PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE

DATE DUE

DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2/05 «mama

 

)5

 

—

 

 

 

k.’rsazrr:;;tszg '2; ;¢:. .,.
Icarxlas " ‘;T "
€:J(13c{,CNTOH?¢fl45;k1§hLLfiK.-_- .

 

LAND NATIONALIZATIDN AS A REFORM MEASURE --
ITS IMPACT ON HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT IN THE
CROSS RIVER STATE OF NIGERIA

Onofiok Joshua Ekpo
UP 898
Masters Research (Plan B)
M.S.U.
Spring 1979

'11“; 3‘ z ‘
TITLE:- 193

0 Ho'.

 

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface ........................... i
Introduction ........................ 1
Land Tenure: Nigeria . a . I ............ ..'. . . . 2
Land Tenure Law 1962——Northern Nigeria . . ........ 4
Land Tenure in the Yoruba Provinces (West) ........ 6
The Ibo/Ibibio Land Tenure . .. .............. 8
Land Laws in Modern Nigeria ................. 12
‘ The Land Use Edict 1978 ............. .- .'. . . . 14
Land Reform ......................... 21
Land Reform Definition .................. 22
Significance of Land Reform ............... 23
Categories of Reform Measures .............. 25
MiId ................. . . . . ...... 26
Strong . . . . ...................... 27
Stringent. ........................ 28
The Egyptian Experiment ................... 28
The Indian Experiment .................... 30
. The Italian Experiment .' ......... ~ ......... 32
The Taiwan Experiment .................... 36
FederaI Government Efforts Toward Housing ...... . . . . 38
The Shortcomings . . . .- ............. . . . . 39
Housing PoIicy of the Cross River State Government ..... 40
The Shortcomings of the State PTan ............ 41
Recommendations . .. ..................... 42
ConcIusion ..... - ................... . 43
Biinography ........ > ................ 47

53

PREFALE

The intent and purpose of this paper was to identify the impacts
of Iand nationaTization as it woDId affect growth and deveTopment in the
Cross River State of Nigeria. It made it both necessary and desirabIe
for a systematic anaIysis of the Land Tenure Systems both past and
present. I have discussed the different systems during the anaIs of
our poIiticaI evqution; from a coIonized peOpTe to independence.

ConsiderabIe emphasis had been pIaced on growth and deveIopment
in the face of a Tand nationaIization poTicy. This poTicy stems from
my interpretation of The Land Use Decree 1978 which as a Land Reform
measure has not set the stage appropriate for the change.

I have aIso caITed attention to different countries of the worId
which at one time or another instituted Iand reforms in their efforts
to create a sociaT equaIity, economic deveIopment and growth. These
countries have operated with differing circumstances and systems which
for the most part may have been justifiabie. ATthough these circumstances
differed in their origins and depths, I have noticed that certain ele-
ments of Tand reform were not brought in to bear upon the Nigerian
situation and that what had been pIanned in good faith may not fquiTI
the promise that was Tong anticipated.

I have aiso set out to expTain how a poIicy of outright nationaTiza-
tion cannot foster growth in the private sector on which we have depended
for housing, etc. This study can therefore form the nucTeus of a series
of studies to truTy determine what needed to be done before Tand
nationaIization. MeanwhiTe the few suggestions contained in this study
are the resuIt of meaningfuI discussion with other Nigerians, research

for which I am directTy responsibTe.

Introduction

 

Land reform is a sociaI change which affects the Tives of farm peopTe
in underdeveIoped countries. It\is aiso an economic change affecting
farming in mainIy agricuIturaI countries. The scope of Iand reform is
wide because countries differ in their Iand systems, methods of farming,
pressures of popuTation, generaT economic TeveTs, and rates of growth.
It is because of these differences that it becomes difficuTt to bring
their differences together and find the common eIements that wiTI satis-
fy conditions in countries as diverse as Nigeria, Egypt, India, ItaTy
and BraziI.

Land NationaIization is one kind of reform and re-distribution of
Tand resources. Some think it is necessary for growth and deveTopment
but this is higth controversiaI. Reforms we know can be manifestations
of poTiticaT aims, nationaT independence, sociaI equaTity, and Tiberty.
Effects on agricuTturaI production and empioyment are aTso major aspects.

In the discussion which foTIows, it was found necessary to Took at
the tenuraI systems in Nigeria on a historicaT perspective, Tand tenure
systems of the North, the South, East and the West and to foIIow up with
trends which Ied to the promngation of the Land Use Edict of 1978.

With this genera] overview, attention was focussed on the impacts
of Iand nationaTization on growth and deveTopment with direct emphasis
on housing.

The probTem of housing shortage and the attendant eviTs of crime,
overcrowdiness, unsanitary conditions and much more are not new to the
Nigerian puinc. With the creation of new states foTIowing the 1967-

1970 civiI war, this probIem became too monstrous to handTe. The new

capitaIs were iii-prepared to absorb ;>e sweIIing'popuTation that surged
to them from the ruraI communities. Because of the diversity of our
peopIe and the varying degrees of economic as weII as sociaI awareness,
it was prudent to focus attention on the impacts of reform on the Cross
River State.

A Took at the foundations for change has been attem ted here and
efforts have not been spared to offer suggestions where such can aid in
the choice among various aTternatives that may in the future be considered.
It shouId be borne in mind that generaT reform had its roots in feudaIism
and that the most notabTe thing in history is that once property rights
were vested in society as individuaIs there was the beginning of the

industriaI revoTution, growth and deveIopment.

Land Tenure: Nigeria

 

Nigeria has a vast Tand area with a wide diversity of tribes. With
such a diversity there is bound to be cuIturaT patterns which feature
indigenous systems of Iand tenure. The TocaT Iaws and customs with respect
to Iand vary from pIace to pTace in certain particuIar detaiIs and in
some or aImost aIT cases these Taws are not written. In nearIy aTT tribes
untiI quite recentTy Iand beIonged to the community, the viTIage or the
famin. The individuaI had no cTaim except to as much famin Tand as
he coqu possibTy farm and this parceT reverted to the famin soon after
the tract is Ieft faIIOW-.AII members of the community, viTIage or famin
have an equaI right to the Tand but in every case the chief or the head
man of the viITage or famin has charge of the custody of Iand. Any
member of the community wouId normaTTy go to the headman to Todge his
request. The headman cannot dispose of the Tand aTI by himseTf. He

consuTts the erers who must give consent before a grant is made.

Although this gives a somewhat T: 52 agglomeration of people, the
family is the smallest social unit and comprises of a man, his wife or
wives, their children, their grown up sons and their wives plus children,
brothers and close cousins together with their wives and children. The
chief interest of the community or village in land is purely social and
political-~to maintain group solidarity.

The chief or headman of the community or village or head of the
family exercises a right of control over land as a trustee on behalf
of the particular group he represents and from him permission has to
be obtained before grants of land are made whether to members or to
strangers. Essentially grants to individual group members or strangers
leave the ultimate title in the family. No member of the community or
family to whom land has been allocated by the headman can make any im—
portant disposition of his allotment without the consent of such a head
or elders of the community. 8

However, where pressures of population, economics of sorts do per-\
mit individuals to own lands in their own right, as for example, they d
in Lagos, Abeokuta, Ibadan, Onitsha and Calabar, this has been due to
the importation of the English idea of land law wholly foreign to in-

igenous tenural system.

The explanation of the phenomenon of individual ownership is only
true in a broad sense. It might well have developed sooner than re-
corded because due to the pressures of population the process of social
change was already forcing a crude economic sense and subsistence
economy was already proving unequal to the new dmeands of an increas-
ingly complex society. (Elias: Nigerian Land Law and Custom, 1950,

pp. 92-95)

pI I

-4-

We do need to take care in apply. ; the word “ownership“ to the
complex scheme of relations between the Nigerian and the soil. Under
the customary law of tenure, there is no conception of land holding
comparable to the English idea of a fee simple absolute in possession.
Dr. Elias further asserts that "the average occupier has something
analogous to a possessory title which he, however enjoys in perpetuity
and which gives him powers of user and disposition scarcely distinguish-
able from those of an absolute free holder except that he cannot alien-
ate his holdings so as to divest himself and his family of the right to
ultimate title.” “ ‘ ft“'flr%

The genral picture throughout the length and breadth of the country
had been that of community ownership. Where changes have occurred, the
difference between customary law and community rights has been almost
negligible.

At this point it becomes very important that specific changes that
have secured be mentioned. The case that dominates most studies is the
Land Tenure Law of 1962.

Land Tenure Law 1962-—Northern Nigeria. After the attainment of

 

independence on the first of October 1960 it was considered necessary
to regulate the land law in Northern Nigeria and so in 1962, the Northern
Nigeria legislature passed the Land Tenure Law. The purpose was to re-
place the land and Native Rights Ordinance by a new law but nevertheless
to pressure the existing basic principles of that law while introducing
some modifications and improvements.

By virtue of the Land Tenure Law of 1962 as it has come to be known
all the lands in the northern states are declared to be native lands.

