Backgrounder Part II: The Agrarian Question in Guatemala

January 13, 2003

Part 2 of this paper discusses land markets and the establishment of FONTIERRAS, and explores the role of Civil Society in shaping the debate over agrarian reform Guatemala.

Print Article Email Article

FONTIERRAS

FONATIERRA, a government agency administered by INTA, was founded in 1994 to “jumpstart” the market by assisting those tenants, smallholders and landless workers unable to enter normal market transactions. The fund was mostly supported by international donors and was mandated to purchase land from the state or on the open market and then facilitate the “transfer” of these lands to beneficiaries via the extension of low interest loans and technical assistance. This fund (renamed FONTIERRAS in 1997, dismantled in 1998, and reestablished by the Ley de Fondo de Tierras of May 1999),²² has two main programs: 1) the allocation of public financing for land acquisition and the promotion of a transparent land market, and 2) the allocation of subsidies and technical assistance to began production enterprises. Its implementation has been slow at best (see Table 3).

Table 3. Achievements of FONTIERRAS

Sources: Molina Cruz, 2000; FONTIERRAS, 2001.

In order to obtain credit from FONTIERRAS, a socioeconomic evaluation of the soliciting group and an agroecological study of the land are conducted. The socioeconomic background, the level of organization and cohesion and the productive potential of the property are considered. Looking at FONTIERRAS’ performance, Molina (2000) noticed observes that a minimum level of capitalization is required to obtain credit. In an assessment of the FONTIERRAS, CONGCOOP and CNOC (2001) elaborates the following characterization of the benefited groups:

- Low level literacy.

• Experience in subsistence production, not in production for export.

• Land sales are often overpriced, due to the weight of desire for land over ability to negotiate.

• Beneficiaries above the lowest socioeconomic level.

• Most of the groups belong to the CNOC.

• Sometimes they are former workers who organize to buy land.

• Some are groups that had invaded land, where the owner is willing to sell.

CONGCOOP and CNOC (2001) note that in the negotiation process, FONTIERRAS’ role has been weak and women’s participation is almost zero, given that FONTIERRAS’ staff prefers to work with groups made up of men. In the productive area, FONTIERRAS’ staff has not taken into consideration the groups’ experiences and capacities.

The United Nations Mission in Guatemala notes that under current budget allocations, the Fund will only be able to acquire land in 5 ha hectare average plots for 1500 families, an estimated 5% percent of registered demand by landless families (MINUGUA, 2000: 12). As of April 18, 1999, the estimated organized demand for land according to the UN was 60,000 families, but the Ministry of Agriculture estimates that over 500,000 families are landless or do not have enough land to achieve subsistence (MINUGUA, 2000: 11). Primary obstacles identified by the UN Mission for the Land Fund to effect future land distribution included lack of funding and staff (12), noting that pending loans from the World Bank might offer a potential solution. The Ministry of Agriculture and INTA have identified 150 public “baldios” (unused land parcels) totaling 106,500 ha hectares that could benefit 9000 families, but say that the Land Fund only has enough money to “regularize” 30, citing the additional obstacle that the potential beneficiaries are failing to provide funds for legal costs of registration (MINUGUA, 2000: 14).

In addition to the lack of government funding to foster a transparent land market, several issues inherent to the concept of market-led land reform are important to note. The problem most often cited in regards to market-based land reform is the principle of willing-buyer/willing seller. Stringer and Lambert (1989) argue that in the context of land concentration in Guatemala, it is practically impossible for campesinos to enter the land market. When large landholdings go on the market in Guatemala, the market is usually closed except to a small group of people with resources to buy a large plantation, as large landowners are usually unwilling to divide holdings to sell to individuals or to sell to groups of campesinos. The World Bank (1995) also suggests that large landowners are reluctant to sell land for fear that sales might increase demands for land redistribution and invasion. In addition, a majority of landless and land-poor do not have access to savings or collateral to effectively negotiate on a land market (Stringer, 1989: 17), even when favorable interest rates or other concessions are offered. Thus, the current implementation of the 1996 Agreement focuses for political reasons on the privatization and negotiated sale of unused state and public lands to foster the land market; in terms of just quantity alone, there is little potential to significantly transform the distribution of land in Guatemala.

