1.3.2 TIPOS DE ESTRATEGIAS:
B. Por su valor
The EPRDF, which has been in power since it helped fight, overthrow, and succeeded the Derg in May 1991534, then enacted its own land law reform programme that is currently in effect in Ethiopia. As Atakilte and Hussein suggested, the EPRDF had the same socialist economic programmes, ethnic- based social agenda, and Marxist political worldview as the Derg.535 And as Crewett and Korf, Merera,
528
Yigremew, 2001a:58;Dessalegn, 1992:43-57;Teketel, 1998.
529
Clapham, 2002:15.
530
Kassahun, 2012:6; Yigremew, 2001a:58.
531
Brune, 1990: 25-27; Kassahun, 2012:6; Yigremew, 2001a:58.
532
See, for example, Assefa Fiseha, 2006:54.
533 Vaughan, 2003:13. 534 Vaughan, 2003:13. 535 Atakilte, 2004:60; Hussein, 2004:12.
115
and Abbink observed, the EPRDF is originally a Marxist ethnic liberation movement and the successor of the TPLF (Tigray People’s Liberation Front) that still constitutes the backbone of the political organisation and the current government it leads in the country, which had fought an armed struggle against the Derg claiming ethnic-based oppression and seeking ethnic-based solution for the settlement of Ethiopia’s longstanding problems, including those pertaining to land law reform, smallholder agricultural productivity, and poverty.536 However, the fall of the Derg and the coming to power of the EPRDF in May 1991 was accompanied by major internal and external events, which appear to have considerably shaped the ideological orientation of the EPRDF, the national development strategy objectives and goals it designed, as well as the formulation and implementation of the land law reform it enacted to help raise smallholder productivity and tackle poverty to attain those objectives and goals. Internally, Ethiopia was a country almost in full-blown crisis, with protracted war, extreme poverty, widespread dislocation and emigration, maladministration, corruption, and a state, though inept and illegitimate, that controlled virtually every aspect of life, leaving little space for grassroots activity, civil society or the private sector.537 Moreover, the period was marked by the existence of numerous political organisations with various national and ethnical platforms, the dire situation of smallholder productivity and poverty, and the prominence of a view that blames the Derg’s legacy, especially the policy of state ownership of land, for this situation.538 Externally, the period was characterised by the collapse of the Soviet Union its communist bloc, the advent of the “New World Order” marked by the dominance of Western bilateral and multilateral funding agencies, particularly the World Bank and the IMF, the emergence a school of thought viewing the Western economic, social, and political principles of capitalism, individualism, and liberalism as the only viable path for transitional countries like Ethiopia539, and the commencement of “structural adjustment” as a condition for Western aid under the auspices of bilateral and multilateral funding agencies, such as the World Bank and the IMF.540
Therefore, despite its socialist economic programmes, ethnic-based social agenda, and Marxist- oriented political worldview, the EPRDF had no alternative but to also accommodate the Western principles of capitalism, individualism, and liberalism, which has thus by the EPRDF’s own admission
536
Crewett and Korf, 2008:205; Merera, 2003; Abbink, 1997.
537
Scholler, 2006:55-56 and 67-70.
538
EPRDF, 2005a:29-34. See, also, EPRDF, 2000 and 2005b; Vaughan, 2003:27-31.
539
Adelman, 1998:75.
540
116
forced it to adopt the governing ideology that it claims to be a pragmatic mixture of Marxism- liberalism and later gave it the name “Revolutionary Democracy”.541 The EPRDF framed virtually all aspects of life in Ethiopia along ethnic lines as per its commitment to what it called “the national question”. Accordingly, it restructured the country into a federal polity composed of a central government and regional administrations that were formed mainly along ethnic lines under the TPCE (Transitional Period Charter of Ethiopia), which was the supreme law of the land from its adoption at the TNC (Transitional National Conference) in July 1991542 until it was replaced as such by the FDRE Constitution, which was put into effect on 21 August 1995543, proclaims to have been adopted by “the Nations, Nationalities and Peoples of Ethiopia”544, and to be “the supreme law of the land”.545 The TPCE and the Constitution emphasise ethnic-based group rights and contain provisions such as a “secession clause”, which authorises the federating units formed mainly along ethnic lines units to seek “unconditional” secession546, which turned out to be controversial, as, for its proponents, it provides the only formula to achieve ethnic harmony and maintain Ethiopia as a political unit formed by the voluntary unification of ethnic groups547, whilst, for its opponents, it invites ethnic conflict and risks the eventual disintegration of the country.548 However, the Constitution also contains provisions setting out fundamental human rights and individual freedoms and creating a series of liberal institutions, including elected, representative legislature549, accountable executive550, and independent judiciary.551 On the other hand, since the EPRDF had the same socialist economic programmes, ethnic-based social agenda, and Marxist political ideology as the Derg, it continued the Derg’s policy of state ownership of land under its land law reform programme.552 The major objective of the EPRDF’s land law reform is to “put in place legal conditions conducive for sustainable rural land use, whereby rural land is
541
EPRDF, 2005a:29-34. See, also, Vaughan, 2003:27-31.
