Agrarian Reform in Ecuador: An Evaluation of past Efforts and the Development of a New Approach

Abstract

* The authors previously served as assistant director for economic development and economic adviser, respectively, USAID mission to Ecuador. This paper is based in part upon a longer study prepared for AID's Spring Review of Land Reform in June 1970 (Charles Blankstein, Clarence Zuvekas, Jr., Alfonso Avil6s, and Jack Nixon, Land Reform in Spring Review Country Paper [Washington, D.C.: U.S. Agency for International Development, June 1970]). The authors have benefited considerably from discussions with Alfonso Avil6s, formerly with USAID/Ecuador and the Banco Central del Carlos Camacho of IICA/Turrialba, and Lewis Townsend and Pablo Maldonado of CLUSA/Ecuador. Professor William Thiesenhusen of the University of Wisconsin Land Tenure Center (LTC) has provided a number of valuable comments, both on the Spring Review document and on an earlier draft of this paper. Professor Peter Dorner of the LTC made a number of useful suggestions during the development of the land-sale guaranty project described below. We have also benefited from the comments of Professor Dwight B. Heath. Any remaining errors are the responsibility of the authors, whose views as expressed in this paper should in no way be interpreted as representing the official position of the U.S. government. 1 A detailed discussion of colonization as an alternative or complement to agrarian reform is beyond the scope of this paper. An argument for placing strong emphasis on colonization in Ecuador has been made by Anthony Bottomley (see Agricultural Employment Policy in Developing Countries: The Case of Ecuador, Inter-American Economic Affairs 20 [Spring 1966]: 53-79; and Programa de ingresos para la agricultura del Ecuador, Trimestre econdmico 33 [Julio-Septiembre 1966]: 403-21). But the problems that have attended colonization efforts thus far in Ecuador suggest that Bottomley has underestimated the costs and administrative difficulties of such efforts.