Even though Colombia possesses natural resources such as oil, coal, precious metals and minerals, it is land that has led to many of the problems associated with the natural resource curse such as civil conflicts, human rights violations and corruption.
"natural resource curse" is the name given to the chronic underdevelopment that most countries with abundant natural resources are characterized for. For instance, Nigeria, Angola, Indonesia and Iraq. The term is mainly directed to countries with non-renewable natural resources such as oil and minerals. Nevertheless, the term can encompass other important resources such as land, which can potentially generate riches for all the population if properly managed.
Latin America has been one of the most affected regions by land ownership inequality. This occurred shortly after the continent was stripped off its most precious natural and cultural resources in the 15th century by European colonial powers. The so-called independence period that most countries achieved in the 19th century only transferred the ownership of land to locally-bred elites that have since controlled the political future of the countries.
Colombia is one of the best examples of such legacy that has never allowed the country to advance politically, socially and economically. According to a World Bank report Colombia's land inequality, as measured by the Gini coefficient, is the eighth worst in the world at 0.8 (1 being most unequal) -- since the data is from 2001, it's clear the the number is much higher now. It is not surprising, therefore, that quasi-attempts for land-reform have consistently failed in Colombia.
Even though Colombia possesses other natural resources such as oil, coal, precious metals and minerals, it is land that has led to many of the problems associated with the natural resource curse such as civil conflicts, human rights violations and corruption.
The Colombian civil conflict is fueled by land-ownership inequality and the corresponding injustice. The FARC’s Marxist-Leninist ideology has agrarian reform at the epicenter of their aims. Regardless of the methods utilized by this terrorist organization, it is undeniable that those problems leading to their formation have only intensified. Moreover, the paramilitary forces or private armies created by land-owners and businessmen in the 1980’s did not stop at protecting their sponsors’ land. They also displaced millions with the intention of accumulating more land. There are currently 5.5 million hectares of land stolen by armed groups from about 3.5 million rightful owners. These people are now a statistic labeled "internally displaced".
Human rights violations are committed by the three sides involved in the conflict, namely the guerrilla, the paramilitaries or emergent bands, and the army. In many cases the reasons for killing and torturing Colombians may not be directly related to land. But it is directly linked to the idiosyncrasies of the internal conflict that is moderated by land. For instance, the demobilized paramilitaries have so far admitted 24,000 murders. The guerrilla have killed and tortured thousands more. And the army, for their part have, are not only accomplices of the paramilitaries’ atrocities but have also killed more than 1,200 innocent civilians in extrajudicial killings in order to obtain personal benefits.
Government corruption, with land as protagonist, is an everyday occurrence. Examples are limitless as is the government’s insolence in their response to recurrent scandals such as Carimagua, free trade zones for the president’s sons and Agro Ingreso Seguro (Secure Agricultural Income). The latter was a fund with an annual budget of US$ 200 million created in 2006 under former Agricultural minister and current presidential candidate Andres Felipa Arias (affectionately known as "little Uribe") to promote productivity, competition and to reduce inequality. Therefore, protecting small farmers from the effects of the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the U.S.
There is not FTA yet, but since 2007 most of the US$ 117 million in non-repayable subsidies allocated to the "irrigation and drainage" component of the Agro Ingreso Seguro (AIS) program benefited traditional landowners, wealthy ex-beauty queens (Valerie Dominguez) and even two druglords (Ismael Augusto Pantoja, requested in extradition by the U.S. in 2005, and Jensy Miranda Davila), rather than poor peasants. Moreover, 45 sponsors who contributed US$ 275,000 to Uribe's two presidential campaigns received US$ 16.7 million under AIS. And 10 sponsors who donated US$ 64,000 for Uribe's recollection of signatures for the re-election referendum received US$ 8,3 million under AIS. Furthermore, 5 percent of those who benefited by AIS received 71 percent of the subsidies. This outcome had been predicted since 2006 because poor farmers did not have the means to prepare quality proposals that would compete for the subsidies. Therefore, the real intention of the government with Agro Ingreso Seguro was to compensate its financial backers using the FTA as pretext.
The land curse has always existed in Colombia but, as the latest act of corruption indicates, its negative effects have been exacerbated by the government’s policies. Uribe’s widely glorified “investor confidence” policy, one of the government’s three pillars, is not only directed at foreign investors but also national ones. The subsidies and tax breaks (or any other name given to redistributing public money to already rich individuals, families and businesses) have been responsible for enforcing the counter-agrarian reform. Land, after all, would receive a "Secured Agricultural Income".