The World Bank also notes substantial price speculations in areas where INTA and the Land Fund have expressed interest in buying land.²³ In Guatemala, land is often held as a speculative hedge against inflation; land is also held by large landowners for many reasons including culture and family status, access to credit and services, and many are accused of setting the proposed selling price at unrealistic levels, reflecting lack of desire to sell.

Finally, it is estimated that between half and 95% of the Guatemalan landholdings do not have current registered titles, while at the same time others suggest that the extension of titled land found in the Registry totals more than twice the total land area of Guatemala (Stringer, 1989: 18; WorldBank, 1998: 4). This ambiguity in property rights and an ineffective and inefficient land registry also cause problems for a land reform based on the promotion of a land market. Some critics suggest that the new registration process (Cadastre) suggested by the Agreement and currently funded by the World Bank will allow lands illegally seized from poor campesinos and indigenous villages to be registered as legal holdings, especially given the lack of a legal mechanism to ascertain how titles were obtained in the first place (Palma Murga, 1997). Thus further cementing inequity. In 1999, a discussion was begun to prepare a law of environmental and agrarian jurisdiction with government, NGOS, universities, and campesino and indigenous groups; but by May 2000, talks had stalled (MINUGUA, 2000: 9).

Reactions to FONTIERRAS

Hernández (1998: 43) points out that “given the history of corruption and political manipulation of the public institutions of social interest, it is necessary to create social mechanisms of control over this Fund [FONTIERRA], with the aim to avoid resources being given according to the interests of political parties.”

CONGCOOP and CNOC (2001) point out that many experts agree in saying that FONTIERRAS won’t have any impact on the structure of land tenure in Guatemala, and that a market- assisted land reform would not succeed in Guatemala. Instead, CONGCOOP and CNOC suggest that the state should be more involved in recovering land taken illegally during the dictatorships, in following up land allocation by INTA, and in carrying out expropriations of land that is constitutionally permitted (with compensatory payments).

Eugenio Incer of AVANCSO argues that FONTIERRAS has not followed through with the technical assistance they are it was mandated to provide, while Daniel Pascual from CNOC agrees that the FONTIERRAS model would will not work given the existing conditions of land concentration, lack of resources and the current production model. Moreover, because there are no programs designed to facilitate the commercialization of products for new small farmers, they will not be not be able to pay back their mortgages and the land will be taken from them once again.

Other Governmental Bodies

CONTIERRA (Dependencia Presidencial de Asistencia Legal y Resolución de Conflictos de Tierra) was created on July 15, 1997, based on the Peace Accords’ Agreement on Social and Economic Aspects and the Agrarian Situation to address conflicts related to land in Guatemala. According to peasant organizations, CONTIERRA has not been able to solve most of the land conflicts they have it has faced (Hernández, 2000).

PROTIERRA (Comisión Institucional para el Desarrollo y Fortalecimiento de la Propiedad de la Tierra),²⁴ coordinates and integrates strategic policies regarding land, supposedly guiding the efficient and proper implementation of land- related programs.

Cadastre

According to Rosalinda Hernández (1998: b), Guatemala is currently the only country in Central America that lacks a National catastro and a Registry of property. In 1968, USAID financed the Instituto Geografico Nacional (IGN) to carry out a cadastral survey, and during the Efrain Rios Montt administration (1982–1983), USAID carried out an inventory of fincas. This study proposed to create a land bank to sell land to campesino families and facilitate access to credit. The last aerial photography of Guatemala is from 1991, and it was taken with the aid of the US Defense Department.