The control and disposition rests with the Minister of Lands for the

 

-5-

state who administers the land for th. good and benefit of the natives.
Under the law, the government recognizes the right of the individual
under customary law and merely acts as administrator for the lands.
Their basic duty is to maintain‘a general oversight of all dealings in
lands for the overall objective of preserving the land ensuring maximum
utilization for the common benefit of the population.

The greatest interest recognized and permitted by the Land Tenure
Law is a right of occupancy that is a title to the use and occupation
of land which is divided into two categories, statutory and customary.
Under this categorization, a statutory right of occupancy is a right
granted to a native or non-native under provisions of Section 6 of the
law. It is in effect similar to a leasehold interest under English law
being generally a grant for a specific number of years. A customary
right of occupancy is the title which a native or non-native community
occupying lands in accordance with the rules of native law and custom
has and which therefore is not limited in time. (Charles MacDowell:
Introduction to the Problems of Land Ownership in Northern Nigerha, 1966,
pp. 46-50).

Although there may be some exceptions to some provision of the law
yet the idea is that land belongs to the people thus emphasizing the
general communal concept. But by constituting a custodian in the person
of the Minister, the Land Tenure law at once sets the Statutory Rights
as superior to Customary Rights. It is these aspects in Sections 30 and
34 (3) which give the impression that the people of Northern Nigeria
through their representatives, have adopted the principles of land

nationalization.

m

 

-5-

It is therefore the intent of tn' paper to advance the assumption
that this is not the best development incentive to be applied to the
Cross River State of Nigeria.

\\
Land Tenure in the Yoruba Provinces (Westl

 

The effort here is to introduce an element in the tenural system
which ran through the country before the advent of the British admini-
strators. Even after the colonizers have settled in some major cities
there was some respect for tradition and customs of the people regard-
ing land.

It does not seem expedient to delve into the history of the Yorubas.
They along with the Hausas of the North, the Ibos of the East, form the
major tribal groups of Nigeria. Nowadays it may not be possible to find
any land which is absolutely unadministered. All land has come under
the administrative control of some chief or headman, mainly because it
has been found necessary for the progress of modern government to have
clearly marked boundaries, and in consequence the government in Nigeria
has determined what are to be the separate administrative areas, and
included all the land under one chief or another.

Natives of a group whose area contains some as yet unappropriated
land still have the right to go and take some of it, and make it their
family property. This, of course, has to be reported to the head chief
so that he can witness the acquisition. Non-natives whose characters
have been proven to be good can also ask the chief for a portion and the
chief, in consultation with other members of the chief's council, will
apportion the land to the stranger. His obligation to the family,
group or community is to obey local rules and become a loyal member

of the community. In Yoruba land the c ieftancy title is very respected

«.12..

-7-

and this entitles the holder to land belonging to his people. (H. L.
Ward Price: Land Tenure in the Yoruba Provinces, 1939, pp. 9-11)

The institution of family property is one of the corner stones of
customary land law. The rules as all the various systems of customary
law are largely uniform as to the incidents of this form of tenure
although the composition of the group making up the family differs from
place to place.

Yorubaland is divided into numerous units of various sizes: some
are still under the administration of the local heads or some minor
chiefs who acnieved the rank of Oba and still others under the Bales,
i.e. heads of towns. Under the ancient system almost each village was
a separate land owning unit.

Land used to be owned either by the gruop, the head chief who merely
used land to keep up his status and the products from land for the en-
tertainment of visitors or by families communally. Town land could be
granted to family members who were capable of farming or needed house ~
room. .

The system stipulated that once family land was alloted to individuals
it cannot be reclaimed unless misused. Thus the Yorubas had been used
to individual ownership of land despite the fact that most of the land
was regarded as communal property. Even with this individual ownership,
one had to show need for wanting a separate parcel from the family
holdings. A house site was considered an outright allocation and, of
course, virgin land could be given to another for absolute possession.
In either case, the land reverted back to family pool if upon the death
of the original allotee, surviving children take possession. Another

important point to make here is the amount of land one could take from

-8-

unappropriated land. There was respc L for others‘ needs and no self—
ish actions were condone . Land was also owned by religious cults or
societies and the leaders of such cults or societies automatically be-
came the caretakers. \\

As time went on there was a necessity to enter into mutual agree-
ments regarding boundaries (Ward-Price, p. 47). In the less metropolitan
areas land was still being regarded as a gift from nature and a source
of livelihood. Sales of land was not a legitimate custom and even then
there was no rule against it.

Suddenly there was a general practice of taking a token fee for
the use of land which has evolved into outright sale and the institution
of private ownership of land. The point I have tried to put accross
is simply that land in the Yoruba provinces has originally been communal-
ly owned and that the family was, and of course is still, the final unit
in community sense where customary law has the leverage. With the
realization in recent years of the economic value of land, the growth
in population numbers and the establishment of growth poles and com-
mercial centers, these factors coupled with scarcity and non-renewability
of land resources have made private investment in land more lucrative

than ever before.

The Ibo/Ibibio Land Tenure

 

The Ibos as a tribe dominates what used to be Eastern Nigeria until
1967 when that region was partitioned to form the initial South Eastern
now Cross River State, East Central State presently re-grouped into Ino
and Anambra States, and the River State.

Although culturally the different groups differ in many ways, the
system of tenure in land seemed to have been primarily the same. So

that in describing the land tenure system of the Ibos I will be rightly

-9-

describing the same system for both tae Ijaws, Ogonis,and Kalabaris of
the River State; the Efiks, Ibibios, Anangs, Umons or Ogojas of the
Cross River State as well as the Ngwas, Onitshas, Owerri and Abakaliki
communities of the East Central‘State.

The Ibo system of land tenure is based on three cardinal principles:
“that the land ultimately belongs to the community and cannot be alien—
ated from it without consent; that within the community the individual
shall have security of tenure for the land he requires for his compound,
his gardens, and his farms; and that no member of the community shall be
without land.” (Jones, G. I.: ”Ibo Land Tenure“, AEBICA, Vol. XIX, No. 4,
October 1949, pp. 309-323)

Most of what Ward-Price said of the Yorubas is generally applicable
to the majority of tribes in former Eastern Nigeria and particularly to
the Ibos. They are strong, independent-minded men.

Here in Iboland, land tenure system is a very important part of the
traditional societies. There is a number of groups and subgroups within
the Ibo society and certainly the communal aspect of land tenure does
not envisage a tribal delineation. The Ibo village exhibits most of
the common characteristics in a greater or lesser degree of deviation
from an average or typical situation. Tne basic social and political
groupings in Ibo society is the village and individuals belong to
families or kinship groupings. Land was basically divided into two
main categories. It should be mentioned though that the subgroups that
actually occupied and used the land owned use right to it. The two
categories mentioned are houseland and farmland. This is responsible
for the concentric zone most often found in most settlements. The inner

zone is houseland Where people live and grow trees and shade crops.

 

 

 

-19-

Farmland makes up the outer zone wher. ,eople farm but do not live.

Here they grow such staple food crops as casava, yams, etc. Village

land may be partitioned among members of the extended family. At each
level of society, land abandonedxthrough migration or death reverts

back to the next higher land holding unit.’ On household, the individual
householder is the owner and has the right to plant whatever crops he
wishes. While the larger community regulated the farmland the individual
rights were thus protected from seizure by other groups.

With the passage of time, the pressures of population, communally
owned lands began to shrink and society emerged into the consolidating
stage when sale of farmland was forbidden and included even transfers
within the land holding community. Finally there was the disintegrating
stage where practically all land has become houseland and any transfers,
of right of use was prohibited. (Jones, G. 1.: Africa, pp. 309-323)

In any case the family farmland becomes the joint property of the
sons upon the death of the family head and depending upon the number
of surviving male children this property can be partitioned among groups
of descendants of each of the original family head's wives where there
are male descendants living, be they children, grandchildren or great
grandchildren. It is apt to mention that polygymy is an accepted
practice not only among the Ibos but with other Nigerian tribes although
relgion seems to have limited this practiCe in certain cases.

As population increased with differential growth rates among the
extended families within a village and as vacant land is progressively
used up, the inheritance system insures an ever increasing degree of
fragmentation among the holdings accompanied by a corresponding re-
duction in the size of the land holding unit. (William P. Huth: Land

Tenure Center, University of Wisconsin, Madison, August 1969, pp. 50-60).

* -L.§...... ‘..

 

.3

A J.*-.-“AJ. g“ 4-.

Thus began the system of pledging land. A fee was agreed upon and
paid in the lump sum and the pledgee received the use of the land until
the pledgor redeemed the land by paying back the same amount. Use of
the land by the pledgee was thonght of as annual interest which is paid
by the pledgor for the use of the pledge money.

Mutual rights and obligations regarding redemption of the land
are heritable in perpetuity by the descendants of both parties. There
are other stipulations spelled out in the pledge but to be valid pledg-
ing of land must be carried out in front of witnesses to safeguard the
rights of both parties. As most pledgors may not redeem the land it is
generally assumed that a pledge far above the going rate amounts in fact

to a sale in Iboland. (Meek, C. K. “Ibo Law“ In E. Adamson Hoebel,

Jessee D. Jennings and Elmer R. Smith (eds.) Readings in Anthropology.

