Impreso en Colombia -Printed in Colombia El contenido de la presente publicación se encuentra protegido por las normas internacionales y nacionales vigentes sobre propiedad intelectual, por tanto su utilización, reproducción, comunicación pública, transformación, distribución, alquiler, préstamo público e importación, total o parcial, en todo o en parte, en formato impreso, digital o en cualquier formato conocido o por conocer, se encuentran prohibidos, y sólo serán lícitos en la medida en que

more »

... e cuente con la autorización previa y expresa por escrito del autor o titular. Las limitaciones y excepciones al Derecho de Autor, sólo serán aplicables en la medida en que se den dentro de los denominados Usos Honrados (Fair use), estén previa y expresamente establecidas, no causen un grave e injustificado perjuicio a los intereses legítimos del autor o titular, y no atenten contra la normal explotación de la obra. Abstract The paper analyzes the effects of land reform on social development -poverty and land distribution-at the local level. Land reform in Colombia, understood as the allocation of public land to peasant, has granted 23 million hectares which comprises around 20% of Colombian territory and about 40% of usable productive land. Theoretically, the net impact of land reform on development is the combination of a poverty effect and a land distribution effect. Our findings suggest that land reform from 1961 onwards has slightly reduced poverty and mildly improved land distribution. Nonetheless, municipalities with strong presence of latifundia prior to 1961 have experienced both a slower drop in poverty and a weaker improvement of land distribution. This paper finds that prevalence of latifundia partially reduces the positive effect of land reform in promoting social development. Abstract The paper analyzes the effects of land reform on social development -poverty and land distribution-at the local level. Land reform in Colombia, understood as the allocation of public land to peasant, has granted 23 million hectares which comprises around 20% of Colombian territory and about 40% of usable productive land. Theoretically, the net impact of land reform on development is the combination of a poverty effect and a land distribution effect. Our findings suggest that land reform from 1961 onwards has slightly reduced poverty and mildly improved land distribution. Nonetheless, municipalities with strong presence of latifundia prior to 1961 have experienced both a slower drop in poverty and a weaker improvement of land distribution. This paper finds that prevalence of latifundia partially reduces the positive effect of land reform in promoting social development. Abstract The paper analyzes the effects of land reform on social development -poverty and land distribution-at the local level. Land reform in Colombia, understood as the allocation of public land to peasant, has granted 23 million hectares which comprises around 20% of Colombian territory and about 40% of usable productive land. Theoretically, the net impact of land reform on development is the combination of a poverty effect and a land distribution effect. Our findings suggest that land reform from 1961 onwards has slightly reduced poverty and mildly improved land distribution. Nonetheless, municipalities with strong presence of latifundia prior to 1961 have experienced both a slower drop in poverty and a weaker improvement of land distribution. This paper finds that prevalence of latifundia partially reduces the positive effect of land reform in promoting social development. Abstract The paper analyzes the effects of land reform on social development -poverty and land distribution-at the local level. Land reform in Colombia, understood as the allocation of public land to peasant, has granted 23 million hectares which comprises around 20% of Colombian territory and about 40% of usable productive land. Theoretically, the net impact of land reform on development is the combination of a poverty effect and a land distribution effect. Our findings suggest that land reform from 1961 onwards has slightly reduced poverty and mildly improved land distribution. Nonetheless, municipalities with strong presence of latifundia prior to 1961 have experienced both a slower drop in poverty and a weaker improvement of land distribution. This paper finds that prevalence of latifundia partially reduces the positive effect of land reform in promoting social development. Abstract The paper analyzes the effects of land reform on social development -poverty and land distribution-at the local level. Land reform in Colombia, understood as the allocation of public land to peasant, has granted 23 million hectares which comprises around 20% of Colombian territory and about 40% of usable productive land. Theoretically, the net impact of land reform on development is the combination of a poverty effect and a land distribution effect. Our findings suggest that land reform from 1961 onwards has slightly reduced poverty and mildly improved land distribution. Nonetheless, municipalities with strong presence of latifundia prior to 1961 have experienced both a slower drop in poverty and a weaker improvement of land distribution. This paper finds that prevalence of latifundia partially reduces the positive effect of land reform in promoting social development. Abstract The paper analyzes the effects of land reform on social development -poverty and land distribution-at the local level. Land reform in Colombia, understood as the allocation of public land to peasant, has granted 23 million hectares which comprises around 20% of Colombian territory and about 40% of usable productive land. Theoretically, the net impact of land reform on development is the combination of a poverty effect and a land distribution effect. Our findings suggest that land reform from 1961 onwards has slightly reduced poverty and mildly improved land distribution. Nonetheless, municipalities with strong presence of latifundia prior to 1961 have experienced both a slower drop in poverty and a weaker improvement of land distribution. This paper finds that prevalence of latifundia partially reduces the positive effect of land reform in promoting social development.