Land Distribution Patterns Research Articles

Land Inequality and Political Violence

Considerable research effort has been invested in establishing the appropriate relationship between patterns of land distribution and political violence. In an article in the June 1988 issue of the Review, Manus I. Midlarsky proposed and tested a new measure of the distribution of land, which he called “patterned inequality.” He presented supporting evidence with data from Latin American and Middle Eastern countries. In this controversy, Midlarsky's analysis is challenged by Edward N. Mutter, Mitchell A. Seligson, and Hung-der Fu. They advocate an alternative measure of land inequality, test its effect on levels of political violence in Latin America, and find it wanting. In his rejoinder, Midlarsky offers new analytical support for his claims.

Entropy and Demography

A socio-physical theory describing the land distribution patterns of a system in demographic equilibrium is developed in this article.

Political incorporation versus political stability: The case of the Chilean agrarian reform, 1965–70∗

Summary The thesis of this article is that the relationships often assumed to hold between political integration and political stability are subject to numerous conditions. After distinguishing and redefining processes of ‘integration’ and ‘incorporation’, the argument subordinates the relationship between these and the maintenance of political stability to the pattern of class conflict and class alliance in a society. On this basis it is claimed that the Chilean Agrarian Reform under Frei, as a process of both incorporation and integration, created unstable conditions in the society, despite the relatively small changes in the pattern of land distribution; had structural change been more profound in the countryside, greater instability would have ensued even sooner.

Patterns of Land Holding and Land Distribution in the Ife Division of Western Nigeria

The Pattern of Land HoldingThe holding of land in the Ife Division is governed by a multiplicity of arrangements. Some ‘own’ land in the ordinary sense of the term; some enjoy unrestricted rights over property which in fact belongs to the ebi and not to the individual; and others again hold by leases or grants which permit cultivation under a host of different conditions. A listing based on legal and conventional norms would consequently run to considerable length, and the sheer number of discernible types may well bewilder rather than clarify.