 

New York, McGraw-Hill Co., Inc. 1955, pp. 234-248.)

Mr. M. M. Green writing about the various tenure on which land came
to be held concluded that with only one exception land can only be owned
by right of inheritance. The exception is that land hEId on pledge from one
generation to another and unclaimed until all evidence of its original
provenance is lost, comes to be looked on as the property of the heir
or heirs of the man who originally obtained it on pledge. Apart from
this, the oWnership of land is based on ancestral rights. He was infact
giving an account of tenure system in Umueke Agbaja (M. M. Green: Lgnd

Tenure in Ibo Village, p. 6).

 

Generally speaking, land in this village was not communally owned
by any group either as large unit, the village or village group. It
normally being divided up into small kinship numbers, members of an

extended family. There is in some places the merging of a system of

-m

 

 

-12-

land holdings with the changes taking fiace currently in political and
socio-economic awareness. The general trend is more inclined towards
an extension of individual rights.

Although the totality of land tenure systems in this region would
not apply in all sections of former Eastern Nigeria yet it can be said
very sweepingly that land right by inheritance is common among the people.
In the Cross River State a similar situation applies where houseland is
owned in perpetuity and farmland is generally allocated to members of
the family, group or village by the family head. Also in the farm land,
the palm trees which form the main cash crop of a permanent nature can
be harvested by any member of the family on family land or villager in
the village holdings. In case the need arises in the family or village
to raise money for a common cause like fighting a court case it becomes
illegal for any person to enter upon the community land to cut palm
fruits. A certain time is set aside in the fruiting period and at the
end of this period all males are required to pay a certain amount of
money to participate in the harvest, otherwise each cutter is expected
to give an amount in palm oil varying from 1 tin (4 gallons) to 3 tins.

The palm kernels belong to the wife or wives of participating husbands.

,,fiLand Laws in Modern Nigeria

\

That strict native law and custom forbade the sale of land there
can be no doubt. Land was to be maintained intact for future generations.
It was considered to belong to the past, the present and the future.
Aiding this sentiment were the somewhat practical reasons that land
sale was unknown because there was no scarcity of land and consequent-
ly no exchange value. Until comparatively recent times there was no

monetary medium of exchange under which land could command a price.

iii

 

-13-

Among the Ibos of Eastern Nigeria, th ;ale of land was in general con-
trary to customary law though land might have been transfered from one
group to another as a gift, or as compensation for wrongful acts.

The position is very different today and sales and other forms of
alienation for value are commonplace. This_change has been attributed
WEI . 9f Europeans—and—theJmportati on _of_the'tr_ideas

QEQ.flQLiQfl§- Another_factor could have been the rise of the money econo:

my, the growth of cash crops and the pressue of an increased population--

The effect of this attitude was first felt in Lagos and spread gradual-
ly to territories in close proximity to it until the entire country
became subservient to the idea. This can be seen as a national conse-
quence to the rise of trade and commerce and the development of a money
economy. In any case the earlier reasons for selling land was to raise
money to pay family depbts. Yet in all this there were certain restric-

tions on the landowner. There were prohibitions against alienating land

- to strangers unless anyone who wanted to settle was acceptable to the

village. Again this prohibition gradually broke down in many areas because
it came to be recognized that the larger the number of non—natives that
can be attracted to buy and settle in an area, the greater the trade and
prosperity that will come to the area. As early as 1932 there was to
be complete freedom within the then Western Nigeria and no Yoruba was
to be regarded as a stranger in any Yoruba speaking community (James:
1973, p. 180).

Under the Local Government Laws Native authorities ceased to exist
and these Local Government Councils had extensive powers of control both
direct and indirect over the use of land. .In parts of what used to be

Eastern Nigeria where "Alienation of Land Bye-laws“ still operate to

13.

-14-

regulate land transactions notice of any proposed transaction must be
given in public before the council, which may approve or withhold ap-
proval for good cause.

There have been the Native\Laws Acquisition Act to succeed the
Acquisition of Land by Aliens Law but the provisions of this act sets
out procedures to be followed before an alien can enter into land con-
tracts in Nigeria.

There has been a series of changes in the land tenure laws of Nigeria
with emphasis on the unification of the many law systems. There also have
been efforts of the courts to adapt customary laws to a changing society--
one path than has been tedious and many times unproductive pay of litigation.
Customary law sees land as a means to serve the needs of a subsistence
economy and a people whose attitUde to land is that it is a means of
fostering family and tribal solidarity. The received system of laws on
the other hand depicts the feudal origin and the fact that it developed
to express goals of a philosophy of individualism and competition. With
the growing conflict, the tendency has been for more and more land to
be transferred out of the customary into the received system and for
customary law to take on the trappings of the latter. Land attitudes
in the face of the resultant changes have accordingly undergone tremen-
dous metamorphosis. The possible and probable solution to the land
tenure problem in Nigeria will undoubtedly start with a “systematic

adjudication," ”demarcation” and ”registration.” (Ibid, p. 275).

The Land Use Edict 1978

 

The right of government to acquire land is inherent in a democratic
society provided such acquisition is used for the good of the people.

It is therefore in pursuit of such fundamentals of government that the

. a

 

-15...

following tools are utilized.

Eminent domain

Police power

Power of Expenditure (spending power)
Property ownership (it *} ‘= ”'i‘f“v’ )
Taxation

However, this paper is concerned with land nationalization and its

effect on housing development. The Land Use Decree 1978 has various pro-
visions that employ the above tools, but it goes a little further in

section 34 subsections 5 to 9 where it states

(5) Where on the commencement of this Decree the land is
undeveloped, then--

(a) one plot or portion of the land not exceeding half hec—
tare in area shall subject to subsection (6) below, continue
to be held by the person in whom the land was so vested as if
the holder of the land was the person of a statutory right of
occupancy granted by the Military Governor in respect of the
plot or portion as aforesaid under this Decree; and

(b) all the rights formerly vested in the holder in respect
of the excess of the land shall on the commencement of this
Decree by extinguished and the excess of the land shall be
taken over by the Military Governor and administered as pro-
vided in this Decree.

(6) Paragraph (a) of subsection (5) above shall not apply
in the case of any person who was on the commencement of this
Decree also the holder of any undeveloped land elsewhere in
any urban area in the State and in respect of such a person
all his holdings of undeveloped land in any urban area in the
State shall be considered together and out of the undeveloped
land so considered together—-

(a) one plot or portion not exceeding 8 hectare in area shall
continue to be held by such a person as if a right of occupancy
had been granted to him by the Military Governor in respect of
that plot or portion; and

(b) the remainder of the land (so considered together) in
excess of 8 hectare shall be taken over by the Military Governor
and administered in accordance with this Decree and the rights
formerly vested in the holder in respect of such land shall be

extinguished.

l 3

-16..

(7) No land to which subsectir' {5) (a) or (6) above applies
held by any person shall be further subdivided or laid out in
plots and no such land shall be transferred to any person ex—
cept with the prior consent in writing of the Military Governor.

(8) Any instrument purporting to transfer any undeveloped
land in contravention of subsection (7) above shall be void
and of no effect whatsoever in law and any part to any such
instrument shall be guilty of an offence and liable on con-
viction to imprisonment for one year or a fine of N=5,000.

(9) In relation to land to which subsection (5) (a) or (6) (a)
applies there shall be issued by the Military Governor on appli-
cation therefor in the prescribed form a certificate of occupancy
if the Military Governor is satisfied that the land was immediate-
ly before the commencement of this Decree vested in that person.
Essentially the section of the decree which directly purports to nation-

alization of land refers specifically to urban land. In a sense and
planning context, the definition of urban excludes farming as an inte—
grated activity within the confines of an urban area, so that growth in
this sector automatically means institutional embracing social, cultural,
economic, legal, political, artifacts and scientific components.

It is essential that we recognize the implications of the provisions
of section 34. It sets a precedent--a nationalization policy that stiffles
the traditional institution of land ownership by private individuals
SOUth of the country and imposes upon this society the Land Tenure Law
of Northern Nigeria--a society that for years has thrived and grown upon
private ownership of land to meet its development needs.

It is also pertinent to assume at this point that despite the fact
that state lands do exist in most of the major towns of the Cross River
State, that pockets of family land also exist in these towns within the
city or town core which might have passed to individual members of some
family unit. Let us assume also that some of these plots have not been

developed in the sense that standard housing units have not been erected

there upon. This phenomenon exists all over the city of Calabar, capital

: ID

(LID

of the Cross River State.

It should be recognized too that housing development has been exclu-
sively undertaken by theprivate sector; this notion is confirmed in the
Third National Development Plan‘i975-198O which states

The Government has traditionally tended to leave the field

(housing) almost wholly to private effort, restricting itself

to the provision of a limited number of residential quarters

for its workers. . . . Until very recently the government did

not explicitly accept any social responsibility for producing

houses for the masses and therefore did not deem it necessary

to participate actively in mass housing programs. (Third

National Development Plan 1975-80, Vol. 1, p. 308).