During the Ramiro de Leon administration (1993-1994), through a donation of the World Bank (WB) of US$484,000, efforts were made to carry out a cadastral survey for tax purposes in 30 municipalities of Quetzaltenango, San Marcos, Quiche and some eastern departments (Hernndez, 1998: b).

Table 4. Cadastre Funding Sources

Funding source	Projects	Amount (US$)	Type
European Union	Santiago & San Lucas	24-40 million	Donation
Nederland	San Jacinto and Huite	300,000	Donation
Germany	Santa Cruz & Purulha	4.2 million	Donation
World Bank	Peten	31 million	Loan
Sweden	Technical Assistance	1.1 million
Norway	Cadastral cartography (Peten)	5 million	Donation
France	Master Scholarship and proposal for a Cadastre College	60,000
PNUD	Studies other activities	400,000
Total		62.5 million

Source: UTJ-PROTIERRA in (Hernández, 1998: b).

The Accord on Resettlement of the Displaced Populations due to the Armed Conflict also mentions the need to modernize the cadastre. The Peace Accord on Socio-economic Aspects and the Agrarian Situation also mentions the need to promote a legal reform that establishes a legal, reliable, accessible, and simple framework for land tenure, that would simplify titling and registry of land rights.

Until 1998, the Guatemalan government had local funds to initiate this work, but it was unclear how they were it was going to use them. International funding agencies have failed to coordinate efforts, while the lack of local technical capacity to carry out a cadastral survey is a significant problem. In addition, current programs often are limited by the lack of participation of local communities. (Hernández, 1998: b).

Reactions to the Cadastre

According to consultants from COPMAGUA-CPT (in Hernández, 1998: b), the cadastre and FONTIERRAS are complementary, as the cadastre is needed to recover the abandoned fincas and those that were taken illegally during the armed conflict. For Gilberto Atz, a campesino leader, the cadastre would play a very important role as a source of information, and for that reason it is recommended that the poor campesinos get involved in this process. For Jorge Soto, ex leader of the URNG, the cadastre should be oriented to create a market for land. Once completed, it could be used to tax iddle idle lands and territories (Hernández, 1998: b).

The Institute of Political, Economic, and Social Studies (IPES) sees the cadastre as a participatory process with three levels: at the CPT (Bi-partite Commission on Indigenous Peoples Land Rights) to discuss the law and the cadastre model; at the level of social organization to solve conflicts, and for the whole population to corroborate the work The institute has proposed to form communal monitoring (Hernndez, 1998: b).

For MINUGUA, one of the main problems of the agrarian situation in Guatemala is the low level of security of land tenure. Government sources estimate that less than half of the land used for forestry, agriculture or cattle is properly titled, and with boundaries clearly established. The supplementary titling law has in fact created situations throughout the country in which several titleholders claim the same land (MINUGUA in Hernández, 1998: b).

Hernández (1998: b, 78) points out that the Alvaro Arzú administration is currently committed to cadastre projects in Peten, the Verapaces, Sacatepéquez, Chiquimula and Zacapa. These projects do not include the Franja Transversal del Norte,²⁵ where significant land usurpations took place and where many land- related problems are evident. The selected municipalities in which projects are being initiated are far from the places recommended by social organizations.

CIVIL SOCIETY POSITIONS

A group of NGOs, research institutes, and human rights, and religious organizations including AVANCSO (Asociation for the Advance of Social Science), CALDH (Center for Legal Human Rights), CONIC (National Coordinador of Indigenous and Campesinos Organizations), and PTI (Inter-Diocese Agency for Land Issues) has developed a Plataforma Agraria (Agrarian Platform).²⁶ This group has worked for over three years to develop a proposal for Rural Development called Abriendo Brecha, Propuesta de Plataforma para el Desarrollo Rural.

For the Plataforma Agraria the rural development principle of access to land is regarded as fundamental, and as something that should not be limited by market laws, but that should be supported by investment in infrastructre and services to facilitate sustainable livlihoods.

