Main Article Content
Role of International Institutions in Ethiopia’s Rural Land Policy
Abstract
This Article explores whether and to what extent Ethiopia`s contemporary land policy is influenced by international institutions chiefly the World Bank and the USAID. To this end, the article has identified and examined two opposing views, the first of which contends government policies including land policies in Ethiopia are dictated by some influential international institutions as the regime in Ethiopia is dependent on aid funds in implementing its social policies, which include land policy. According to this first perspective, such policies are not the result of organized collective action by the insecure land holders. The second view is that such policies are internally driven because international institutions have been unable to push through policy agenda their way meaningfully. Having considered such views, the article finds it is not persuasive to put the extent of influence of international institutions in Ethiopia`s land policy in black and white; yet, it seems unreasonable to argue that such institutions which contribute significantly to Ethiopia`s annual budget have no influence over land policy at all even if determination of the extent of their roles is complex and vague. For instance, some tenets of Ethiopia`s current land policy as a tool to poverty reduction and smallholder commercial agriculture are strikingly similar to the tenets of the WB`s 2003 Land Policy which include legalizing land rentals, land use collateralization for agricultural investors and establishment of customary dispute resolution methods, regularization of informal landholdings, and landholding registration programs without however conceding the fundamental aspect of land law. The USAID`s involvement in drafting Ethiopian current Federal and regional rural land laws has led to the inclusion of some of these elements. External pressures may not nevertheless have a decisive role as domestic political and bureaucratic interests in land policy at implementation phase may lessen their magnitude.