The much orchestrated Staff Housing Loans Schemes, housing corporation, .
credit unions, etc. are plagued with problems and bottlenecks and make

it increasingly difficult for the private sector to meet the increasing
housing demand occassioned by rural-urban migration.

Therefore, restricting the amount of land available for private pur-
chase, lease or inheritance further reduces the incentive for private
participation. Nationalization therefore does not offer the best alter-
native solution to the acute problem that confronts the Cross River State,
infact all of the Southern states in their effort to provide standard
housing for the masses.

Conceptually the definition of Standard housing provides for adequate
living space, kitchen, bath, toilet, yard for kids to play, running water,
electricity, access to transportation, schools, etc. Some of these might
be considered luxuries, but they are necessities to ensure good health,
public morals and safety. There is need at this point to illustrate the
capacity to build in the Cross River State where a high percentage of its

reSidents are either underemployed or unemployed and where even the employed

live at the mercy of a few landlords.

-13-

TYPE OF SHELTE‘ 1ND COST

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hut Sub Std Minimum Basic Good Luxury Type Cost
it 1000 it 2000 it 4000 it 8000 it 1600 it 3200
Income/ -
Month \\
=N= 50
=N=100
Region -————*"
=N= 200 of
Aspira~ ,_-__...-——a:
tior
fi=400
=N=800
\
\\
\
\\
#- 1600 \\

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This chart is adapted from a lecture delivered by Dr. Paul Strassman,
Professor, Department of Economics, M.S.U. on February 27, 1979.

Topic:

Classification

Cost of Housing

 

 

Hut:

Substandard:

 

Minimum:

Basic:

Good:

Luxury:

A very primitive shelter made from scraps of boards, mat,
roofing iron sheets, leaves, etc. Internal dimension vary
with need but generally lacks all the facilities for a healthy
living.

Made of mud and wattle and roofed with leaves (mat) no adequate
ventilation, room size very small: often using open pit
latrine.

Same materials as substandard but provides space for food
storage and larger room size. Ventilation is still poor.

Corregated iron roofing, minimimum size (10x12) rooms for
living, dry pail toilet system, no electricity, no tap water.

Good location, ventilation with water and light-~toilet may
be water system, open surroundings and recreation.

Ampled room size with all amenities for modern living.
Esthetically gradios and imposing.

_—-.—'-~

l

C?

-19-

I shall assume also that the mec'.n cost of a basic home lies around
8000 naira (not based on any statistics) although not very far from being
the truth when one considers what is regarded as basic, i.e. without the
luxutry of running water or electricity and consisting of 2 bedrooms, a
sitting room, kitchen and toilet (dry pail system).

It means speCifially that for a basic house one has to be in the
400 nair per month bracket. This is the starting point for an employeed
with a Master's degree. Below this level the possibility of acquiring a
decent accommodation is perhaps bleak and nonexistent for the low income
(N=100 - 200). We may fantasize by asking the question how many people
fall within these categories. The answer is, very many people. How will
the land nationalization policy cater for the welfare of these people.
Once again the answer hangs in the air. Yet, we can assume too that the
policy was intended to better the living conditions of these people--to
redistribute land so that these people can own their homes. It should
be noted that the quote assumed cost does not include cost of land and/or
improvements like streets, pavings, light, water, sewer and refuse dis—
posal except in designated areas meant to be showcase projects for high
government officials.

Critically enough the government or infact any agency cannot provide
housing for the low income of 50 naira per month worker. But somehow he
is an important member of the society and has to be protected from the sun
and rain, from other natural and manmade elements which are increasingly
becoming part of our environment. He might have been lucky to own, by
inheritance, a parcel of land in an urban area which he presumably intended
to lease or sell to a willing buyer in order to erect a home in his sub-

urban lot, but because this willing buyer has already gotten more than

.-7.4 7", _\

-23—

8 hectare in undeveloped plots and be;ruse the law prohibits the transfer
of any land in excess of 8 hectare (undeveloped) our low income friend is
to spend the rest of his life without land and without a home. I am not
so sure of the degree of bitterness this Land nationalization policy can
generate, but I am sure that not many people will like to lose their
holdings for a compensation that is computed arbitrarily low.

0n 'Uue other hand assuming that the land is taken over by the govern-
ment and leased to a willing allottee; he builds with intent to sublet and
fixes rents to recover his cost. There is no way he is going to let it
to someone who cannot pay him at the end of the month.

The intent of this paper is not to go into the cost of providing
housing throughout the Cross River State but to stress the impact of
land nationalization policy on the development of the state housing
market.

Housing in Calabar is characterized by qualitative and quantitative
inadequacies. Housing quality implies something about the environmental
surroundings and physical characteristics which promote health, convenience
and the well-being of the occupants. Quality then being a subjective term
defies universal definition. Each individual has his own idea of quality
and the measure becomes even more difficult between climatic and geographic
areas as well as between rural and urban places. (Sheaver, 1972:41).

It whould be wrong to use without modification the criteria used in
evaluating houses in developed countries. As Chapin points out--there are
intricate factors in housing analysis. The important thing to bear in
mind is that for a structure to be called a house it should be able to
support its occupants as shelter, provide room for living, conveniences

and storage.

to

9
. I
i

’

Land Reform

 

Almost all known cases of land reform have been a revolutionary process
stemming mostly from peasant unrest, the change from colonial masterdom
to nationalism upon independence\or an appeacement exercise with the rise
and fall of governments seeking recognition or appreciation from where it
hopes to win votes and stay in power. In all these as we-shall come to
realize, there is no concensus on the degree of success or failure that
can be attributable to any one situation. Either because the machinery
of government was inept or that the whole process was hurriedly phased
without adequate studies conducted to come up with acceptable rationale
and mode. It might seem an unending experiment playing one social class
against the other without adequately weighing each case on its merits ‘
and demerits. To say that the Nigerian land decree lacks teeth will be
an oversimplification and shallow overgeneralization. The country¢h
emerged from colonial domination barely two decases ago and behind those
years of colonialism many systems of land tenure were operating: in the
north where statutory and customary laws held together and rich chief-
tains controlled land and power. In the south there was the communal
land with option of private ownership either through outright purchase,
lease or inheritance.

We are talking here about traditional values, traditional inStitu-
tions and traditional concepts. The Cross River State and indeed Eastern
Nigeria has never known anything like feudalism. Our social and economic
and cultural institutions have been based on free choice, individual com—
petitive society. This is the core of the matter and spells the dif-
ference between a class conscious society and one where status is measured

by indiviudal achievements. Nationalization is a far off deviation from

 

‘@

to

n... ..-_......._. .-.

r)

— L-

our tradition because progress can nc 7.nger be measured on free choice

and individual effort.

Land Reform Definition

 

Over half the world's population is dependent upon agriculture for
its subsistence. In various Asian and African nations, the subsistence
farming absorbs or engages well over 90% of the population and the problems
of these people are often that of poverty associated with low productivity
of rural fram holdings. Among these people, mass poverty is a recurring
problem and life is very much dependent on crude peasant farming, is punc-
tuated with such phenomena as tiny and fragmented holdings, primitive
dwellings, poor health and sanitary conditions, backward farming tech-
niques, high rents, etc. One of the most important influences which
affect rural living standards is the institutional framework of agricul-
ture. This includes land tenure systems, distribution of ownership of
property, the existence or non-existence of agricultural credit marketing
facilities, technical advice, education, health services. In countries
where land is privately owned, the very large and the very small properties
often exist side by side. When this situation exists there is a general
ill—feeling amongst the rural groups especially if the large farm owner
is an absentee landlord. It is not surprising therefore that agriatian
reform receives high priority among measures aimed at promoting economic
growth and social justice. However land reform is better treated in the
context of nation's cultural heritage and economic conditions.

Land reform has come to be a term of many meanings and it is appro-
priate to differentiate the concepts. In a broad technical sense any
program that leads to change presumably for the better in the manner in
which urban or ural land resources are held and used may be described

as land reform.

@

 

Within limits of common practice 1 pecially in purely agrarian
interpretation the usage of the term has been confined to programs designed
to bring improvements in agricultural economic institutions. This is the N)
sense in which it was used by the U.N. Department of Economics and Social
Affairs in 1951. I

Doreen Warriner, a noted authority on this subject, would rather ‘1’"!
have thETmEaning put differently. To her land reform means the redis-
tribution of property or rights in the land for the benefit of small
farmers and agricultural laborers.

Still others limit their definition to programs which identify with
radical measures such as expropriation of land holdings. Perhaps it would
be appropriate to go along with Johnson and Kristjavson who recommended
the use of three terms in order to eradicate the confusion. (Barlowe,
Raleigh. Land Resource Economics, 1972, p. 526). They suggested the terms,
1) Land distribution which would involve programs designed to either break
or combine existing land holdings. ‘

2) Land reform which would involve the rearrangement of ownership rights
and other institutions associated with land in the interests of the many
rather than the few.