The Plataforma Agraria proposes to dismantle the agro-export model, to democratize access to land and land tenure, and to diversify the economy. This aspect of the Agrarian Platform includes:

1. The rescue of communal, abandoned, and national lands. “According to the Platform, the democratization of land tenure is based on the following principles: i) land to the tiller, ii) the social function of property, and iii) acknowledgment of historic claims to land;”;

2. Secure property rights: “the lack of property titling puts a brake on development.” Women and historically marginalized communities should be prioritized, and land conflicts addressed;

3. Eliminate large unproductive properties. “It is urgent to apply (and enforce) a property tax on idle land to obligate land owners either to generate jobs or to give the land to landless peasants;”;

4. Carry out expropiation of idle and underutilized land and recuperate land usurped during the civil conflict;

5. Limiting land extension;

6. Establish a Land fFund that will ensure that market-based land transfers are just, with fair conditions for price, credit, and negotiation;

7. Access to Additional Resources. Access to infrastructure, training, credit, market information, and appropriate tech for men and women. Eliminate minifundismo, and promote family business enterprises based on food security and diversified agriculture..

The National Peasant and Indigenous Coordination (CONIC) has about 80,000 members in 14 of the 22 Departments in Guatemala, 95% of them indigenous. CONICs main interest is to reivindicaterevindicate the right to land, and the right to development and improve access to services. Juan Tinay, general coordinator of CONIC, argues that international policies for land markets, such as those promoted by the World Bank, are not an option in Guatemala where debt burdens are carried by the majority of the population, while the private sector takes advantage of programs for land markets.

Organizations such as CONIC have started to renegotiate debt contracts with FONTIERRAS; an example of this was the cancellation of 32,000 thousand Quetzales (USD 4000) in benefit of 540 families (46 caballerias). Other organizations have been able to reduce their debt (20 fincas obtained a 80% discount), and some have been able to extend the grace period without having to pay interest. Another strategy to obtain land, particularly in the Northern part of the country, is through the payment of severance to plantation workers.

• CONIC has recovered land through occupations of territory that has historically belonged to indigenous communities or that are state/national lands. According to Juan Tinay, these tactics are requiered required given the government’s failure to act.

• CNOC identifies five mechanisms to access land:

• Through FONTIERRA

• Reclaiming properties from the Franja Transversal del Norte

• Restitution of communal land

• Mixed enterprises

• Expropriation of excessive land holdings (excesos)

The Coordination of NGO and Cooperatives (CONGCOOP), and the National Coordination of Campesino Organizations (CNOC)²⁷ carried out a study to determine the impact of structural adjustment measures on the peasant population in Guatemala, and elaborated a proposal to reform the Land Fund (FONTIERRAS) so that it offers better solutions to the problem of access to land and rural development in Guatemala (web page).

In the same study, CONGCOOP and CNOC identify the main factors that impede access to land:

• An estimated 95% of rural properties are not registered.

• The existing Land Registry in Guatemala was established during the colonial era and never modernized; the recreation of this Registry is very incipient and doesnt show advances.

• Access to credit for small farmers: 95% of credit is concentrated in urban areas; while the land fund gives credit to small farmers, its budget is much too small.

• Technical assistance: the Ministry of Agriculture (MAGA) has dismantled the Public Agricultural Sector, and no public institution now offers technical assistance; FONTIERRAS provides technical assistance only to its beneficiaries.

Bayron Garoz, from CONGCOOP, mentions that even though the World Bank knows that Guatemala does not exhibit the right conditions to encourage a market- based land reform, it has still pushed to implement it in Guatemala.

Eugenio Incer from AVANCSO agrees that there should be a variety of means to access land, but it is also important to look at different ways to make it productive. Several international aid organizations have offered funds in the form of grants and loans for to carry out projects that involved making distributed land productive, but information is lacking on the goals and impact of international actors (i.e. CARE in the Petén).