Some cynics would argue that there is nothing wrong with the government’s model since the rich and powerful are the ones who actually pay the taxes in Colombia, therefore such distribution is well directed. But the result of this pseudo-economic theory – also known as trickle down economics – has enforced inequality in the country. The 2009 Human Development Index report places Colombia as the 6th most unequal country in the world after Angola, Haiti, Botswana, Comoros and Namibia. In other words, Colombia's poorest 10 percent control 0.8 percent of national income whereas the richest 10 percent control 45.9 percent of income.
The accumulation of land in fewer and fewer hands only reinforces the vicious circle of violence that has engulfed Colombia since the Spanish conquistadores looted the country in search of El Dorado. The reality today is considerably more tragic. At least 500 years ago foreigners exterminated the local population; now Colombians are killing each other in the name of a seemingly cursed resource.
gringomedeliin
said:
 |
... since the data is from 2001, it's clear the the number is much higher now. You base this on what? numbers that are over 8 years old is dangerous to assume and use .There are currently 5.5 million hectares of land stolen by armed groups from about 3.5 million rightful owners. you again assume that 3.5 milion owned property, were as many might have been only tentants. You leave out the fact that home ownership increased, You also use old arugements that do not relate to property ownership to try and build your case that your right. my first hand knowledge is that many Colombians have purschased homes in the last 4 years, Thus I would say your wrong in stating that their is no improvement in ownership equality, Based on sites I have seen about Colombia the , Colombia is seen as strong on protecting property rights these days, Clearly back in 2001 that was not the case, but that seems to have changed under Uribe. |
Sebastian
said:
|
... @gringomedellin, 1. I based the assumption (that land ownership inequality is much worse now than it was in 2001) in the policies that the government introduced in the rural areas. Agro Ingreso Seguro and Carimagua are the best examples. If you didn't read the 8th, 9th, 10th and 11th paragraphs please read them. Alternatively, try to read the transcript or listen to the intervention of Senator Jorge Robledo in the debate in the Senate last Tuesday about Agro Ingreso Seguro. In that intervention Robledo had figures backing up the failure of Uribe's agricultural policy 2. Even if we assume that the 3.5 million were tenants, it doesn't make the situation any less precarious or unjust. They were forcibly expelled from the land they were making a living from. 3. This column is about land in the rural areas. Land that has an agricultural use. The article is not stating anything about houses or flats, nor the property rights that people in Medellin enjoy. This article is about the rural area. 4. You can argue that Uribe was effective in pushing the guerrilla to the jungle but defending Uribe's agricultural policies is totally different. |
gringo michae
said:
 |
... Seb are you writing about land inequality or about Colombnia coruption again? Throwing out past charges of coruption doesn't make land inequality. While the coruption that takes place inColomb ia is wrong, using to use it to tray and make a case of land inequality. with out fact that what was happening in 2001 compared today doesn't cut it. It is clear that somehting wrong happened with the agricultural program which currently under investigation, again this does not make the case for land inequality. what is clear is you dislike Uribe and will keep tjhrowing old issues and new and twist them to try and make your case, you also ask people to read what is said by Senator Jorge Robledo who clearly is left leaning and algined with left groups and Unions even in the USA, Clearly when he speaks he does so with an agenda which one should take with a grain of salt. you claim it is about rural land where are you getting the number 3.5 mill from? what is clear one can take different reports and number to twist them to back any case thay want, that is one thing I have learned from my many years. I disagree with your assumations and would say that land inequailty has improved that many Colombias over the last few yerars have become property owners not just houses, apartments but also farms. You might want things to change over not, but Colombia's problems didn;t happen overnight and it will take years to fix. One can only hope. |
gringo michae
said:
|
... Seb I took time to look at the 2009 Human 2009 Human Development Index report in section 2 it shows the numbers of people migrating , bith internal and external, if one looks at the Americas sextion one will see that Chile, Ecuador and Venenzual had more people moving internally then Colombia in fact if you look at the 10 countries there Colombia is near rthe bottom of the number of people moving internally, with Brazil, Costa Rico, Mexico and the USA with lower number. so using oyur arguement then that means during your time frame Land inequality appears much worse in 5 SA countries considered to have governemnnts more left leaning than Colombia . |
gringo michae
said:
|
... sorry need to make a correction in 200-2002 Colombia had a goverment who thought he could hold peace talks with the FARC and the country was controled mostly by FARC, Drug Lords and Paramilitary unlike today, yes Colombia had less people migrating internally , during that time Colombia was number 4 of migration out of the country which makes sense consider the government was not in control of the country at that time. |