3) Agrarian reform which would include overall improvements of rural life

and improved relationship of rural people to the land.

Significance of Land Reform

 

Two goals become prominent in any reform. One of these centers around
the improvement of the lot of the average land operator or worker while
the second emphasizes the possible contributions of reform measures to
national economic development. These are very sound policies when pr0per-

ly defined, especially in the rat race of trying to implement a rapid

A“

,

I
q
~

‘9'

C?

p
.
\

19

l C)

_24-

transition from a subsistence agrarian economy to a market economy in which
varying proportions of the gainfully employed within the population are
engaged in agriculture. This is the situation commonly found in the less
developed nations of the world.\\Frequently the rural people in these
countries are exploited by the large landowners who are capable of raising
capital needed for the kind of development that enables them to live in
luxury while the tenant or the landless live in poverty without a future.

Within the complex definitive structure, a combination of these
phenomena can be welded into a single approach to further make it more .
formidable. This is the Nigerian experiment.

A clear definition of land reform does not come easily because of
the diverse nature of the countries which institute them. Thus reform
may be seen in its historical perspective as a revolutionary reversal
of long term processes, or as a manifestation of political aims and social
equality. Effects are commonly focussed on agricultural production, in-
crease in incomes and employment. Again these definitions are either
circumvented or all embraced in the new Nigerian land edict.

It would appear that one of the implications of the reform in Nigeria
is the redistribution of property or rights in land for the benefit of
not only the farmers but the landless majority especially workers. Per-
haps it may suffice to assume an all embracing definition and treat all
else in this common context; that land reform is understood to mean any
improvement in the institution of land tenure or agricultural organiza-
tion.

There is perhaps nothing new in the land use decree of 1978 as far
as government powers to acquire land for public use is concerned, the clause

that makes it seem unusual and unfamiliar is the expropriation and

F

9

C}

Q)

-25-

redistribution clause. For one thing, it sets a limit as to how much land
the local government may allow for grazing or agriculture without stipula-
ting the procedures for a classification.

Section 6, subsection (2) readings in part

"no single customary right of occupancy shall be granted in respect

of an area of land in excess of 500 hectares if granted for agri-

cultural purposes, or 5000 hectares if granted for grazing purposes

except with the consent of the military governor.“

Although compensation is paid where land has been taken from a pre-
vious owner it should be remembered that land values vary according to
use capacity, accessibility, fertility and aesthetic amenities among other
things. It would seem that a uniform or blanket compensation is hereby
offered even if the land in excess of approved amount is marshland or rock
cropping or even stark barren or sandy.

The issue of classification of land to determine use has not been
carefully dealt with and one may nurture the impression that this was
a costly oversight. Secondly, the advocates of reform at this time have
not addressed themselves to mechanisms which may be employed to reclaim
wet lands and pUt them to use. Notwithstanding these flaws, there is no
evidence of a study to determine how much land may be expropriated and
consequently redistributed. The full realm of provisions necessary to
arouSe public awareness and make them receptive to the change have not

been incorporated into the policy. In the concluding chapter, efforts

will be made to draw up a catalog of these prerequisites.

Categories of Reform Measures

 

A broad range of land reform programs have been adopted in different
countries. Some of these programs involve single reform while others em-

brace combinations of reforms. Some provide for mild adjustments while

i9

. (.3

-25-

others are sweeping and strict in their effects.

A variety of mild reforms has been used in the more developed and
even in the less developed nations to secure a particular tenure objective.
In the United States, early\ordinances of 1785 and 1787 prescribed
a policy for surveying all public lands and offering them for sale to

settlers at nominal fee (Barlowe: Land Econ., 1972, p. 527).

Denmark emerged into real nationhood around the 1800's by granting
liberal long—term low interest loans for tenants. purchase of farms. They
also encouraged the formation of farmer cooperatives. In 1870, Great
Britain enacted the Landlord and Tenant Act which facilitated the purchase
by farm tenants of the lands they operated. Holland and Italy have carried
on large scale drainage and settlement schemes which have provided home.
sites for many operators. Some other mild reform measures include agri-
cultural extension programs, the development of reclamation projects, the

establishment of voluntary land consolidation commissions.

 

Mild. Here are some of the mild reforms that can be adopted
Land Surveys
Registration of Titles
Provision of Land Credit
Improved Landlord/Tenant Relationship
Land Settlement Programs
Land Drainage and Reclamation Programs
Still some nations adopt stringent land use policies in order to
weave a particular tenure system. West Germany and Holland use strict
regulatory process to determine what uses owners can make of their land.
During the World War II years, Great Britain, Switzerland had policies

that authorized local boards to evict ineffective land managers and

5

1C.

‘3

-27-

replaced them with ones capable of co~iributing more to the national food
production. Israel has for many years been encouraging farm settlements
and farming cooperatives. These cooperatives hold and work the land in
common. AThe farm settlement approach to agriculture was introduced to
Eastern Nigeria by the same people but it lasted for a few short years
before the war in 1967. Most have either been abandoned or converted into
agriculture extension centers.

In 1952 the United Arab Republic adopted an Agrarian Reform Law that
limited rents, if paid in cash to no more than seven times the real estate
tax and share rents to 50 percent of the crop. Agricultural rents were
limited to a maximum of 37.5 percent of the crop in Nationalist China in
1949. Some laws requiring sizeable reductions in farm rents have been
enacted both in Japan and in Pakistant. Some of these measures have been

classified as strong reform measures and they include:

 

Strong.

Rent Control and Reduction

Ceilings on Land Sales and Values

Ceilings on Areas Owned

Floors and Parcellation Sizes

Housing Susidies

Prescriptive Measures to Clear Titles

Controls Affecting Prospective Buyers

Land Consolidation Programs

The most far reaching reforms have called for the expropriation of

certain land holdings and their redistribution in smaller sized tracts. A
large program of this type was started in Mexico during the interwar years.
In Japan, India, Pakistan, Iran, Italy, Algeria, Kenya, Bolivia, Cuba

and the United Arab Republic measures of this magnitude have prevailed

’~

A.

i C!

.J

3V

-28-

since World War II. Compensation has ‘ven paid for most expropriated lands
in some of these countries but in the Iron Curtain countries, properties
of land holders have often been confiscated without compensation. Where
this confiscation has been the rule, the land was distributed to landless
workers and farmers. Forest and other non—farm holdings have been retained
in public ownership and estates with extensive bUilding improvements have
sometimes been retained as a unit to be used for educational, research
and cooperative purposes. Individual allotments of land have been generally
small and recipients are expected to pay nominal charges.
Stringent. These stringent measures include:
(i

) Public taking of private land without compensation.
(ii) Expropriation or confiscation of private holdings.
)

(iTT Land redistribution programs
(iv) Exploitive taxation measures. (Barlowe: Land Economics,
1972, pp. 528—29).
Fittingly enough at this point it is essential that a little compari-

son be made between countries that have instituted reforms and Nigeria.

The Egyptian Experiment

 

The Egyptian Agrarian Reform was made into law in 1952 with the ex-
pressed provisions to accomplish the following
(i) Limitation on ownership of agricultural land and expropria-
tion of certain land for distribution among small farmers
(ii) Establishment of agricultural cooperative organizations for
the farmers who acquired requisitioned land
(iii) Limitations on dividing agricultural land
(iv) Regulation of the landlord/tenant relationship

(v) Provisions in regard to the rights of agricultural laborers.

if.)

i k}

-29-

Before the reform, Egypt's patte : of land holding and use contributed
considerably to instability, insecurity and unrest. The problems included
unequal distribution of land ownership, small size farm units, fragmented
holdings, few owner operated farms, insecure farm tenancy, inadequate credit
facilities, a dysfunctional agricultural ladder and a rigid class economic,
social and tenure rankings. (Saad M. Garalla, 1962).

I would like to surmise here that the choice of Egypt for this com-
parison arose from the fact that Egypt like Nigeria thrives on agriculture
and that its population is growing at as fast a rate as is experienced in
Nigeria. While it does not fall within the confines of this paper to dwell
on the ramifications of Egyptian reform notions, a few things stand out

a) that Egyptian reform did not include urban land

b) government instituted land reclamation and improvement programs

aimed at increasing the supply of usable land

c) the public was informed of the need and necessity of the reform

through normal educational processes.

d) the Moslem rights or Islamic laws of inheritance are still observed

e) where individual holding was too small to support a family cooper-

atives were strictly advised in order to keep the family unit

f) there was a recognized need for change because not all families

owned land

9) leading members of the cooperatives were inducted into the admini-

strative machinery to spell local autonomy and participation

h) the reform reduced the incentive to education as most peasants

were able to own land.

In any case, redistributed land was not limitless and as soon as the
limit was exhausted and population was still growing, some peasants who

otherwise could have worked for large estate owners cfiscovered that they

’- -

" ; _

-33-

could neither work nor own farms. Th.< unemployment resulted especially
in the villages. Consequently the level of life within the villages went
back even worse than before the reform.