In terms of women’s participation, according to Hernández, it is mainly resettled women who work on this issue. Their experience of organization and access to literacy gave has given them a good basis to work on access to land, but still women’s rights in Guatemala are very poor.²⁸

CONCLUSIONS

In terms of the 1996 agreement, then, no advances in terms of changing or enforcing existing legislation covering idle or underutilized lands have occurred as of May 2000 (MINUGUA 2000, 10). As it currently stands, the process for determining what land is “idle” is complex, laborious, and based on declarations of current owners, and property owners threatened with expropriation have been given ample time to put idle land into production (Sandoval V. 1987; Berger 1992; Stringer, 1989).

Agrarian reform in Guatemala today suffers from a historical legacy in which most reform policies and legislation (progressive or otherwise) have been suppressed, misinterpreted, or poorly implemented in a “contradiction between laws, applications, legitimacy, and pertinence” (MINUGUA, 2000: 9). Hernández (1998, a) notes that “the land aspects of the peace accords have neither been respected nor carried out on time. Furthermore, the issue of granting land to the landless has not even been touched upon” (49)”.

Looking forward, though, we see in Guatemala at the present time increased grassroots organization and political activity, gaining strength from global indigenous and landless rights movements and increased political space for dialogue in the last decade. Worldwide, the FAO sees a “new fire under land reform,”, noting that increasing support for agrarian reform among urban populations (in Guatemala, many of whom are only recently removed from rural areas) has fueled movements for rights currently already guaranteed in by law (FAO, 1998: 2). Forster (1998) notes that in Guatemala, the only time national laws have been successfully implemented only ever achieved anything has been when they have been supported by grassroots organizations. of those at the grassroots. While inadequate in the current historical context, the 1996 Agreement on the Agrarian Situation may be a first step towards more useful agrarian reform measures in the future.

REFERENCES

Adams, Martin. 1995. "Land Reform: New Seeds on Old Ground." Natural Resource Perspectives (ODI).

ASESA. 1996. "Agreement on Socio-economic aspects and the agrarian situation." Mexico City?

AVANCSO, CALDH, CONIC and PTI. 2001. Abriendo Brecha, Plataforma de Desarrollo Rural. Guatemala. Agosto. Pp. 20.

Berger, Susan. 1992. Political and Agrarian Development in Guatemala. Boulder: Westview Press.

Brockett, Charles D. 1998. Land, Power, and Poverty: Agrarian Transformation and Political Conflict in Central America. Boulder: Westview Press.

CONGCOOP. Programa de Estudios para el Desarrollo Rural “FONTIERRAS, el ajuste estructural y el acceso a la tierra en Guatemala” (investigación/ propuesta). Guatemala, Diciembre 2000.

Christodoulou, D. 1990. The Unpromised Land: Agrarian Reform and Conflict Worldwide. London: Zed Books.

Deere, Carmen D and Magdalena León. 1997. "Women and Land Rights in the Latin American Neo-Liberal Counter-Reforms." Pp. 81. Michigan State University.

—. 1999. Mujer y Tierra en Guatemala. Guatemala City: AVANSCO.

FAO. 1998. "Contemporary thinking on Land Reforms." Rome: Land Tenure Service in Rural Development Division.

Forster, Cindy. 1998. "Reforging National Revolution: Campesino Labor Struggles in Guatemala, 1944-1954." Pp. 196-228 in Identity and Struggle at the Margins of the Nation State, edited by Aviva Chomsky and Aldo Lauria-Santiago. Durham: Duke University Press.

Handy, Jim. 1994. Revolution in the Countryside: Rural Conflict and Agrarian Reform in Guatemala, 1944-1954. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.

Hernández, Rosalinda. “The Lan Issues in the Peace Accords: A Summary of the Government´s Response.” Cuadernos de Investigación interactiva No. 2. Inforpress Centroamericana. Guatemala, enero 2000.

