"As noted above, a sound land policy should provide secure tenure to all landholders at all times. Access to secure rights is an indispensable element if we wish to invigorate the rural economy and induce the land user to invest on the land and to improve production."
"Secure rights means that landholders have the right to dispose of their land in any way they choose. The argument of the state is that if the peasant is given absolute rights over the land he will immediately sell, or will be quickly deprived of it by unscrupulous urban-based capitalists, and the result will be large-scale landlessness."
"This argument is not only foolish but assumes the peasant to be either irresponsible or child-like who will quickly throw away the most valuable asset in his possession. The peasant values the land very highly and is strongly attached to it; he or she will not give it away under any circumstances unless there is a compelling reason to do so. Moreover, selling the land is not a mortal sin. "
"Given the agrarian experience of the last two to three decades in this country, tenure security cannot be accomplished overnight. It will take a long time before the peasant will be assured that he or she has secure rights to the land he/she is farming. The first step in reaching that goal is to convince peasants that there will be no more redistribution of land. "
"Land tenure issues must not be politicized as it is done at present. There must be a recognized institution (a court of law or a special land tribunal, for example) which is responsible for ensuring rights of land and adjudicating conflicts over land when they arise. Such an institution must be politically independent and must have a strong presence in the rural areas."
"At present, land redistribution, consolidation and similar measures have become political issues and are taken by the political agents of the state. There will be no secure ownership until the politicization of land is brought to an end.
"A new land policy must enable the rural population to move out of agriculture and seek alternative employment (see above)."
"The points noted here do not necessarily mean that private ownership of land in the capitalist sense of the term is the ultimate solution. I have argued instead that what I call associative ownership, which combines private rights with community responsibilities, is a viable option. Under this system, the peasants have secure and individual rights to their holdings but the community, in the form of the peasant association, for example, protects this right if it is threatened by outsiders. The community acts as the guarantor of rights of individual ownership."
"We cannot assume that private ownership will ensure security of holdings under all circumstances and in all social contexts. It is, for instance, the institution of private property that is in part responsible for peasant insecurity and agrarian conflict in Latin America. Similarly, the privatization of land in Kenya has had mixed results. It has not succeeded in institutionalizing private control over land, and has instead given rise to conflicts and litigation among farm households and social groups. Indeed, it has undermined the very security of tenure that the reform was supposed to protect."
"A new land system must promote the autonomy of the landholder and the empowerment of farming communities. It is important to remember that rights to land have to be defended from encroachments and violations in order to be or remain secure. An autonomous peasantry is the best guarantee that such rights will be vigorously defended when the occasion calls for it. Autonomy involves independence from the influence or control of the state and other external forces, and the ability to pursue one's interests through one's own economic, social and political institutions."
"The emphasis of the agricultural development strategy of the government, which is based on a widespread dissemination of modern inputs (mainly agro-chemicals) is increased food production achieved through improvements in land productivity. But, what is equally needed is improvements in labour productivity which cannot however be achieved with micro-holdings that are today the basic feature of peasant agriculture. The enlargement of farm sizes is necessary, but this will mean some significant changes in the social profile of the rural society."
"Today, rural society is by and large socially undifferentiated, thanks mainly to the prevailing land system which has been in force now for well over two decades. But I believe rural differentiation should be welcomed, and we should encourage the better-off elements of the population to improve their status."
"The change from "peasant" to "farmer" is I believe essential, and the pioneers in this change will be the richer peasantry. So, let there be "kulaks"! I am not convinced that we will have to wait for the urban bourgeoisie to rescue the rural economy. The real force behind sustained improvements in livelihoods will come from those who were peasants once but managed to change themselves into farmers."