One may notice that traditienal institution of inheritance is still
upheld as was the case in the Cross River State before the reform; that
government has not instituted with the reform improvements on land in order
to stimulate agricultural growth and so cannot claim that nationalization

as envisaged will bring any greater yields in agricultural production in

‘areas designated as rural land; that because the Cross River State has all

along recognized traditional ownership by inheritance and that every man,
woman or child belongs to a family and has right to land, no person has

ever been landless. The national land use decree does not classify land

in terms of yield capacity, i.e. fertility, accessibility, aesthetic and
other endowments. The emphasis on redistribution seems only to affect lands
in urban areas where only the rich can afford to live. It is most likely
that the same people the law purports to dispossess will end up winning

the new allocations since they alone possess the capability to develop
within a fixed period of time.

The landlord/tenant relationship which gave rise to malcontent and
unrest in Egypt was a rural phenomenon whereas that relationship exists
in the urban areas where problems of high rent and overcrowding call for
adequate housing supply at a price workers, traders, businessmen and
laborers can afford. Thus the regulation of land holdings in the urban
scene inhibits the landlord's ability to expand on production of the

housing stock causing a shortage that ultimately drives rent prices up.

The Indian Experiment

 

The country of India was socially stratified by the caste system when

a class of pe0ple were held by another as subhumans. These subhumans had

r‘

LA.

\8

-31-

no rights and merely worked the farms for the enrichment of the landlords.
There was nothing that could be called a peasant movement among the patient
cultivating castes, though there was unrest. Here the agrarian policy was
an applied religion of Ghandi in\raising the level of the untouchables.
Another action that prompted the reform was nationalism and was directed
towards the abolition of Zamindari, a form of land tenure established
under the British rule and identified with it. Essentially land was a
main source of revenue because taxes were levied on estates. The aim of
the Indian reform was individual peasant ownership or land-to-the-tiller
because the middlemen or land owners often increased taxes arbitrarily
when assessing the laborers so as to reap high profits. There was a long
congressional fight to eliminate the intermediaries between the state and
the tiller. The reform however instituted cooperative farming and was set
out to accomplish the following:
1) the agrarian economy should provide an opportunity for the develop-
ment of the farmers personality;
2) There should be no sc0pe for exploitation of one class by another;
3) There should be maximum efficiency of production
4) The scheme of reforms should be within the realms of practicability.
The idea was thought to offer a properly determinelscheme of rights
in land that would satisfy the agrarian tradition and the agricultural
needs of the nation. Reclamation schemes were instituted and joint co-
operatives enforced by some degree of compulsion on farmers to join together
to form sizeable holdings. State farms were limited to research and the
landless were organized to farm on reclaimed and improved wasteland.

Although the aims were high and idealistic, much of what was accom-

plished fell far short of expectation.

l
1 .éfi.§

Kev

_ -32—

There was not a uniform definiti;r of “economic holding” and the poli-
tical process that created autonomy in the states often made laws very dif-
ficult of implementation.

The fundamental concept of‘the reform was to end the Zamindari or
middlemen and give status to tillers of the land while raising the status
of the castes. There is no aggreement on the efficiency of production
brought about as a result of the expropriation of the Zamindaries but it
is mentioned that wages in the villages had gone down and the ndmber of
wage-laborers had increased.

The general trend here does not hold much for comparison with land
nationalization in Nigeria because the caste system is foreign and
land taxation is executed in urban areas. The only lesson one can draw
from the Indian experience is that arbitrary taxation via middlemen was
abolished, whereas other vices were in the ascendancy due to regulatory

inconsistencies among states.

The Italian Exgeriment

 

Instead of movements involving land tenure changes of the convention—
al land reform types, Italian agricultural history is dominated by land
reclamation schemes, referred to as bonifica: The first national law on
bonifica was the Baccarini law of 1882, subsequently modified in 1923,
1927, and 1929 and then recast in the fundamental law of 1933. (King,
1973, p. 40). The process consisted of the coordinated execution of all
the works required to adapt the land and the water on it to such intensive
forms of production as will ensure work and higher social standards to a
dense rural population. Form this purely hydraulic measure it evolved into

most phases of land improvement. A fundamental distinction was drawn

A“)
6'24»;

- *w . .
-.__._._ _. -___._ r.-.__- V...
n — A. . ‘

 

‘."~'.?i“§.- INL‘..- -- - ‘---- - “‘4'. "i." "’ ‘ """' """‘ " ‘ ‘

between public and private bonifica s w:0€S, the former being carried out
by the states to include large planned resettlements on the newly trans-
formed territories, and the latter involving small regional associations

of private land owners who were\grouped together for the purpose of local
grant aided land improvement works. By 1936, one third of the country's
productive area was classified under the bonifica region. Already in 1911
the element of compulsion had been introduced into the legal texts although
the sanctions were not carried out. This howeverrmnnitexpropriation if

the required transformation works were not carried out.

Although the bonifica programme was extolled as a boon to the landless
peasants, the land reclamation schemes by themselves have offered little
land to the rural masses. Reasons for this was because (1) a large amount
of the expenditure on bonifica during the Fascist period was concentrated
in one area. (2) Investment in the south was considerably less than in
the North. (3) The Fascist government used the opportunity to carry out
enormous projects of publicity values so that conversion regardless of
cost of the famous Pontine Marshes within 70 kilometers of Rome to a model
agricultural colony of 3000 small farms cultivated by ex—soldiers only
served as advertisement for the regime.

The real Italian land reform came about in 1950 with the passage of
three laws:'

(i) The Legge Sila (law #230 -- May 12, 1950)
(ii) The Legge Stralcio (law #841 -— October 21, 1950)

(iii) The Legge Siciliana (Regional law #104 -- December 27, 1950).

One of the most important of these laws was the Legge Stralcio with
aims to provide

1) The creation of comprensori di reforma, large tracts of land of

a.)

-34-

latifundia character, each admin r;ered by a public agency, the

Ente di Riforma, operating under the direct supervision of the
Minister of Agriculture.

2) The amount of land to bexexpropriated in each zone was to be
determined by applying a formula which would take into considera-

tion the total area owned and the average per hectare income.

Property owners were allowed to retain one third of the expropriat-
able portion (so called "residual third“) on condition that they
undertook to develop it in accordance with the prearranged plans

of the Ente Riforma. Also excluded from expropriation were model
farms well organized and efficient farms run in cooperation with the
agricUltural workers, and certain livestock farms. Compensation to
landowners was based on the taxable value of the expropriated lands

as of 1947. (Ibid. p. 47).

3) The expropriated territory was to be transformed (de-stoned, drained,
deep ploughed, etc.) and assigned within three years to landless
laborers, sharecroppers and other peasant categories. The beneficiaries
were to pay back some of the cost of expropriation and transformation
in 30 annual installments during which time the land could not be

sold or rented out. Assignees were obliged to join cooperatives.

The assignees took two forms; the podere, a self sufficient farm
ususally with a farm house on the holding and the quota, a small

plot designed to round up income derived from other sources.

4) The Ente Riforma was charged with the responsibility of providing
for land improvements, construction of buildings (farms and service
villages) roads and irrigation works, as well as technical assistance,

cooperative and education.

.Fn {Viv—v" -' "
V 114'“. ._ “'9‘- .
I. s n. .- 5" ~

 

 

 

--o — - ~ . ..— _—.—..- -o~ ~ -. ' "
u . -W~' W‘ *7. .... .4111”..- a. ’ " ‘P‘ M g -_ v __

’ LO
U1
I

As grandios as these aims were a. as determined as the government
was to go ahead with these improvements, the problems of overpopulation
and lack of improvable lands made solutions more problematic. There was
to be a choice between economic‘and socially equitable solutions. Only
where the land—to-man ratio was at a balance was it even attempted to
satisfy as many peasants as possible.

Land reform per se is a political and highly revolutionary issue and
the developments in Italy are no exceptions to the rule. In any case the
systematic and coordinated approach points up tothe good intentions of
the government even if it failed to meet the aspirations of the entire
population.

Characteristically the Nigerian reform presents a rather paradoxical
situation of haste in waste.‘ (i) The studies as conducted to determine
available supply of developable land was never done. (ii) State or federal
agencies were never in agreement as to which region should be selected for
the experiment.

(iii) The involvement of government in land reclamation, irrigation
and other improvements have not been considered economical in the long run
to arouse public action.

(iv) There is no agency of the government to oversee the distribution
of expropriated lands in keeping with its intention to equitably share the
resources.

(v) The introduction of cooperatives is essential in handling sales
and services within regions of agricultural production but this has not
been emphasized or even introduced on a model scale to educated the peasants

on the merits of joint venture.

Q'-

-35-

(vi) Conceptually the Nigerian l r: reform applies a uniform rate of
compensation to expropriated land owners regardless of land quality and
location.

(vii) A need appraisal is essential to determine what percentage of
the population owns what percent of the land and to what use these lands
are constantly put. In the general context of Nigeria and especially
Southern States which include the Cross River State, land ownership or
ownership of rights on land takes various forms including inheritance,
purchase, pledge, etc. and because of the very crude nature of our agri-
as one farmer has land in excess of what he can cultivate.