Hernández, Rosalinda. “¿A quien servira el catastro.” Cuadernos de Investigación interactiva No. 2. Inforpress Centroamericana. Guatemala, enero 2000.

Hernández, Rosalinda. “Problemática de la Tierra reclama soluciones efectivas.” Cuadernos de Investigación interactiva No. 3. Inforpress Centroamericana. Guatemala, enero 2000.

Hildebrand, John. 1962. "Farm Size and Agrarian Reform in Guatemala." Inter-American Economic Affairs 16:51-57.

Hough, Richard et al. 1982. "Land and Labor in Guatemala: An Assessment." Washington, DC: US AID.

Katz, Elizabeth. 2000. "Social Capital and Natural Capital: A comparative analysis of land tenure and natural resource management in Guatemala." Land Economics 76:114-132.

MINUGUA. 2000. "La situación de los compromisos relativos a la tierra en los Acuerdos de Paz." Pp. 26. Ciudad de Guatemala: MINUGUA.

Molina Cruz, Javier. Acceso a la Tierra por medio del mercado experiencias de Banco de Tierras en Centroamerica. FAO. 2000.

Palma Murga, Gustavo. 1997. "Promised the Earth: Agrarian Reform in the Socio-Economic Agreement." Accord: An International Review of Peace Initiatives.

PeaceBrigades. 1996. "The Struggle for Land: Invasions and Evictions." Guatemala City: Peace Brigades.

Perera, Victor. 1993. Unfinished Conquest: the Guatemalan Tragedy. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Sandoval V., Leopoldo. 1987. Estructura agraria y nuevo régimen constitucional. Ciudad de Guatemala: ASIES (Asociación de Investigación y Estudios Sociales).

Stringer, Randy and Virginia Lambert. 1989. "A Profile of Land Markets in Rural Guatemala." Pp. 27. Madison: University of Wisconsin, Land Tenure Center.

Thiesenhusen, William C. 1989. "Blaming the Victim: Latin American Agricultural Land Tenure System and the Environmental Debate." Pp. 41 in Land Tenure Center. Madison, WI.

—. 1995. Broken Promises: Agrarian Reform and the Latin American Campesino. Boulder: Westview Press.

WorldBank. 1995. "Guatemala: An Assessment of Poverty." Pp. 140. Latin American and Caribbean Regional Office: World Bank.

—. 1996. "Guatemala: Building Peace with Rapid and Equitable Growth." Central America Dept.: World Bank.

—. 1997. "Guatemala Land Fund Project." Natural Resources and Rural Poverty Sector.

—. 1998. "Project Appraisal Document for Land Administration Project." Central America Dept.: World Bank.

ACRONYMS

ASIES - Asociacin de Investigacin y Estudios Sociales

AVANCSO - Asociacin para el Avance de las Ciencias Sociales

CALDH - Centro de Atencin Legal Derechos Humanos

CIEN - Centro de Investigaciones Economicas y Sociales

CONIC - Coordinadora Nacional Indigena y Campesina

CONGCOOP - Coordinacion de ONG y Cooperativas

CONTIERRA - Dependencia Presidencial de Asistencia Legal y resolución de Conflictos sobre la Tierra

COPMAGUA – Coordinacion de Organizaciones de Pueblos Mayas de Guatemala

CNOC - Coordinacin Nacional de Organizaciones Campesina

CPT - Comision Paritaria sobre los Derechos Relativos a la Tierra de los Pueblos Indgenas

CUC - Comit de Unidad Campesina

FONTIERRAS Fondo de Tierras

FLACSO Facultad LatinoAmericana de Ciencias Sociales

IPES - Instituto de Estudios Polticos, Economicos y Sociales

MINUGUA Mision de Verificacion de naciones Unidad para Guatemala

PROTIERRA – Comisión Institucional para el Desarrollo y Fortalecimiento de la Propiedad de la Tierra

PTI - Pastoral de la Tierra Interdiocesana

SEPAZ - Secretaria de la Paz