growth rate of 7 per cent per annum in the 1960s and the consequent social investments by the post-independence state in Kenya were underpinned by agrarian and land reform programmes that sought to redress historical injustices and consequently to restructure agrarian relations. Its limited success was due to the conjuncture of both external and internal factors. Internally, a nationalist consensus provided the glue of legitimacy to the state and facilitated the land reforms. This was reinforced by the international consensus on the necessity of state involvement in the economy as a vanguard of modernization. Recent events have however, shattered this legacy. In the context of a deepening agrarian crisis characterized by high unemployment and poverty rates, food shortages and persistent ethnic conflicts, questions have emerged as to the extent of success of the previous land reform program and the possibilities of inaugurating a new set of “second generation” land reform programmes. Underlying these calls is the recognition that land is still not only a critical source of livelihood for a large majority of Kenyans but is also a basis for ethnic identification and hence the multiple conflicts over access to and ownership of land. Pivotal events which have necessitated these questions include the 2008 post-election violence in Kenya and the increasing pervasiveness of a militia culture in both the rural and urban centres. This paper will seek to examine the political economy of land reform and describe the shifting priorities of the state in response to new global market opportunities. In other words, what does the present configuration of socio-political forces portend for the possibilities of resolving ethnic conflicts over land as a basis for revitalizing economic growth, creating jobs and new livelihood opportunities through land reform? land reform in kenya 201 202 ETHNIC DIVERSITY IN EASTERN AFRICA Land policy in Kenya: A short history British imperial ambitions engendered a process of violent enclosures beginning in the 1890s in which large swathes of highly fertile land covering 8 million acres were carved out from the native land. On December 13 1899, the British Crown, under its Foreign JurisdictionAct 1890 declared all “waste and unoccupied land in the protectorate where there was no settled form of government and where land had not been appropriated to the local sovereign or to local individuals” free for its disposal. These were henceforth declared Crown lands under the Crown Land Ordinances in 1902 and 1915. The designation ‘Crown land’ referred to all public lands in the East African protectorate. The consequences of these legal enactments were threefold. One, the relocation of ultimate ownership of land to the imperial Crown. All land allocations would be done at the behest of the state and the natives would assume the role of tenants at the will of the Crown. Two, the establishment and evolution of an agrarian capitalist economy spawned a series of labor laws, tenancy laws, vagrancy laws and identification mechanisms (kipande, ethnic stereotyping) to facilitate the exploitation of labour and hence guarantee the profitability and viability of the agrarian capitalist economy. Lastly, the emergence of a white settler class controlling both 8 million acres of fertile land and relevant state institutions. Meanwhile, the native reserves were developing increased land pressure. By the 1920s, out-migration was a marked feature of the Kikuyu reserves. Some of the complaints included decreased soil fertility, low food production, sub-economic parcelization and inheritance disputes. Political agitations had begun. By the 1940s about 100,000 Kikuyu were already settled in the Rift Valley. These were either farm labourers or squatters awaiting the possibility of more land resettlements. By the 1950s, the Mau Mau rebellion had crystallized into an agrarian movement which precipitated the Lancaster House independence talks. In the course of these talks, it was agreed among both the colonial administration and the smallholder Kikuyu agrarian middle classes that enjoyed colonial state privileges that land would be set aside for the resettlement of all landless people in order to assuage the land hunger that was capable of threatening the post-independence economy. Post-independence land reform The “Land Question” was a central factor in the negotiations for independence in Kenya. This is because of the uneven development experiences of different ethnic communities in the colonial agrarian capitalist economy. This situation crystallized two...