gringo michae
said:
|
... Colombia's poorest 10 percent control 0.8 percent of national income whereas the richest 10 percent control 45.9 percent of income. did you read the disclaimer they had this section b Because the underlying household surveys differ in method and type of data collected, cross-country comparisons should be made with caution as the the distribution data are not strictly comparable across countries. it uses income and expenditure data if you look at Brazil the poor is 1.1 and rich 43 were as the DR is poor 1.5 rich 37 which shows Brazil has bigger inquality while it is close to Colombia. Ecuador poor 1.5 rich 43.3 Chile poor 1.6 rich 41.7 you also forgot to include Boliva which is poor .05 rich 44.9 giving it a higher rating then Colombia ,the chartrt doesn't show who controls the money it is showing difference in income/spending of the poor compared to the rich. The report is pretty detailed, it's purpose is to debunk those that say migration is bad, in fact they report conclues that those that move internal end up better in terms of income, access to education and health care, which dosen't back your agruement that 3.5( your number) of rural migrators has increased inquality in Colombia, they report agrues that those 3.5 million mostly should have seen an improvement in income and quality of life. Thus supporting my positiion. |
gringo michae
said:
|
... the one sad number is the number Conflict and insecurity-induced movement Colombia ranks number one as of 2008 ( they used a year prior) the report places Colombia number 2.6 to 4.3 million that in 2007 alone they est it at 70 thousand. ranking it number 2 or 3 in the world of total displaced. the report fails to state the range of years just as of 2008. |
Sebastian
said:
|
... @gringo michae, First of all I would ask you to take some time to proof read what you write because it becomes confusing following your points. 1. Land is a contributing factor of corruption in the Colombian government. For instance, the AIS is a flagrant policy in which the government "took from the poor to give the rich". 2. The government has been promoting and offering various "incentives" for the cultivation of African palm oil. Most of the business and people who benefited with the government's AIS were involved with African palm oil. Moreover, this has led people to be forcibly displaced by armed groups on behalf of companies that want to cultivate that palm. Furthermore, the paramilitaries also have economic interest in this plant. These are two very good introductions to what is occurring with this plant tree and the displaced: http://www.colombiareports.com/opinion/89-from-the-editor/4672-colombian-bio-energy-boom-is-a-bust-for-farmers.html And if you can understand Spanish: http://www.contravia.tv/?m=200...s&t=Agosto 2005 3. Jorge Enrique Robledo's numbers are the same numbers that NGO's are utilizing for a number of years. Don't let your partisan politics dismiss the well supported arguments. 4. I don't understand your migration numbers. No one mentioned anything about migration. It's about forcibly displaced people. Colombia has the second highest number in the world after Sudan. |
gringo michae
said:
|
... Seb, 1) AIS is a program to give help to small farmers, because lack of over site or coruption( which is currently under invesyigation) some large land owners received money, no where did AIS take land from anyone or take money from the poor as you claim. 2) The Palm oil issue you are now add to the debate, from everything I read to date, In the State of Choco ex Para's seem to have stolen land to grow palm oil, that one of them it is claimed recieved AIS, again AIS didn't take anyones land, this land was stolen by NGO's . In your hatered for Uribe please do not cast a negative shadow on all the growersof palm oil, some are hard working Colombians, that have done nothing illegal. |
gringo michae
said:
|
... Seb, 3) The fact is no one has firm number on the number of displaced, a recent UN report has it 2.6 to 4.3 million displaced, I suggest you take your own advice Don't let your partisan politics dismiss the well supported arguments of others. It is clear that Robledo has an agenda, if you choose to cast a blind eye to that fact so be it. the facts are over the years different NGO's have used different numbers, they have not been consistent. even they UN admits there is no firm number. |
gringo michae
said:
|
... Seb, 4) The report you cited in your article is about migration of people inside and outside of their country, did you just pull a single number from the report in an attempt to support your claims, I read the whole report and it conclued that most people that relocated ended up better off, better income and access to education and health care , Colombia was inclued in this report paid for by the UN. As for Colombia have the second highest diplaced , it's debatable with Sudan number 1 , the number 2 and 3 spot is between Iraq (2.8 mill per the UN) and Colombia (2.6 to 4.3 million per the UN) I personally know a number of Colombians that moved due to the conflicts, many are doing better today, they own their on homes no loger renting, their children have access to better education and access to health care , sadly I also know a number whose lifes are just as bad as what they left but they have not given up on life or hope, the only plus is their children are settled in school and learning with hopes for a better furture. |
gringo michae
said:
|
... Seb wondering if COHA Research Fellow Sebastian Castaneda and you are one in the same? |
