AS we continue to discuss about land reforms, we move to the Middle East, particularly Iran and Iraq.
When Iran, formally known as Persia until 1935, gained independence from Britain, a significant land reform took place during the ‘White Revolution’.
Iran’s revolution was launched in 1963 and lasted until 1979, when another revolution overthrew the Shah and turned Iran into an Islamic republic.
A minor industrial revolution occurred during this period of reform whereby port facilities were improved, the Trans-Iranian Railway was expanded and the main roads connecting the capital city and provincial capitals were asphalted.
Many small factories, specialising in clothing, food processing, cement, tiles, paper and home appliances, opened up and larger factories for textiles, machine tools and car assembly were also developed.
Land reform, however, was the main focus of the White Revolution that witnessed rapid expansion of small landowners.
Nonetheless, the peasantry as a whole did not acquire land.
Roughly, half of the rural population received land and many of the beneficiaries did not receive adequate land on which to sustain themselves.
The Reform began in 1962 and continued until 1971 to become known as the White Revolution owing to its lack of bloodshed. It was intended as a non-violent regeneration of Iranian society through economic and social reforms.
It was agreed upon through a public referendum, as part of socio-economic reforms at a time the Iranian economy was not performing well, with the ultimate long-term aim of transforming Iran into a global economic and industrial power.
A land reform programme, the bulk of which was aimed at Iran’s peasantry, was initiated during the White Revolution, which amounted to a huge redistribution of land to rural peasants who previously had no possibility of owning land as most were poorly paid labourers, not unlike Zimbabwe.
As a result, nearly 90 percent of Iranian sharecroppers became landowners and, consequently, the traditional landed elite of Iran lost much of their influence and power.
Sharecropping, which has a long history, is a form of agriculture in which a landowner allows a tenant to use his land in return for a share of the crops produced on that portion of land.
There are a wide range of different situations and types of agreements that have used a form of the system.
Some are governed by tradition and others by law.
Initially, the White Revolution was mostly criticised by the clergy and the landlords who were angered by the land reforms because their land was bought by the Government and then sold in smaller plots to the people at a lower price.
They also did not appreciate the government undercutting their authority when it came to dealing with peasants or land labourers.
The Government bought land from the feudal landlords at what was considered to be a fair price and sold it to the peasants at 30 percent below the market value, with the loan being payable over 25 years at very low interest rates.
This made it possible for 1,5 million peasant families, who had once been little more than slaves, to own the lands that they had been cultivating all their lives.
Given that the average size of a peasant family was five, the land reform programme brought freedom to approximately nine million people, or 40 percent of Iran’s population.
The land reforms were marked by three distinct groups of land distribution; private, Government-owned and endowed land. These resulted in the newly-created peasant landowners owning six to seven million hectares or about 52-63 percent of Iran’s agricultural land.
The result; the rural population could be separated into three groups — prosperous farmers, consisting of former village headmen, bailiffs and some former landlords; small landowners, consisting of sharecroppers who received no more than 10ha of land and village labourers.
The first group was the only group to really benefit from the land reforms.
Most of the second group traded their land in for shares in state co-operatives.
The third group received no land at all; surviving as farm hands, labourers or shepherds.
Many migrated to urban centres in search of work.
With the land reform came the nationalisation of all water resources and the introduction of projects and policies in order to conserve and benefit from Iran’s limited water resources. Many dams were also constructed and reconstruction and development corps were developed to teach the villagers modern methods and techniques of farming and livestock husbandry.
As a result of these measures, the area of land under irrigation was increased from 2 million acres (8 000 km²), in 1968, to 5,6 million in 1977.
Agricultural production between 1964-1970 had increased by 80 percent in tonnage and 67 percent in value.
Forests and pasturelands were nationalised and other measures were introduced, not only to protect the national resources and stop the destruction of forests and pasturelands, but also to further develop and cultivate them.
More than 9 million trees were planted in 26 regions, creating 70 000 acres (280 km²) of ‘green belts’ around cities and on the borders of the major highways.
Although considerable land redistribution was undertaken, the amount of land received by individual peasants was not enough to meet most families’ basic needs, with approximately 75 percent of the peasant owners having less than seven hectares of land.
This amount was generally considered insufficient for anything but subsistence agriculture.
By 1979, a quarter of prime land was in disputed ownership and half of the productive land was in the hands of 200 000 absentee landlords.
The large land owners were able to retain the best land with the best access to fresh water and irrigation facilities.
Not only were the new peasant land holdings too small to be viable, the peasants also lacked quality irrigation system and sustained government support to enable them to develop their land to make a reasonable living.
By the late 1978, there was widespread dissatisfaction among Iranian farmers regarding land reforms that were meant to empower them.
Although the reforms turned many peasants into land-owners, they imposed on them costs such as taxes, purchase of seeds, water and equipment that they did not incur when they worked for landowners, at the same time removing services such as health and education provided for them by landlords under the traditional system.
This was in spite ofthe White Revolution contributing towards the economic and technological advancement of Iran.
Set against the economic boom from oil revenue, the land reforms did not improve life for the rural population where poverty remained the norm for the majority; with only a small group of the rural population experiencing an improvement in their welfare
Some of the failures of land reform programmes, as well as a strong antipathy towards the White Revolution from the clergy and the landed elite, ultimately contributed to the 1979 Iranian Revolution.
Dr Michelina Rudo Andreucci is a Zimbabwean-Italian researcher, industrial design consultant lecturer and specialist hospitality interior decorator. She is a published author in her field. For views and comments, email: linamanucci@gmail.com