542
Vaughan, 2003:15.
543
FDRE Proclamation, 1995: Article 3; FDRE Constitution: Article 9(1).
544
FDRE Constitution, Preamble.
545
FDRE Constitution: Article 1.
546
TPCE: Article 2(1); FDRE Constitution: Article 39(1) and (4).
547
See, for example, EPRDF, 2005a.
548
See, for instance, Vaughan, 2003:14-15.
549
FDRE Constitution: Articles 8(3) and 50(3).
550
FDRE Constitution: Articles 72 and 50(4) and (6).
551
FDRE Constitution: Articles 78 and 79.
552
117
conserved and sustainably used in a manner that gives a better output”.553 The FDRE Constitution, which embodies the current land policy of the country, validates the policy of state ownership of land, declaring that “Land is a common property of the Nations, Nationalities and Peoples of Ethiopia”.554 The land law reform programme of the EPRDF is linked to its agriculture-led national development strategy called ADLI, which has been the flagship of the EPRDF government since it unveiled it immediately after assuming power declaring it to be an effective instrument for attaining food security and pro-poor economic growth in Ethiopia.555 ADLI, which the EPRDF adopted arguing that Ethiopia is a smallholder-based economy, and that the country has little capital and other resources necessary for outright industrial development except abundant agricultural land, labour, and water, was tasked with its objective of helping attain food security and foster overall economic growth mainly by raising smallholder productivity in staple crops.556 In short, in the words of the EPRDF government, “ADLI is a strategy in which agriculture and industry are brought into a single framework, wherein the development of agriculture is viewed as an important vehicle for industrialisation by providing raw material, a market base, surplus labour, and capital accumulation.”557 ADLI is hoped to ultimately help accomplish the four national development policy goals the EPRDF has been pursuing, which are to (i) bring about rapid economic growth; (ii) benefit the majority of the population therefrom; (iii) move the country from aid-dependency to self-sufficiency; and (iv) establish a well-developed market economy.558 In view of that, although the EPRDF’s land law reform has made significant continuities from the Derg’s, including the enforcement of the policy of state ownership of land, the provision of usufructuary land access, the restriction of succession to family members, the prohibition of sale, and disallowance of collateralisation, it has also recognised the right to compensation for investment made on land upon expropriation, lifted the 10-hectare restriction on maximum plot size, abolished the prohibition of tenancy and hired labour, allowed the leasing of land, expanded the succession of land rights from spouse and children to all family dependents, and decentralised the governance of land.559
553
FDRE Proclamation, 1997: Preamble; FDRE Proclamation, 2005b: Preamble and Article 2(3).
554
FDRE Constitution: Article 40(3).
555 Amdissa, 2006:23. 556 EPRDF, 2005b:8-17; MoFED, 2002:13. 557 MoFED, 2002:13. 558
EPRDF, 2005b:1; MEDAC, 2001:9; MoI, 2001:4.
559
118
The EPRDF’s land law reform was also accompanied by several agrarian reform programmes undertaken within the framework of the ADLI strategy. One is the agricultural extension programme known as the Participatory Demonstration and Training Extension System (PADETES), which was launched in 1994/95 to merge the training and visit system with the technology diffusion experience of the Sasakawa Global 2000, and thereby demonstrate to smallholders the benefits of a package of inputs, notably balanced and higher rates of fertiliser, improved seeds, pesticides, and management practices.560 The other is the Sustainable Agriculture and Environmental Rehabilitation Program (SAERP), which was intended to expand small-scale irrigation and watershed management schemes to reverse environmental degradation and boost agricultural productivity.561 Yet, the EPRDF has made continuities in its agrarian reform from the Derg’s, particularly as regards the state’s dominant position in the supply of modern agricultural inputs, implements, and services, arguing that “the private sector will play a leading role in these activities, but given the early stages of transition to market agriculture, a range of public sector investments and services is needed to help jump-start the process”.562