Land Reform and British Tea

In April 2005, Malawi implemented a land reform after the controversial land grabs in Zimbabwe in which many white farmers were violently thrown off their land without proper compensation. The World Bank agreed to fund the project approved by Malawi's cabinet in order to give some of the 90% of Malawians owning less than 2 acres of land something more to produce with. Is the land reform proper or morally justifiable?

One may find a solution looking at the historical consequences of colonialism that still permeate in Malawi. According to Reuters, "much of Malawi's most fertile land is run by tea companies operated from Britain" (cited on PBS link). This reminds me of the thesis summarized by Acemoglu, Johnson, and Robinson in their noteworthy paper on development entitled: The Colonial Origins of Comparitive Development. In their paper they state that colonial governments set up long-lasting institutions in those areas of the world which proved most liveable and profitable for European business. In those areas where diseases such as malaria were active and other difficulties such as unavigable transportation were present, Europeans failed to put any time into setting up forward looking institutions such as education, government, missionaries, etc.

What's the connection? The long life of British tea companies in Malawi are now finding their tight hold on prime soil slipping away. One might ask why the World Bank supports this? Maybe the usefullness of the soil has passed.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/malawi_04-14-05.html