The few coca and palm estates there are, are owned by quasi-government
corporation.

Farm houses on these states were erected to accommodate the workers
and their families and barely meet the basic standards. At once it is
seen here that steps have not been taken in full to stimulate growth for
what gorwth should be. The factors of production are land, labor, capital
and entrepreneurship and the least mobile is land. Since man cannot trans-
fer this input he can at least improve it. The format stipulated by a re-
form such as that emphasizing expropriation and distribution of land is
a long way from satisfying the goals of production and growth. We need
at this point a system that will cultivate social values based on the need

satisfaction capabilities of the majority.

The Taiwan Experiment

 

The institution of land reform in Taiwan followed an investigation
and surveying of individual plots cultivated by more than one farmer.
It however included the subdivision of the sUrveyed sites to be relocated
to workers who have been employed on these farms. It did not include the

breaking up of family land. Furthermore, what is called plot in Taiwan

-37-

land records is frequently a combinat':r of several pieces being cultivated
by several families and must be fairly large. The compulsory purchase of
farm land by government began with the investigation and compilation of

a list of such lands and a public announcement of the said list. Without
trying to grapple with the effects or ramifications of this reform my in-
tnetion is succintly to point to the initial work that had to be done in
order to come up with a meaninful information regarding the quantity and
quality of land available for redistribution. In effect family lands were
investigated and accorded a category either for the compulsory purchase

or not despite its size. A set of criteria was developed to be able to
come up with the various categories. Since the reform was to give land to
the tiller and since majority of these tillers were landless peasants
working for the lords, a reform like this was in the best interest of

the masses. (Tang. 1954). There were also other relief neasures institu-
ted and applicable to the old and infirm, widows, orphans, handicapped

and other disabled persons who have been joint owners of land compulsorily
purchased by government. The system also allowed landlords to sell to
workers such portions of land as had been worked by the same before the
revolution. The liberal system recognized the need for advanced compila-
tion of land records and the classification of this compilation into
categories in order to facilitate reallocation. The agricultural context
of the Taiwan reform lends itself to public acceptability because most

of the peasants worked in rice fields. The reallocation or sale of plots
gave the farmers the incentive to work for greater production because by
now they were only accountable to the government who charged a minimum

tax.

I

—_.._,.—n. -‘tEZ‘ ana—m;- -..'.. . ”PM W. — .J‘me' . ,

Federal Government Efforts Toward Hon ng

 

Until late in the 19705 housing was not considered a domain for govern-
ment to wade into. Quite recently the acute shortage of housing in key
environments has generated great\concern and with the formation of the
National Council on Housing all levels of the Nigerian government have been
asked to give proper emphasis to the problem and to allocate adequate funds
(not less than 10% of annual budget) for the provision of housing.

The Association of Housing Corporations which was formed in 1964 with
the participation of Midwest,Western, Northern and Eastern Nigeria govern-
ments has only succeeded in stimulating national consciousness. t its
annual conference, held in Kano in 1971, the association called on the
Federal government to regard housing as an economic as well as a social
project.

Despite the mushrooming concern that was being played down, the archi-
tects of both the 1962-1968 and 1970-1974 Development plans did not care
to define what the National Housing policy should be. This was reflected
in the token allocation of $67.2 million in 1962/68 to Town and Country
Planning and actually spending $31,36 million for the entire running of
services including housing. This amounted to about 47% of the allocation
only to illustrate the evasive attitude of the government regarding the
provision of this vital linkage of the social environment. However, as
the private sector tried unsuccessfully to keep pace with the demand, the
Federal government in the 1975-1980 Development plan came up with an al-
location that reflected the growing concern of the majority of people in
the country. This figure of 5.5% in monetary terms was the recognition
of housing deficiency and the urgent need to remedy the situation. The
proportion is still far below the recommended level of the N.C.H. and

definitely insufficient to initiate a resolution of the mounting shortage ‘

; ,I

-39-

of housing as a problem in the count: . (Ebogn, Maurice, 1978).

In the circumstance one is tempted to recognize the establishment of
the Federal Housing Authority in 1973 as a milestone in planning. By and
large this body is an agent and\merely advises the government on its per-
ceived needs. Perhaps what the Federal government had in mind was to ac-
tively participate in providing housing for the poor and low income who
are most affected by the shortage. One should be able to recognize this as
a very illusive dream and the reasons are not too far fetched.

According to the guidelines of the National Housing Program, each
state regardless of its population was expected to provide 8000 units
during the plan period 1975-80. The Federal Government was to be respon-
sible for 50% of this number as well as provide the infrastructure that
goes with housing. At a glance one should ask why the 8,000 units. We
are yet to discover the rationale for assuming that 8,000 is an equitable

number; again the different categories of housing is not stipulated.

The Shortcomiggs

 

The scheme is not only limited in scope of its housing activities
but it is grossly mismanaged and to say the least, is very indifferent
to the needs of the very people for whom concern should have been fore-
most.

1) There is indisciminate plot allocation

2) Public servants who take loans to build their homes sublet these

homes at inflated rents while continuing to occupy government
quarters.

3) Prices of building plots have soared so high that the average

A wage earner cannot even consider owning a house in his lifetime.

4) The attendant high cost of material and labor pushes the possi-

bility of ownership beyond the realm of realization.

4!

 

 

N‘“ rm ‘V‘W-r "m”-rm'

-40-

The situation has provided the o ':rtunity for specific class of
people to acquire specific areas of building plots in designated planning
areas of towns in the country. Thus the elitist nature of the Nigerian
distribution makes housing almost entirely dominated by the upper income,
governmental bureaucrats and the intellectual university lecturers and
professors. This practice is becoming the norm as observed by Odepitan
who has correctly warned ”if Nigeria is to develop the highest type of

civilization, if its industry is to thrive permanently, if its government

vate investors must think of providing a home life for every family rich
or poor.’I He invariably did recgonize the fact that private investors must
be encouraged because they and they alone can provide housing for the
various classes without personal bias. In time we shall come to see why
the nationalization policy has removed the last best hope for the cross

section of society to improve the housing situation.

Housing Policy of The Cross River State Government

 

As a young state created barely a decade ago it has long recognized
that the provision of shelter is absolutely essential for the physical
survival of man. The state in its limited capacity is making efforts to
emphasize the social evils associated with inadequate housing. One
approach to the housing shortage in the urban areas of the state has
been the Staff Housing Scheme which provides quarters to senior staff
and a few civil servants. Although this policy reminds us of the colonial
system, it is a policy in which the governmentacquires a parcel of land,
builds housing units and makes them available to civil servants for a
fixed proportion of their salary. This subsidy system supplies housing

at a fixed cost below the going market rate. The state‘s Third Development

“at,

 

.-..— ..-o-a.4-ro“‘.—-—-

-41-

Plan calls for the construction of 305 staff housing in the capital city
of Calabar and 20 in each of the 14 divisional headquarters.
The establishment of the Staff Housing Fund, a financial arm of
the Housing Corporation in 1973~Qas not gone far enough but is seen as
a set in the right direction. The limitations imposed by rules promulgated
by the Board of Trustees of the corporation have once again helped to
stratify the society, discriminating against the poor and the unemployed.
According to the rules:
A person is not eligible to apply for a loan under these rules
unless at the time of the application he is a duly confirmed
holder of a pensionable appointment in the service of the Govern-
ment of the State, or in a Statutory Corporation, or in a state-
owned company, or in a Voluntary Agency, Medical or Educational
Institution by virtue of which he is entitled to receive an
annual allowance on completion of service (SES, 1973).
The policy objectives of the Third National Development Plan include the
following:
1) the expansion of services of the Housing Corporation in Calabar
and other parts of the State;
2) the implementation of the low cost housing scheme;
3) the expansion of staff housing scheme;
4) an introduction of other measures to increase the number of‘
modern houses in the State;

5) the increase in supply of building materials in the State;

6) the obtaining of adequate statistics concerning housing.

The Shortcomings of the State Plan

 

It can be seen however that the State Plan is plagued by the same
limitations of the Federal Government.

1) Indifference to the needs of the poor and needy.

2) Funds allocated to housing is far below the 10% of Annual Budget

recommended by the National Council on Housing.

-42-

3) The Housing Corporation, the cqiy public supplier of houses with
known estimates can only complete an average of about 50 units for
the 15 urban centers of the state per year.

4) Housing policy for the dapital city of Calabar that receives the

bulk of immigrants is yet to be specific on quality and distribution.

Recommendation

 

(I

‘ [2'3

In view of the circumstances in the Cross River State and the necessity

for planned growth, the following recommendations are hereby suggested.

1) Efforts should be made to map out all the available land and
water resources for a more comprehensive planning.

2) The state should designate planning areas and provide the
necessary infrastructure-—roads, light, water, sanitary conditions
for sewage disposal, etc.

3) The planning areas should be located in local council areas with
local powers to direct growth and citizen participation.

4) Local materials should be improved and treated to stand the
effects of weather. This can be done if research facilities are
provided either by the state or the Federal Government.

5) Encourage village integration and cooperative ventures in
housing and agriculture.

6) Credit facilities and loan schemes should be liberalized to
offer seed money for people willing to develop the rural economy.
7) Open a network of roads and minor thoroughfares in order to
reduce the barrier of inaccessability.

8) Public housing as a policy should be reassessed in order that

the poor and the needy can benefit without undue hardships.

\.

 

-43-

9) National acquisition should hxn. precedence over state only in

matters of security and acute national interest of defense.
Redistribution of land as it is, manifestly stated does not guarantee that
recipients of these allotments Will be better off than the losers because
in no way have the land been classified to effectively analyse its use
capacity. Again society also knows that welfare type of giving out land
without prompting a development is almost tantamount to further impoverish-
ment. The polich should first aim at developing a system where the new
land can be gainfully used in production. It, however, boils down to
the provision of basic infrastructure, low interest loans, a list of pos-
sible allotees. One thing is certain though, the very people who are
dispossessed will come back to buy the redistributed lots because they
have the financial means to develop the lot. It is to curb this that I
would recommend a graduated tax system whereby the excess of undeveloped
land is taxed enough to discourage speculative ventures. This applies to
urban as well as rural land. Some countries use taxation to discourage
the use of farm land for the production of certain crops, e.g. Tobacco
in Indonesia, grapes in Chile, marijuana in the U.S.A.

A system of public education should precede any land reform.

Conclusion

 

In the various countries where land reform has taken the shape of
nationalization, i.e. exprOpriation of land from big landholders and
redistribution to the poor, the needy and the landless, land was never
communally owned as it was in the Cross River State. These have, in all,
had their roots in feudal institutions where the powerful lords con-
trolled land and rented these holdings at high rental fees to the

peasants. The changes occurred with peasant uprising usually demanding

v.)

.-44-

the right to share in the rights of ownership or use of land.

When the political machinery deems it advantageous to effect the
changes several things are often taken into consideration.

Basic among these are the oadastral surveys to know the land mass,
the registration of individual holdings and a classification of soil
types to determine uses. Thus the drawing up of a growth policy com-
mences with primary studies focusing on direction, level and rate at
which gorwth is anticipated. Such a policy must be flexible enough to
accommodate any changes that might be encountered during the planning
process.

In Italy and Egypt for instance, the government made sure that the
basic infrastructure were set in place and that land that was to be re-
distributed was made productive. A system of dams and irrigation projects
were initiated and water logged areas were reclaimed to put these wet lands
to use. Where the wet lands permitted rm) other uses, recreation and
public grounds were made available for public use. Land resource becomes
scarce with increase in population and the pressures of economic awareness
have been immense in ordering growth and development.

It is therefore more pertinent now to point out these short comings
of the nationalization policy in Nigeria and to stress thereby that such
a policy besides being stringent does not encourage growth in the private
sector where the nation for the most part have turned to for the supply
of housing stock.

Planning as we come to know it in Nigeria is most effective on the
state level. It is here that the power and need to determine location
and the provision of urban utilities and transportation manifest very

strongly. The much orchestrated idea of reform cannot be taken seriously

:53

N39

;\.“' now, . --

in the Cross River State because the on.y main city of an urban dimension
and character is Calabar, the capital city.‘ There is therefore still a
steady drift of people from the rural areas to Calabar. The labor force
is growing faster than it can becabsorbed. Rural development is one
answer to the vicious cycle. Efforts should instead by made to create
growth opportunities and prosperity in the rural towns so as to reduce
the flow of people to the city. Land can be assembled much easier in
the rural areas for the service programs and it is rather premature to
think that land nationalization can succeed in this part of Nigeria.

Dr. Ebong has observed in a recent study that land nationalization is
difficult to implement since the policy makers are the owners of most of
the urban land. The acquisition of land by the government in the Cross
River State has never been a big deal and it has not become that yet.
What is required is a comprehensive plan covering the various towns of
the state. This plan should embody provisions for local councils to
initiate their development plans with the state subsidizing or providing
the infrastructure within a time frame.

The state can aid in fostering growth and more development if steps
should be taken to utilize local materials for the construction of houses
rather than depend as we do on imported items like cement, iron rods,
nails, bolts and corrugated iron sheets. Besides the unfamiliar language
of reform, the average Nigerian does not lack land. He may not own land
in the cities but he is always assured of a piece of land in his native
village-~the family land.

The question of land use evolves most often around tenure issue in
Nigeria. The complete absence of routine planning until recently was a

result of the militating forces generated by lack of uniform system of

Ike;

-45-

land assembly or acquisition. Land 5 :éted to be associated with individuals
and groups of families rather than with communities in the CRS. It was
possible to sell or lease land in most urban centers and in most of the
South which used to be Eastern Nigeria, still a disproportionate amount)
of land belonged to the private owners either as individuals or families.
The situation is much different in the Northern States where the recent
Land Tenure Law of 1962 has declared all lands to be native lands.

Total nationalization of land will tend to liquidate our family sys-
tem, disrupt our grand traditions and impose responsibility on those who

can less afford and set the government up as land custodian.

l \./

 

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

\\
Achunine, Obi Basil. Dynamics and Strategies for Urban Housing and
Infrastructure in Developing Countries: A Case Study at Lagos,
Nigeria. (A Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1977.)

Barlowe, Raleigh. Land Resource Econ. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey,
1972.

Berry, Sava S. Cocoa, Custom and Socio- Economic Change in Rural Western
Nigeria. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1975.

Chubb, L. T. Ibo Land Tenure. 2nd edition. Ibadan University Press,
Nigeria, 1961.

Cole, C. W. Report on Land Tenure, Niger Province. Government Press,
Kaduna, I952.

Ebong, Maurice Okon. Policy Implications of Rural-Urban Migration in
Calabar-Nigeria: The Relative Effects on Housing, (A Ph.D.
dissertation, Michigan State University, 1978.)

Elias, T. Olawale QC. Nigerian Land Laws and Custom. Routledge and
Keggan Paul, Ltd., London, 1962,

Nigerian Land Law. 4th edition. Sweet and Maxwell

 

London, 1971.

Gadalla, Saad M. Land Reform in Relation to Social Oevelopment--Egygt,
University of Missouri Press, Columbia, 1962.

Green, M. N. Land Tenure in An Ibo Village. Pergy Lund Hymphys and Co.,
Ltd., London, 1941.

Huth, William P. Traditional Institutions and Land Tenure as Related to
Agricultural Development Among the Ibos of Eastern Nigeria. University
of Wisconsin, Madison, 1969.

James, R. W. Modern Land Laws of Nigeria. University of Ife Press-~Ile
Ife, Nigeria, 1973.

Kaufman, Robert R. The Politics of Land Reform in Chile (1950-1970).
Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1972.

King, Russel. Land Reform: The Italian Experience. Butterworths, London,
1973.

-43-

Land Use Decree #6, Gazette Notice r2‘.. Federal Republic of Nigeria
Gazette. Federal Ministry of Eu.cution, Lagos, Nigeria, March
29, 1978.

Lloyd, P. C. Yoruba Land Law. Oxford University Press, London, New York,
Ibadan, 1972.

 

McDowel, C. M. An Introduction\to the Problems of Ownership of Land in
Northern Nigeria. Institute of Administration, University of
Pittsburg, 1966.

 

 

Meek, C. K. Land Tenure and Land Administration in Nigeria and the Cameroons.

 

Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London, 1957.

Monlin, Chiang. Land Reform in Free China. JCRR, Ed. Tang: Taiwan, 1954.

 

Nwabueze, B. O. Nigerian Land Law. Nwamife Publishers, Ltd.-Enugu Oceana
Publishing Co., New York, 1972.

 

Obi, Chinwuba S. N. The Ibo Laws of Property. Butterworths, London, 1963.

 

Odepitan, Omobolanle.. “Plans for Housing Systems for Rich and Poor.”
Sunday Times Nigeria Ltd. February 1974.

 

Olawoye, C. 0. Title to Land in Nigeria. University of Lagos, Nigeria,
1974.

 

Pohoryles, S. and Dr. A. Szeskin. ”Land Tenure in Africa and Its Effects
on Economic Growth.” Land Use Research Institute, Jerusalem, Paper
#3, April 1973.

Rowling, C. W. Land Tenure in Ijebu Province. Government Press, Western
Region--Nigeria, 1956.

 

”Report on Land Tenure.” Kano Province, Government Press,

 

Kaduna, 1949.

Rural Economic Survey of Nigeria. Federal Office of Statistics, Lagos,
Nigeria, 1973.

Third National Development Plan. Vols. I and II. Central Planning Office,
Lagos, 1975.

Ward-Price, H. L. Land Tenure in the Yoruba Provinces. Government Press,
Lagos, 1939.

Warriner, Doreen. Land Reform in Principle and Practice. Clarendon Press,
Oxford, 1969.

 

MIICH IANG NSTATEU

llll l

Hill ”I Nlllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

31293 02638 1263

 

..........